De Lacy’s Family Background
‘Gilbert de Lacy, a man of judgement and shrewd and painstaking in every operation of war’ Gesta Stephani
Hugh de Lacy was born into an aristocratic family, part of the Norman social elite. The surname, de Lacy, is derived from Lassy, in the canton of Condé-sur-Noireau, Vire, in Normandy. The original family home may have been a castle near the church. The family held lands at Lassy and Campeaux in southern Calvos. Lassy is forty kilometres south of Bayeux while Campeaux is nineteen kilometres north-west of Lassy. This land was held from the bishop of Bayeux jointly by two branches of the family for the service of two knights. While both branches of the family held the estate together, it is possible that there was a bailiff at Lassy and one at Campeaux to organize the demesne and to receive the rents from each estate.
Gautier (Walter) de Lacy and his elder brother, Ilbert, (Gilbert) fought with William the Conqueror at the battle of Hastings. Ilbert, the older brother, established himself at Pontefract, in present-day Yorkshire, while Walter received grants of land in western England near the Welsh border. The Lacys had arrived into England as knightly tenants of the bishop of Bayeaux, following their overlord, William fitz Osbern, steward of Normandy.
Ilbert of Pontefract was succeeded by Robert who was banished from his English estates about 1114. Ilbert II succeeded Robert and was restored to his family lands in England by Stephen. Henry de Lacy succeeded and supported Stephen during the Anarchy for which he was pardoned by Henry II.
The Herefordshire branch of the de Lacy family had a somewhat similar history. Walter de Lacy first appeared on the borders of Wales in 1067, apparently with separate grants of lands and authority from the Crown. He made a raid into Wales in 1069 or 1070 as second in command to fitz Osbern. As Earl of Hereford, fitz Osbern established a new castle at Ewyas and granted four carucates of waste land to Walter de Lacy, a tenure from which the castle took the name of Ewyas Lacy. Originally established to protect Herefordshire from Welsh attack over the desolate Black Mountains, the grant was quickly converted by the de Lacys into a marcher lordship, based first at the motte of Pont Hendre and later at the castle and borough of Longtown. Walter acquired some Shropshire manors from Roger of Montgomery about 1074. In 1075 the fitz Osberns were deprived of their English lands following an unsuccessful rebellion against the king and Walter de Lacy profited from the disgrace of Roger fitz Osbern. In co-operation with two Saxon churchmen Walter foiled an attempt by Roger fitz Osbern to cross the Severn with an army of rebels. Walter became a tenant-in-chief of the crown, building a castle befitting his status at Ludlow. Several towns in Shropshire and Herefordshire took their names from the family, including Stanton Lacy, Stoke Lacy, Hopton Lacy, Holme Lacy, Mansell Lacy, and Ewyas Lacy, the latter now known as Longtown. The Norman family name was added to the existing Saxon place name. The family’s lands consisted of five large groups of manors in Gloucestershire, Worcestershire and Oxfordshire, safely east of the original border zone of the Severn and Wye, in addition to four equally large groups in Herefordshire and southern Shropshire. Walter re-founded and endowed a church for the monks of St. Peter, Hereford. Actively involved in the construction work he died in 1084 following a fall from a ladder and was buried in the chapter-house of the cathedral at Gloucester.
Walter de Lacy had three sons, Roger, Hugh and Walter. Walter became abbot of Gloucester. Roger succeeded his father as the second baron. He was the grandfather of Hugh de Lacy. Roger took part in two rebellions against the king in 1088 and again in 1094-5. In both cases he had the support of the Welsh as allies. As a result of his second rebellion Roger was banished in 1096 and retired to Normandy where he held high office under Duke Robert. The English king was not able to confiscate the family’s lands in Normandy, even though the duchy was in pawn to him. The date of Roger’s death is not known but he was dead by 1133. His English lands were seized by the Crown in 1096, and granted to his brother, Hugh, who became third baron.
The Augustinian Priory of Llanthony Prima and the abbey church of St. John the Baptist was founded as a hermitage in 1103 by William, one of Hugh’s knights and then re-founded by Hugh in 1108. The endowment was fairly extensive, consisting of estates and churches in Herefordshire and Gloucestershire. The valley in which Llanthony itself was situated was on the extreme western border of the Lacy lands, beyond the old traditional border with Wales and even beyond the family’s castle at Ewyas. Following the Welsh revolt the entire community abandoned the monastery in 1134. Two years later Miles of Gloucester founded a new monastery for the monks at Llanthony Secunda, near Gloucester. Hugh died before 1126 and following his death the family estates seem to have been subject of dispute.
Henry I passed the estate to Sybil de Lacy and her husband, Payn fitz John. Sybil may have been the daughter of Roger and Hugh’s sister, Agnes, and her husband, Geoffrey Talbot, or may have been Hugh’s daughter. Alternatively the grant may have been to reward fitz John as a loyal household servant. Fitz John, a supporter of Stephen in the Anarchy, seems to have acquired at least some of the family’s lands, which were confirmed after his death in 1137 to his daughter Cecily, wife of Roger, later earl of Hereford. Following the death of fitz John Stephen acted quickly to control the Welsh Marches and ordered the marriage of Sybil to Joce de Dinan, one of his knights. The third man to receive a share of the Lacy estates was Miles of Gloucester, later earl of Hereford. The family estates were claimed by Gilbert de Lacy who may have been the son of Emma, sister to Hugh, the third baron. Emma’s husband may have been Hugh Talbot. According to this version Gilbert assumed the name of de Lacy, and claimed the barony. More recent writers suggest that Gilbert de Lacy was son of Hugh’s exiled brother, Roger. Gilbert was Hugh de Lacy’s father.
Gilbert succeeded to the Normandy lands of his father by 1133. At the death of Richard, bishop of Bayeaux, in 1133 Gilbert is recorded as sharing the ownership of Lassy and Campaux in Normandy with his cousin Henry of Pontefract. Following the death of Henry I in 1135 Gilbert crossed over to England in an attempt to recover the family’s lands and was with king, Stephen, at Easter 1136.
When Henry I died the throne was seized by his nephew, Stephen, but it was disputed by Henry’s daughter, Matilda, who was married to Geoffrey of Anjou. A war arose between the two claimants which became an opportunity for the nobles to seek to expand their power.
Gilbert de Lacy’s claim to his family’s lands helped to fuel the war in the southern Welsh marches. The civil war in Herefordshire was the outcome of conflicting claims over the inheritance of Hugh de Lacy and the ambitions of Miles of Gloucester and of the earl of Leicester rather than the struggle between the two claimants for the crown. Like many other nobles Gilbert appears to have changed sides in the war depending on which side offered most potential for the restoration of his lands. Gilbert faced formidable adversaries in pursuing his claims to the family estates. Nobles, like Gilbert, who held lands in Normandy were unwilling to support Stephen as they feared the loss of their Normandy possessions to Matilda and her husband’s supporters, the Angevins.
In May 1138 the civil war erupted in Herefordshire with most of the baronage initially following Stephen. The de Lacy castle at Weobley was fortified by Gilbert’s relative, Geoffrey Talbot, on behalf of Matilda but was taken by Stephen. In 1140 Stephen granted Robert, Earl of Leicester and Hereford, the fee that Joce de Dinan held (i.e. Ludlow) which previously belonged to Hugh de Lacy. This would appear to suggest that de Dinan had gone over to the Matilda’s side. Gilbert seized Ludlow Castle and held it for Matilda. In late summer 1138 Gilbert was at Bath which he tried to capture for Matilda. Sybil and de Dinan supported Stephen until Miles of Gloucester changed to the Matilda’s side in the summer of 1139.
Stephen took the castle at Ludlow by siege. The conversion of his rival for Ludlow and the de Lacy estates, Miles of Gloucester, to Matilda’s cause probably drove Gilbert into supporting Stephen by late 1139. In 1141 Stephen was captured and Gilbert deserted his cause to again support Matilda, thus placing all three claimants of the de Lacy lands in support of Matilda. Gilbert remained with Matilda on her disastrous visit to London and fled with her back to Oxford and Gloucester. He then seems to have abandoned the civil war and worked on his own account to regain Ludlow and the family estates. He gained control of Ewyas. After 1144 Gilbert Lacy and his allies who included Hugh Mortimer, attacked Jose de Dinan in Ludlow Castle. By 1146 Gilbert had gone back to supporting Stephen, perhaps because Matilda kept Joce de Dinan in possession of Ludlow Castle.
Matilda’s party was in eclipse for the last six years of Stephen’s reign at least and Gilbert seems to have deserted Matilda in pursuit of his own claims against de Dinan and Roger, earl of Hereford. In view of this it seems possible that Gilbert might have gained the family’s estates by 1148. Roger, earl of Hereford, sought the support of the earl of Gloucester in the treaty of 1147-9 to disinherit Gilbert.
Gilbert de Lacy’s attack on de Dinan at Ludlow was re-told in a romantic tale. The Romance of Fulk fitzWarin is an account of Fulk III fitz Warin in the time of King John but it also relates the story of his father who assisted Jose de Dinan in his fight to retain Ludlow from the de Lacys. The names and timings of the story are confused with events taking place during the Anarchy being related as occurring later and the name of Walter being used for Gilbert de Lacy. In the Romance story Gilbert and Sir Arnold de Lis, became prisoners of Joce, but were allowed freedom of movement within the castle. Sir Arnold formed a relationship with a young lady in the castle, Marion de Bruer, who assisted him and Gilbert to escape. Later, Marion secretly admitted Arnold back into the castle by lowering a rope down an outer wall. Unbeknown to Marion, Arnold left the rope in place, and whilst occupied in her chamber some of his men climbed the rope and opened the castle gate to de Lacy’s soldiers, who slew the garrison and recaptured the castle. On discovering her lover’s treachery, Marion killed Arnold with his own sword before throwing herself out of a window, breaking her neck on the rocks below.
Gilbert seems to have recovered a large part of his estates by 1155 on the death of Earl Roger but may have re-gained some of his lands as early as 1143 and more substantial parts by 1148. The estate to which Gilbert de Lacy returned under Stephen was a good deal smaller than it had been at the time of Domesday. Ten knight fees and something like £100 worth of land, including the monastic grants had been detached from the honour since 1086.
When Stephen’s son and heir, Eustace, died in August 1153 Stephen decided to agree terms with the Angevins. Stephen would retained the crown for his lifetime with Matilda’s son, Henry, to succeed him. In November 1153 at the agreement between Henry and Stephen they pledged to return the landed situation to what it had been when Henry I died. Stephen died a year later in 1154 and Henry became king. Gilbert was restored by Henry II to most of the de Lacy lands, the new king merely recognising a situation which already existed as Gilbert had obtained possession and control of the lands. Gilbert married Alice and had two sons, Robert and Hugh
Gilbert granted lands to the Templars at Temple Guiting, Gloucestershire, and erected a round-naved chapel, clearly showing Templar influences, at Ludlow. In 1158 or 1159 after more than twenty years of fighting to regain his family’s lands Gilbert handed over his estate to his eldest son, Robert, and joined the Templar Order. In May 1160 Gilbert witnessed a treaty in Normandy between Henry II and Louis VII of France as a Templar. Gilbert joined the Crusade. The Second Crusade was launched as a result of the fall of a frontier fortress, Edessa, in December 1144 but the crusaders were on the defensive from 1153 to 1169. By 1160 or 1161 Gilbert had reached Jerusalem and he became preceptor of his order in the county of Tripoli. In September 1163 he was among the leaders of a crusader army resisting Nur-ad-Din, Sultan of Aleppo. Gilbert may have been killed in 1163 while leading an attack against Nur-ad-Din and his Kurdish conscripts at Krak. However a later record states that in 1167 or 8 Gilbert de Lacy and Robert Mansel, starting from Antioch, surprised Nur al-Din in the neighbourhood of Tripoli and put him barefooted to flight. Gilbert’s year of death is unknown but it is probably 1168 and the date 10 November was later commemorated at Hereford.
In 1159-60 Gilbert’s son, Robert, succeeded to the family estates. His career was short, since by 1162 his brother, Hugh, had succeeded him. A suggestion has been made that Robert joined his father on crusade.
Early Years and Marriage
Nothing is known about Hugh de Lacy’s birth, youth and early manhood. His early life must have been in Normandy while his youth was dominated by the campaign of his father to be restored to his English estates.
Hugh was the son of Gilbert de Lacy. Gilbert’s wife is sometimes recorded as Alice de Gant but this lady was married to Gilbert de Lacy of Pontefract. Hugh’s date of birth is not clear but he succeeded his elder brother Robert about 1162. There was no set age of maturity but assuming that full age was twenty one, this would mean de Lacy would have been born before 1141. As he may have witnessed charters in 1154-55 it could have been 1133 or earlier. A date in the early 1130s is the most likely date of his birth.
Baptism usually took place shortly after birth and at least within eight days of birth but baptism on the day of birth was not unusual. Hugh was named in honour of his great-grandfather, who founded the monastery at Llanthony. The name, Hugh, is a Norman name which became very popular in England after the Conquest and a de Lacy cousin at Pontefract also bore the name in the late eleventh century.
Robert, his eldest brother, succeeded to the lands but Hugh’s immediate family is unclear. A possible brother of Hugh could be Amalric de Lacy who held land at Cressage in Shropshire and at Frome in Herefordshire. He may have had another brother, Peter, with lands at Chesterton. Hugh’s sister married Gilbert de Nugent. She is sometimes recorded as Rose but this name seems to have been attached by chroniclers to every woman connected to de Lacy.
Hugh’s father was an able military commander and it is likely that he would have trained his sons in the art of war. Hugh’s knighting as the son of a baron would have been a festive occasion for the family. His sword would have been girded to his side by his master and he would have received the ritual blow to the shoulder. There would have been a vigil, a mass and feast.
The earliest possible documentary reference to Hugh de Lacy is as a witness to a charter of William fitz Alan to Haughmond abbey in 1155. Hugh de Lacy of Coolmere (near Ellesmere) witnessed that charter but it is not clear if this is the Hugh de Lacy under discussion. There is another charter of 1155 which also has a Hugh de Lacy as a witness. A Hugh de Lacy also appeared not later than 1158-9 witnessing a charter to St. Werburgh’s, Chester. Hugh de Lacy as a younger member of the family may have been provided with a small estate, perhaps as a tenant of William fitz Alan. Ellesmere is in the north of Shropshire, some distance from the main family lands in south Shropshire and Herefordshire. Perhaps Hugh was granted an outlying estate, far from the centre of the estate. Before 1155 de Lacy advised Hugh Mortimer that a new abbey he was building for the monks of Shobdon at Lye near Aymestrey could be made use of by an enemy if captured and the monastery was removed to Wigmore.
Hugh had succeeded his brother by 1162 to become the fifth Baron de Lacy. Hugh had certainly taken possession of Ewyas by 1160-62 when Henry II wrote to the earl of Hereford and Hugh de Lacy concerning land at Lye which had been granted to Gloucester by Sybil Lacy fitz John. Henry II addressed a writ to de Lacy and the sheriff of Herefordshire prior to 1162, which suggests that de Lacy was the most significant landholder in the county at this time. According to Eyton Hugh on his succession to the title received a confirmation charter from the king confirming him in his holdings of Stauntone Lacy, Lodelow, Webbelleye, Ewyas and Arkhulle. Following the death of de Lacy’s father, his mother, Agnes, granted part of her dower lands to the Templars, the order which Gilbert had joined.
In 1165 Henry responded to a Welsh offensive with a major campaign. Henry gathered his army in Shropshire where Hugh de Lacy likely joined the force. Henry set out from Oswestry with the intention of crossing the Berwyn Mountains and descending into the Dee valley. The entire campaign proved a fiasco with Henry’s army driven back by summer storms as it tried to make its way across the mountains. Henry was forced into an ignominious retreat with the Welsh winning a major victory without striking a blow. Having moved his army north to Chester, ships from Dublin and other Irish towns arrived too late to take part in the action. As de Lacy paid no scutage in 1164-5, it is likely that he was present in person on the campaign.
Hugh de Lacy married Rose de Monmouth, the daughter of Baderon de Monmouth and Rose de Clare. Rose was first cousin of Gilbert de Clare, Strongbow. Baderon was a major landowner in Monmouth and Hereford and so would have been known to de Lacy. There is a suggestion that Rose de Monmouth was the widow rather than the daughter of Baderon.
Synnott suggested a date of 1172 for the marriage but it was probably in the late 1160s. It is likely that Hugh must have succeeded to his estates before a marriage could take place so it would have been after 1162. Hugh’s son Walter came of age in 1189 but there was no set age of maturity but assuming that full age was twenty one, this would suggest the marriage of his parents took place before 1168.
A man married for policy not personal affection. All marriages were arranged at de Lacy’s social level. Elder sons were married off while younger sons with no income did not marry. Hugh, as a younger son, would not have married until he succeeded to the family estates in 1162.
If the marriage was a typical marriage of the high aristocracy Rose would have been about seventeen years of age when she got married. Rose witnessed charters of her husband, therefore she was well educated. Hugh de Lacy, his wife, Rose and son, Robert, granted the priory of Monmouth an annual rent of three shillings in Lideney. Rose’s mother, also Rose, made a number of gifts to the priory of Monmouth.
In the twelfth century the church insisted that the consent of a man and a woman was sufficient for a valid marriage – consent of family, lord or a public ceremony were unnecessary. The indissolubility of marriage from the time vows were exchanged and the need for a solemn ceremony at the church door in the presence of a priest were emphasised. The marriage usually took place in front of the church, a public ceremony under ecclesiastical supervision. The wedding feast followed after which the priest blessed the bridal bedchamber and the bed.
Before betrothal it was customary for a financial settlement to be agreed between the families of the bride and groom. A woman was expected to provide a dowry which might have consisted of land. On marriage a woman received a dower from her husband and a marriage portion from her father. The husband could only alienate his wife’s property with her consent. According to English Common Law when a woman married her property passed wholly into the hands of her husband who became her sole guardian. It is unclear what dowry Rose de Monmouth brought to the marriage.
The king may have been consulted before de Lacy’s marriage. The king had the right to control the marriage of his major barons and they could not marry without his permission. The king’s control of marriage was a crucial factor in his control of his kingdom by which he could exert control through patronage, reward his followers and influence the personnel of his kingdom.
Ambitious men like de Lacy became members of the court. Henry’s court was the focal point of whole political system. De Lacy’s early life was similar to Henry’s and they may have been a similar age. Henry’s family, like the de Lacys, had a tortuous fight to reclaim their inheritance. Henry, as a young man, would have lived through that ordeal as de Lacy did whilst his father, Gilbert, sought to regain the family property. De Lacy’s services and his ability seem to have been appreciated by Henry II. De Lacy was prominent enough to witness royal charters. Present at court on many occasions de Lacy witnessed charters both in England and Normandy. De Lacy was at court at Bonnerville-sur-Touques (1165 or 1173), Chinon (1165, 1167, or 1173), Le Vaudreuil (1166 or 1173), Quévilly (1170 or 1173), and in 1173 at Valognes. In 1173 he was with the king at Gisors, Quévilly, Rouen, and Nonancourt, whilst in 1173 or 1175 he was with Henry at Caen, Port-audemer, Valognes and Cherbourg. He witnessed a charter at Northampton during 1181-82. He also appeared on witness lists at Feckenham, Shrewsbury, Winchester and Reading.
De Lacy was part of the king’s entourage on his visit to Ireland in 1171-72 as a trusted member of the king’s court. Frame suggested that those who benefited from royal patronage in Ireland came from the inner circles of the king’s household and administration.
The Lacy Honour in Wales, England and Normandy
The de Lacy family held extensive estates in England, the Welsh March and Normandy. The principal estates were Ludlow (Staunton Lacy), Ewyas Lacy (Longtown) and Weobley. The de Lacys were the most important of the marcher barons in Herefordshire and southern Shropshire, since all the principal passes into Wales on that part of the border led through lands in their hands or very close to one of their main centres. Hugh de Lacy was the largest land-holder in Herefordshire with the exception of the king. The family’s lands lay in a vast triangle from the north of Shropshire to the Severn estuary and across to south eastern Oxfordshire. The de Lacy lands were divided in half by the river Severn which by its size and lack of bridges formed a major obstacle to communication between the eastern and western halves of the family lands. It is possible to further separate the western half into marcher and non-marcher lands. De Lacy held three main castles at Ludlow, Weobley and Longtown but which was his caput is not clear, perhaps he moved between all three. Alternatively the caput of the estate happened to be where de Lacy was at the time. There must have been some official in charge each of the four castles of the honour. Ludlow and Weobley must have had their own constables though no such officer is mentioned before 1200.
The barony was viewed as having 60 knights’ fees but Hugh de Lacy never paid scutage on more than 51¼ fees. This would have made him one of the larger tenants-in-chief of the king in the country. In 1162-3 de Lacy claimed to hold 52 knight’s fees in the barony as a whole, of which 23½ were in Herefordshire. In 1166 Henry ordered a survey of land holding carried out to ascertain what lands were held by the various barons. Part of this survey included the changes in landholding which had occurred from the time of his grandfather, Henry I. De Lacy made a return to the king stating that in England he held 54¼ fees of old enfeoffment, of which 3½ were not acknowledged as his by their holders. Tenants attempted to take advantage of the disruption of the Anarchy period to try to withdraw their service. This is a low level of dispute considering what de Lacy’s father had to do to secure possession of the lands. These disputed fees were never recovered by de Lacy or his descendants. He also held 5½ fees of new feoffment. These new feoffments were post-1135 creations, though it is always possible that some were re-creations of old fees in the hands of different men. The 1166 enquiry allowed de Lacy an opportunity to define and re-enforce his control over the family’s lands. In 1167-8 de Lacy was charged fifty one marks and forty pence on fifty one and a quarter fees. In 1166 there were nine resident knights maintained in de Lacy’s household. They held not fees but lands of a stated value, one hundred shillings in seven cases, thirty six in one case and one virgate in the ninth. The knight remained either with de Lacy or in his domibus in Wallia, which may mean the castle at Ewyas (Longtown). As resident knights they were provided with food and clothing as well as being ready to fight for their lord at any time.
An improving landowner de Lacy cleared waste lands to provide more arable land. He was fined for assarting, the clearing of woods to make arable lands, in Herefordshire and Wiltshire in 1169-70. These fines may have simply been a means of creating crown revenue as offenders were not compelled to return the lands to woodland provided an agreed annual rent was substituted. In the case of de Lacy payment was never made, for the fine was remitted. Either the king was being careful not to provoke or offend his powerful marcher baron or possibly de Lacy’s military activity at that time may have been regarded as cancelling the debt. Fined twenty marks in 1173-4 for assarts, purprestures, and the like at Ludlow, indicates that de Lacy was bringing more land into cultivation.
The development of mineral rights could add to the income of the estate. Smelting of iron ore was an industry developed by the monasteries of Llanthony and Monmouth in the Forest of Dean and is probable that de Lacys developed this resource in their manors of Aylburton and Longhope. Temple Guiting provided salt for the estate.
The main source of de Lacy’s income came for the demesne lands retained in his own hands and his manors let out for rent. The running of large blocks of demesne, whilst probably the most profitable way of managing the honour if it were feasible, was not necessarily the simplest. The estates were organised so that they could run with as little trouble as possible. A measure of the success of the organisation of his estates is that de Lacy was able to spend the greater part of his time from 1171 onwards in Ireland and yet retain in demesne, apparently successfully, a valuable amount of land. He acquired a considerable reputation as an administrator. A steward for his Herefordshire estates, Miles de Mucegross, witnessed some of the Lacy charters to St. Guthlac’s. Miles de Mucegross was sheriff of Herefordshire in 1182-3. This could be a case of Miles serving both king and baron at the same time. Hickey suggested that some of the de Mucegross family may have moved to Ireland with de Lacy.
There was a large number of tenants. The de Baskerville family held a total fee of de Lacy in 1166 consisted of eight knights. The de Furchis fee held was three knights. The Salceit and Sarnesfield fees can also be traced down the generations. Richard d’Esketot held three knights fees in 1166. In the mid twelfth century the Esketot family held the manors of King’s Pyon and Wormseley in Herefordshire. The Tyrell family held lands of de Lacy. Walter Devereux held three knight’s fees of Hugh de Lacy at Lyonshall Castle, Herefordshire in 1165. The manor of Chanstone Tump was also held by the Devereuxs from the de Lacys. The de Lacy family held lands in Shropshire at Stanton Long where the de Says were tenants. In 1170s Hugh re-granted Wooton in Aldon, Shropshire to William of Wooton.
The Marcher barony of Weobley lay mainly to the north of Hereford. Weobley castle, lies towards the west, as if protecting the lands from Welsh attack. Weobley was the centre for a large number of manors, seventeen at least were subinfeudated to such families as the Baskerville, Esketot and Devereux families. Weobley was an important strategic position being near the north-east route from Clifford to Leominster. It provided easy access to the other important Lacy frontier zones and was close to Ludlow. There is no documentary evidence for Weobley castle prior to 1138 when it was occupied by Geoffrey Talbot but it is probable that the large ringwork and bailey, whose extensive remains lie on the southern margin of the town, was constructed in the late eleventh century.
The manors of Stanton Lacy, Stokesay, Aldon and Onisbury were centred on the castle of Ludlow. Stanton Lacy is a small village about four kilometres north east of Ludlow and takes its name from the family. Ludlow lies on one of the easiest routes for attack of the fertile lowlands of England for the Welsh who were just thirteen kilometres to the west. Ludlow is at the very centre of the Welsh March on the old medieval road linking Chester to Gloucester. The site of Ludlow, in the parish of Stanton Lacy, was located in a corner of the family’s manor of Stanton. The first reference to the castle at Ludlow is in 1139 but the castle was constructed by Roger de Lacy at the end of the eleventh century. Hugh de Lacy carried out a major enlargement of Ludlow castle in the 1160s or early 1170s. The gatehouse was heightened to form a great keep, one of the first great keeps in that area. Increasing the size of the castle de Lacy surrounded the outer bailey with a curtain wall.
De Lacy held lands at Ewyas Lacy with its strongholds of Pont Hendre and Longtown. Port Hendre is presumed to be the original castle at Ewyas Lacy and Longtown was erected to replace it. This estate was a strategic base for defence for Herefordshire as it was on one of the possible routes by the Welsh into England. The lands included the valley of the upper Monnow, its tributaries, the Olchon and Escley brooks and vale of Ewyas, where the priory of Llanthony was located.
Pont Hendre castle consists of a very steep sided motte at the end of an eastward running ridge, surrounded by a circular ditch. On its eastern side is a kidney shaped bailey. Pont Hendre has always been regarded as the predecessor to Longtown and may actually date to before Domesday.
The motte and bailey at Longtown were erected in the 1140s or 50s and it is likely to be the ‘new castle’ mentioned in the Pipe Rolls for 1187, perhaps erected as a result of the invasion of the Welsh in 1146. In the 1180s the eastward movement of the Welsh caused Henry II to refortify or have refortified several castles along the threatened border. The sum of £37 was spent on Longtown and the older castle at Ewyas Lacy at Pont Hendre. Longtown castle was erected on an earlier square earthwork enclosure which served as a bailey. The steep conical motte which is eleven metres high is situated in the north western corner of the enclosure. A massive circular keep made of local sandstone rubble was constructed on the motte. A circular keep was unusual for Britain and perhaps this was the new castle erected in 1187. There may have been a chapel within the castle in the twelfth century.
Away from the borders of Wales the Lacy estates were in four main groups in eastern Worchester, Gloucestershire, Oxfordshire and Berkshire. The manor of Britford in Wiltshire, a possible acquisition by Hugh, provided a useful stopping point for de Lacy on his way from the West Midlands to Southampton. This large estate which included land rented from the bishop of Salisbury, produced as much income as Weobley. The two Berkshire manors at Childrey could have served a like purpose if de Lacy was using the more direct route to Normandy from Southampton or Portsmouth. For these English lands Hugh’s son, Walter II, was assessed at fifty-one and a quarter knights’ fees in the scutage of 1190, 1194 and 1210. By the end of his life De Lacy would have had an annual income in the region of £750 from his lands in England, Wales, Normandy and Ireland, an enormous sum in those days.
An inquest into knight’s fees in Normandy in 1172 recorded that Hugh de Lacy held a half share in the family fee at Lassy and Campeaux from the bishop of Bayeux. This fee was jointly shared with the Pontefract branch of the de Lacy family. This large holding was held from the bishop of Bayeaux. The lands held in Normandy were quite substantial, providing an income as large as his English estate.
The honour of Le Pin was purchased by de Lacy from Robert, count of Meulan, for a fee of £200. Le Pin lay in the bailiwick of Exmes, north of Séez and east of Argentan, in the region of Le Pin au Haras, on the edge of the Forêt de Gouffern. It was composed of the villages of Le Pin, Nealpha, Montormel, Assevilla and Busevilla. The purchase of an entire honour such as this was an unusual occurrence. The purchase may have been forced on Robert as he had taken the side of the young king against Henry II. In 1173 Henry II confirmed the land of Le Pin to de Lacy for two knight’s fees.
Anglo-Norman Arrival in Ireland
‘The King of England, the second Henry, Duke of Normandy and Aquitaine, Earl of Andegavia, and lord of many other countries, came to Ireland this year.’ Annals of the Four Masters, 1171.
In 1166 Ruaidraí Ua Conchobair, king of Connacht, was acknowledged as high king of Ireland. The success of Ua Conchobair encouraged his ally, Tigernán Ua Ruairc, king of Bréifne, to seek revenge against Diarmait Mac Murchada, king of Leinster and his rival claimant for the kingdom of Mide. A contributing reason for this attack may have been the abduction of Derbforgaill, wife of Tigernán Ua Ruairc, by Mac Murchada in 1152.
Dispossessed by the forces of Ua Conchobair and Ua Ruairc, Mac Murchada, fled to seek the assistance of Henry II, king of England. These two men were already acquainted as Mac Murchada had provided fleets from Dublin and other Norse areas to assist Henry in his Welsh campaign of 1165. Mac Murchada submitted to Henry who granted him permission to recruit military forces in order to recover his lands. Mac Murchada formed an alliance with Hugh de Lacy’s cousin in law, Richard fitz Gilbert de Clare, better remembered in Ireland as Strongbow. Strongbow’s father had been created earl of Pembroke by King Stephen in 1138 but Henry had refused to recognise the title. In exchange for his help Mac Murchada promised Strongbow his daughter’s hand in marriage and the kingship of Leinster after his death.
Mac Murchada returned to Ireland in 1167 with a small band of Welsh and Flemish soldiers and regained a portion of his ancestral lands. Ua Conchobair marched against them and forced Mac Murchada into submission.
Early in May 1169 a significant Norman, Welsh and Flemish force landed near Wexford. Together with Mac Murchada’s forces they took the town of Wexford and advanced into Leinster. Ua Conchobair again intervened and forced Mac Murchada to agree to terms.
Strongbow landed in August 1170 with a considerable army and captured the walled city of Waterford. Having married Mac Murchada’s daughter, Strongbow turned his attention to the strategic political and trade centre of Dublin. Ua Conchobair and his allies attempted to prevent Strongbow reaching Dublin but failed. A small party of Anglo-Norman knights burst into the city from different directions and routed the Ostmen defenders. Mac Murchada followed up the victory at Dublin by taking his forces into Mide, which he had contested in previous years with Ua Ruairc. Mac Murchada plundered Mide including the monasteries of Clonard, Teltown, Dowth, Dulane, Kilskyre, Castlekiernan, Kells and Slane. Many of these monasteries are in the north of Mide, territory held by Ua Ruairc and Mac Murchada’s forces made an incursion into Ua Ruairc’s own home territory of Tir-Briuin.
Aware of the opportunity to go to Ireland de Lacy would not have taken the risk as he was already in secure possession of a large estate. Many of the knights who came to Ireland were landless younger sons who were anxious to secure property.
With Mac Murchada’s death in May 1171 and the accession of Strongbow to the kingship of Leinster Ua Conchobair called on the Irish provincial kings to drive out the foreigner. A large Norse fleet under the former Dublin king, Asculf Mac Torcaill, blockaded Dublin while Ua Conchobair’s army approached the city by land. The Norse attacked Dublin but were outmanoeuvred and defeated. The army of Ua Conchobair including the forces of Ua Ruairc, Ua Máel Sechlainn and Ua Cathasaigh laid siege to Dublin during the months of July and August. As the Irish supplies began to run out, the besieged Anglo-Normans made a surprise sortie on the forces of Ua Conchobair and routed the Irish armies, leaving Strongbow in power in Dublin and Leinster.
Strongbow was a lordless man in Ireland after Ua Conchobair’s forces had been defeated. Having made himself master of Dublin and Leinster he sought to extend his power with an attack on Mide. The English king may have feared the establishment of a separate kingdom as had happened in Sicily early in the twelfth century. As in Sicily the initial success of the Normans attracted further land hungry knights. Henry wished to prevent a free for all situation arising and so decided to travel to Ireland to enforce his authority. Henry had no objection to Mac Murchada recruiting landless younger sons but it was quite another matter to have prominent barons, such as Strongbow, establishing a position of private power beyond his jurisdiction and control. Two further reasons may have impacted on Henry’s decision to visit Ireland. It would have been political to avoid the papal emissaries bringing a sentence of interdict as a result of the murder of Thomas Becket and secondly Irish kings may have appealed to Henry for protection from his subjects.
The invasion of Ireland had been previously considered by Henry II in 1155, at which time Pope Adrian IV issued a Bull Laudabiliter authorizing Henry to conquer Ireland in order to bring the Irish church into line with Roman standards.
In July 1171 Henry consulted with his courtiers at Argentan and it was agreed to launch an expedition to Ireland. The army assembled at Newnham on Severn, near de Lacy’s centre of power in Herefordshire so Hugh and his knights had only a short journey to join the king’s forces.
Henry prepared an imposing force including five hundred knights, between three and four thousand archers with elaborate equipment, including siege towers. This show of force ensured that no resistance was offered either by the Anglo-Normans or the Irish.
Henry’s entourage was composed of a mixture of regular members of his household and feudal magnates. De Lacy was one of the feudal magnates called upon to specifically accompany the king to Ireland and is listed in contemporary sources as one of the earls and barons who accompanied the king.
Strongbow sailed over to Wales and appeared before Henry to lay his conquests at his feet. Having prayed at the shrine of St. David, the king and his company set sail for Ireland.
Accompanying Henry throughout his visit to Ireland, de Lacy and the kings’s forces embarked from Pembroke and landed at Crook outside Waterford on 17 October 1171. The king again received Strongbow’s formal homage and Leinster was granted to Strongbow for the service of one hundred knights.
Henry then marched westwards, pausing first at Lismore where he stayed for two days, and then travelling to Cashel, where Domnall Ua Briain, king of Thomond submitted to his authority. At Cashel arrangements were concluded with the archbishop, Domnall Ua hUllachain, for the holding of a synod of the Irish Church. On his expeditions Henry may have identified sites for future castles. Henry returned to Waterford before marching northwards to Dublin while the pattern of Irish submissions continued.
A special palace was constructed for Henry, presumably in advance, between the city and the Thingmót, near the current St. Andrew’s church. While part of his train included wooden pre-fabricated castles Henry’s palace was constructed from polished osiers ‘after the fashion of the country.’ The palace may have been constructed by the Irish chieftains as an act of homage to Henry. Camping outside the walls the most powerful ruler in Western Europe sought to impress the Anglo-Normans and the Irish with an ostentatious display of wealth and power. Henry held court at Dublin for nearly three months during which time many Irish kings including Ua Ruairc of Mide attended and readily made submission. Entering Henry’s house and accepting his hospitality they acknowledged him as overlord. De Lacy would have witnessed the submission of these kings at court. The king attended Christmas ceremonies at Christ Church cathedral. The city had to cope with an influx of armed men. Henry’s retinue created a boom for city merchants, purchasing wine and other supplies as they had at Waterford. A number of his soldiers were unfamiliar with Irish food and some contracted severe dysentery and died.
Henry granted Dublin its first charter, declaring it a royal city and granted it to his men of Bristol with the liberties of the same. Neither Strongbow nor de Lacy witnessed this charter but Hugh did witness grants to All Hallows and to Aelelmus, brother of Hamund, at Dublin.
According to Giraldus during Henry’s visit Hugh de Lacy and William fitz Aldelin met the high king, Ruaidraí Ua Conchobair, at the river Shannon. However this claim is denied by other chroniclers and the Irish annals make no mention of it. The Shannon would have been an appropriate meeting place for negotiations between Ua Conchobair and the representatives of Henry as it was on the borders of the territory controlled or claimed by each. In France when the king of England, who was duke of Normandy, met the king of France they did so on the borders of their territories. According to Giraldus Ua Conchobair submitted to Henry as overlord, and bound himself in alliance with the king. Ua Conchobair did not make personal homage to Henry and he did not leave his territory but forced Henry’s two representatives to come to him. By doing so he was not acting like the minor kings who attended on Henry and submitted in person. Other records state that Ua Conchobair claimed all of Ireland as rightly his. If Ua Conchobair had submitted then Henry could have rightly claimed to be lord of Ireland, a title which he did not use. Flanagan suggested that Giraldus exaggerated if not entirely invented the meeting between Ua Conchobair and de Lacy and fitz Aldelin at the Shannon. She also suggested that the meeting might have taken place in 1173 as a preliminary for the Treaty of Windsor in 1175. De Lacy may have described this event to Giraldus in 1185 out of context in order to promote himself and his alliance with Ua Conchobair in the 1180s.
While the king remained at Dublin, he received news from England, that the pope had sent two legates to make an inquisition into the murder of Archbishop Becket. Henry sailed from Wexford on Easter Monday, 17 April 1172. Tradition states that Henry did penance for Becket’s murder at Selskar in Wexford.
Before his departure from Wexford Henry created Hugh de Lacy bailiff of Dublin city and provided him with a garrison of forty knights men including Robert fitz Stephen, Maurice fitz Gerald, Meiler fitz Henry and Miles fitz David. The king was removing some of Strongbow’s adherents and attaching them to his supporter, de Lacy. Henry granted de Lacy an additional grant of fees around Dublin for the duration of his tenure of the office.
De Lacy Granted Meath
‘Henry, by the grace of God King of England, Duke of Normandy and Aquitain, and the Earl of Anjoy, to the Archbishops, Abbots, Earls, Barons, Justices, and all his ministers and faithful subjects, French, English, Irish, of all his Dominions, greeting: Know ye that I have given and granted and by this my charter confirmed unto Hugh de Lacy, in consideration of his services, the land of Meath with its appurtenances, to have and to hold of me my heirs, to him and his heirs by the service of fifty knights, in as full and ample a manner as Muirchard Hu-Mulachlyn held it or any other person before or after him: and as an addition I give all the fees that he owes or shall owe me above Dublin while he is my bailiff, to do me services in my city of Dublin. Wherefore I will strickly command that the said Hugh and his heirs shall enjoy the said land and shall hold all the liberties and free customs which I have or may have therein by the aforesaid service from me and my heirs, well and peacefully, freely, quietly, and honourably, in wood and plain, in meadow and pasture, in water and mills, in warren and ponds, in fishing and hunting, in ways and paths, in seaports and all other places appertaining to the said land, with all liberties which I have therein or can grant or confirm to him by this my charter.’ – Calendar of the Gormanston Register
Before Henry departed from Wexford he granted Mide to de Lacy for the service of 50 knights. Henry made this grant just before his departure so was it a last minute decision or had he intended to do it while in Ireland but never got around to it until forced to leave? Ó Hoireabhárd suggested that Henry might have been prepared to leave Ua Ruairc in possession of Mide if his ally and supporter, Ua Conchobair, had submitted. Ua Ruairc and Ua Conchobair had just recently besieged Dublin. Henry granted Mide to de Lacy to prevent the northward expansion of Strongbow and to protect the king’s city of Dublin from attack by Ua Conchobair and the Irish. Henry may have feared that Strongbow would continue his raids into Mide and make a claim for its control as had his father-in-law, Mac Murchada. Mide was a threat to the security of Dublin and by granting it to his loyal servant Henry removed that threat and created a physical barrier to attack from the west. With the grant of Mide de Lacy was of sufficient stature to act as a counter balance to the power of Strongbow. De Lacy was equal in pedigree to Strongbow and was as familiar with dealing with Celtic peoples. De Lacy was required to provide fifty knights or the equivalent in monetary terms whenever Henry demanded service. The service was to be performed in Dublin so Henry was protecting the city. Mide would prove a valuable resource for the English crown contributing knights and income. This knight service was transformed into scutage, a monetary sum, which provided Henry with additional revenue. The scutage for fifty knights was a considerable sum. Mide was as yet unconquered and by granting it to de Lacy, Henry was bestowing it on someone who could control and exploit the territory. As a marcher lord de Lacy was familiar with the nature and experience of frontier warfare. De Lacy may have had a good relationship with Strongbow, as Strongbow was his wife’s first cousin. Indeed Henry may have meant the two men to work together rather than counterbalance each other. At the same time as the grant of Meath to de Lacy Henry recognised Strongbow’s title of count or earl of Striguil.
For de Lacy Mide was an opportunity to increase his estate and income. After his accord with the Welsh princes in 1171-72 Henry positively discouraged further advance into Welsh controlled territory, thereby limiting the opportunities for expansion by de Lacy and other nobles in the Welsh marches. Mide was a large grant of good land served by a navigable river and within easy reach of the port of Dublin. Worth the price of many Weobleys Mide provide de Lacy with enormous potential. The grant of Mide for a fee of fifty knights almost doubled Hugh’s property as he held fifty fees in England and Wales. Mide was granted by the king, not conquered like Leinster, therefore its grantee, de Lacy, owed his lands to the power of the king.
The king delegated his authority in Mide to de Lacy. Granted almost regal powers in Mide de Lacy was still subject to Henry’s overall rule. The charter included ‘all the liberties and free customs which I (Henry) have or may have’. The grantee could raise his own forces, administer the king’s justice, collect revenue, erect castles and create boroughs. De Lacy created the barons of Delvin, Killeen and Dunboyne.
The rights which Hugh received in Mide were similar to the rights which the marcher lords on the border with Wales enjoyed. De Lacy was granted all the liberties which Henry held and Mide is sometimes described as a ‘liberty’ in the Middle Ages. The marcher lords had the rights to appoint sheriffs, hold courts, wage wars; powers and privileges beyond the greatest of the English barons. Each lordship might have different systems of organisation. The king’s law did not operate in the Marches, instead a hybrid of local custom and the English common law was in force. The Norman lords adapted the local customs to suit their military needs with their powers being an amalgam of English, feudal and Welsh laws. One distinctive feature of marcher lordship was the right of the lords to levy private war against their neighbours. There was never any restriction on castle-building within the March. This was a system which could easily be transferred to a similar situation in Ireland.
The powers of these lords were derived from the Welsh lordships which they had conquered. De Lacy’s grant of Mide as ‘Muirchard Hu-Melaghlin held it’ could be a similar provision of Irish power to an Anglo-Norman lord. De Lacy was now to ruler over the Irish chieftains holding the lands in Mide. With no agreed king in east Mide de Lacy was stepping into the role formerly played by the kings of Mide. A scribe writing at a later period described de Lacy as the successor of Ua Máel Sechlainn. His powers were ‘in as full and ample a manner as Muirchard Hu-Melaghlin held it.’ The native Irish came to view their new lord as king of Mide.
The witnesses to the charter of Mide were Count Richard fitz Gilbert (Strongbow), William de Braose, Ralph de Verdon, William de Albin, Reginald de Courtenai, Hugh de Gundeville, William fitz Aldelin, Hugh de Cressi, William de Stotevilla, Ralph de Haia, Reginald de Parvilli, Ralph de Verdun, William de Gerpuvilla and Robert de Riulli. A number of these witnesses were to play a role in the conquest of Ireland and the subsequent generation of the de Lacy family. Hugh’s eldest son, Walter, was to marry the daughter of William de Braose. Ralph de Verdun’s brother, Bertram, was an itinerant justice in Herefordshire where de Lacy held lands in 1176. Bertram arrived in Ireland with John in 1185 when he was granted the lordship of Dundalk. It appears that Bertram may have been involved in the administration of de Lacy’s estates after de Lacy’s death at Durrow as he appears as a witness to a deed of Adam de Feipo about 1186. Bertram’s daughter, Leselina, married de Lacy’s son, Hugh, somewhere between 1194 and 1199.
What was required in Mide was a warrior rather than an administrator and de Lacy filled this role. Royal administrators generally came from the royal court or king’s familia. Gilbert, Hugh’s father, had attended the court of Matilda and Henry’s court and witnessed their charters on a number of occasions. Hugh too became a regular visitor to the court.
As one of the biggest landowners in Herefordshire de Lacy was an important tenant-in-chief of the crown. The king’s household normally included some of the most powerful barons. De Lacy had attained a prominent position in the king’s entourage to Ireland and must have been one of the intimates of the king. The grant of Mide may have been a reward for his loyal service.
Henry knew his men and was familiar with the strengths of de Lacy, establishing him in Mide as his protégé. As a marcher lord de Lacy was well able to cope with frontier warfare and did not need to be near administrative centres or supply centres. He had the ability, the resources and the political credentials to conquer and control Mide. The lands of Ireland provided Henry with an opportunity to provide patronage to his favourite noblemen, enriching de Lacy overnight with the grant of a kingdom.
Murchad Ua Máel Sechlainn had been king of Mide until his death in 1153. Henry demonstrated that he had carried out research into Mide before making the grant in order to ascertain the extent of its boundaries and its recent history. Henry ignored the divisions of Mide which had taken place in the years after Murchad Ua Máel Sechlainn’s death. The grant was quite vague and allowed for various interpretations of the size of the kingdom.
Mide had undergone a long stretch of political turmoil and little resistance was offered to de Lacy’s claim. By keeping Mide divided the neighbouring dynasties were ensuring that the province would remain weak and not be a challenge to their territory. Mide was a kingdom which was divided and re-divided during the twelfth century. Murchad Ua Máel Sechlainn was the primary resident claimant and held major parts of the territory in the first half of the century. By the late 1130s Murchad was powerful enough to raid the territory of Bréifne and Uriel. In 1141 Murchad was recognised as the king of Mide and Conmaice by the high-king but a few years later the high-king was attempting to replace Murchad with his own son. In 1150 the kingdom was once more divided between Tairdelbach Ua Conchobair, Tigernán Ua Ruairc and Ua Cerbaill of Uriel with Murchad banished. This arrangement did not last and in 1152 the kings of Connacht, Ulster and Leinster met at Rathkenny in Mide and divided the province between Murchad and his son, Maeleachalinn. Clonard was the point of division. In 1153 Murchad died at Durrow. Maeleachalinn succeed his father but died of poisoning in 1155. A cousin, Donnchad, was then made king but he was set aside for his brother, Diarmait, who was banished to Connacht in 1156. Diarmait was recalled only to be deposed again amidst much confusion. Mac Murchada of Leinster and Ua Ruairc of Bréifne became the principal rivals for supremacy over Mide. In 1163 a new claimant to western Mide emerged. In 1169 Mide was divided by Ua Ruairc and the high king, Ua Conchobair. After the success of Strongbow at Dublin in 1170 Mac Murchada and his forces overran and devastated the territories of Ua Ruairc in Mide.
Inheriting the problems caused by the unceasing warfare for control of the territory de Lacy was strong enough to bring an end eventually to the chaos by establishing a strong central administration.
Mide, stretching forty kilometres from the east coast to the Shannon and almost twenty five kilometres north-south, lies in the central lowlands of Ireland. Mide is a fertile, drift-covered undulating lowland centred on the valleys of the river Boyne and Blackwater; the area has always been one of Ireland’s richest agricultural regions. The Boyne was rich in fish particularly salmon, trout and mud-eel. Quite a large portion of eastern Mide was cleared to produce land for arable crops. The land was fertile but was used more for pasture than grain production prior to the arrival of the Anglo-Normans. The quality of land declined westwards with the percentage of bogland increasing. Glacial features such as eskers provided route ways through the territory. This limestone floored lowland is at the heart of the rich eastern triangle, with easy access to the Irish Sea. The territory has been attractive for all new cultures and new arrivals to Ireland since Neolithic times. From this area new arrivals had their best chance for commanding the whole country, while at the same time allowing easy access to routes abroad.
Mide was a crucial border zone between the new colony of Dublin and Leinster and Connacht. Mide had easy access to Dublin, the chief city of the island, providing important trading opportunities and ease of access to the centre of political control. Mide was the natural hinterland of Dublin with the city and territory of Dublin sandwiched between the former enemy kingdoms of Mide and Leinster.
Hugh de Lacy was granted Mide ‘in as full and ample a manner as Muirchard Hu-Melaghlin held it’. The Boyne valley was the central nucleus of the region but Mide had no natural border. The Ua Máel Sechlainn had exercised authority over a fluctuating area, not a clearly defined territory. When de Lacy attempted to conquer the lands the frontiers of the emerging colony remained fluid.
This territory extended from the Shannon to the sea, traditionally has been in later times described as having similar bounds as the present diocese of Meath and to have included the present counties of Meath and Westmeath but also the baronies of Garrycastle and Kilcoursey (now the north-western part of Offaly) and the eastern part of the modern county of Longford around Granard. However the boundaries of this territory were not clear and de Lacy also made claims to parts of the modern counties of Louth and Dublin. When de Lacy attempted to conquer the lands the frontiers of the emerging colony remained fluid.
The kingdom of Mide included seventeen smaller petty kingdoms which were subject to constant change. The diocese of Meath ranged from Dunleer and Balrothery in the east to Granard and Eglish in the west. The borders of the diocese of Meath were derived from the borders of the dioceses of Duleek, Clonard and Kells as established under the synod of Rathbreasil in 1111. The synod of Rathbreasil had set the boundary between the dioceses of Armagh and Duleek at Slieve Breagh, the range of hill running from Collon to Clogher Head. The synod of Rathbreasil envisaged the diocese of Glendalough and Dublin bordering the diocese of Duleek at a line from Lambay to Greenogue. In east Mide the northern part of the territory was in the hands of Tigernán Ua Ruairc. Kells may have served as the principal church of the kingdom of Bréifne with Ua Ruairc claiming lands to the north of the Boyne, even as far as Navan. By the time of his death de Lacy was regarded as king or lord of Bréifne. The border with Leinster was clearly defined by the Liffey, Ryewater and upper Boyne valleys.
Ferrard, a territory in south Louth today, was traditionally part of the territory of the Máel Sechlainn, kings of Mide, under whom it was held by the men of Brega. The sub-kingdom of Brega, centred at Knowth, included parts of southern Uriel. Donnchad Ua Cerbaill, who became king of Uriel in 1125, was a claimant on the territory of Mide as was his half-brother, Tigernán Ua Ruairc. The Ua Cerbaills regained the territory on the north side of the Boyne in the mid twelfth century. Lands on the south side of the Boyne from Collon and Slane to Drogheda were granted to Mellifont by Ua Cerbaill. Donnchad’s successor, Murchad, submitted to Henry II in 1171, but supported Ruaidrí Ua Conchobair in 1174 in his attack on Trim castle. Interpreting his grant of Mide to include part of Uriel, particularly Ferrard, north of the Boyne, de Lacy’s development of Drogheda on the north bank of the river Boyne may have signalled an intention to use it as a base for further expansion into that territory. Grants were made by de Lacy to Mellifont Abbey which were located on the northern bank of the Boyne. The regular subinfeudation of Ferrard would seem to indicate that it was carried out by de Lacy or his son. Philip de Nugent as kinsman of Gilbert de Nugent, brother-in-law of Hugh, was granted land in Ferrard. Following the development of the Anglo-Norman power structure in east Mide, Ua Cerbaill, would seem to have acquiesced to de Lacy’s claim to southern Uriel and may have regarded him as his overlord. In 1184 de Lacy and his forces assisted Ua Cerbaill in his attack on Armagh. Ua Cerbaill retained possession of most of his lands until his death in 1189 but even before that de Lacy was being recognised as king of Uriel. While this claim of kingship might have been an exaggeration de Lacy certainly did control some of the lands of Uriel and Ua Cerbaill acknowledged him as his overlord.
The territory of Saithne, north of Dublin, was a sub-kingdom of Mide and Hugh de Lacy as lord of Mide may have used this to justify its appropriation. Imar Ua Cathasaigh, lord of Sithne, had submitted to Henry at Dublin. Taking control of the territory of Saithne when Ua Cathasaigh died in 1179, de Lacy was forced to restore the territory to the royal demesne of Dublin by Henry II’s agent, Philip of Worcester, about 1184-5. De Lacy granted Hugh Tyrell Castleknock so that may have been seen as a part of the kingdom of Mide. De Lacy also made grants to the monastery of Llanthony of lands north of Dublin, which were confirmed by John and also by the bishop of Clonard. The fact that the bishops of Clonard/Meath could grant a confirmation for these lands could be interpreted that these lands were part of the diocese of Meath, as any territory held by the lord of Mide could be viewed as part of the diocese of Meath.
Henry, in his grant of Mide to de Lacy, ignored the rights of the other claimants to the territory of Mide. The king on occasion ignored the rights of inheritors to estates, he did so in the case of the Giffard estate in 1164 where Strongbow was one of the claimants. Warren described Henry as an ‘oath breaker’.
From the native Irish came a number of claims. Domnall Breagach Ua Máel Sechlainn was recognized only as king of east Mide, the western half was under the control of his brother, Art. Domnall had recognised the overlordship of Leinster in his submission to Mac Murchada in 1170.
Ua Ruairc had raided into Mide in early 1171 in an attempt to regain control of the territory. Ua Ruairc, as king of Mide, submitted to Henry in 1171-2. Henry ignored the fact that the king of Mide had submitted to him when he made the grant to de Lacy. Flanagan discussed the nature of the submission of the Irish kings to Henry. Did the Irish kings submit to Henry as their feudal lord, holding their kingdoms of him and paying an annual tribute? In return they would expect Henry to protect them and their kingdom or had they agreed to recognise him as their over-king in the Irish tradition. Henry does not appear to have granted Ua Ruairc a charter to his lands, so Henry could have felt free to grant the lands which had been submitted to him to his own chosen person. Having accepted the submission of the king of Mide and guaranteeing his lands to then grant those lands to one of your courtiers might be seen as an act of bad faith. Henry’s grant to de Lacy might be seen as exacerbating the political instability of the territory. Lydon suggested that the submission of the holder of Mide, Domnall Ua Máel Sechlainn, to Mac Murchada in 1170 put the kingdom in the hands of Strongbow and through the submission of Strongbow into the king’s hands.
Ruaidrí Ua Conchobair would have a claim on the western portion of Mide, having held it in the 1160s and been confirmed in it by the partition of 1169. Similarly Murchad Ua Cerbaill, king of Uriel, could claim part of east Mide, his father having held it in the previous decade. Murchad had also submitted to Henry and therefore should have received his protection.
De Lacy’s cousin in law, Strongbow, made a claim on Mide but surrendered it when he submitted to Henry. Strongbow’s father-in-law, Mac Murchada, had been attempting to annex Mide to Leinster and had even secured sections of the territory in a number of the divisions prior to 1166. Mac Murchada had intervened in Mide for the first time in 1138 and did so again in 1152, 1156, 1157 and 1161. The Song and the Book of Leinster described him as king of Mide when he died. As Strongbow was his nominated successor, then Strongbow would have a claim on the territory as well. In 1170 Mac Murchada and the forces of Strongbow campaigned successfully in Mide and secured part of the territory near Dublin. Domnall Breagach Ua Máel Sechlainn, king of east Mide, submitted to Mac Murchada at that time, acknowledging him as overlord of Mide. Strongbow could have but did not argue the case for his succession in Mide in right of his wife or by conquest. Giraldus considered Strongbow’s seizure of Mide as unlawful. Henry by granting Mide to de Lacy as ‘Muirchard Hu-Melaghlin held it or any other person …. after him,’ prohibited Strongbow or any other more recent claimant from making a claim.
The grant of Mide to de Lacy established a link between Ireland and the Welsh marches for the next two centuries. Hugh’s estates stretched from Normandy to the Shannon and a change in one area could affect the family elsewhere. The whole of his estate was ruled from wherever de Lacy happened to be staying at the time. A similar system existed in each area and the lord’s court accompanied him as he travelled. To travel to Ireland necessitated a day’s voyage from Wales, but inclement weather could prevent passage for months. He may have had his own ships to transport his retinue as his son, Walter, did in 1215.
Holding lands in Wales, England, Normandy and Ireland, the importance of his Irish estate and position led to de Lacy concentrating on Ireland and the family became regarded as being Irish. Hugh was to be one of the two most powerful men in Ireland until the death of Strongbow in 1176 and thereafter the most powerful man in Ireland until his own death in 1186.
The grant, while it was on a magnificent scale, was a speculative grant. It was now up to de Lacy to go forth and win the land by the sword.
The conquest begins with the elimination of a rival
Tiernan O’Rourke, Lord of Breifny and Conmaicne, a man of great power for a long time, was treacherously slain at Tlachtgha by Hugo de Lacy and Donnell, the son of Annadh O’Rourke, one of his own tribe, who was along with them. Annals of the Four Masters, 1172.
The stakes that de Lacy was playing for were massive. His first objective was to establish military control so that settlement and exploitation could begin. Progress was initially rapid with raids by bands of Anglo-Norman soldiers setting out to terrorize the country into subjection. They pillaged and plundered ruthlessly. Guided and supported by the son of Annadh Ua Ruairc, the Anglo-Normans plundered Annaly (Longford) and carried off many cows and prisoners. Later that year they attacked Ardagh and killed Domnall Ua Ferghail, chief of Conmaicne. They raided Fore and for a fortnight consumed the food there and burned the town. From there they went to Cell Achaid where they plundered the church and killed some of the people. These may have been exploratory raids accessing the strength of the Irish.
De Lacy was extremely well versed in the business of war. His knights were familiar with ongoing military developments such as lancing, which they practised on Tleachtga in 1172. Hugh appears to have fought in a similar fashion as the Irish carrying out raids into neighbouring territories. Campaigns consisted of harrying and ravaging the country with no set battles taking place.
The Irish annalists did not recognise the Anglo-Norman’s warfare as being significantly different but the Anglo-Normans also used horse mounted soldiers and archers. Evidence of stabling and horses were uncovered at de Lacy’s ringwork castle at Trim. Marcher lords used lighter armour which was coming into fashion in northern France in the latter half of the twelfth century. This enabled them to fight better on foot in wooded areas and bogs. The marcher lords gained experience of this type of fighting in Wales. The Irish tactics, like the Welsh, consisted of ambushes and raids and while the Irish were also capable of laying siege to castles, they rarely did so. The Irish fought as light horsemen. Giraldus portrayed the Irish as going naked and unarmed into battle, being mainly interested in cattle raiding and plundering while the Anglo-Normans were attempting to conquer and hold the land. Flanagan proved that the Irish military capability was underrated while the Anglo-Norman capability exaggerated.
The Anglo-Normans were outnumbered but met little organised or co-ordinated mass resistance. The Irish kings quarrelled among themselves preventing one strong leader from emerging. As in Wales, the Anglo-Normans were able to augment their forces by recruiting Irish allies or Irish mercenaries. The native Irish were a component in the conquest through the supply of escorts, interpreters and guides during reconnaissance operations with de Lacy utilising professional interpreters or latimers.
Shortly after the departure of Henry, de Lacy found that he had to confront his major rival in Mide. Tigernán Ua Ruairc still claimed jurisdiction over those districts in Mide which had been granted him under Ruaidrí Ua Conchobair and had further enhanced his position in 1171 when he had negotiated a peace with Domnall Breaghach, king of east Mide, and accepted his submission. Ua Ruairc did not see the arrival of the Anglo-Normans as having altered his position, he continued to attempt to impose control over the lands he claimed. If de Lacy was to secure control in Mide he had to negotiate with Ua Ruairc and if he wished to secure control over the territory he had to remove Ua Ruairc as a rival. He might try to do this by negotiation or more violent methods. Granted Mide by Henry de Lacy would have regarded himself as the lawful lord of the territory.
Tigernán Ua Ruairc was first mentioned as king of Bréifne in 1124. Murchad Ua Máel Sechlainn, king of Mide, provided support to Ua Ruairc, as the new king of Bréifne and Tigernán married Murchad’s daughter, Derbforgaill. Ua Ruairc received a portion of Mide when it was divided in 1125 by Tairdelbach Ua Conchobair, the high king. Ua Ruairc devoted a large part of his reign in expanding his kingdowm into Mide. In 1144 Ua Conchobair divided east Mide equally between Ua Ruairc and Diarmait Mac Murchada of Leinster. The lands to the north of the Boyne and Blackwater fell under Ua Ruairc’s control following this division. Ua Ruairc and Mac Murchada were rivals for the lands of east Mide. Following Mac Murchada’s abduction of Derbforgaill in 1152 they became fixed enemies.
In Mide Ua Ruairc became chief patron of the monastery at Kells and supported its case to be an episcopal see. Controlling lands extending as far east as Slane he also provided lands to the monastery at Navan. Ua Ruairc and his wife, Derbforgaill, attended the consecration of the abbey church at Mellifont in 1157 and endowed the church there. Tigernán Ua Ruairc was described as king of Mide by Giraldus.
Ua Ruairc’s claim to Mide was reinforced in 1169, when Ruaidrí Ua Conchobair, successor of Tairdelbach, overran Mide, and granted him the eastern half, while Ua Conchobair retained the western portion. Ua Ruairc had supported the high king’s campaign against Mac Murchada and the Anglo-Normans. He also supported Ua Conchobair at Dublin in an attempt to prevent the Anglo-Normans taking the city and had participated in the unsuccessful siege of the city in 1171 and made two additional attacks on the city in that year. He raided into Mide on a number of occasions in 1171 and attacked the settlement of Tulach Ard, burning the bell tower. This site, to the north east of Ath Truim, was later captured and garrisoned by Anglo-Norman forces. A counter raid was made into Mide by Mac Murchada and the Anglo-Normans. Ua Ruairc submitted to Henry at Dublin in late 1171.
Treating Ua Ruairc as an equal de Lacy did not altogether deny him his claim but suggested a parley should be held to define their respective areas of control. It was arranged that the two should meet at the Hill of Ua Ruairc.
The Hill of Ua Ruairc has been identified as Tleachtga, today the Hill of Ward, Athboy. Half way between Dublin and Bréifne and on the borders of the territory under Ua Ruairc’s control, Tleachtga was an ancient assembly or ceremonial site. The hill had been the site of a major assembly held by Ruaidrí Ua Conchobair, high king of Ireland, in 1167 and so was an easily identifiable and significant site for a meeting. Tleachtga was on the borders of the territories controlled by both men – Ua Ruairc to the north and de Lacy to the south. The hill may also have served as an inauguration site for the Ua Ruaircs.
That neither party trusted the other is indicated by the fact that they exchanged messages at a distance before agreeing to a personal meeting. Both de Lacy and Ua Ruairc were reluctant to give ground to the other as both felt they had the rightful claim to the territory. It was agreed to meet with a small number of lightly armed men on either side. Hugh retained a small band of mounted knights on the side of the hill and Ua Ruairc had a party of foot soldiers. As to what followed, both parties accuse the other of treachery. On one side it is asserted that Ua Ruairc produced a battle axe from beneath his robe and attacked de Lacy while on the other side it is alleged that Ua Ruairc was treacherously slain.
The Anglo-Normans regarded the Irish as very treacherous. The Irish carried axes, having adopted the weapon of the Vikings, used it easily, creating a sense of anxiety in the Anglo-Normans. Giraldus described the events from the Anglo-Norman side under the heading ‘The treacherous conduct and death of Ua Ruairc.’ Griffin, nephew of Maurice Fitzgerald, foresaw treachery by Ua Ruairc in a dream on the night before the parley. At the meeting Ua Ruairc produced an axe and signalled his men to attack. Maurice fitz Gerald warned de Lacy who rose to defend himself. It was recorded that the invading lord fell twice while trying to escape Ua Ruairc’s axe, a circumstance not to his credit considering his opponent, Ua Ruairc, would have been an old man at this stage, having been king of Bréifne for nearly fifty years. The Irish interpreter was wounded and the Anglo-Norman company were saved by the arrival of Griffin and a group of mounted knights. Griffin dispatched Ua Ruairc and his head was cut off and sent to the English king. The Irish were pursued until they reached the safety of the forests. Giraldus made de Lacy a bit player in the event, granting the hero’s role to his relatives, Griffin and Maurice fitz Gerald.
There was involvement by Irish individuals in de Lacy’s force. Accompanying the new lord of Mide was a rival of Tigernán Ua Ruairc, Domnall, son of Annadh Ua Ruairc, who assisted in the slaying of Ua Ruairc. Domnall supported the Anglo-Normans on a raid into Longford later in 1172. A year later, in 1173, Domnall was slain by the supporters of Tigernán Ua Ruairc and his hand sent to Ruaidrí Ua Conchobair who nailed it to the top of his castle of Tuam.
The Irish claimed that Ua Ruairc was treacherously killed and beheaded. His headless body was sent to Dublin and gibbeted with the feet upwards on the northern side of the city with his head erected over the door of the fortress. Giraldus stated that the head was dispatched to Henry.
Acting as expediency dictated de Lacy removed the major obstruction to his rule and he was left undisputed lord of the whole of Mide. Ua Ruairc’s death may have been regarded at the time as a major breakthrough in the conquest.
The removal of rivals by murder was an ongoing and acceptable practice both with the Irish themselves and the Anglo-Normans so de Lacy did not act in an improper manner by executing Ua Ruairc. The Irish annals abound with examples and similar events happened in Wales. A rival, Gaelic or Anglo-Norman, irrespective of race, could be removed. Another minor rival, Maghnus Ua Máel Sechlainn, the lord of east Mide, was hanged at Trim, an act of treachery according to Irish sources.
Ruthless when required de Lacy was confident in his own rights as lord of Mide and so the removal of an unlawful claimant was the right action to take. The death of Ua Ruairc sent a message to the lesser Irish aristocracy that de Lacy was in charge and would brook no dissention.
Tigernán Ua Ruairc’s territory of Bréifne was the subject of an invasion and occupation by de Lacy’s sons a generation later, obviously feeling they had a claim on Bréifne as it had been part of the same kingdom with Mide.
Trim Castle
Then Hugh de Lacy
Fortified a house at Trim
And threw a trench around it
And then enclosed it with a stockade. – Song, ll 3222-5.
Having been granted the entire kingdom of Mide Hugh had a totally free hand in deciding where to erect his caput. A new lordship required a new castle as a centre for the estate. The fact that all de Lacy’s Irish lands were not fragmented but in one cohesive lot allowed him to consider erecting a major administrative centre for his lands. He sought a defensive position with the good infrastructure and communication lines. Drawn to the existing early Christian monastic sites de Lacy
made a clean break with the past rulers and chose Trim as the site for his caput. Trim, although not strong as a defensive site, was strategically located in the centre of his grant of Mide. Another site he might have considered was Duleek, one of his other earliest castles, but this was not sited on a major river and was not centrally located in the grant. The de Lacy castle at Ludlow was in a corner of the manor of Stanton, on a good defensive site but not central to the family’s estates.
Various factors such as defensive conditions, communications routes, water supply and existing settlement played a part in locating the castle at Trim. These factors also applied to other castle sites. While the site at Trim did not provide the greatest possible security, the river provided defensive protection on one side and the castle facilitated the control of the mass of the population and the cultivable land in the river valley. The slightly elevated site and the clearance of the surrounding woods provided good all round vision. The siting of the keep on a natural outcrop of rock elevated over the river provided a vantage point over the surrounding countryside.
The castle site was the focus of routes, both land and riverine. Trim’s strategic site location allowed it to control traffic up and down the river and also across the river. Trim esker, to the south, provided an excellent natural dry foundation for a routeway. It is possible to follow a route from Trim where an old Mass path runs from Maudlins to Scurlogstown and then onto the esker to Moynalvey which is within ten kilometres of the great east-west esker route across Ireland, the Slighe Mhor.
The Boyne as far upstream as Trim was navigable in the medieval period by small boats. This would have allowed de Lacy to develop Drogheda as a port from which he could send supplies upriver to Trim. The river also provided a supply of fresh fish and later the water could be used to supply the moat. De Lacy developed a very similar site at Carlow, which is situated on a slight rise beside a navigable river at a fording site.
Pre-existing settlement played a part in the choice of sites for castles by the Anglo-Normans. Many mottes and castles are located at pre-existing secular sites such as ringforts and at ecclesiastical sites such as Kells and Duleek, where earth and timber castles were developed by de Lacy. The monastery of Trim was attacked and burned in 1143 and 1155. At Trim a small church may have stood on the site before the erection of the castle. It is possible that this church building was surrounded by some sort of ringfort fortification. Hayden suggested that the pre-Nroman structures indicated some form of secular native settlement. The archbishop of Armagh and the bishop of Meath later claimed ownership of the site of Trim castle; as it had been an ecclesiastical site and received a rent in compensation. In the castle yard archaeological investigation uncovered a corn drying kiln, a post and wattle house and an animal stockade, predating the castle, indicating early medieval settlement; possibly a farm or grange associated with the monastery of Trim. Kildare, Roscommon and Roscrea castles were erected on church lands. The location of the castle at an existing ecclesiastical site may have had symbolic importance for de Lacy. De Lacy’s castle at Longtown Castle was erected on earlier enclosure, with the existing settlement site proving attractive to the medieval castle builder as at Trim.
The site at Trim was close to Tulach Ard which was an already accepted focus of lordship being the centre for the kingdom of Lóegaire and which had been temporary quarters for Hugh’s men. Hayden suggested that Trim may have been the capital for the Lóegaire kingdom.
A ringwork castle, a wooden defensive fortification, encircled by a trench and enclosed within a wooden stockade, was erected by Hugh at Trim in 1172.
Hugh’s castle at Weobley comprised of a double ditched ringwork and oval bailey and obviously he considered a similar construction suitable for the caput of his new land grant. The original bailey at Ludlow resembles a ringwork in form.
Sections of the ringwork palisade on the north and north-western side of the keep were noted during excavations in the 1990s. Large frontal posts, braced with further posts behind them, were linked by a slot trench. A raised wall walk inside the palisade would have been a defensive feature. The ringwork was carefully planned with a large number of buildings within the enclosure. The remains of a stone-built residential hall, incorporating a vaulted cellar, a chapel, a granary and a number of other timber buildings were also uncovered in the northwest corner of the ringwork. A bailey was protected by a second palisade and the entrance was guarded by a gatehouse.
The excavations uncovered a very large ringwork (45-50 metres in diameter) defended by an elaborate double line of palisades with a core of earth and stones. It is possible that the ringwork may have only been the central part of a larger defended site.
The existence of a ringwork beneath the keep is a feature commonly found both in British and Irish sites, as evidenced by Carlow Castle, another site fortified by de Lacy, which had a partial ringwork castle prior to the erection of the stone castle.
Earthwork castles were able to resist powerful and sustained attacks and in war conditions a castle’s main purpose was to hold the territory. The first castle at Trim failed in this function. The ringwork may have been a campaigning structure than a final structure. A ringwork could Hugh Tyrell, de Lacy’s constable, was forced to abandon the castle in the face of overwhelming numbers. The timber buildings and palisade were destroyed by fire in 1174 in a raid by Ua Conchobair. Large quantities of burnt grain was uncovered during excavations indicating the presence of a significant number of military horses. The ringwork was rebuilt on the existing site. This destruction spurred de Lacy on to build a castle in stone, a castle which would be more impressive than the earth-and-wood castles of his subordinates. Trim Castle was to be the only stone castle in Anglo-Norman Mide, the only one of its kind. This made it stand out to both the Anglo-Normans and the Irish. Building in stone ensured that the castle would be less vulnerable to destruction by fire.
The stone castle at Trim is the largest and one of the most significant Anglo-Norman military constructions in Ireland. Hugh de Lacy erected the first stage of this castle, the first stone castle erected in Ireland.
Trim castle was constructed on high ground on the south bank of the river Boyne, which protected it from the north. Constructed in three phases de Lacy erected a stone keep, which was further raised by his son and surrounded by curtain walls. The keep stands in the middle of an enclosure with a curtain wall along the river to the north with square towers while to the south the walls have half-round towers. To the west now stands the town of Trim. To the south the castle faced open countryside.
The building is significant as after it was completed it remained almost unaltered in the later middle ages. About two thirds of the internal area of the castle has been excavated to varying degrees. P. David Sweetman excavated a section of the castle grounds during 1971-4 and Alan Hayden excavated part of the site during 1995-8.
Following the destruction of the ringwork castle by the Irish, work began on the stone keep and curtain walls in 1175. McNeill suggested that the keep and curtain walls were part of a single overall plan while O’Keeffe stated that the curtain wall was commenced before the keep. De Lacy erected the first stage of the keep which was the central block to first floor level but with walls carried up a floor higher, to support the side towers which went up to that level. This central structure was roofed; it had a wall walk and parapet on top of the walls of the central block. The first phase of the keep could be described as a ‘hall-keep.’ There was a break in the work between 1186 and 1194 when the de Lacy’s lordship was held by John, the lord of Ireland. Hugh’s son, Walter, erected the upper two stories in two stages after 1194 and completed the curtain walls. The start of construction had usually been dated to 1200 from documentary sources with the project halted while Walter was in exile in France from 1210. Taking an entry in the Book of Howth, the date of 1220 was traditionally identified by many writers as the completion date of the castle. However the commencement of construction work on the castle has now been dated to 1175 through the use of dendrochronology and the archaeological excavations carried out in the 1990s further support this dating.
The keep is situated on the summit of a gently sloping hill at the centre of the area surrounded by the curtain walls. The shape of the keep is unusual with a central square core, with four projecting towers, one located centrally on each side of the square. The plan is a combination of a square and a Greek cross or more accurately a quadrate cross (a cross with a square at the intersection point); complicating the external appearance of the building and giving it twenty sides. Each side of the central square core measures approximately 20 metres in length, with the height to the highest point today being 23 metres. The north projecting tower is almost entirely missing. The exterior dimensions of the projecting towers are 8 metres by 12 metres while interior dimensions of the projecting towers are approximately 4.6 metres x 4.9 metres.
The cross design was personally adopted by de Lacy. A number of other castle of the period used interesting geometric designs such as the twelfth-century keep at Etampes (Essonne) in France which was designed in the form of a quatrefoil. The cross design may have given the castle a Christian imprimatur, perhaps linking it to its formerly ecclesiastical site. The design may indicate that de Lacy was interested in complex Christian symbolism and display.
Trim’s design may be compared with Orford Castle, Suffolk, a massive polygonal stone keep with a unique shape and plan. Henry II erected Orford castle with work beginning in 1165. The individualistic design was a royal statement of royal authority. The design of the keep at Trim may have been de Lacy’s statement of power, a power which could possibly equal or rival the power of the king. Orford was one of the first castles to have mural towers projecting from the curtain wall as those erected at Trim sometime later. Trim’s design was part of a European wide experimentation with different plan-types.
For defensive purposes the entrance to the keep at Trim is on the north face of first floor of the eastern tower. There was a defensive fore-building erected to protect the bottom of the stairway. The main rooms of the castle were in the keep. A large well-dressed stone pillar in the centre of the main room supported the timbers of the roof. This was later removed and a north-south central wall erected to support the new floors above. The keep or donjon provided the essential rooms of the castle including the domestic accommodation of the lord, and could be used as a place of final retreat if the outer curtain walls were breached.
There is a clear break in the masonry about half way up on the keep indicating where Hugh’s construction finished. The scar of the gable line of Hugh’s two un-equal sized roofs is indicated in the interior masonry in the central block and of the lean-to roofs in the projecting towers. The walls of the main block were higher than the apex of the two roofs over the main block. The roof was covered with concave ceramic roof tiles. Tehse tiels are similar to the “monk” and “nun” tiles sued to cover castles and churches in Denmark and northern Germany at the time. This type of tiles were not used in Britain at the time so what prompted de Lacy to roof his new castle with this type of tile and how did he know about them? Some of the tiles may have been imported with others loclally produced.
Constructed on bedrock, the keep is built of roughly coursed limestone rubble with red sandstone mouldings on the lower windows and doorways. The masonry on the lower half is more compact than on the upper part. Externally the walls are plain and rise vertically. Access to the towers and the upper storeys is by stone staircases built within the thickness of the main walls. A hoarding enclosed the twenty sides of the keep. Entry to the defensive hoarding from the central block was through a number of access points including stepped embrasures at the south end of the main east and west walls.
The keep stands at the middle of a triangular walled enclosure measuring slightly more than one hectare, making it the largest castle by area in Ireland. The keep was erected within the area occupied by the ringwork and the ditch of the ringwork was expanded to create a fosse to surround the keep. A second protective ditch, a large rock cut moat, was constructed outside the curtain walls when stone was quarried for construction work.
The central keep was a perfect square with four projecting towers. The design was laid out on geometric lines using a central peg. A trench which was marked out for setting out the walls of the building was uncovered during archaeological investigations.
The site was levelled and cleared and the size and shape of the building was marked out using wooden pegs and string. A square was initially marked out on the ground and then diagonal lines were then inserted from corner to corner. Half of one of these diagonals, when swung out to the side wall, defined the point at which the projecting towers touch the core of the keep. Willy Cumming and Kevin O’Brien identified the many geometric factors in the castle design. The use of a 4.4 diameter for the marking out trenches was significant as it was twice the length of the medieval “Cana” measurement. The designer then had to decide how far the towers should project. This was probably determined by placing a rope from a point at the corner of the keep and swinging it around at ninety degrees. These were marked out by shallow trenches.
The foundation stage of the building was built slightly off square and adjustments had to be made to bring it back into line. The foundations of the keep were laid out in an anti-clockwise direction.
The construction of the castle required raw materials such as stone, lime and timber. As in the case of de Lacy’s English castle at Ludlow the building material comes from the site itself and the lime mortar was made on site. Stone was quarried from the bed rock and this excavation then formed the castle ditch. The keep walls are made from roughly coursed limestone from the site itself and the rounded window arches of the lower floor are of local sandstone. As there was no technology for moving large amount of materials long distances local supplies were important.
Mortar for the walls was prepared by burning limestone in kilns to produce quicklime. The large limekiln uncovered by Hayden built in to the old ringwork ditch could have provided all the mortar used in the castle’s construction. Timber was required for construction and scaffolding and so the trees in the nearby woods were cleared which also provided timber to fuel the lime kiln.
Castles and in particular royal castles were designed, constructed and repaired under the control of an ingeniator or engineer. There is no record of an architect or engineer being involved in the keep at Trim but there must have been a designer and an overseer of work. Aware of what was being built in France and in Britain de Lacy may have been the architect or designer and as it was his castle he would have taken an active part in supervision of the works, depending on his other duties and commitments. There was no great tradition of working in stone in Ireland and organising the building of a stone castle was a special effort. The master masons at least were brought to Ireland. A master mason was employed to oversee the planning and building of the castle, he would also organise the accounts. Masons, quarrymen, carpenters, blacksmiths and a host of unskilled labourers was required. Skilled craftsmen had to be paid but the backbreaking menial works might have been done by forced labour. Castle building was an important industry with master builders being in high demand and gangs of castle builders moved from site to site. Combined with the church building the new lords patronised, there must have been a major expansion of the building industry. Skilled workmen cut blocks of stone which were carved into the right shape by stonemasons. Rough masons would then lay the courses on the wall. Carpenters were required to make doors, roofs and scaffolding. Blacksmiths provided nails, chains, hinges and bolts as well as the tools required in construction.
The foundation trenches would be dug. The trenches were first filled with a rubble and mortar mix, then retaining walls were built on top to just below ground level and the space between them filled with more rubble and mortar. Rubble masonry was lumps of irregular shaped stone, which was used for walls which were not going to be seen as it was cheap and easy to lay. The masonry of Trim keep is of very rough quality with the sparing use of dressed stone, a material that was expensive and time-consuming to prepare. The window embrasures have mouldings of wrought red sandstone.
It is possible that the south tower of the keep actually pre-dates the keep and belongs to the ringwork phase of the site which was then integrated into the design of the keep. The function of the early pier at the centre of the keep or the two slots in the west side of the central spine wall is not clear and there may have been a change of plan during an early stage of the first phase of the building. The stone pillar may have been intended to support the timbers of the first floor, indicating that there was no cross-wall at this first stage of the castle. The north tower in this period was lower than the other towers, with just two floors.
Ashlar masonry was good quality cut stone that was used for exterior walls and was more neatly laid and jointed. Two faces of uncoursed limestone facings were laid with the space in between filled with unbonded rubble and mortar. Quicklime was mixed with water to produce lime putty to which sand was added to make mortar. The mortar knitted the three layers together.
Once the walls were high enough scaffolding had to be erected. Timber supports were placed in putlog holes in the walls. There are many of these putlog holes in the walls of the keep and the curtain walls of Trim castle. Construction material was raised by pulleys, hoists or ramps. The walls would then be covered with plaster and whitewashed to protect the stone and mortar.
Erecting a roof with two gables and a central valley, running north-south above the first floor level, scars of de Lacy’s roof supports remain. There was a walkway and a parapet on top of the walls of the central block. A hoarding enclosed the twenty sides of the keep, with access from the central block.
After the erection of the keep the protective ditch was enlarged and deepened. The building of the first keep may have been interrupted or its design curtailed or altered after construction began. In the case of the northern tower it is curious that this tower was extended from a lower level than the others suggesting that its collapse may have been due to structural failure.
Hugh also planned the replacement of the outer wooden defences with stone. These may have been erected at the same time as the keep was under construction. Ludlow had protective curtain walls from 1086. Curtain walls with rectangular towers were erected at the inner bailey of Dover Castle by Henry II in the 1180s. At Trim the walls along the river and on the north side of the bailey with their square flanking towers were erected first and are of late twelfth century date contemporary with the keep. A line of the walls along the river with square towers is shown in the first (1836) OS maps. This suggests that the early emphasis of the castle defences was facing the river. The large northern tower of the curtain walls was laid out on a grid based on seven metre units which is identical to the grid used to set out the keep. It would appear that there was one plan for the castle complex as the keep, which was poorly designed from the point of defence, was then protected by a defensive outer cordon. The towers in the curtain walls were erected first and then the sections of wall were erected between the towers. The early curtain and open backed rectangular towers are paralleled in British castles of the 1170s and 1180s. Trim has a number of early examples of plunging arrow loops, a feature which is not found in Britain until a decade or two later. De Lacy would have this very up-to-the-date technological features installed to protect his new castle. The walls, which cover a circuit of about 400 metres, survive intact in the south and northwest but those to the northeast along the river have mostly been disappeared. The curtain walls and towers were erected on and against the natural bedrock. This results in the ground level inside being 5 metres higher than that outside the walls, providing a secure platform for the defending forces and preventing undermining. This feature also provided additional strength to the wall. The walls are 8 metres high on the outside and 3 metres on the inside and 1.8 metres thick. The northwest section has a small base-batter. The walls to the south were not erected in Hugh’s time. The curtain walls are dominated by two gate towers, the west gate to the town and the south gate facing the approach from Dublin.
The west gate of the curtain wall led directly into the town. A wooden gatehouse was replaced by a stone-built structure. The rectangular gatehouse consists of the barrel-vaulted passage with a rectangular chamber to the north which served as a guard house. The chamber is placed over a cellar, accessed by a trap door in a wooden floor, possibly used as a prison. The groove for a portcullis is visible in the passage. The gate opened inwards and there were two murder holes one in front and one after the gate. The west gate changes from a square to a polygonal plan above the gate passage, as did two towers at de Lacy’s castle in Ludlow. There are signs that there was a moat or ditch with a defensive drawbridge and barbican towards the town.
Defence was one of the primary military functions of a castle but it also provided a residence for the lord and an administrative centre for the estate. The military power of the castle was used as a political tool, enforcing the physical control of the territory and its population.
Castles in Ireland have generally been viewed as structures associated with war. The main military function of Trim castle was to protect de Lacy, his family and retainers from attack and hold the territory. Trim castle played a defensive role protecting the territory to the east from attack by the Irish.
A small number of defenders in a well built castle could generally hold off all but a major attack for long enough for a relief party to arrive or until the attackers were forced to fall back by lack of supplies, diseases or losses. The castle provided protection and a base from which to launch a counter attack.
De Lacy was familiar with defending a castle as he did so at Verneuil during the rebellion of the king’s sons in 1173. He experienced a siege from the French king and withstood the king’s war engines but the Verneuil castle itself was not taken by force. Despite being well versed in defence the design of the Trim keep is militarily weak in some aspects of its design. The plan of the keep with its four projecting towers may have been planned to provide flanking fire but the design is flawed in this purpose. Providing numerous potential points of attack, with twenty different wall faces and twelve corners Trim castle would be very vulnerable to mining or picking. Some of the walls are particularly thin which would have facilitated entry with the use of a battering ram.
At the time Trim castle was commenced great towers provided impregnable protection as siege techniques were not yet properly developed. The keep at Trim was erected on rock and so could not be easily undermined. The keep may have been a poor defensive capabilities but the completed castle did not. A person seeking admittance to see the lord of the castle would have had to pass through the outer curtain walls, a causeway across the fosse and then the protected doorway on the first floor of the castle so defence was relatively good. The door on the first floor was protected by a causeway and fore-building which would have restricted the use of a battering ram as the door was too high up and there was little space to use such a weapon. The castle withstood a two month siege in 1224.
Trim castle provided comfortable shelter and protection for de Lacy, his family, servants and soldiers. The domestic accommodation reflected the highest available standards of the day. The design with its square towers off the main tower may have provided additional accommodation rather than the mian tower itself. A masonry tower-keep such as at Trim gave greater scope for domesticity than the timber tower of a motte. The first-floor level provided the great hall with a central wall supporting the roof timbers. A pantry kitchen, a wardrobe chamber and a withdrawing room and stairs completed the ground floor layout of the building. The lord lived life in public, people needed to see the lord. He would have sat at a raised dais in the hall so he could see and be seen. The central block was a dark and cold space with the main hall having no fireplace. A central open hearth or brazier provided heat with the smoke rising and escaping through a louver, a lantern-like structure in the roof with louvre side openings. A fireplace was inserted into the west wall of the hall after some of the construction work had already been completed. The great thickness of the walls helped to preserve an even temperature. The floor was strewn with rushes. The tables were temporary trestle type. Lighting was provided by rushlights or candles of wax or tallow. Soldiers and servants slept in the great hall. The great chamber was where the lord and lady slept. The great bed with a heavy wooden frame had springs made from interlaced ropes or strips of leather. The bed might accompany a lord on his journeys.
The castle provided the administrative, social and judicial centre of de Lacy’s estate. The hall was essential to administer justice and for meeting tenants or allies. Nothing is known of the lordship court but Hugh had complete control of all administration and all jurisdiction in his lands in Meath, powers similar to the king. Government was personified in an individual man, de Lacy. Built to inspire awe, Trim castle was a status symbol erected to be seen and to impress. The keep would have conveyed a feeling of power and authority and provided a suitably imposing setting for de Lacy’s home and court. The use of stone as the building material emphasises the prestige of its builder and provided a permanent symbol of authority. Building in stone, rather than earth and timber, was neither cheap nor quick, Hugh was sending a clear message of his intentions to commit himself to Ireland. Such a high building dominated the town and surrounding countryside. Painted an off-white colour, using a lime wash, the keep would have stood out in the landscape. A huge building in context of its period the keep was largest structure in the area, more impressive than the round towers at Monasterboice, Kells and Tullyard and would have been a striking visual assertion of power for the native Irish. The use of stone as a building medium would have marked out its difference to the Irish buildings of earth and wood, with different being something unusual, something to be feared. As the possessor of the largest castle in Ireland, de Lacy could be viewed as being a powerful baron, possibly strong enough to rival the king.
Trim castle occupies more than twice the area of any other castle in Ireland. Trim castle was an imposing symbol of social standing and prestige. Power and domination were themes associated with stone castles. The control of high ground and the erection of a keep enhanced the height, raising de Lacy above his body of retainers, servants and lower status peasants.
The castle was a symbol of de Lacy’s authority over the newly conquered territory. This massive pile dominated the landscape and intimidated the ordinary Irish who had never seen such a large building before.
A stone castle was an extremely costly undertaking for the new lord of Mide. It is difficult to assess the cost of building the castle at Trim. The keep of Newcastle cost £911-10s-9d when it was constructed over the period 1172-77. Orford Castle tower was erected at a cost of £1400 by Henry II in eight years while Dover Castle cost £4000 over a five year period. By the time Dover was finished in 1191 it had cost nearly £7,000. De Lacy could have spread the cost of construction over a number of years. The expense of such a construction added to the status of the builder. The masonry castle was the mark of a baron of wealth and standing. A man who began building a castle was embarking on a major undertaking. Trim is the only Irish castle to be comparable with English or French castles of the time.
Trim castle was an alien innovation, associated with the invading forces but was also differed from what was typically being constructed in England at the time thereby becoming a unifying factor for the Anglo-Norman sense of ethnic identity and the symbol of a colonial power for the native Irish. The castle was designed by and paid for by men from outside Ireland. It is identified as an ‘Anglo-Norman’ building.
The baronial household of de Lacy was probably large. The extent of accommodation provided for his immediate household shows the new type of administration with extensive staffs of officials.
The personnel of a castle fell into two groups, the first military and the second ministerial in character. The first group consisted of fully armed knights and men at arms. The knights were supplied as part of feudal obligations or hired. De Lacy’s tenants provided the castle guard with Hugh Tyrell providing his castle guard duty when the castle was attacked in 1174. The garrison would have also included household knights and sergeants drawn from a wide area. The size of garrison fluctuated with the political situation. In the royal castle of Windsor in the twelfth century the garrison had eight knights on duty at any one time. Mounted men would have garrisoned the castle in times of threat. Evidence of the presence of horses was uncovered in the ringwork phase of Trim castle. The second type of personnel in the castle were the clerk of works, porters, watchmen, artisans, smiths, masons and carpenters.
Every major castle had a chapel and chaplain. The private chapel provided a place for church services for the lord and also for the occupants in time of siege. Geoffrey, chaplain of Trim, is one of the witnesses to a confirmation of Bishop Eugene, bishop of Clonard concerning churches in Meath and the land of the Grange of Skryne recorded in the chartulary of St. Mary’s Abbey about 1185 and also witnessed a charter of Reginald de Turburville to Llanthony. The priest or clerk as the only literate member of the castle community would have been called to keep record and carry on written correspondence.
The lord slept in the chamber where he kept his valuables in a chest – the man in charge was the chamberlain. Hugh’s chamberlain, Richard de Stottesdun is mentioned in papal document relating to the hospital of St. John the Baptist, Dublin, in 1188. Stottesdon is a village due east of Ludlow in Shropshire. Financial matters originated from the keeper of the lord’s chamber, a private room belonging to the lord. The chamberlain looked after the lord’s cash, jewels and other valuables as well as his bedding, clothing and laundry arrangement. A latimer or interpreter would have been necessary for dealing with Gaelic speakers.
The lord had a group of men who were just below him in status and these were his household. It was their duty and privilege to attend him and help him with their advice. All of these servants had to be paid so the upkeep of a fully serviced castle could be expensive. When Hugh was at the castle there were people there to serve him but when he was away there was only a small group left to take charge of the castle.
The impact of Trim castle on the landscape was profound and enduring. Large areas of the woods were cut down to provide construction timber. The forest at Trim must have been substantial as even sixty years later timber was still being cut for construction. This deforestation had the added benefit of providing better viewing capabilities and therefore additional security. Timber was also required as a fuel for fires for heating and for crafts such as blacksmiths. The landscape was adapted to provide a game reserve for Hugh’s entertainment and table. Hunting and hawking provided an important food source as well as providing entertainment. Restricted for the use of the nobility, forests were also a status symbol, reinforcing the image of Hugh’s wealth and power. Foresters are mentioned in charter to Trim town c.1194. A rabbit warren was developed near the castle; it is mentioned in a grant of 1234. The proximity of church and castle helped to reiterate the message of duality of spiritual and temporal power.
Trim castle served as a military base, a seat of government and a private residence for the lord and his household. Trim Castle demonstrated that Hugh was a man of wealth and standing and marked him as a military engineer in the forefront of the development of stone castles.
THE SUBINFUEDATION OF MEATH
‘Of Hugh de Lacy I shall tell you
How he enfeoffed his barons
Knights, serjeants and retainers.
Castle Knock, in the first place, he gave
To Hugh Tyrell, whom, he loved so much;
And Castle Brack according to the writing,
To baron William le Petit,
Magheradernon likewise,
And the lands of Rathkenny,
To the cantred of Ardnorcher then
To Meiler, who was of great worth,
Gave Hugh de Lacy –
To the good Meiler Fitz Henry;
To Gilbert de Nangle, moreover
He gave the whole of Morgallion;
To Jocelin he gave Navan,
And the lands of Ardbraccan
The one was son, the other father,
According to the statement of the mother;
To Richard de Tuite likewise
He gave rich fief;
Rathwire he gave moreover
To the baron Robert de Lacy.
To Richard de la Chapelle
He gave good and fine land,
To Geoffrey de Constantine Kilbixi
Near to Rathconarty;
And Skryne he then gave by charter;
To Adam de Phepoe he gave it;
To Gilbert de Nugent,
And likewise to William de Musset,
He gave lands and honours,
In the presence of barons and vavassours
And to the baron Hugh de Hussey
He then gave fair lands;
To Adam Dullard likewise
To land of Rathenuarthi.
To one Thomas de Craville
He gave in heritage
Emlagh Beccon in quiet enjoyment
At the north east of Kells,
Laraghcalyn likewise,
And Shanonagh, according to the people,
Gave Hugh de Lacy,
Know in sooth, to this Thomas.
Cradone then to a baron,
Richard Fleming was his name –
Twenty fiefs he gave him of a truth
If the geste does not deceive you.
Song ll 3129-77.
De Lacy owed military service to the king for his lands and he subinfeudated his lands to provide the required number of knights. The new lord divided Mide into baronies and these in turn were sub-divided. Barons sub-enfeuded the lands to their knights. Each baron drew his grantees from the closely knit group of his knights. Small military tenancies were created to satisfy the desire of the settlers for knightly status. Enlisting men who were land hungry, prepared to take a risk; very few of Hugh’s larger tenants became involved. These settlers would enable him to defend his new lordship physically and exploit it economically; they would also form the military which de Lacy in return for his grant of Mide, had undertaken to supply upon demand, to the king. Having to seek beyond his English tenants to find settlers willing to come to Ireland de Lacy even had to poach some from Leinster where they had been granted lands by Strongbow. A number of tenants held lands from more than one magnate. Lands were granted at favourable terms with rents being waived completely during the first years of settlement.
Imposing a definite ordered structure of knights’ fees on his new lordship, the new lord retained the best lands and the most desirable locations as seigniorial manors including Trim, Kells, Duleek, Clonard, Killare and Fore whilst his principal grantees drawn from such families as Nangles, Flemings, de Feipos, Husseys, Missets, le Petits, Nugents, Constentines, fitz Henry and de Tuits were rewarded with lands in Ratoath, Navan, Morgallion, Slane, Skryne, Deece, Lune, Magheraldernon, Delvin, Moygoish, Ardnurcher and Granard. The location of the seigniorial manors suggest that de Lacy wished to spread the location of his manors, a number in the safer areas and others in the areas where there might be a threat of attack. This policy points to an overall strategy for landholding. The new manors and seigniorial areas were anchoring points for his power. Lands were granted to household knights and retainers, men who would owe personal loyalty to Hugh. The areas granted to his knights were substantial in size with seven of the principal grants being recognised as baronies in the future. These grants were speculative grants with the grantees required to secure and hold possession of the lands. A grant did not necessarily mean the lands had to be confiscated from their existing owners; it could simply mean the imposition of a new overlord on the existing landholding.
As custodian of Dublin Hugh had the right to grant the king’s lands of Dublin. Using this power to the full the majority of tenants-in-chief of Dublin were also his tenants in Mide, providing his men with a relatively secure base from which they could advance into Mide. Many of Hugh’s knights were granted good lands in east Mide and Dublin with a portion of the poorer lands and less secure lands in west Mide. This may be represented by the relative value of a knight’s fee in each area with a knight’s fee being composed of ten ploughlands in county Dublin, twenty in east Mide and thirty in inhospitable west Mide. Hugh Tyrell was granted lands at Castleknock and Fertullagh in west Mide. Adam de Feypo was granted lands at Santry, Skryne and west Mide. William Messett was granted lands at Donnybrook as well as in Mide. Richard de Tuite held land at Granard from Hugh, was in possession of a caracute of land (120 acres) beside St. Kevin’s Church, without the walls of Dublin. The Constantines may have held land from their Mide lord in Saithne, north Dublin. De Lacy held the fees of seven knights at Finglas in the vale of Dublin, which were confirmed to Hugh’s son by King John.
Each feudal vassal was to supply a certain number of knights to their overlord – each knight was to provide service when required. Each baron passed on his obligation onto his tenants. The great magnates made sure of ample military strength by enfeoffing many more that their quota of knights on their estates. De Lacy created some 120 knight’s fees although the service of only fifty knights was owed to the crown. De Feipo was to supply twenty one fees but Skryne only returned nine knight’s service so the fee may have included de Feipo’s Dublin and west Mide lands. The territory of Slane was granted to Flemings for the service of twenty knights. Tyrell owed three knight’s fees for Castleknock. Where the area of land was smaller than a single knight’s fee, then the grantee was required to provide foot soldiers, the equivalent of a fraction of a knight. In England by 1166 these fees had begun to fragment and were being commuted to a money payment. Instead of personal service a vassal could pay a fee called a scutage. One knight’s service was the equivalent of twenty ploughlands or caracutes (about 120 acres). In 1175 a knight received 8d a day or 2 marks for his service of 40 days.
The actual date of the subinfeudation is not clear. It is likely that the early sub-infeudation of Mide took place in 1172-3, with the initial grants concentrated on the borders nearer Dublin. It is only in 1174 that there are any extant documentary references indicating settlements being established. One of the primary objectives was to provide reasonable security from attacks by the Irish from the north and west. The speed of enfeudation was impressive. The grants of Duleek and Colpe to Llanthony were part of the early settlement of Mide, as part of the subinfeudation process. According to a charter of 1230-34 Hugh allocated lands to Llanthony as early as 1172, before he allocated lands to any of his men. Hugh’s grant of Castleknock to Tyrell was dated to after 1172 and the lands was regranted by Henry prior to 1177. The grant to Adam de Feipo of Santry was dated to before 1173. In 1174 Cellach Ua Findalláin, lord of Delvin-More, took part in a raid on Cairpre Cairpri, so it would appear that Nugent had not yet been granted Delvin by Hugh at that date. The grant to William le Petit dates to after the erection of the castle at Killare which occurred in 1184. The grant to Geoffrey de Constantine could date to the 1180s after he had lost his lands in Laois and Offaly. The motte at his caput of Kilbixie was not erected until 1192 as was fitz Meiler’s castle at Ardnurcher. The motte in de Tuite’s fee of Granard was constructed in 1199, which would tend to suggest that this grant was made in the 1180s. Hugh’s grants could have been made at different times with the grants in Dublin and east Mide being made in the mid 1170s and the grants in west Mide being made in the early 1180s when de Lacy was attempting to expand his control over the western part of his grant. Hugh made the grants through charters with charters to Tyrell, de Feipo, Nugent, le Petit and de Hose being recorded.
The kingdom of Mide was held by Hugh as Murchad Ua Máel Sechlainn had possessed it – a direct continuity of a land division. Crown grants such as the grant of Mide were based on the old territories of the Irish kingdoms. Using the Irish land divisions to make his grants to his followers de Lacy’s grant of Delvin to Gilbert de Nugent, was as Ua Findalláin held it ‘at the time of the Irish’. The grant of Deece to de Hussey was of ‘all the land del Dies which Shaelin held’.
Hugh superimposed the Norman system of control and settlement on the underlying and pre-existing cultural landscape. As in Sicily, England and Wales the Anglo-Normans retained the pre-existing divisions. The pre-existing arrangement of land divisions and their boundaries and names were used in charters. The existing tribal areas formed a territorial framework which was at least partly defined prior to the coming of the Anglo-Normans and provided a basis for the baronies. The Anglo-Normans used the names of the most recent Irish lords to designate a territory. The new lords grafted their manors and parishes onto the existing secular framework of tuath.
The recognition of existing divisions allowed de Lacy to rapidly distribute the lands at his disposal. Time was not wasted in surveying the lands and it allowed the new lords to take over the existing powerbase. Graham argued that grants of knight’s fees in east Mide and Dublin were standardised ploughlands but it is clear that some divisions were allocated on the old Gaelic territorial divisions. The names of units of lands used in England and Wales such as cantref was used in grants for example in the grant of Ardnurcher to Meiler fitz Henry.
The names of pre-existing settlements were retained for towns and villages with the Anglo-Norman colonisation being reflected in some of the townland names. There is no evidence that Hugh re-named any site. Extensive areas of the County Meath have townland names which are Gaelic in origin, with the Trim area being an exception having a large block of English/Anglo-Norman townland names.
Hugh Tyrell was a close friend of Hugh and they were related through Strongbow. A tenant of the de Lacy family holding lands at Crowle, Worcester and Kingsworthy near Winchester and Tyrell Avon in the New Forest, Tyrell also held two knights fees from de Lacy in Herefordshire in 1160. Tyrell arrived in Ireland with Raymond le Gros. A trusted lieutenant, de Lacy placed Tyrell in charge of his caput at Trim and his castle at Duleek while he served the king in France. However before de Lacy’s death the men had quarrelled. Hugh Tyrell was obviously trusted because he was granted the strategic territory of Castleknock. De Lacy granted Tyrell three knight’s fees at Castleknock, including much of the territory west of the city of Dublin. This grant was probably made on behalf of the king, although in de Lacy’s name, with the grant being confirmed by the king in 1177 on identical terms to the original grant and acknowledging Tyrell as de Lacy’s man. Castleknock was part of the lands surrounding Dublin which de Lacy gained control of as constable of Dublin. Tyrell erected a motte and bailey castle at Castleknock and granted large estates of land to the priory of St. John the Baptist at Kilmainham. Tyrell held the manor of Moyglare briefly before it was transferred to Milo le Bret. Tyrell was also granted the barony of Fertullagh in west Mide where he constructed a motte and bailey castle outside Rochfortbridge.
William le Petit was granted lands by de Lacy at Castlebrack (possibly in Laois), Dunboyne and Rathkenny and the barony of Magheradernon in west Mide. The Petit family were established in Welsh marches. The Ua Máel Sechlainn mensal lands in west Mide were granted to William le Petit, but de Lacy retained Dysart and the surrounding district. Le Petit was required to provide his knight service at the castle of Killare. In 1185 William le Petit defeated the men of Cinéal Eóghain when they invaded Mide.
De Lacy made a grant to the king’s first cousin, Meiler fitz Henry. Fitz Henry had arrived in one of the first waves of the Anglo-Normans and had been at the siege of Dublin in 1171. Meiler fitz Henry was made part of the garrison of Dublin in 1172 when de Lacy took control of the city. Fitz Henry married a niece of Hugh’s and received extensive lands from both Strongbow and de Lacy. A castle for fitz Henry was erected by de Lacy at Timahoe about 1182. Flanagan suggested that de Lacy’s grant of Ardnurcher may have occurred at the same time. The motte at Ardnurcher was erected in 1192 which was some time after the original grant.
Navan was granted to Jocelin de Nangle who re-edified the abbey of St. Mary’s and erected mottes at Navan and Ardbraccan. Jocelin’s son, Gilbert de Nangle, was granted all of Morgallion including Nobber. William, another son of Jocelin, received a grant in Leinster from Strongbow, which was witnessed by Gilbert de Nangle.
A ‘rich fief’ was granted to Richard Tuite by de Lacy with the Tuite family becoming established in the territory around Granard.
Providing patronage for his family with close relatives being rewarded with land grants, Robert de Lacy was granted lands at Rathwire. De Lacy erected a motte and bailey castle at Rathwire. Robert was probably Hugh’s cousin but there were later suggestions that Robert was Hugh’s brother, but this is unlikely as his elder brother, Robert, had died leaving the family estates to Hugh. De Lacy did have son, Robert, but it is unlikely that this son was de Lacy’s heir or of an age to inherit.
Kilbixbie, near Rathconrath, was granted by de Lacy to Geoffrey de Constantine. Geoffrey took part in the rebellion of 1173-4, in support of the king’s son; therefore he was opposing de Lacy and Henry. Geoffrey was in Ireland prior to 1176 and he witnessed the foundation charter of St. Thomas’s Abbey, Dublin, in 1177. Geoffrey held lands in Laois and Offaly until 1181. The Costantines of western Mide also held land in Staffordshire and Lincolnshire. Geoffrey de Constantine held twenty knight’s fees in the territory surrounding Kilbixbie from Hugh de Lacy’s son.
In 1166 Hugh de Lacy listed Adam de Feipo among his household knights ‘without any fixed service (land).’ Adam de Feypo was granted the barony of Skryne for the service of twenty one knights. Retaining lands in the barony of Skryne de Lacy erected a large motte at Rathfeigh and held the lands of Timoole, Cushinstown, Trevet, Ardmulchan and Kentstown. The motte castle at Skryne was erected before 1176 and may have been erected by de Lacy. The motte was erected on the southern slope of the hill of Skryne, the summit of the hill being already occupied by the monastic settlement.
De Feypo was also granted lands by de Lacy at Santry and Clontarf, near Dublin with the place name, Phibsborough, commemorating the family. De Feypo was also granted lands at Disartale and Rathconnell in west Mide where he constructed the motte on a high hill overlooking Mullingar at Rathconnell. Adam de Feypo made a grant of lands held by his brother, Thomas, at Rathconnell to Llanthony.
Rose, de Lacy’s sister, married her cousin, Gilbert de Nugent. Hugh granted Nugent the barony of Delvin and erected a castle for him. Fore was exempted from this grant by de Lacy when he had provided for the Benedictines. Philip de Nugent, who was enfeoffed in Ferrard, was a relative of Gilbert de Nugent, brother in law of Hugh.
‘Good and fine land’ was granted by de Lacy to Richard la Chapelle but where these lands were is unknown. Richard was brother of Gilbert de Nugent and succeeded him as second baron of Delvin.
William de Musset or Messet was granted ‘lands and honours’ by de Lacy. The lands granted were probably the barony of Lune where de Musset established the caput for his barony at Athboy.
Hugh de Hussey was granted the barony of Deece and established a motte at Galtrim. The Hussey family were established in Shropshire. Hugh de Hussey arrived in Ireland in 1169 serving under Maurice fitz Gerald.
Lands at Rathenuarthi were granted by de Lacy to Adam Dullard. The location is unknown but is probably Dollardstown, in the barony of Duleek, near Beauparc.
Thomas de Craville was granted Emlagh Beccon, which is identified as the parish of Emlagh, north east of Kells. In west Mide Laraghcalyn and Shanonagh were also granted to de Craville. In 1234 a possible descendant held lands at Laracor, just outside Trim.
De Lacy granted Cradone, identified as Creewood, Slane, to Richard le Fleming. The Flemings were established in Pembrokeshire from which a large contingent joined the initial mercenary group to come to Ireland. Richard le Fleming erected a castle at Slane on his holding of twenty fees.
Milo le Bret appears to have been a knight of the household of Hugh de Lacy in Herefordshire. Hugh Tyrell received the manor of Moyglare who granted it to Milo le Bret. Le Bret was also granted Rathfarnham and another member of the le Brett family held lands at Santry under Adam de Feipo.
Derrypatrick and Ballymaglasson were granted to Leonisius de Bromiard. De Bromiard granted the churches of Derrypatrick, Kilmore, Culmullin and Kiltale to St. Thomas’s Abbey, Dublin, before de Lacy’s death.
Geoffrey de Cusack arrived from France about 1175. His immediate overlord was Adam de Feypo, who granted him the manor of Killeen. Stephen de Kent held Kentstown from de Lacy.
In order to make the land profitable it was necessary to secure settlers. To attract colonists from England and Wales with the necessary skills privileges offered had to be more attractive than those on offer in their place of origin. While it is difficult to quantify the amount of actual immigration into Mide and Ireland due to the lack of documentation, it is clear that Mide became one of the most intensively settled Norman regions of Ireland. However the number of new settlers was not very large numerically in terms of Ireland as a whole. It would seem that the main catchment area for settlers was the Severn basin and the southwest of England. Whole families moved to Mide and Ireland to secure a better life. Those granted lands brought their families to Mide. There were women and children in the motte on Slane when it was attacked and destroyed in 1176.
As he required labour to exploit his new lands de Lacy treated the Irish peasants favourably. Giraldus wrote:
‘But Hugh de Lacy went to great trouble to conciliate those who had been conquered by others and forcibly ejected from their lands, and thus he restored the countryside to its rightful cultivators and brought back cattle to pastures which formerly had been deserted. So when he had won their support, he enticed them to his side further by his mild rule and making agreements on which they could rely, and finally, when they had been hemmed in by castles and gradually subdued he compelled them to obey the laws. Thus he succeeded in reducing to an ordered condition all that his predecessors had either destroyed or thrown into confusion, and was the first to succeed in deriving any profit from that which had brought others nothing but trouble. To sum up, within a brief period he settled the country and reduced it to a peaceful condition, everywhere generously rewarded his own followers, while bearing heavily on others, and winning the support of the Irish by generous treatment and flattering them with his friendship, he made the more important of them his allies.’
While English, Flemish and Welsh peasants were introduced to Mide there was never enough and the native Irish were retained to till the soil. The native Irish were content with a lower standard of living than the settlers. To ensure a supply of labour de Lacy did not attempt to displace the Irish population of Mide. Hugh appeared to have followed a consistent policy of accommodation and absorption rather than subjugation and displacement. The native aristocracies were displaced but the population remained predominantly Irish. However there must have been some element of displacement of population, particularly by those who resisted the new system and new lords. The Treaty of Windsor in 1175 had as one of its objectives the return of Irish exiles to their territories. As in England and Wales following the Norman Conquest the lower orders had a change of lord and a change of system but their quality of life did not change noticeably. The lowest class of Irish, the betagh, remained on the land and are remembered today in place names such as Bettystown. Colonists were in a minority so co-operation with the Irish was necessary. The pattern of castles does not indicate that there was any real fear of rebellion from the Irish population in areas after the initial seizure of land and displacement of former lords. Giraldus stated that de Lacy was killed by his Irish followers, indicating that he had Irish followers.
The takeover of the eastern portion of Mide occurred without much opposition from its inhabitants and confrontations where they occurred were inspired and led from outside. The Irish elite reacted by assimilating and becoming part of the new system or resisted and were dispossessed. Making no effort to turn the native kings into Norman barons, instead de Lacy where possible formed a working relationship with them. The Ua Máel Sechlainn kings of Meath were threats to de Lacy’s control and their strongholds including Dissert were confiscated and retained by Hugh. Eventually the family were confined to the barony of Clonlonan, stretching from Lough Ennel to the Shannon. However when it suited an alliance could be made with the Ua Máel Sechlainn or other native nobility. In 1178 Art Ua Máel Sechlainn and the Anglo-Normans inflicted a defeat on Ua Máel Sechlainn Beg and on the men of Tebtha. Domnall, son of Annadh Ua Ruairc, assisted de Lacy in the slaying of Tigernán Ua Ruairc in 1172.
De Lacy allowed the native rulers to remain on his borders. The Ua Fearghail continued to rule in most of Longford with the native Irish chiefs of Ua Cerbaill, Ua Conchobair Failge, Mac Eochagain and Ua Maoil Mhuaidh carried on ruling to the south. These native septs paid a tribute to the de Lacy and his descendants in order to preserve their holdings.
Following the Norman conquest of England and Wales Roger de Lacy would seem to have ruled his Welsh tenants according to their custom and his Norman tenants under Norman custom. Hugh de Lacy must have attempted the same in Mide.
The Ua Caíndelbáin (O Kindelans), the chieftain of Cenél Lóigaire, survived the infeudation. The lands granted by Hugh to them descended undivided in a single line down to the seventeenth century. It is possible that de Lacy either trusted the local Ua Caíndelbáin chieftain, who ruled the area surrounding Trim before de Lacy arrived or else as the family were under the shadow of Trim castle where they could be kept under observation. The Ua Caíndelbáin were unusual among the old Irish nobility of eastern Mide in retaining their position, but it is possible that grants were made to other native chieftains.
Any hostility between the Anglo-Normans and the Irish related to land rather than race. The Irish aristocracy had to be expelled, not because of an anti-Irish policy but rather as a power struggle between the Anglo-Norman and the Irish claimants for the land. The Irish chieftains would fight alongside the Anglo-Normans when it suited them. In 1174 Cellach Ua Findalláin, king of Delbna Mór, assisted the Anglo-Normans of Dublin in the slaying of Ua Ciarda, king of Cairbre.
Manors were established at the centre of the principal land grants. The earliest reference to a manor settlement is to ‘the church of the vill of Reginald de Turbeville (Trubley) near the Boyne’ dated between 1177 and 1191. The process of manor creation was a gradual one which commenced in the stable areas of east Meath and spread westwards until all of Meath was parcelled into manors by the mid-thirteenth century.
De Lacy established manors at Laracor, Trimblestown and Tullyard in the vicinity of his caput at Trim. The lord chose the best land for the manor where the agricultural work would be carried out under a bailiff. A large part of the manor was ploughed to grow wheat, barley, oats and vegetables which required more labourers than minding cattle. The peasants owed ‘labour service’ to their lord, when they had to work on his demesne lands without being paid for it, usually for fifteen days a year.
In the richer agricultural areas manorial centres grew into villages. Ninety eight manorial village sites have been identified in the county of Meath; the great majority of which are now deserted. Examples of deserted settlements include Moylagh, Rathmore and Trimblestown. A village would have a church and might included gardens, dovecotes, mills and fisheries. Water-powered mills, although a large capital outlay, were a source of profit as tenants could be forced to grind their corn at their lord’s mill.
The Anglo-Normans began farming immediately as food was required immediately with corn being sown as early as 1171 in the area surrounding Dublin. The main change in land usage was the growing of corn crops instead of raising livestock. The existing framework of townlands and settlements provided the basis for the new system of agriculture. The profitability of the Mide manors depended on their ability to grow grain with the surplus being sold. The new lords were prepared to expend capital on their manorial estates in the prospect of earning a dividend. The Anglo-Normans introduced systematic agriculture and estate management.
The earliest extant records relating to land usage from 1211/12 indicates that there was considerable cultivation of grain crops in Meath. Eight-ox plough teams operated on the manors of Clonard, Kilmore, Ardmulchan and Nobber. Cattle, sheep and pigs were also important in manorial economies.
By the time Hugh was assassinated in 1186 one of the Irish annals said that Mide ‘from the Shannon to the sea was full of … foreigners.’ This was quite an achievement for Hugh to have conquered and settled this huge grant of land.
Timber and earthwork castles
‘Mide, from Shannon to the sea, was full of castles’
The Annals of Loch Cé, 1186.
Castles were constructed by de Lacy to subdue and retain territory. Hemming in the Irish with castles Hugh forced them to obey his laws. A master builder of timber and earthwork castles de Lacy erected them not only in Mide but also in Leinster. Castles had proved essential in the Norman conquest of England. Castles also provided a fortified, defensible home for members of the feudal nobility and a centre from which an estate could be administered. De Lacy and his nobles erected earthwork castles to protect their settlements and newly conquered lands. Earthwork castles are not an earlier type of castle to the stone castles, nor are they simplified fortifications; they can be as complex and defensible as a stone castle and serve the same purposes. There are two main types of earthwork castles – motte and bailey castles and ringwork castles. Motte and bailey type castles are more commonly found than ringwork castles.
A motte consisted of a raised mound of earth with flattened summit, surmounted by a wooden tower surrounded by a ditch and defended by a wooden palisade. The height of a motte varies, with the ramparts often revetted with stone, timber or turf to prevent the earth slumping. Mottes and baileys varied greatly in size and shape. Many mottes were low in height with broad summits. The size of mottes in Mide appeared to be related to the social standing of the person for whom the motte was erected. The timber castles dominated the surrounding countryside and provided an advantage to the defender; providing a platform from which to observe or throw missiles. Some mottes had attached enclosures, a bailey, at their base. Baileys provided space for kitchens and halls on areas of better land and in border areas, space for barracks for a garrison. De Lacy constructed baileys for major lords at the main centres of settlement and also in border areas where they provided additional fortifications for soldiers.
Motte towers could be quite elaborate, with dwelling rooms, private rooms, chapels and granaries. The towers were small and high, and were seigniorial rather than communal. Pits on the summit have been interpreted as water cisterns or cellars while pits on the periphery of the motte provided emplacements for archers. Easily defensible by a few armed men, timber castles were not designed to withstand siege. The other vulnerability was to fire. Cladding the timber with clay was one way to make them less combustible. Another precaution was to collect rainwater in butts or tanks, and place them around the castle for use in emergencies.
A ringwork castle consisted of a circular ditched and embanked enclosure with a rampart, which make them difficult to identify due to their similarity to ringforts. These earthwork enclosures were topped with a timber palisade but did not have a motte. In England there are on average 3.7 mottes for every ringwork which suggest that there are many unrecognised ringworks in Mide. Increasing numbers of these fortifications are being identified but dating the works is difficult.
De Lacy was very familiar with the form and design of earthwork castles. His home area of Herefordshire was the one area where earthwork castles had been erected in pre-Conquest England. When Hugh came to Ireland he already possessed castles at Ludlow, Weobley, Clifford, Ewyas Lacy (Longtown), Ewyas Harold, Lyonshall and Castle Frome. While Ludlow was a stone castle erected at the end of the eleventh century, Weobley and Longtown were both timber and earthwork castles. In addition there were castles on demesne estates at Cusop, Bacton, Eardisley, Lyde, Yarkhill, Stoke Lacy and Leominster and on an estate the de Lacys held as subtenants at Almeley.
Earthwork castles were an innovation introduced into Ireland, hundreds of them being erected in the fifty years after the arrival of the Anglo-Normans. These earthwork castles are often seen in Ireland as the physical symbol of Norman feudalization. De Lacy through the introduction of earthwork castles was at the leading edge of military engineering.
Mottes could be erected quickly using unskilled labour. It would take fifty people forty working days to erect a small motte and take them 120 days to build a large motte. The earthwork of the bailey would require an equivalent amount of work and time. The construction of the castle is likely to have been performed partly, if not wholly, by coerced local labour under Anglo-Norman direction. Irish workers had no great tradition of building in stone so they would have had the skills to construct the wooden and earthen buildings required.
Mottes were often constructed by using the material dug from the enclosing fosse and piling it up on the perimeter of the intended mound. In other cases such as at Galtrim the motte is formed mainly of soil, from another location, with very few large stones, except possibly in an annular ring around its base. While unskilled labour was required for the erection of the motte the work needed to be supervised by a military engineer. The military value of the mottes depended on the steepness of their banks and angles of up to 40° would have been difficult to maintain on unconsolidated material. The sides would have been revetted with stone or timber.
The Pipe Roll of 1211-2 record a cost of £19 4s 10½d for the construction of a motte castle at Clones in Co. Monaghan with £15 4s 7d on supplies and £21 11s 0d on carriage of men and materials to Clones.
When de Lacy was granted the kingdom of Mide in 1172 he began a whirlwind programme of castle-building to create a network of powerbases. De Lacy retained much of the territory under his own control and he erected mottes or earthwork castles at his seigniorial manors of Trim, Ratoath and Dunshaughlin, Kells, Clonard, Fore, Duleek and Drogheda. De Lacy’s castles at Trim and Duleek were destroyed in 1174 by an Irish raid. When the castle at Kells was in the process of erection in 1176 it had to be abandoned in the face of an Irish attack, but was rebuilt two years later. By 1176 the de Lacy’s forces had erected castles at Dunshaughlin, Trim, Skryne, Navan, Knowth, Slane, Galtrim, Derrypatrick and Kells.
De Lacy would have encouraged, if not required, his subordinates to erect a motte in their holdings. Similar motte-and-bailey castles were constructed either by Hugh or his barons at Navan, Galtrim, Nobber, Slane, Skryne, Kilbeg, Castlecor (or Typermessan), Dunboyne and Dollardstown. The erection of mottes on principal land grants by de Lacy suggests that there was some concept or plan for the grant as a whole. Mottes were erected at the centre of holdings of the major tenants. Nobber and Castlecor are attributed to Hugh de Lacy as they were amongst the castles restored by the Crown to Walter de Lacy in 1215.
In the western part of Mide de Lacy erected castles at Killare and also castles for Adam de Feypo and Gilbert de Nugent. De Nugent was a relative through marriage and de Feipo had been a household knight in England. The two knights may not have had the necessary funds to erect the castles. De Lacy may have been encouraging his knights to settle in west Mide in order to support his expansion plans. The castle erected for de Feipo may have been at Almoritia in west Mide rather than at Skryne and was probably erected at the same time as Killare. De Nugent had been granted the barony of Delvin. De Lacy erected a castle for his cousin, Robert, at Rathwire. Loughsuedy (Ballymore) was another castle returned to Hugh’s son in 1215. These mottes could be viewed as an expansionist policy into the western part of Mide. Graham interpreted the distribution pattern of mottes in Mide as a westward advancement of the frontier in the Norman liberty and he suggests that there were four chains of mottes, which represented this westward advance. He suggests that the earliest frontier may have been the Boyne and Blackwater, with a second chain being the mottes in Demi-Fore in the north to Durrow in the south. Later advances are suggested for the period after de Lacy’s death. Graham admits that Killare does not suit the timeframe of his suggestion but if Almorita and Delvin were of a similar date as Killare then his basic premise may be accepted, except that the westward expansion happened at an earlier period and within Hugh’s lifetime. Some mottes were erected beyond the suggested Boyne-Blackwater frontier at an earlier date than suggested by Graham supporting the earlier date for westward expansion. By 1186 Hugh had expanded the territory under his control as far south and west as Durrow. Laghelachan and Hincheleder were two castles returned to De Lacy’s son, Walter, in 1215 but the location of these castles is unknown.
Mottes without baileys are usually undocumented; which indicated their relatively unimportant status. Minor mottes at Laracor and Tremblestown, both near Trim, are also attributed to de Lacy. Neither possesses a bailey and are 4-5 metres in height, and may be associated with the settlement of a tenant rather than the new lord of Mide. Mottes at de Lacy manorial centres of Dunshaughlin and Colpe are smaller and lower than those at his more major centres. The precise number of castles erected by de Lacy is unknown but most of his mottes had been constructed by 1181.
The motte at Ardnurcher is known as Horseleap, which takes its name from a feat of horsemanship when Hugh de Lacy or one of the Petits leaped on horseback over the drawbridge of the motte. Another version has de Lacy making a dramatic escape from his Irish enemies leaping from one pier of the gate to the other. This colourful and oft-repeated story is not true as the motte at Ardnurcher was not erected until 1192, after de Lacy’s death but the story may pertain to his son, also Hugh de Lacy.
In 1181 de Lacy as justicar began a programme of castle-building throughout Leinster to reinforce the new settlements there. Giraldus commented that previous to this ‘very many castles had been built in Mide, but few in Leinster.’ A partial ringwork or possibly small motte and large bailey castle was erected by Hugh at Carlow. Communication routes and defence were important considerations in selecting this site. Another riverside castle was the motte at Ballyknockan, near Leighlinbridge, which is sited on an existing fortification. This site has mythological connections as it was the fortress of the south Leinster kings and features in the story The Destruction of Dind Ríg. A castle was erected for Raymond le Gros at Castlemore, now in the barony of Forth, Carlow. Castles were also erected at Tullow and Castledermot or Kilkea. A castle was erected at Timahoe for Meiler fitz Henry, who was married to a niece of de Lacy. These mottes were substantial steep-sided mottes, being centres for a manor comparable to mottes in Mide, while other mottes in Leinster were flatter and lower.
A ringwork castle, a wooden defensive fortification, encircled by a trench and enclosed within a wooden stockade, was erected by de Lacy at Trim in 1172. There was a possible ringwork castle at Clonard excavated by Sweetman but artefacts proved to be from later than the twelfth century. Clonmacnoise may also have been the site of a ringwork castle. A ringwork with a bailey was revealed during field work at Drumsawry, Loughcrew. This example has pronounced ramp and extensive stonework on each side of the entrance and on top of the ramparts. Other sites within Mide have now been classified as ringworks. Danestown is now identified as possible ringwork castle as is Roddanstown. Hickey suggested that Danestown was occupied by the de Avenis family, a native Welsh family, who were granted a fee by de Lacy’s baron, Adam de Feypo. The re-working of the mound at Knowth might be described as a ringwork. As in the case of mottes, ringforts may have been adapted to form ringworks. Ten of the fifteen ringforts in the former kingdom of Lóegaire have raised interiors which may indicate adaptation by the Anglo-Normans.
Castles are multifaceted in terms of function including military, administrative and domestic purposes. Motte castles provided secure bases through which conquered territory of Mide could be held and controlled which allowed settlements and agriculture to be introduced. The castle could not block an army or prevent an invasion but as long as they remained untaken they could be used for raiding and prevent the enemy from controlling the area and also keep part of the enemy force occupied. Castles were vulnerable to major concentrations of Gaelic Irish military forces as happened in the case of first castles at Trim, Slane, Duleek and Killare which were captured and destroyed.
Mottes were the first stage of colonization, becoming centres of manorial estates. The distribution of mottes is linked to the pattern of land grants and the need to defend the borders of the newly conquered area.
Mottes erected in east Mide were manorial features with mottes being erected in the area to the south-east of the Boyne, an area which was most secure from raids by the Irish. Mottes were located at the centre of the holdings of the major tenants, providing a status enhancement for the lords, who could look down on their tenants. It has been argued that the pattern of castles does not indicate that there was any real fear of rebellion from the Irish population after the initial seizure of land and displacement of former lords.
There was a conscious attempt to construct a line of fortifications to protect the boundaries of the lands of Mide. In north Meath and north Louth mottes are closely spaced with the average distance between them being two and a half kilometres. These forward observation posts provided an early warning system for settled Mide, making it difficult for raiders to enter Mide unnoticed or leave it while encumbered with their booty. A similar dense concentration of mottes occurs in Welsh marches – the greatest single concentration in the British Isles. De Lacy’s estates on this border would have made him familiar with the use of earthwork castles as a defence against external threat. Herefordshire has an average density of one castle every 9 square kilometres.
Another line of defence was the river systems and many mottes were erected on the banks of the river Boyne, thereby giving the Anglo-Normans both control and use of the river system for trade and supply purposes.
Land and water routes influenced the choice of castle sites by de Lacy. Overland routes such as the Slíghe Mór may have influenced the location of a motte at Clonard. Clonard was on the main east-west route, the Slíghe Mór, and there may have also been a north-south route passing close to Clonard. Control of this route from the south to Trim and the route to further expansion to the west could have been key factors in locating the motte here. Monasteries were often already the centre of route ways and this may have influenced the decision to locate castles at these sites. Slane, Navan and Kells were linked by the Slíghe Assail.
Navigable rivers such as the Boyne and Blackwater were controlled by the siting of mottes. Major river crossings and fords were also controlled by the erection of earthwork castles such as Athlumney. The Drogheda motte at Millmount guarded the crossing on the river Boyne. Navan motte was erected by de Lacy or his grantee, Jocelin de Angelo, to control the crossings on the Boyne and Blackwater. Killare motte may have been erected to secure the pass or road from Durrow to Ardagh.
There was a strong element of continuity with the erection of mottes at existing sites of ecclesiastical or secular enclosures as part of a conscious attempt to take over existing power structures. These sites were already accepted symbols of authority and political control. Authority continued but there was a change of personnel – the Anglo-Normans replaced the Irish rulers. These sites may have already benefited from other advantages such as nearness to communication routes or protective ditches and defensive positions. Their defensive potential had already been recognised. A good location was a good location whether you were Anglo-Norman or Irish.
Royal residences or high status sites were considered as suitable sites for castles. The fortifications at Knowth, the capital for northern Brega, were adapted to provide a castle. Hugh de Lacy granted Gilbert de Nugent the territory of the kingdom of Delbnas which had been held by the Gaelic Ua Findalláin chieftains. The motte constructed for Gilbert de Nugent replaced, or was superimposed on, a pre-Norman earthwork at Telach Cail, Delvin. Clonard monastery was a site of royal patronage as Murchad Ua Máel Sechlainn, king of Mide, founded the Arrouaisian nunnery of Clonard c.1144.
Use of ecclesiastical centres was strategic but also symbolic. Clonard, Trim, Kells, Duleek and Durrow were sites chosen by de Lacy where there had been pre-existing ecclesiastical settlements. Nobber, Skryne and Slane are other motte sites located at monastic centres. These ecclesiastical sites were the main focal points in an area of scattered settlement and may have been the nuclei of associated secular settlements. The patronage of the kings of Connacht led to de Lacy attacking Clonmacnoise. Diocesan centres such as Clonard and Kells were the focus of considerable wealth, patronage and political power as was Clonmacnoise. Control of ecclesiastical centres linked the new lords with the church establishment. A number of monasteries had defensive banks which would have offered protection.
In some cases ringforts were adapted or replaced by earthwork castles. The royal site of Tulach Ard was the centre for the kings of Lóegaire Breg, this fortification was captured by the forces of Hugh de Lacy and used as a base by these forces for raids into Connacht in 1177. Magnus Ua Máel Sechlainn was hanged by ‘the Foreigners of Dublin and Telach Ard’ in 1175 and in 1176 the men of Airgialla overtook a raiding party of the foreigners of Dublin ‘and inflicted a slaughter upon them thence as far as Telach Ard and Dublin’.
There are no earthworks within the modern townland of Tullyard but the townland to the immediate south, Steeplestown, contains a bivallate ringfort, consisting of a raised circular area with an annexe attached to its northern flank. An outer bank formerly surrounded the main section. Known locally as the ‘Moat’ the south, east and west sides resembles a motte with steep sides and perhaps the addition of stone facing, with the annexe to the north possibly being a bailey. This ringfort was modified by de Lacy’s forces to provide a military base; perhaps this rather than Trim was the initial fortified base for the area. The royal site of Tulach Ard was linked to an ecclesiastical site, now remembered in the townland name ‘Steeplestown’. Tullyard was the site of an early church identified in the Book of Leinster as Ciaran Tulche Airdde, Ciaran Aird Heó and Brenaind Aird Eo. The round tower at this church was burned during a raid into Mide by Tigernán Ua Ruairc in 1171.
The motte at Ratoath which was erected by de Lacy stood on a pre-existing ringfort as did the castle Hugh erected for his cousin at Rathwire. Other examples of possible adapted ringforts include Navan, Castletown-Kilberry, Slane, Killallon and Moat, Oldcastle.
Earthwork castles are usually located on fertile lowlands even when higher or favourable defensive locations were available. This may have been the reason why Tleachtga or Tara were not considered suitable sites for castles. However mottes were erected as a highly visible symbol of lordship and conquest and so were constructed on rising ground such as at Rathwire.
Ease of construction was a factor in siting a castle, with a number of castles being located on glacial deposits allowing the Normans to construct a castle speedily and with a minimum of effort. De Lacy’s castle at Fore and the castles at Navan, Slane and Galtrim used natural features such as glacial moraines as the base for the fortification.
A number of sites chosen as sites for castles had then or have since had mythological associations. The site of Rathwire is the reputed burial place of the Connacht prince, Guaire. The castle at Drogheda is traditionally associated with the burial of Amergin. The site at Slane is associated with the burial of Sláine, the Fir Bolg king, with Ochré and also the men of Fiacc. The motte of Navan is linked to the mythological Odhbha. In addition the passage grave at Knowth was used by the Anglo-Normans and it is possible that this was also the case at Dowth, both of which have mythological associations. Killare motte was erected by de Lacy within sight of a mythological centre at the hill of Uisneach.
Familiar with the form, function and construction of earthwork castles from his estates in Herefordshire and on the Welsh Marches de Lacy took these as an ideal of best practice and erected ringwork and motte and bailey castles on the lands he was granted in Mide and in newly-conquered territories in Ireland. With the construction of earthwork castles de Lacy was bringing Ireland into the leading edge of military engineering.
Town founder and urban developer
‘to my burgesses from Trim, all the freedoms which they had and which they made use of according to the ‘law of Breteuil’ before they obtained my present charter as my gift’
Walter de Lacy’s charter to Trim c. 1194
While the control of rich agricultural lands was a priority the development of urban settlements offered de Lacy the opportunity to increase income from newly conquered territory. The erection of castles at his seigniorial head manors led to the establishment of settlements at these protected sites which grew into trading communities and then towns. The establishment of towns, generating additional revenue, may have been one of de Lacy’s objectives in erecting the castles in the first instance. Military protection and seigniorial support was necessary for the protection and development of towns. Markets required regulation and supervision and locating them at the castle gate ensured that market tolls due to de Lacy were collected. Towns were established as speculative ventures, attracting traders and craftsmen, who paid burgage rent to de Lacy and provided an outlet for the produce of his lands. The development of settlements necessitated the attraction of colonists. While those of the knightly class could be granted lands, those of lower classes were attracted by the granting of rights which they did not possess in their place of origin. Towns were part of a process of pacification and development of the newly conquered territory. In attracting colonists to settle in towns the new lord of Mide also increased his military capabilities.
Between the eleventh and fourteenth centuries new towns were developed throughout Europe with de Lacy being at the forefront of urban development in Ireland. Irish urban development reflected a number of the characteristics of the urban expansion taking place on the continent. Out of the eleven towns having charters and burgesses by 1200, four were located in Mide. De Lacy changed the settlement pattern of the region as prior to his arrival urban life was almost unknown among the inhabitants of Mide. The introduction of towns brought Mide and Ireland into mainstream European development and culture.
Hugh de Lacy had links with a major borough at Ludlow and was actively concerned with smaller urban communities at Leominster and Weobley. The castle at Ludlow was erected by the de Lacy family before the end of the eleventh century and it is likely that a settlement grew up there under the protection and guidance of the family. From 1169 onwards there are records of fines, trading practices and disputes over coinage recorded at Ludlow. In the 1180s there is mention of Herbert, the reeve (mayor), an indication of established local government and it would seem that Ludlow had been granted the laws of Breteuil before Hugh’s death in 1186. Burgage plots are mentioned by de Lacy in his grant of lands to the Knights Hospitallers on the west side of Corve Street, at Ludlow. As Corve Street is about a kilometre from the castle, a town of some size was in existence in de Lacy’s lifetime. William fitz Osbern, the family’s feudal lord, founded boroughs in Normandy before introducing the concept to Hereford where he was granted lands after the Conquest. Fitz Osbern based his new foundations on the laws which governed his Norman town of Breteuil-sur-Iton. The de Lacys would have followed their lord’s example and established towns at Weobley and Ludlow. The family had been involved in the development of Hereford town where the burgesses had customs and rights prior to 1086. Hugh’s great great grandfather, Roger, had received rent from burgesses in Hereford, Winchcombe and Gloucester in 1086. Hugh was familiar with organised towns in France, having defended the walled town of Verneuil in 1172-3.
De Lacy, having completely free choice as to where to locate his seigniorial manors, decided on Trim, Kells, Duleek and Drogheda. Having the support of the powerful lord of Mide, being the first urban settlements in the area and being located on the most advantageous sites, these settlements possessed the best prospects of developing into successful towns. Influencing the choice of site were strategic factors such as the protection of communication routes, cultural continuity and economic concerns. The principal river valleys of the Boyne and Blackwater provided the easiest route ways with sites at Trim and Kells controlling these communication routes. Existing settlements, such as the ecclesiastical foundations at Kells and Duleek, offered the opportunity for rapid adaptation, an actual successful site and continuity for the existing population. Drogheda, at the mouth of the navigable Boyne, provided a commanding site with potential for economic development.
In the twelfth century urban settlements throughout Europe were being granted legal status through charters. Charters provided towns with self government with town dwellers, burgesses, enjoying free status with certain rights and entitlements. This urbanisation process was already in progress in Ireland with the title and possibly rights of burgesses existing in Dublin in the early twelfth century, prior to the arrival of the Anglo-Normans.
De Lacy possessed the right to issue charters to the towns which he had founded but there is no trace of any charter surviving, if any were issued. His charters giving rights to burgesses may have been issued in a verbal format. His son, Walter, issued charters to Trim, Kells, Drogheda and Duleek. These may have been charters confirming rights which the burgesses already enjoyed either unofficially or under charters issued by Hugh de Lacy. A charter might be issued only when there was sufficient population and markets and fairs had been established or when a lord required the additional funds generated by the grant of a charter. Mac Niocaill suggested that the grant of a charter was the end of a process rather than the beginning, arguing that burgesses might exist well before there was a borough or charter. There are references to burgages in Athboy and Trim in 1188.
The town charters of Trim, Kells, Drogheda and Duleek were based on the laws of Breteuil. On the unstable border of Maine and Blois, Breteuil’s charter allowed low charges and liberal rights to its inhabitants as an encouragement to settle in this frontier area. Burgesses were granted specific building plots and a small amount of agricultural land outside the town. In Kells and Drogheda the burgesses were provided with three acres of agricultural land outside the town. Burgesses were allowed to sublet or rent their plots and to engage in trade within the town. For these rights they were charged a maximum of twelve pence per annum, thereby generating revenue for their lord. The burgesses were free to surrender their positions and leave burgages at will, without penalty, unlike their unfree agricultural neighbours. The burgesses were well protected against abuses of the law, being governed by the town’s court, with fines being limited to no more than twelve pence. Breteuil’s charter served as a model for the new frontier towns in Ireland. The charter of Trim and Kells record that they were granted the rights of Bristol but this is thought to be a transcription mistake and that it should read Breteuil. De Lacy’s town of Ludlow was subject to the laws of Breteuil. Verneuil, which de Lacy defended in 1172-3, had similar town laws to Breteuil. In newly conquered territories, like Mide, the privileges being granted to the townspeople had to be at least as advantageous, if not better than what they were leaving behind. The first settlers in de Lacy’s new towns must have been English or Welsh and it may have taken some time before the Irish adapted to the alien concept of town dwelling.
Trim castle provided the attraction to tradesmen and merchants to move to the developing settlement. The castle was the nucleus around which the town developed. The walls of the castle protected it from attack from outside but also from attack from the townspeople. The existing monastery on the north-side of the river resulted in a curved street pattern following the line of the enclosure while the newer section on the south side, which developed as a result of the castle, was laid out in straight lines. This grid pattern is similar to that in Drogheda. De Lacy erected the bridge over the river to facilitate transport. The town must have possessed a defensive ditch or palisade. Activities outside the town defences, particularly outside the Dublingate, seem to have been established quite quickly after the establishment of the town. Trim was granted a new charter c.1194 by Hugh’s son, Walter, recognising and confirming the existing rights of the burgesses. According to Brady Trim had a provost by 1188 and a charter by 1189.
Kells, as a major ecclesiastical centre, proved attractive as a manorial location and site for a town. De Lacy re-founded and endowed the Augustinian abbey of St. Mary’s. A castle was erected by de Lacy which was destroyed by the Irish in 1176 but replaced. Already possessing a market Kells provided an existing centre of exchange and commerce. Identified as a proto-town Kells had been a royal centre in the ninth century and the centre of a diocese from 1152. As an existing seat of power for Tigernán Ua Ruairc, de Lacy as the new lord provided continuity for control of population. Protected by earthen ramparts Kells was on the frontier of de Lacy’s liberty but it was also on a route way into Ulster via the Blackwater valley and provided a base for attacks into Ulster during medieval times. Walter de Lacy granted Kells a charter between 1194 and 1211. The street pattern of Kells was laid out in a concentric pattern reflecting the early ecclesiastical enclosure.
The town of Duleek was founded by de Lacy and granted its first charter by his son, Walter. Duleek was the centre of a diocese from 1111 and the pre-existing ecclesiastical settlement with its protective outer enclosure proved to be an ideal location for a lordship centre for de Lacy’s seigniorial manor of Duleek. The street plan reflects the early ecclesiastical enclosure but there are also elements of a linear pattern. De Lacy’s motte castle was erected just outside the enclosure. Duleek became a significant settlement as it was one of the stopping points for King John’s visit in 1210.
Although there are references to Viking activity in the area it would appear that Drogheda was a new settlement, established by de Lacy, three kilometres away from the pre-existing ford and bridging point at Oldbridge. The site was strategic as it controlled the lowest narrow bridging point on the river Boyne, the major river system in the region. The site provided easy access to the sea and up river as far as Trim and Kells. Being a new foundation and a new crossing on the river it adopted the name novus pons de Drochale, the new bridge of Drogheda, before 1193.
McNeill suggested that Drogheda may have been the new lord’s initial caput or that it shared that status with Trim. De Lacy as town developer laid out the streets and parishes. Two separate towns developed separated by the Boyne, only being united into one corporation in 1412.
Working on a green field site de Lacy laid out the streets along the natural contours of the ground. On the high ground on the south side of the river (Mide) he erected his motte and bailey castle while the north side (Uriel) was more suitable for the quays, commercial and habitation development. Drogheda in Mide was laid out in a linear pattern while Drogheda in Uriel was laid out in a chequer plan. The castle and bridging point were the focus of the settlement on the south bank.
As a result of the ecclesiastical dividing line of the Boyne between the diocese of Louth (Clogher) and the diocese of Meath de Lacy was forced to erect two parish churches. The church on the Uriel side of Drogheda was granted to Llanthony Prima while the church on the south side was granted to Llanthony Secunda. Both these monasteries would have had a significant influence on the initial development of the town. The north side of the Boyne was part of the diocese of Louth until 1192 when it became part of the archdiocese of Armagh.
Developing Drogheda as a port with access up river to his lands as far as Trim de Lacy was also providing a link to his lands in England and Normandy. Having access to a large agricultural hinterland Drogheda developed to become a major port. By creating his own port de Lacy freed himself from the additional charges of using the royal port at Dublin. His son, Walter, possessed ships in 1215, so Hugh may have possessed his own ships for transporting goods.
Drogheda has the earliest extant text in Ireland of a charter to a purely Anglo-Norman town, dating to 30 June 1194 granted by Walter, to all his burgesses living on the south side of the Boyne at Drogheda. Walter de Lacy confirmed to all of his burgesses living on the south side of the bridge the rights of the law of Breteuil and further that each burgess may hold a burgage plot as well as three acres in the fields outside the town. Burgesses had the right to free access along the Boyne as far as Trim. This charter recognised the existing town and its organisation. Drogheda is exceptional among the major Irish medieval towns in that its motte was never replaced by a stone castle. The castle was taken into royal hands in 1189 and was never recovered by the de Lacy family, although being such a good defensive position continued in use as a military establishment down to the twentieth century. Being established by de Lacy, who chose a very strategic and advantageous site, the town survived and prospered becoming, after Dublin and Waterford, a leading town in medieval Ireland.
De Lacy’s other seigniorial centres also developed as settlements, some being granted charters but not really developing to become proper towns. The settlement of Ratoath developed around de Lacy’s earthwork castle and the street pattern follows the curve formed by the motte. Ratoath was described as a borough by 1200 and was one of the principal towns of Meath in the fifteenth century. Dunshaughlin was a manorial centre for de Lacy with its earliest reference as a borough in 1423. Clonard and Fore had difficulty surviving as settlements due to their proximity to Irish controlled areas. Clonard was a significant monastic settlement being described as a town before the arrival of the Anglo-Normans but it failed to develop as an urban settlement. Fore was described as a ville in de Lacy’s grant to the Benedictines. Fore had a market, receiving a charter from the king in 1436.
The foundation and walling of Navan is traditionally but erroneously attributed to Hugh de Lacy. The monastery at Navan was founded prior to the arrival of the Anglo-Normans. Parts of its estate consisted of lands granted by Tigernán Ua Ruairc and de Lacy may have appropriated these lands after his assassination of Ua Ruairc in 1172.
Developing urban centres at his seigniorial manors de Lacy’s aim was to provide additional income and further strengthen his capabilities to colonise Mide. Creating an urban system in the region for the first time de Lacy laid down a framework of centres of population which remain the principle centres today. As a town founder and developer he established and laid out the town of Drogheda. With the exception of Drogheda there seems to have been a large element of continuity with regard to the location of settlements in conquered Mide.
Benefactor and Patron of the Church
‘Hugo de Lacy, the profaner and destroyer of many churches’
Annals of the Four Masters, 1186
The Irish church of the early twelfth century did not conform to the continental church in terms of organisation and marriage customs. Major church reform was well underway and substantial progress was made prior to the arrival of the Anglo-Normans. The Irish were viewed by the English and Europeans as ‘Christians only in name, pagans in fact’ and one of the reasons suggested for the conquest of Ireland was the expansion of the boundaries of the church. Settlement of other areas in Europe began with the taking up of the cross of the crusades. The fact that de Lacy’s father was a Templar may have influenced him to possibly see Ireland as a crusade to expand the borders of the church.
The invaders changed the nature of the Irish church creating a new wave of religious activity. The native Irish reform movement had been successful in adopting a number of continental innovations such as a diocesan structure and the introduction of European religious orders. The church welcomed the secular support of the Anglo-Normans for these reforms. The new lords, like de Lacy, supported these changes and facilitated further developments such as parochial organisation. The church became an integral part of the new system, supporting and endorsing the new lords.
De Lacy accepted the existing Irish bishops and the existing Irish diocesan arrangements. The Irish bishops including Thaddeus of Kells and Ethru Ua Miadhachain of Clonard did fealty to Henry in 1172, accepting the coming of the new order. The Ua Máel Sechlainns were displaced to the barony of Clonlonan from which they could still exert some control over west Mide and on the church in west Mide through Clonmacnoise.
De Lacy may have been preoccupied with his new grant in Mide and the war in France to attempt to involve Henry in the succession after the bishop of Clonard/Meath, Ethru Ua Miadhachain, died in 1173. The boundaries of the diocese of Meath had not yet been fixed and bishops of Clonard sometimes styled themselves as bishops of Meath.
Echtigern (Eugene) Mac Máel Chiarain succeeded as bishop of Clonard, and also occasionally used the title, bishop of Meath. The Irish church accepted the customs of the English and continental church as part of the re-organising of the church. Eugene witnessed grants of tithes and churches to monasteries introduced by the Anglo-Normans but resisted the granting of Duleek to Llanthony by de Lacy. De Lacy established an Augustinian monastery at Clonard which seems to have functioned as the cathedral and chapter for the diocese. Eugene was bishop of Meath throughout de Lacy’s time in Ireland, dying about 1194.
The existing Irish church traditions were respected by the new lord of Mide. The dedication of the parish church at Trim to St. Patrick was not altered by de Lacy. Allowing the cult of St. Fechin to continue in Fore de Lacy did associate the additional dedication of St. Taurin of Evreux. The cult of St. Cianan continued to flourish at Duleek with his church being impropriated to the Augustinian abbey. The cult of St. Finian continued at Clonard with a shrine dedicated to St. Finian being erected in the new church. Giraldus mentioned a holy bell associated with the monastery at Clonard. De Lacy allowed pilgrimages to continue at Clonard. In 1185 Maelisa Ua Dalaigh, chief poet of Erinn and Alba, and ruler of Corca-Raidhe, died at Clonard on pilgrimage. The relics of Cianan and Finian were protected by de Lacy. His actions replicated what had happened in England after the Norman invasion, a century earlier. When the de Lacys arrived at Longtown they did not interfere with the local church allowing its dedication to the native saint, St. Clydog, to continue. When de Lacy attacked Clonmacnoise in 1178 he plundered the town with the exception of the churches and the bishop’s houses.
This respect was tinged with fear of what might happen if the new arrivals committed sacrilege. De Lacy must have told Giraldus the story of archer who violated a woman in the holy mill of St. Fechin at Fore. The archer died the same night from a burning sensation. Another story related to de Lacy’s attack on Fore described how corn stolen from the church and mill had resulted in the death of the two horses which had been fed with the grain. When de Lacy attacked Clonmacnoise in 1178 his forces could not sleep for the following nights as a result of what they had done, even though they had purposely avoided damaging the bishop’s houses and the churches. When de Lacy’s associate, Hugh Tyrell, stole a cooking-pot from Armagh, he lost his horses and lodgings due to a fire and was forced to return the pot. The Irish saints and their traditions were respected.
The development of the parish system with its associated tithes was promoted under de Lacy. There is a clear identification of manors, established by de Lacy and his subordinates, with the developing system of parishes. The manor in turn may have been based on the Irish land division, the tuath. Using the example of Skryne, Otway-Ruthven demonstrated how one of the first parishes in this area had come into existence by 1185. The whole of the barony of Dunboyne, 16,782 acres, granted to William le Petit by de Lacy, became one parish. The granting of churches to religious establishments by de Lacy and others placed the responsibility of parochial organisation on those establishments. By 1191 upwards of three dozen churches had been placed under the care and control of the monasteries of Llanthony, St. Thomas’s and St. Mary’s, Dublin. This would have resulted in those in authority in those parishes being loyal to de Lacy and thereby further increasing his influence and authority. The proximity of church and castle helped to reiterate the message of duality of spiritual and temporal power.
The patronage or foundation of monasteries was the Christian duty of a noble man such as de Lacy. Monks prayed for the salvation of the patron’s soul and the soul of his family, interceding with God on behalf of their benefactor. Monasteries could bring additional benefits to the occupants on landed estates with the religious orders providing schools and hospitals. A new church or endowment was also a mark of prestige and a statement of affluence. In this de Lacy was continuing a family tradition. His great grandfather, Walter, founded the church of St. Peter’s in Hereford and his grand uncle, Hugh, had endowed the monastery of Llanthony.
De Lacy became the patron of existing monasteries in Mide or re-founded them. Many of these monasteries were Augustinian, an order he was familiar with at Llanthony. The adaptability of the Augustinian rule made it ideal for introduction in the new and existing communities in Ireland as it allowed local conditions influence the set of observances of each house. The cost of establishing an Augustinian house could be far lower than that of a Cistercian house. Augustinian foundations were most commonly found in urban settings thereby encouraging and supporting the process of urbanisation. Prior to the arrival of the Anglo-Normans there were Augustinian communities for both sexes in Kells, Duleek, Clonard, Durrow, Trim and Navan. A number of these monasteries suffered damage during the campaigns of the Irish and the Anglo-Normans in the 1170s. All the existing monasteries had their grants and possessions confirmed to them or were re-founded and it would appear as if they continued to function without major change. Gwynn and Hadcock suggested that the monasteries of Kells and Trim were re-founded by the Anglo-Normans with the objective of bringing in their own canons but also state that according to a charter of Kells in Ossory there were no Anglo-Norman monks until after 1183. Hadcock suggested that Kells and Clonard were re-founded after 1183 by de Lacy to allow English monks take over from the native incumbents.
The Augustinian abbey of Kells was re-founded by de Lacy having been damaged in a raid by the Irish in 1176. Granting it lands de Lacy provided that one of the canons of the abbey should be constantly retained as chaplain, to say Mass for the health of his soul and the soul of his ancestors and successors. The Augustinian abbey at Trim, dedicated to St. Mary, was either restored or newly erected by the new lord of the town. The Augustinian abbey at Clonard, dedicated to Saint John, was founded by de Lacy. Monks from St. Thomas’s in Dublin were introduced. The prior later resisted the move of the chapter of the diocese to Newtown, Trim. An Augustinian monastery in existence at Durrow may have been founded by de Lacy.
De Lacy may have introduced the order of Knights Hospitallers of St. John of Jerusalem to Kells.
The principal monasteries de Lacy supported in England were Llanthony Prima and Llanthony Secunda. These establishments were favoured by his ancestors. An relative, also named Hugh, endowed a monastery at Llanthony about 1103 and its monks fled to Gloucester in 1136 founding a second monastery, Llanthony Secunda. Llanthony Prima was restored in 1154. These two monasteries were granted lands in Mide by de Lacy and his knights.
St. Peter’s church on the Uriel side of Drogheda was founded by de Lacy and granted to Llanthony Prima while St. Mary’s on the south side was granted to Llanthony Secunda. The church at Hereford endowed by Hugh’s grandfather was dedicated to St. Peter as was the church at the family manor of Stanton Lacy, just outside Ludlow.
De Lacy founded St. Michael’s priory or cell at Duleek making it a dependency of Llanthony Secunda. It became one of the richest monasteries in Ireland, with only a few canons to supervise the great farming estates for the support of Llanthony. A leper hospital was founded at Duleek and another at the bridge of Drogheda attached to Duleek but it is not clear if these was established in de Lacy’s life time.
Establishing an Augustinian monastery at Colpe de Lacy made it a cell of the priory of Llanthony Prima. Colpe had as a possession the manor of Beaubec which is represented today by the townlands of Beamore and Beabeg. The name originally comes from the abbey of Beaubec in Normandy, where the de Lacys had an interest.
The grants of Duleek and Colpe to Llanthony were part of the early settlement of Mide, the grants being made as early as 1172. De Lacy may have made his grants as part of the subinfeudation process, providing for the monasteries before he granted lands to his knights. Other dates put forward for these foundations include 1180, 1182 and 1185-86.
Colpe and Duleek were two farming granges and collection points for tithes and other produce which was sent to support the two mother houses in Wales and England.
Only two surviving Llanthony charters bore the signature of de Lacy. One charter is by John, the king’s son, of land at Wicklow and the other is a confirmation of those lands in Wicklow by John Cumin, archbishop of Dublin. The first dates to John’s visit to Ireland in 1185 and the second one probably dates to a short time later.
De Lacy made a grant of the tithes and ecclesiastical benefits of Saithne, the land of Ua Cathasaigh including Ardcath, Garristown and Naul in north Dublin to Llanthony. He seems to have had the right to grant these lands on behalf of the crown, grants which were confirmed by John and also by the bishops of Clonard/Meath.
The tenants of de Lacy emulated him and many made grants to Llanthony. At least fifteen family members and knights of de Lacy made grants to Llanthony. William le Petit granted the churches of Rathkenny, Mullingar, Drumman and Dunboyne to Llanthony for the salvation of the soul of his lord, Hugh de Lacy. De Lacy’s brother-in-law, Gilbert de Nugent, gave lands at Delvin. William Messet granted Kilcooley to Llanthony and also lands at Donneybrook. Fitz Henry granted his monastery of Great Connell to Llanthony. Many of the grants by de Lacy’s knights to Llanthony were granted in the border areas of Delvin, Killua and Killucan between the Norman controlled eastern Mide and the Irish-controlled western Mide. This may have been to provide an element of stability on the border area.
This new source of funding from Ireland allowed the monks at Llanthony Prima to erect new and stronger buildings to protect itself against attack by the Welsh, having been destroyed in the 1130s and only restored in 1154. The priory may also have suffered in the 1172 raid by the Welsh which resulted from the killing of Owain, son of Iorwerth ab Owain.
De Lacy focused on Fore in one of his earliest forays into the borderlands of his territory. Fore may have reminded him of the valley in which Llanthony abbey was situated. Fore resembled Llanthony in its location, on the extreme western border of the de Lacy lands and near the border with the Celtic peoples. De Lacy founded a Benedictine cell at Fore and granted all the churches and endowments to the abbey of St. Taurin at Evreux about 1180. The Benedictine order had already established abbeys in Ireland prior to the arrival of the Anglo-Normans. The lands of the existing Irish monastery at Fore were granted by de Lacy to the new Benedictine monastery.
Needing to create a buffer zone between his settled area and the native Irish to the north de Lacy’s establishment of a monastery and estate would reduce border incidents. Monastic establishments were a stabilising influence on a newly colonised area. Such land grants made it difficult for the dispossessed to reclaim property which had been granted to the church. Llanthony had been established earlier in the century in an area claimed by the de Lacy family but still being disputed by the Welsh. Similar suggestions are made for the establishment of monasteries at Mellifont and Baltinglass. However Masterson contended that the Benedictines were more suited to a stable area. The Benedectine order were closely associated with the Norman settlement of Wales.
As an energetic reformer de Lacy was attracted to the Benedictines and decided to experiment by introducing this order from Normandy into Ireland. De Lacy was familiar with Evreux having jointly witnessed charters with its bishop and he also had tenants from Evreux, the de Evreux family. He may also have been influenced by his superior, Henry, who favoured the Benedictines. The king was familiar with Evreux as the bishop of Evreux, Gilles de Perche, was sent by Henry II as ambassador to Rome while his successor, Jean, was also close to the king. The king’s aunt, Maude d’Anjou, was prioress at the abbey of Fontevrault, which followed the rule of St. Benedict.
At Fore the Benedictine cell, dedicated to SS. Taurin and Fechin, was probably the conventional community of prior and perhaps as few as three or four monks, and it was erected at a distance from the early monastery and church. Providing a charter to the Benedictines de Lacy granted them the church, tithes, mill, woods and tithes of Fore. The mill was a valuable commercial enterprise. The Fore establishment was not an independent one but a priory under the authority of the Benedictine abbey of St. Taurin at Evreux, in Normandy. Fore became a manorial and administrative centre. The east gable of the church and its large round headed windows are the work of de Lacy and he also laid out the plan of the monastery.
De Lacy’s’s sons later took refuge in the abbey of St. Taurin, Evreux, to escape from the wrath of King John.
The Benedictines never took root in Ireland and Fore remained their biggest monastery in the country. De Lacy’s friend, Hugh Tyrell, founded a priory of St. Brigid for Benedictine monks at Castleknock about 1185 and John de Courcy granted land for the establishment of a Benedictine priory at Downpatrick. The foundation of three Benedictine monasteries at the same time may suggest that there was a promotion of the order at that time.
Prior to the arrival of the Anglo-Normans the Cistercian abbey of Mellifont held lands in the lordship of Mide at Rathmullen, Oldbridge, Fennor (Drogheda), Staleen, Rossnaree, Collen, Knowth and Fennor (Slane). These possessions were confirmed by a grant of Henry II in 1177-8 which was witnessed by de Lacy. De Lacy and his tenant, Robert of Flanders, were patrons of Mellifont making grants of lands in east Mide. In a charter of 1185 John confirmed his father’s grant to the abbey of Mellifont. De Lacy’s grant of two carucates at Croghan and Inseil was also confirmed in this charter. There is no trace of any grants by de Lacy to Bective, the Cistercian abbey, located near his caput at Trim.
De Lacy made grants to other Irish churches and monasteries. As constable of Dublin he witnessed Archbishop Lorcán Ua Tuathail’s grant to the Church of Holy Trinity, Dublin (Christchurch) at a date between 1173 and 1180, possibly 1178. John’s unsuccessful grant of Glendalough to Dublin in 1185 was witnessed by de Lacy. He also made a grant of a knight’s fee, including the ville of Liskilli with ten carucates to the church of the Holy Trinity, at a date between 1181 and 1186.
Lands at Clontarf were granted to the order favoured by de Lacy’s father, the Templars, prior to 1180, a grant which was confirmed by Henry. This may have been lands controlled by de Lacy or his tenant, de Feipo.
De Lacy also made grants to those establishments favoured by the king. He witnessed the charter for the foundation of St. Thomas’s issued by the king in May 1177 and witnessed grants to the abbey. The tithes of Dunshaughlin and Ratoath were granted by de Lacy to St. Thomas’s Abbey before 1183. De Lacy’s church at Ratoath was dedicated to St. Thomas Becket. As in the case of Llanthony de Lacy’s followers made land grants to St. Thomas’s. A number of these grants were made after de Lacy’s death and were for the salvation of his soul. Lands at Delvin, Donaghmore, Scurlogstown, Killegland, Knockmark, Derrypatrick, Greenogue and Laracor were some of the grants made by his knights, whether for themselves and their families or for the soul of de Lacy.
Three charters to St. Mary’s of Dublin were witnessed by de Lacy, one at Dublin for Henry II in 1172, another for Henry at Feckingham in 1175 and a third at Dublin for John in 1185. Lusk was granted to St. Mary’s by de Lacy. De Lacy’s knights, Gilbert de Nugent and Adam de Feipo, made grants to St. Mary’s for prayers for his soul and their own souls.
As a major patron of Llanthony it can be presumed that de Lacy made grants of churches and monasteries under his control to Llanthony. The churches at Weobley and Ewyas Lacy (Longtown) had been granted to Llanthony, a grant which was confirmed by a charter of Henry II in 1154-5. A small grant was made by de Lacy to the Benedictine priory of Monmouth.
Grants to other religious establishments in England were made by de Lacy including a grant of twelve burgages and other land at Ludlow to the Knights Hospitallers of Dinmore, where they constructed their chapel of St. Leonard. Relics of Irish saints may have been brought to the church at Ludlow by de Lacy. Grants of property in Ireland to the Cistercian monastery of Flimby, Holm Cultram in Cumbria were made jointly by de Lacy and Strongbow. De Lacy, his wife, Rose, and son, Robert, granted the priory of Monmouth an annual rent of three shillings in Lideney. Between 1172 and 1177 de Lacy confirmed a charter whereby his tenant, Roger de Esketot, of Bitterley, gave the rents of the mill at Bitterly to Haughmond Abbey, Shropshire. Between 1174 and 1177 de Lacy confirmed Hugh Say’s grant of Stokesay church to Haughmond Abbey. In 1175 and 1176 de Lacy witnessed royal charters to Haughmond Abbey.
Some lands held by the discontinued Irish monastic orders may not have been in the ownership of the church following the synod of Rathbreasail in 1111, a situation not regularised until the early thirteenth century when legislation provided for the transfer ownership of all unassigned church lands to the diocesan bishops. De Lacy and other lords may have exploited this situation to claim lands which were not assigned to the new monastic orders or for diocesan or parish purposes. De Lacy may have been attempting to claims church lands at Trim, Clonard, Kells and Durrow.
Not seeking to upset the existing church system de Lacy seemed to be content to work with the existing church personnel. He supported the existing monasteries and allowed them to continue to function, re-founding them and granting them new status. Where possible he introduced new orders and new foundations to support his favoured monasteries in England.
A generous patron of the Irish churches and foundations erecting churches and abbeys throughout Mide, yet when recording de Lacy’s death, the Irish annalists speak of him, not as the founder, but as ‘the profaner and destroyer of many churches.’ His death was portrayed as the revenge of St. Colmcille for using the monastic settlement at Durrow for the site of a castle. In 1178 de Lacy raided Clonmacnoise but this was an attack on a strategic target with strong connections to Ruaidrí Ua Conchobair. The attack was directed towards the town and left the churches untouched. Other Anglo-Norman and Irish leaders also attacked religious settlements. Monasteries were the only nucleated settlements and so were the focus for attacks both during this period and the centuries prior to the arrival of the Anglo-Normans.
There were important continuities in ecclesiastical organisation, personnel and religious establishments. A number of religious establishments founded under Irish rule were re-founded or continued without change of personnel. Irish religious devotions were respected. Changes were accelerated by de Lacy’s support of religious orders, the introduction of the Benedictines, the grants to a non-Irish monastery, Llanthony and the organisation of parishes, some of which were created on boundaries laid down by the new lord of Mide.
De Lacy re-enforced and promoted the changes that the Irish church was undergoing at the time by his patronage of religious orders from England and the continent. Continental dedications were introduced with St. Michael for Duleek, St. Peters in Drogheda and St. Mary for churches and monasteries.
Churches and monasteries were agents in the process of changes occurring in Mide after de Lacy secured control. The grants of Irish lands to monasteries abroad fostered closer links between Mide and de Lacy’s lands in England and France. Llanthony grew rich on the endowments of him and his knights. De Lacy did not interfere with the Irish church. The Irish church supported de Lacy as he reinforced the reform of the Irish church – a process which was already in progress. De Lacy used the monastic orders as a tool for colonising and conquering his new grant. To ensure his place in heaven he endowed monasteries and churches to pray for his soul. The new churches complimented the new castles, both supporting the power and the prestige of the other. The power of the church was harnessed to the lord of Mide as a secular power. Parochial development was assisted by de Lacy’s grants of lands as manors.
Custodian of Dublin
‘while he is my bailiff, to do service for me at my city of Dublin.’
Henry’s charter to de Lacy
Prior to Henry’s departure from Ireland in 1172 he granted de Lacy custody of Dublin and provided a garrison of twenty knights including Robert fitz Stephen, Maurice fitz Gerald, Meiler fitz Henry and Miles fitz David. In addition to the twenty knights de Lacy had a force of five or six hundred armed men to defend the castle and city. Appointed custos of Dublin de Lacy took charge of the city, its castle and keep. Control of Dublin was vital as it had extensive trading links, substantial military resources and acted as a hub for a wider settled area. As custos or constable the castle was held by de Lacy on behalf of the king. The castle was to be regarded as the administrative centre of royal power in Dublin and possibly Ireland. Being charged with administrative authority in the city de Lacy was also described as bailiff of the king’s city of Dublin.
The actual position and title held by de Lacy is unclear. The office of custos or keeper in the twelfth century was commonly associated with the holding of a castle on behalf of a superior lord. A custos was a keeper, guardian, warden or custodian. A custos was an officer who had to account for all items of revenue. A royal constable had charge of a castle, organising its defences, guarding its prisoners and managing its estate. A bailiff was one charged with public administrative authority in a certain district but could apply to the king’s officers generally. A bailiff was a local official. Henry’s bailiff of Verneuil was responsible for finance, justice and military security of the city and its hinterland.
Henry entrusted the administration of Dublin to Hugh de Lacy rather than a royal administrator. It is possible that Henry considered it more advantageous to appoint a military expert rather than an administrator to cope with the unsettled conditions which existed. While there were custodians appointed to Waterford and Wexford at the same time the most important position was that of custodian of Dublin. Members of the king’s familia were given custody of Wexford and Waterford. Flanagan considered de Lacy’s appointment atypical for Henry, as she stated that de Lacy was not a member of Henry’s household or familia. Martin suggested that de Lacy was already established at the royal court. The king’s familia seemed to have been a fluid grouping. The term may be defined in different ways and so de Lacy could be considered as a member of the familia. Dublin was economically and strategically the most important settlement in the country and Henry had re-enforced its importance by residing there for much of the time he spent in Ireland. Flanagan suggested that de Lacy’s authority over Dublin was overridden by Strongbow when the latter was appointed royal representative in Ireland in 1173. In 1175 Henry addressed a charter to his bailiffs of Dublin thereby suggesting that there was more than one. Similarly when fitz Aldelin was appointed in 1176 he seems to have overridden de Lacy’s authority in Dublin by issuing charters.
As bailiff of Dublin de Lacy was granted ‘all the fees which he has granted or will grant round Dublin while he is my bailiff, doing me service at my city of Dublin’. Making full use of his right to subinfeud the lands surrounding Dublin, de Lacy established a protective belt of settlements held by trusted knights. The majority of the tenants to the north and west of Dublin were also his tenants in Meath while south of the city the grants were mainly to Leinster tenants. A solid block of manors in the south-west of the city were reserved as royal demesne lands. De Lacy held lands at Finglas which were confirmed to his son by King John. His grants in the Dublin area were later confirmed by the king. Hugh Tyrell was granted Castleknock by de Lacy for the service of three knights to be rendered at Dublin. Castleknock was a strategic position guarding the approaches to Dublin from the west and had been used as a base by Ruaidrí Ua Conchobair when he laid siege to the city in 1171. Henry then confirmed this grant with Tyrell holding the land not from de Lacy but from the crown. Santry, Clontarf and the area now known as Phibsborough was granted to Adam de Feipo by de Lacy. Clontarf was granted to the Templars prior to 1180, a grant which was confirmed by Henry. Richard de Stottesden, chamberlain of Hugh de Lacy, was granted lands at Palmerstown. When Ivor Ua Cathasaigh, lord of Saithne, (Balrothery) died in 1179 de Lacy appropriated the lands but they were taken into the hands of the king, by Philip of Worcester in 1184. De Lacy seems to have had the right to grant these lands on behalf of the crown, making grants in the area to Llanthony in the land of Ua Cathasaigh, Saithne, which were confirmed by John and also by the bishops of Clonard/Meath. William Messett was granted lands at Donnybrook as well as in Mide. Richard de Tuite, who was granted lands by de Lacy at Granard, was in possession of lands near Dublin holding a carucate of land beside St. Kevin’s church, without the walls of the city. Geoffrey de Constantine, who was granted lands in west Mide was also granted lands at Balrothery. There seems to have been confusion with regard to de Lacy’s connection to Dalkey. Dalkey may have been granted to the diocese of Dublin by de Lacy or the property was held by the Church even before the arrival of the Anglo-Normans. De Lacy may have occupied it briefly before returning it to the Church which had contested his unlawful confiscation of the property. With de Lacy as lord of Mide and custodian of Dublin the threat of attack on the city from or through Mide was removed.
De Lacy was in attendance to Henry at Dublin during the winter of 1171-2. A special palace had been constructed for Henry and Dublin became the centre of royal authority. The arrival of Henry II in 1171 and his grant of a charter fastened the city to the crown and Dublin became the centre for English lordship in Ireland.
Dublin and its hinterland were created a royal demesne and its initial organisation was established by Henry during this period. He granted Dublin to the men of Bristol for them ad inhabitandam (to inhabit, i.e. colonise) and conferred the city with the liberties of Bristol. The charter had a commercial intention of boosting trade and attracting merchants and traders from Bristol. Henry issued a second charter at Saint-Lô, Normandy, in 1174 addressed to his burgesses of Dublin. By this year a number of burgesses from Bristol had left that city and were now operating entirely from Dublin.
The existing Hiberno-Norse residents of Dublin continued to live in the city. Their style of construction, plot boundaries and cultural identity continued for decades before being superseded by new ways of doing things. The armed forces of the Hiberno-Norse were slowly amalgamated into the Anglo-Norman system. A large force of Hiberno-Norse from Dublin fought at Thurles in 1174.
Exploiting Dublin as a base to raid into Mide, de Lacy made an attack on Fore in 1172. Once captured by the Anglo-Normans Dublin became a safe and secure base from which to launch major campaigns into Mide, Connacht and Ulster. The control of the city by the Anglo-Normans reduced the chances of any Irish claimant of ever again be recognised as high king of Ireland.
When de Lacy assumed control of Dublin in 1172 he found a ready-made town which was already exercising urban functions. By the mid-twelfth century Dublin was the effective capital of Ireland, the most important centre of population and trade in the country. For most of the eleventh and early part of the twelfth century Dublin dominated the Irish Sea trade. While not the seat of government, Dublin was the ‘metropolis of Ireland’ and ‘the chief town of the kingdom.’
As constable of Dublin de Lacy would have overseen the development of the city in the first fifteen years of Anglo-Norman control. While there were new innovations during this period there was a considerable element of continuity in the affairs of the city, from developments in progress before this date.
Being charged with the defence of Dublin de Lacy was involved in the strengthening of the city walls. Having taken the city the Anglo-Normans set about re-fortifying the city as a matter of urgency. The city walls were re-built and a protective ditch excavated. In some locations the new city wall was erected on the Hiberno-Norse earthen embankment (at Lamb Alley) while at other sites (at Geneville’s Tower) a new wall was constructed outside the old wall. Archaeologists have dated these walls to before 1185. As early as 1177 the original west gate of the town had been replaced by the new western gate so the walls were either completed or well on their way to completion at this date. The creation of a water-filled defence was a primary importance. The river Poddle was diverted into an artificial route to feed into the city ditch about 1185, a ditch up to six metres deep and eighteen metres wide may date to this period. There is also evidence of a six metres deep ditch outside the Newgate.
De Lacy’s garrison of forty knights would have required a fortification of some sort. Strongbow made a grant for providing the service of men at the castle of Dublin. Tyrell, lord of Castleknock, provided the service of three knights with horses and arms for Dublin castle.
It is unclear whether the castle was the Hiberno-Norse stronghold or a new construction. The Hiberno-Norse lord of Dublin had occupied a royal hall or residence in the vicinity of the later Dublin Castle. It may have been little more than a defended thatched building, a larger version of the post-and-wattle houses. The first castle may have been a motte and bailey dating from 1171-72. Later in 1172 Tigernán Ua Ruairc’s head was placed over the gate of the fortress and his body gibbeted with the feet upwards at the northern side of Dublin.
A suggestion was put forward at the turn of the twentieth century that the Thingmót was, in fact, a motte where a castle was erected to protect the palace of Henry during his visit to Dublin; however Orpen disagreed with this suggestion. The name, Thingmót, seems to be associated with an area rather than the particular mound. The Norse word for assembly, which provided the word ‘mote’, may have become confused with the French word motte. The castle at Dublin was sufficient for the first thirty years of Anglo-Norman rule.
Under de Lacy the city expanded rapidly beyond the walls. There was considerable development of Dublin in the late twelfth century, particularly in the suburbs, a sign of growing prosperity. The Anglo-Normans were free to set out the suburbs outside the western gate where there had not been any previous settlement. The expansion to the west of the city was greatly influenced by the foundation of St. Thomas’s Abbey in 1177. The expansion was largely linear in character following the route to Kilmainham. The new western gate of the city led onto a great new street, named in honour of the nearby abbey. The southern suburb was already in existence at the arrival of the Anglo-Normans and had a cathedral and five churches. The building of the archbishop’s palace c.1184 and the foundation of St. Patrick’s church in 1192 led to rapid development south of the city.
Major re-development of the port begun with land reclamation from the Liffey providing greater depth for cargo-boats and land for development.
Following the Anglo-Norman invasion Dublin’s economic development was fuelled by charters from Henry II and his son, John, and its international trade links to Bristol and the larger Angevin empire. New manufacturing industries, such as pottery production, were introduced. Shipbuilding continued under the new rulers. English merchants had been trading in Dublin since at least 1170 and guilds may have existed even before the arrival of the Anglo-Normans. The list of guild members, c.1175 – 1200, demonstrated how the connection with Bristol had resulted in large numbers of guild members originating from the Severn basin, Bristol’s natural hinterland. Eight Dublin burgesses were from Ludlow which implies that Ludlow men followed de Lacy to Ireland. There were also five burgesses from Weobley, ten from Hereford and three from Leominster.
Existing monastic foundations were strengthened and major additions included the Abbey of St. Thomas and the hospital of St. John the Baptist. The charter of Lorcán Ua Tuathail to Christ Church was witnessed by de Lacy as constable of Dublin. The re-building of Christ Church took place in the late twelfth or early thirteenth century, probably under the direction of Archbishop Cumin. Stalley suggested a start date of 1186, following Cumin’s provincial council, a date which is also supported by Murphy, while O’Keeffe argued for the years of Cumin’s residence in Dublin 1190-96 as the time when the work was undertaken. Irish masons may have been involved in the construction of the crypt together with English masons at an earlier period possibly the 1170s. The moulding profile of stones in Christ Church cathedral show a profile common in West Country buildings such as Llanthony priory and St. Mary’s, Shrewsbury and this suggests that English masons were present at Christ Church in the late twelfth century. Llanthony priory church, erected between 1180 and 1230, had been endowed by land grants in Mide by de Lacy. As a master builder de Lacy may have been involved in providing expertise and trained masons for the work at Christ Church.
St. Mary’s Abbey, Dublin, was administered from Buildwas from 1156. De Lacy must have played host to the abbot of Buildwas from Shropshire on his visits to Dublin. De Lacy may have known Ranulf, the abbot of Buildwas, before their arrival in Ireland as both were landholders in Shropshire. Ranulf visited Ireland on a number of occasions. He accompanied Henry and de Lacy on the king’s visit in 1171-2 and visited again in 1178 when he and de Lacy witnessed a charter together. Ranulf returned on the king’s business to Ireland in 1183 to prepare the way for Archbishop Cumin. Ranulf and de Lacy also witnessed a charter of John’s in 1185. St. Mary’s benefited from de Lacy’s knights, Gilbert de Nugent and Adam de Feipo, who made grants to St. Mary’s for prayers for the soul of de Lacy and their own souls.
The Augustinian priory and hospital of St. John the Baptist was founded between 1185 and 1188 by Ailred le Palmer. It received two grants of lands, both now known as Palmerstown, in Fingal and west Dublin. This foundation was supported not by the large landowners like de Lacy but rather by their principal tenants. Richard de Stottesdun, chamberlain of Hugh de Lacy, endowed it with property.
De Lacy was a patron of St. Thomas’s Abbey. The priory, later abbey, of St. Thomas the Martyr was founded in March 1177 by William fitz Aldelin, acting on behalf of Henry II who wished to atone for the death of Thomas Becket. Built outside the walls the abbey acted as developer of the western suburb of the city.
John de Lacy, constable of Chester, and Richard de Pec, were sent by Henry to take custody of the city of Dublin from Hugh de Lacy in 1181. De Lacy was restored to the position only to be replaced in September 1184 by Philip of Worcester. One of Philip’s first tasks was to recover revenues de Lacy had appropriated from the royal demesne of Dublin, comprising land of Ua Cathasaigh as well as a number of other territories. De Lacy seems to have been re-appointed as he witnessed John’s charter to Dublin in 1185 as constable with his name appearing as first on the list of witnesses. During John’s visit to Ireland in 1185 de Lacy witnessed eight charters and in six he signed himself as constable.
While Dublin underwent major changes in the earlier twelfth century the Anglo-Norman conquest of Dublin was significant due to the continuation of these changes in political status, municipal status, expansion of the suburbs, land reclamation, economic growth, church building and monastic development. As constable de Lacy played a major role to changes in the city which laid the basis for continued development in the early thirteenth century.
Principal Royal Agent?
‘Hugues de Lasci, who thus nominated Governor of the head of the Anglo-Norman colony, is generally regarded as the first Viceroy for Ireland’
Gilbert, History of the viceroys of Ireland, p. 33.
‘The king of England departed from Ireland, leaving Hugo de Lacy as his constable in his place with great power’
MIA, 1173.
Hugh de Lacy appears first in the list of chief governors of Ireland. Traditionally historians have acknowledged de Lacy’s role as Henry’s representative, chief officer, justicar, viceroy or chief governor in Ireland during the years 1172-3, 1177-81 and 1181-4. There was no actual office with any of these titles in existence when de Lacy arrived in Ireland and these positions and titles really only evolved and developed during the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries. This traditional view of de Lacy as the first governor general has been questioned by Flanagan. Flanagan and other historians now argue that de Lacy was not appointed justicar or governor of Ireland and that his role was simply military governor of Dublin. William fitz Aldelin is now suggested as Henry’s principal agent in Ireland rather than de Lacy. It is suggested that de Lacy only began operating as chief agent of the king after fitz Aldelin’s departure in 1181. There are no extant charters issued by de Lacy on behalf of the king and in the extant charters he is not styled under any title except constable or constable of Dublin. Perhaps the best way to describe de Lacy’s role was principal royal agent for Dublin and possibly for Ireland.
By the twelfth century the position of justicar had been developed in England to ensure continuation of the administration while the king was absent on the Continent. With the king almost never in Ireland, a similar position was imported into Ireland. The position evolved into the position of chief governor or king’s deputy who was the representative of the king, supreme military commander, chief judge and head of the administration. Initially the authority of the king’s deputy was limited to the royal demesne, with control over the rest of the country being dependent on the amenability of lords of those territories. With de Lacy controlling Mide and acting as justicar it ensured that royal rule ran into his lordship, providing de Lacy agreed. Early justicars presided over the Dublin county court, as though their immediate authority was limited to the area under that court’s jurisdiction. Prior to Henry’s arrival in Ireland the king had appointed justicars for England but the definition and powers of the justicar was not standardised in Ireland for centuries. The earliest use of the title in Ireland is with John de Courcy in 1185. Giraldus used the term procurator in relation to de Lacy, Roger of Howden used the word justicar for de Lacy’s title when revising his chronicle at a later date but originally he did not use the term. The first record of a salary for the position of justicar was in 1226 but de Lacy did receive lands near Dublin to compensate him for expenses incurred in carrying out the position of constable. The justicar was appointed at the pleasure of the king but the term was not fixed so there was no security or stability for the position holder. De Lacy’s term was disrupted on a number of occasions by the decision of the king to recall him.
Henry had discussed the security of his Irish dominion with his court and had given it careful consideration before appointing de Lacy to Dublin. Henry indicated that he trusted de Lacy by providing him such a large grant in Mide and control of Dublin. If Henry trusted de Lacy to represent him in those substantial grants then he could trust him to be in charge of rest of the king’s Irish dominions. Many of the chief governors of Ireland during the medieval period were Anglo-Irish magnates, just like de Lacy and included John de Courcy and Meiler fitz Henry, with fewer holders being court officials despatched from England. As controller of Dublin, militarily and through his tenants, and of Mide ensure that de Lacy was central to the control of the country. If he did not agree with something it would have been very difficult to achieve without his consent.
After the death of Strongbow in 1176 de Lacy was the dominant power in Ireland. He was acknowledged as such by both English and Irish sources. William of Newburgh wrote ‘Among the nobles of the king of England who were in Ireland, Hugh de Lasci was esteemed the chiefest and most powerful.’ Acting as king’s agent de Lacy granted charters in Dublin and collected the tribute of Connacht. The Irish regarded him as king of the territories he controlled.
While not a member of the familia de Lacy was at court on regular occasions. He witnessed the king’s charters to at Dublin 1171-2. Despite the fact that Henry had an efficient body of administrators in his household he choose de Lacy as constable of Dublin and allow him to continue to hold that office until 1184 at least. As custodian of city of Dublin de Lacy’s area of control did extend beyond the city limits as he made grants of lands in the area surrounding Dublin and he must have believed that he had the power to take lands into his hands as the king’s representative as in the case of Saithne. De Lacy attested Irish charters as constable between 1177 and 1186, not just as constable of Dublin, suggesting that he had a wider role than just Dublin or in addition to Dublin. During John’s visit to Ireland in 1185 de Lacy witnessed eight charters and in six he signed himself as constable. Four of the six related to Dublin and Flanagan suggested that the probability is that his constableship was associated with Dublin but in two cases de Lacy witnessed charters relating to property outside the Dublin area. There may have been a separate constable of Dublin as Hamo Passeleue ‘constable of Dublin’ witnessed a charter issued by John Cumin, archbishop of Dublin, between August 1184 and Easter 1186 or there may have been more than one constable of Dublin. This would suggest that de Lacy was operating under a different title, perhaps as the king’s representative. John de Lacy and Richard de Pec were appointed constables of Dublin in 1181 yet they seem to have become involved in castle building in Leinster with de Lacy. If they as the king’s representatives in Dublin were acting in an area of Ireland outside Dublin then that is what de Lacy was also doing, so he could be described as the king’s representative.
De Lacy was appointed bailiff of Dublin when he was granted the lordship of Mide by Henry in 1172 shortly before the king left Ireland. The focus of the grant was Mide with Dublin being included as a secondary appointment. There is a suggestion that Henry made hasty arrangements for Dublin and Ireland before he left in 1172 but he had spent six months in the country and had become knowledgeable about its structure and history. According to Roger of Howden de Lacy was appointed custodian of Dublin and justitiarium Hiberniae but only the position of constable was recorded in his original version. As custodian of the Dublin which had been the centre of royal authority for the previous six months de Lacy could claim to be continuing that control. The court official, William fitz Aldelin, is described as dapifer or the king’s steward in the grant of Mide to de Lacy. Fitz Aldelin was despatched to Ireland to take charge of the country when de Lacy and Strongbow left to serve in France in 1173 but Flanagan suggested that he might have had this role from 1171 when he was sent to Ireland to prepare for the visit of Henry. The March 1173 letter of credence to William fitz Aldelin created him dapifer or steward.
Strongbow is recorded in a number of lists as chief governor for 1173 to 1176 with Raymond le Gros as his deputy. After Strongbow’s death, William fitz Aldelin was despatched to Ireland as the king’s deputy but Roger of Howden said de Lacy had custody of Dublin with its appurtenances. In the three years from 1176 to 1179 the Pipe Rolls show de Lacy took delivery of grain from England for use in the defence of the king’s property and for the king’s household in Ireland. De Lacy was present in England when Irish affairs were being dealt with.
According to Giraldus fitz Aldelin was recalled to London in 1177 and de Lacy was appointed Henry’s general deputy in Ireland while Robert de Poer was appointed governor of both Waterford and Wexford. Giraldus did not like fitz Aldelin and may have down played his role. Giraldus’s presentation of de Lacy’s appointment in 1177 may have been wishful thinking on his part. Roger of Howden stated that fitz Aldelin was granted custody of the lands of Strongbow while de Lacy retained custody of Dublin. At the Council of Oxford in May 1177, Henry’s son, John, was nominated Lord of Ireland and de Lacy was re-granted Meath. In Henry’s charters granted at the time of the council at Oxford in 1177 William fitz Aldelin preceded Hugh de Lacy in the witness lists.
In early 1179 a number of Irishmen went to Windsor to complain to Henry of unjust treatment by de Lacy and fitz Aldelin. In 1179 Ivory Ua Cathasaigh, Lord of Saithne, died and his lands were taken into de Lacy’s hands as agent of the crown.
According to Giraldus de Lacy went to great trouble to conciliate both Anglo-Norman and the Irish, restoring, where possible, lands to the original owners. By his mild rule and keeping of agreements de Lacy gradually won the support of his subjects. The next step was the erection of castles which then could be used to enforce the new laws and bring the countryside to peace. Giraldus wrote that de Lacy was most careful in the administration of the office entrusted to him and his conduct of public affairs.
The king, suspicious of the de Lacy, recalled him to England in late spring 1181, and appointed John de Lacy, constable of Chester, and Richard de Pec, to replace him. Before de Lacy left for England he and the two newly appointed officers, fortified north Leinster with castles.
De Lacy erected an earthwork castle for John de Clahull on the river Barrow not far from Leighlin, a site now identified as Carlow c.1180. The castle which de Lacy erected at Leighlin has been identified as the motte at Ballyknockan, just south of the town on the west bank of the river Barrow. De Lacy erected a castle for Raymond le Gross at Castlemore, near Tullow, Co. Carlow. The motte at Knocktopher in Kilkenny, was erected by de Lacy for Griffin, the brother of Raymond. A castle was erected for John de Hereford by de Lacy at Collacht which is now identified as Tullow, Co. Carlow but no traces of the castle remain today. He erected a castle at Tristerdermot in Uí Muireadhaigh for Walter de Ridelsford. The Ridelsford family held fees in Lincolnshire of John, Constable of Chester, who was acting as joint king’s deputy in 1181. De Lacy erected a castle for Robert fitz Richard at Narrach, now the townland and parish of Narraghmore, in the barony of Narrach and Reban, County Kildare, adjoining the Barrow, but no trace of a castle remains exist today. A castle was constructed for Thomas of Flanders not far from the castle de Lacy had erected for Robert de Bigarz, in the furthest part of Uí Muireadhaigh, separated from Uí Buidhe by the waters of the Barrow. A castle for Meiler fitz Henry was erected at Timahoe, Laois in 1183. Meiler’s castle has been identified as a motte and bailey, named the rath of Ballynaclough, a kilometre west of the village. De Lacy erected a castle at Obowi for Robert de Bigarz. Robert witnessed a charter to de Lacy’s abbey at Fore and also de Lacy’s grant to Gilbert de Nugent. The actual site of Robert’s castle is not clear but one site suggested is near Tullomoy, Castletown, Laois, Another site suggested for this castle is on the west bank of the river Barrow near Ardree House where there is a low circular motte with ditch and bank but no bailey. The castles at Timahoe and Oboy were part of a westward expansion by the Anglo-Normans. De Lacy was also expanding westward in Mide at his time. After Strongbow died in 1176, Henry II had divided up custody of his lordship between Hugh de Lacy, Robert le Poer and William fitz Aldelin. It would appear that de Lacy erected castles in the Carlow, Kildare, Laois area, in that part of the Strongbow’s lordship granted to William fitz Aldelin in 1177.
De Lacy was restored in the winter of 1181-2 with a cleric, Richard of Shrewsbury, as coadjutor and councillor. According to Flanagan it was only after fitz Aldelin’s permanent departure from Ireland after 1181 and in the absence of any other notable royal officers, that Hugh de Lacy could be described as procurator general of Ireland.
In August 1184, Archbishop John Cumin, crossed to his new see of Dublin, and de Lacy was recalled. In September Philip of Worcester was dispatched to Ireland as procurator. Philip revoked grants made by de Lacy in Saithne and returned these lands and other lands misappropriated by de Lacy to the control of the crown. De Lacy seems to have had the right to grant these lands on behalf of the crown, making grants in the area to Llanthony in the land of Ua Cathasaigh, Saithne, which were confirmed by John and also by the bishop of Meath.
As the most powerful magnate in Ireland and constable of Dublin de Lacy wielded enormous power. He acknowledged Henry as his overlord and many of his activities were carried out on behalf of the king. Roger of Howden described de Lacy as constabularius totius Hiberniae sub rege Angliae, the constable of all Ireland under the English king.
Campaigns and Politics 1172-1185
‘..Hugh de Lacy and Hugh de Beauchamp, who were the constables thereof, defended the town of Verneuil boldly and with resolute spirit’
Chronica, ii, p. 49.
Entrusting the castles at Trim and Duleek and his lands to Hugh Tyrell de Lacy returned to England in late 1172. He would have been concerned with regard to his Welsh and Marcher lands as the Welsh launched an attack which ravaged the countryside as far as Hereford and Gloucester. This attack arose as a result of the killing of Owain, son of Iorwerth ab Owain, by the earl of Gloucester’s men while on his way to peace talks with Henry II.
A regular crosser of the Irish Sea, the journey took de Lacy approximately twenty four hours when the weather was favourable. De Lacy was a witness to the charter of Hugh Mortimer for the foundation of Wigmore Abbey probably during the late summer of 1172. Despite his duties to the king and his involvement in Ireland de Lacy continued to visit his estates on the Marches on a regular basis. Between 1172 and 1177 de Lacy confirmed a charter whereby his tenant, Roger de Esketot, of Bitterley, granted the rents of the mill of Bitterly to Haughmond Abbey. By 1174-7 de Lacy confirmed Hugh Say’s grant of Stokesay church to Haughmond abbey. In 1170s de Lacy re-granted Wootton in Aldon, Shropshire to William of Wootton. This was for the service for ½ knight’s fee in the host and ¾ knights’ fee when the lord levied an aid on his knights.
In addition to his lands in England and Ireland de Lacy also sought to expand his estate in France and during 1172-3 he acquired the honour of Le Pin in Normandy from Robert, count of Meulan, for 2000 liveres angevins, to be held from Henry II for 2 knights’ fees. The purchase may have been forced on Robert as he had taken the side of the young king against Henry II.
The conquest of Mide by de Lacy was aided by the bitter divisions amongst the Irish rulers. Interfamily rivalry amongst the Irish rulers continued with the assassination of Domnall Bregach Ua Máel Sechlainn at Durrow in 1173 by his half brother, Art, who succeeded him as ruler of west Meath while the kingdom of east Meath appears to have been assumed by Manus Ua Máel Sechlainn. In 1173 Ethru Ua Miadhachain, bishop of Clonard, died but de Lacy was in France and so could not influence the choice of successor.
In 1173 Henry’s eldest son, also called Henry and known as the ‘young king’, began a rebellion against his father with the support of the French. De Lacy and Strongbow were summoned by the king to serve in Normandy in April 1173. Hugh de Lacy was recognised as one of the ‘most notable of the King’s supporters’. He would have been fighting not only for his king but also to ensure the security of his own property in Normandy. De Lacy was at Alençon by April.
Henry made no move until the enemy’s strategy was revealed. De Lacy and Hugh de Beauchamp were ordered to defend the town of Verneuil. This was an important task and showed how much Henry trusted de Lacy. Verneuil was an strategically important border town. About 9 July Louis with the French forces attacked Verneuil. The castle at Verneuil, a fine cylindrical keep, The Tour Grise, was well fortified and defended. The town surrounding the castle was divided into three burghs, each walled off from each other. Having laid siege to the town and with supplies within the walls of the great burgh running low, negotiations began between the French and the representatives of the great burgh. A truce was agreed and if help from Henry did not arrive by the third day, the town’s people agreed to surrender. It would appear that de Lacy was not a party to these negotiations and probably remained in the fortress. The forces of Louis managed to sack the great burgh. On the third day, 9 August, Henry and his forces including Strongbow arrived to relieve the town forcing Louis to beat a hasty retreat. Henry ordered the walls of the town re-built. Reassured of Strongbow’s loyalty Henry despatched him to Ireland and de Lacy may have returned to Ireland with him but it is unlikely.
It is probable that de Lacy continued in the service of the king in his fight against the rebels. De Lacy was in attendance on the king at Caen for Christmas 1173. A royal charter, dated at Caen, in favour of the nuns of St. Mary of Liseux, was attested to by de Lacy amongst others. In January 1174 Louis made an attack in southern Normandy but it was beaten back.
Henry was forced to return to England in the summer of 1174 to counter an attack from the north by the Scots and their rebel allies. Henry made a pilgrimage to the tomb of St Thomas at Canterbury. Later in the summer Henry returned to Normandy to lift the siege of Rouen. By September Louis was suing for peace. In France with the king in December 1174 de Lacy appeared on the witness lists for royal charters at Rouen and at Valognes. Henry spent Christmas in Argentan. It may have been at this time that de Lacy visited Canterbury.
The martyred Thomas Becket was quickly transformed into a saint with miracles being reported almost immediately after his death. A saint by popular acclamation he was officially canonised on 21 February 1173 with the date of his death, December 29th, being established as the feast of “St. Thomas of Canterbury.”
A number of secondary sources state that de Lacy was back in England by 29 December 1172, when he defended the king and rebuked Archbishop Richard for his boastful language. This is based on an incident which was reported by Giraldus but which received a wrong date by a compiler when published in the nineteenth century. The dating of this event in Opera is inaccurate as it was not until 21st February 1173 that Becket was canonised by Pope Alexander and Richard was not elected Archbishop until 3rd June 1173 and consecrated in April 1174 so the de Lacy incident is more likely to date to 1174 rather than 1172. Henry II did not visit the tomb until July 1174 and it likely that de Lacy did not visit it until the following December. De Lacy would have followed the lead set by his superior, Henry II, rather than preceded him.
In 1174 an Irish army under the leadership of Ua Briain of Thomond but including forces from Ruaidrí Ua Conchobair, defeated the forces of Strongbow at Thurles and killed as many as seven hundred. Encouraged by this success Ua Conchobair decided to invade Mide, a crucial border zone between Dublin, Leinster and Connacht. He gathered a great army, including not only the men of Connacht but the claimant to the kingship of Mide, Magnus Ua Máel Sechlainn, the kings of Breífne, Airgialla, and Ulaid – the forces of the northern half of Ireland. The Mide tenantry fled back to Dublin as Ua Conchobair’s great host advanced. Only a few defenders were on duty at Trim castle and were unprepared for a major assault. The Irish had mastered the art of besieging a town, having besieged Dublin for two months in 1171. Hugh Tyrell, de Lacy’s constable at Trim, decided that forces at the castles at Trim and Duleek were not adequate for a successful defence, destroyed some of the fortifications and abandoned the castles, retreating to Dublin. A timber castle such as Trim was vulnerable to fire and was razed to the ground by Ua Conchobair. The Irish forces marched on to the outskirts of Dublin and into east Mide where they destroyed de Lacy’s castle at Duleek. The Irish were forced to retreat when Strongbow and Raymond le Gros mustered their forces and inflicted a defeat on the Irish rearguard. The new settlers feared that if Mide was overrun then the conquest of Leinster and Dublin might be rolled back. De Lacy does not appear to have censured Tyrell for his failure to defend his castles as Tyrell returned to restore the fortifications and guard them with ‘great honour.’
According to Eyton de Lacy was in France at Rouen in December 1174 and in Valognes in April 1175. Henry returned to England in May and it is likely that de Lacy accompanied the king. A royal council was held in Gloucester in June in relation to Wales and as a major noble of the Marches it is likely that de Lacy attended.
The settlers in Mide responded to the Irish attack by rebuilding their castles, raiding into Connacht and hanging the Irish leaders. Trim castle was re-built this time in stone. Magnus Ua Máel Sechlainn, claimant to the kingship of Mide, was captured and hanged at Trim in 1175. The Anglo-Normans raided Mide from the Shannon to the sea with the monasteries of Clonard and Durrow being plundered.
Ua Conchobair having been unsuccessful in his invasion of Mide turned to negotiation in order to secure his authority over his territory and his Irish sub-kings. Flanagan suggested that the meeting between de Lacy, fitz Aldelin and Ruaidrí Ua Conchobair described by Giraldus took place as a preliminary to the Treaty of Windsor, rather than while Henry II was in Ireland.
De Lacy was with the king in England during the summer and autumn of 1175. In August he witnessed a charter to Richard de Pec, who was to become the king’s agent in Dublin in 1181. In October de Lacy witnessed a charter to Haughmond Abbey.
On 6th October 1175 de Lacy witnessed a charter in favour of St. Mary’s Abbey, Dublin together with fitz Aldelin and Strongbow, both of whom took precedence over de Lacy in the witness list.
De Lacy was at court at the time of the negotiation of the Treaty of Windsor. Agreed on 6 October 1175 the Treaty of Windsor recognised Ua Conchobair as king of all lands, outside Mide and Leinster, for which he became Henry’s vassal and was to pay tribute of one hide for every ten beast slain. This was an explicit recognition that Ireland was now divided between the Irish and Anglo-Normans. Ua Conchobair was to ensure that any Irish who had fled before the Anglo-Norman advances should be returned to the ‘lands of the king of England’s barons’. As Henry’s governor of Dublin de Lacy would aid Ua Conchobair on request. This treaty was similar to an agreement Henry made with Rhys ab Gruffudd of Deheubarth in 1171 which was renewed in May 1175 when Rhys and a delegation of Welsh princes met Henry at Gloucester.
The Treaty of Windsor did not secure settled conditions as the Anglo-Normans lords were anxious to capture fresh territory and Ua Conchobair was too weak to control areas outside his direct jurisdiction. He had difficulty even in collecting the tribute in his own territory of Connacht. In 1180 Ua Conchobair despatched his son to Henry as a hostage upon the agreements made between them concerning the payment of tribute of Ireland. De Lacy was in receipt of this tribute in 1186.
One of de Lacy’s daughters married William fitz Alan of Clun at a date between May 1175 and 1177 with six Shropshire manors going with her as a dowry.
In the early part of the 1176 de Lacy was with the king in England witnessing charters in January and April.
Raids and counter-raids continued in the Mide area with Kells and Fore being laid waste by the Anglo-Normans and by the Hy-Bruin. The lord of Carbury was slain by Art Ua Máel Sechlainn, who was then deposed by his own men. Richard Fleming used his castle at Slane as a base to raid into Airgialla, Ui-Briuin and Fir-Mide. In retaliation Máel Sechlainn Mac Lochlainn, king of Cenél nEógain and the men of Airgialla under Ua Cerbaill attacked the castle at Slane and killed the garrison with more than one hundred men, women and children being slain. The castles of Kells, Galtrim and Derrypatrick were abandoned by their defenders and destroyed in the raid. Many new settlers fled back to Dublin but the raid was simply a raid and the Irish forces withdrew. The men of Airgialla overtook a raiding party of the foreigners of Dublin ‘and inflicted a slaughter upon them thence as far as Telach Ard and Dublin’.
In early 1176 Strongbow was in Ireland supporting the cause of Dermot Mac Carthy as prince of Desmond. Strongbow died in Dublin on 5 April 1176 of an infection and was buried with great ceremony at Holy Trinity Church (Christchurch) with Lorcán Ua Tuathail, archbishop of Dublin, presiding. Strongbow left a widow, Aoife, a minor son, Gilbert, and a daughter, Isabel. According to records, Gilbert died a minor in 1185.
De Lacy seemed to have had a harmonious relationship with Strongbow with them sharing tenants in Mide and Leinster. Meiler fitz Henry was a tenant of Strongbow in Carbury and was later granted Ardnurcher by de Lacy. Strongbow made a grant to William de Nangle, a son of Jocelin de Nangle, who was a tenant of de Lacy. Hugh Tyrell held lands from de Lacy at Castleknock and Moyglare and also lands at Castlelyons, Kildare. Geoffrey de Constantine had held lands in Laois and Offaly before being granted lands by de Lacy. Adam Dollard was granted lands in Mide by de Lacy while Hugo Dollard was granted Ardree in Co. Kildare. Richard Fleming was granted Slane by de Lacy while Thomas Fleming received grants from Strongbow. While there is no evidence that the two Dollards or Flemings were related it is possible. In the 1180s de Lacy erected mottes for a number of Strongbow’s grantees in the Carlow/Kildare area. In 1174 Strongbow had led the Anglo-Normans to the defence of Trim castle and Mide. There does not appear to have been any rivalry between the two men.
On Strongbow’s death Henry II took his lands into royal hands, with William fitz Aldelin as administrator in Ireland and Aoife holding dower rights, and possibly the lordship of Striguil, until as late as 1185-6. Strongbow had held together groups of Irish and Anglo-Norman vassals through his own personal influence and after his death this control ceased to exist. After the death of Strongbow, Leinster was left without a resident lord and de Lacy as lord of Meath became the most important Irish nobleman.
In January 1177 John de Courcy marched into Ulaid with a small force of twenty two knights and about three hundred soldiers and captured Downpatrick, the capital of the kingdom of Ulaid. As he had to pass through Mide and Airgialla into Ulaid, de Lacy must have been aware or informed of the force crossing his territory. As constable of Dublin de Lacy would have been aware of a gathering army and had to give his consent before such a force could be assembled. Ua Cerbaill of Airgialla may have been distracted by an attack on Louth by Miles de Cogan or possibly did not perceive de Courcy’s small force as a threat. With Downpatrick as his centre de Courcy set out to reduce all the area east of the Bann.
Two months later, in March 1177, Miles de Cogan, attempted an invasion of Connacht. Some of de Lacy forces from Tullyard joined in the raid on Connacht. The province was devastated and burnt by the invaders as far as the river Suck but from there to Tuam they found themselves in an abandoned and desolate countryside, the churches and buildings having been burnt by the people and all the provisions destroyed or stored away underground. Faced with a complete lack of provisions in Tuam, and hearing that Ruaidrí Ua Conchobair was gathering a huge force the Anglo-Norman retreated back across the Shannon. Following some heavy fighting with Ua Conchobair’s forces de Cogan reached Dublin safely.
The Dublin forces and some of de Lacy’s men made a raid into west Mide stealing some of Muinter Tadgáin’s cows. The forces of Muinter Tadgáin overtook them, recovering their cattle and killing Hugh Sirrisbel and others.
Ludlow was taken into the king’s hands in 1176-7. Ludlow being taken into the king’s hands could have been part of a process whereby baronial castles received royal constables. At the Council of Windsor in 1177 a decree was issued to secure rebellious castles following the rebellion of 1173-4. Castles of loyal barons, including Richard de Lucy, the justicar of England, were also confiscated at this time. The seizure in most cases was symbolic and temporary. The motive for the seizure of Ludlow is unclear but Henry may have seized Ludlow castle as a surety for de Lacy’s behaviour in Ireland. The cost of upkeep of Ludlow would have been considerable and by removing its upkeep Henry may have allowed de Lacy concentrate his finances on the erection of Trim castle and the development of his new Irish estates. Ludlow remained in royal hands until 1189-90 when it was restored to Walter de Lacy. Weobley and Longtown were not confiscated.
The foundation charter of St. Thomas’s Dublin was granted in Dublin in March-April 1177 but de Lacy’s name does not appear on its witness list, perhaps he was already in England with the king as he witnessed a charter to Mellifont in April. A royal charter dated at Oxford, with de Lacy as one of the witnesses, was granted to the Priory of St. Thomas at Dublin.
Henry called a Great Council at Oxford in May 1177 to settle Irish affairs. The Treaty of Windsor had been a failure due to the weakness of Ruaidrí Ua Conchobair. A new policy for Ireland emerged with the king’s youngest son, John, being conferred with the title of Lord of Ireland and a series of grants and re-grants were made to establish a fresh new feudal organization. Speculative grants were made of Cork, Kerry and Limerick with all grantees swearing allegiance to Henry and to John.
Hugh de Lacy attended the Great Council and was re-granted Meath under new terms, a doubling of his knight service to 100 knight fees. Meath was later held for the old service of fifty knights, the service of one hundred knights may have meant to include Dublin and north Kildare. Henry had full confidence in de Lacy as a loyal vassal, re-granting him his lands and his custodianship of Dublin.
Giraldus stated that de Lacy was appointed procurator-general of Ireland in 1177 but it is more likely that fitz Aldelin was granted the control of Strongbow’s legacy while de Lacy held Mide and Dublin with le Poer holding Waterford. It would appear that the royal administration of Leinster was divided into three zones controlled by Hugh de Lacy from Dublin, William fitz Aldelin from Wexford and Robert le Poer from Waterford. De Lacy’s area of responsibility included Mide, Dublin, Kildare, Offaly and Wicklow.
De Lacy’s distant cousin, Henry de Lacy of Pontefract, died on Crusade in September 1177 and was succeeded by his son, Robert. As the families shared lands in Normandy it is possible that the two cousins met or were in communication with regard the property. De Lacy finally sorted out his dispute with the bishop of Hereford over the liability to perform the service of two knights for the manor of Holme Lacy. This conflict lasted at least from 1166 until 1177 when de Lacy surrendered but he may have been sorting out his English and welsh estates before concentrating on Mide.
At Reading 1178 de Lacy witnessed a grant confirming lands to Mellifont by Henry II.
In the late 1170s and early 1180s the Welsh in the Middle March became increasing aggressive and they captured the castles of Abergavanny and Radnor. Reacting to this threat de Lacy erected new defences at Longtown. This castle and the older Castle at Pont-hendre were refortified while under the control of Henry II in 1187 and 1188.
Work on a new building with defensive characteristics at Llanthony Prima began in the early to mid 1180s with the support of finances from de Lacy’s Irish lands.
The military ground work in east Mide was completed by the late 1170s which allowed de Lacy to consolidate and move further westward. In 1178 de Lacy led a raid into west Mide, raiding Ferceall and plundering Clonmacnoise before making a quick retreat. Clonmacnoise was a strategic target as its patron was the Ua Conchobair kings of Connacht. Ruaidrí’s father, Toirdhealbhach Ua Conchobair, patronised its churches, established a mint there and was buried there. By raiding Clonmacnoise de Lacy was sending a clear message to Ua Conchobair that he was prepared to conquer all of Mide and defend it if necessary from incursions and interference. De Lacy did not raid Connacht directly nor did he allow himself to be drawn into a direct conflict with Ruaidrí Ua Conchobair’s forces. Drawing on the support of Art Ua Máel Sechlainn and the Ua Conchobair Failge, de Lacy’s forces returned and routed Máel Sechlainn Beag Ua Máel Sechlainn and the Tethbae, Ruaidrí’s clients, but were defeated later that year by the Ua Conchobair Failge, their recent allies. In 1179 Clonmacnoise was raided again and 105 houses burnt down. Ua Conchobair’s control over this area was being gradually broken by de Lacy.
The raid on Clonmacnoise and other attacks led to a deputation of Irish men to the court of Henry II early in 1179 to complain of the unjust and violent treatment by de Lacy and fitz Aldelin. The king was displeased by these reports. It is possible that these reports were brought to Henry’s attention by Lorcán Ua Tuathail, archbishop of Dublin, and Cadla Ua Dubtaig, archbishop of Tuam, who were at the English royal court seeking permission to travel to the Third Lateran Council in Rome.
Giraldus provided an account of the raid on Fore: “Once when his army was staying for the night in the same place, Hugo de Laci ordered his men to return the corn that they had stolen everywhere from the churches and from the mill. They restored all except a small quantity of oats which two soldiers left secretly in front of their horses. One of the horses went mad and died that night, having broken his head in the stable. And the other, while his rider was scoffing at the others who through a superstitious fear had returned the corn, fell dead on the following morning, suddenly and unexpectedly, beside Hugo de Laci.”
It would appear that de Lacy was reaching westwards to Athlone, in an area bordered to the south by the bogs and forests of Offaly and to the north by the lordship of Annally. In 1184 de Lacy erected a motte at Killare, under the hill of Uisneach, to guard the route from Durrow to Ardagh. Killare would seem to have been de Lacy’s principal stronghold in west Mide. William le Petit was required to provide his service at this castle. The motte for Adam de Feipo at Almorita/Ballymorin in the present barony of Rathconrath may have been erected by de Lacy. The castles at Delvin and Clonard may also have been part of this western expansion. De Lacy’s subordinates in this area included the le Petits who developed a manor at Mullingar. The motte for fitz Henry at Timahoe may have been part of a southward move by de Lacy.
De Lacy may have advanced as far as Lough Sewdy or Ballymoreloughsewdy which was to become the caput of the lordship of west Mide after the destruction of the castle at Killare.
Conchobhar Maenmhaighe Ua Conchobair, king of Connacht, allied himself with Máel Sechlainn Beag Ua Máel Sechlainn to raze a castle belt in west Mide during 1184. The attack petered out after taking one castle. The erection of Killare castle by de Lacy may have been a response to this incursion.
De Lacy’s former ally, Art Ua Máel Sechlainn, king of Mide, was slain by Diarmait Ua Briain at a meeting in Druim-chuilinn in 1184 thereby removing another leader in western Mide. This may have encouraged de Lacy to expand into south western Mide, beginning with a motte at Durrow in 1186.
In 1185 the forces of Cinéal Eóghain from north-west Ulster attacked west Mide but were driven out by William le Petit with the loss of their king’s son. This invasion may have been a reprisal for the attacks of John de Courcy in Ulster.
De Lacy became involved in the conflict relating to the boundaries of the diocese of Armagh and Clogher and succession to the seat of Armagh. Interpreting his grant of Mide to include Ferrard on the north bank of the Boyne de Lacy came into contact with Murchad Ua Cerbaill, lord of Airgialla, who initially raided into Mide but by this time had a close relationship with de Lacy. Ua Cerbaill was a nephew of Tigernán Ua Ruairc, assassinated by de Lacy in 1172. When de Lacy in 1186 the Irish annals termed him ‘king of Meath and Breffny and Uriel (Airgialla)’ and it is likely that Ua Cerbaill saw de Lacy as his immediate overlord, viewing his relationship with him in the same way as he had previously regarded his links with the Irish overkings to whom he had given allegiance.
In 1180 the archbishopric of Armagh became vacant and a nephew of Ruaidrí Ua Conchobair, Tomaltach, bishop of Elphin, was translated to the see, to the apparent displeasure of Henry II and of Murchad Ua Cerbaill, lord of Airgialla. Máel Ísu Ua Cerbaill, a kinsman of Murchad, became bishop of Louth/Airgialla in 1178. Máel Ísu visited England in 1181-2 to secure support for his claim to Armagh where he was entertained by the sheriff of Chester, Gilbert Pipard, who later received lands in Airgialla. Pipard may have been known to de Lacy as he had been sheriff of Hereford 1172-74 and a justice there in 1179. In 1184 Máel Ísu succeeded in temporarily ousting Tomaltach Ua Conchobair from Armagh and installing himself in his place as archbishop with the support of Murchad Ua Cerbaill and de Lacy, who attacked the city in that year. Tomaltach regained his position the following year but Máel Ísu continued to make his claim by travelling to Rome where he died in 1187. De Lacy was supporting Ua Cerbaill while opposing the candidate of his father-in-law, Ruaidrí Ua Conchobair. It would seem that de Lacy took a strategic decision to support Ua Cerbaill, either out of loyalty to Henry or to his sub-king, Ua Cerbaill.
In March 1185 Philip of Worcester and Hugh Tyrell marched to Armagh. There they extracted tribute from the clergy. As a result of wringing this money from the church Philip suffered an illness after he left the city. While the Anglo-Norman forces under Tyrell stayed at Louth on the return journey to Dublin his two horses, his lodgings and most of the town was destroyed by fire. Tyrell who had stolen a miraculous cooking pot from Armagh was cursed by Máel Ísu Ua Cerbaill, who stated that he would meet with a grievous misfortune within the year. Tyrell returned the undamaged pot to Armagh but later in the year he clashed with his lord and friend, de Lacy, perhaps in relation to the dispute with regard to succession in Armagh.
Marriage to Ruaidrí Ua Conchobair’s Daughter
‘He was strongly suspected of wanting to throw off his allegiance and usurp the government of the kingdom, and with it the crown and sceptre’
Expugnatio, p. 191.
It is unclear when de Lacy’s wife, Rose, arrived in Ireland but she did witness a charter before 1176. Rose died between 1177 and 1180 and was buried in St. Thomas’s Abbey, Dublin. De Lacy erected a commemorative cross over her grave between the walls of the city and St. Thomas’ Abbey.
A widower with at least two young sons de Lacy was attracted to women so much so that he was described as ‘a womaniser and enslaved by lust, not just for one woman but for many.’ It is possible that the source of this boast was de Lacy himself. Male sexuality was not limited to marriage in the twelfth century. Accepted morality did not prevent men from having other women either, before, during or after marriage. Men made extensive and very conspicuous use of mistresses and of prostitutes. Sexual activity outside marriage was a common occurrence at every level. There is no record of de Lacy having had any illegitimate children, so perhaps it was just a boastful comment to a gullible writer.
In late 1180 de Lacy married a daughter of Ruaidrí Ua Conchobair, king of Connacht, without the license of the king and according to the custom of the Irish. The name of his new wife is not known but traditionally she is named as Rose, but this is an error probably due to the fact that de Lacy’s first wife was named Rose. De Lacy may have first encountered Ruaidrí Ua Conchobair’s daughter when he met the king at the Shannon in the early to mid 1170s. As governor of Dublin and ruler of Mide de Lacy had an ongoing working relationship with Ua Conchobair. As the king’s representative de Lacy was obliged under the Treaty of Windsor to provide military assistance to Ua Conchobair. Clonmacnoise, as an important site for the kings of Connacht and on the borders of Mide, was possibly the venue for the marriage.
It would appear that the marriage was carried out ‘according to the custom of that land,’ a marriage which may well have been regarded as an irregular union according to church law. It is unclear as to why this marriage should have been irregular as it is unlikely that an impediment was in existence to the marriage. De Lacy was a widower and free to marry but Ua Conchobair’s daughter may have been the product of her father’s unrecognised marriages. The irregularity of the marriage might allow de Lacy to set aside the marriage if the alliance was not productive.
There were various forms of marriage in early Irish society. As many as nine types of union are described in the early Irish laws. Some sources stress that the husband and wife in more formal type of unions should be of the same social class. The children of any type of marriage had rights to inheritance. The twelfth century was a period of reform in marriage practices in Ireland but the older traditions seemed to have continued. The Irish appear to have maintained their civil laws on marriage separate from the church’s teaching on the matter.
It was possible for Irish kings to marry more than one wife at a time. Ruaidrí’s father, Tairdelbach Ua Conchobair, king of Connacht, had four wives in the early twelfth century. He was canonically married to one and married to the others by secular bonds. It was alleged that Ruaidrí had at least six wives and countless offspring. The marriage practices of the Irish were condemned by various churchmen in the twelfth century. Two archbishops of Canterbury, Anslem and Lanfranc, wrote to the Irish kings condemning Irish marriage practices. The Council of Kells-Mellifont in 1152 discussed the defective marriage law. Pope Alexander condemned the ‘unlawful sexual alliances’ of the Irish in 1172 and the synod of Cashel in the same year addressed Irish marriage customs.
It is not clear if de Lacy sought a dowry or a settlement from Ruaidrí Ua Conchobair prior to the marriage. Strongbow had managed to secure the right to succession to the kingship of Leinster prior to his marriage to Aoife. According to Norman custom it was customary for a financial settlement to be agreed between the families of the bride and groom before the betrothal. A woman was expected to provide a dowry, which might have consisted of land. The husband could only alienate his wife’s property with her consent. According to English Common Law when a woman married, her property passed wholly into the hands of her husband who became her sole guardian.
Marriage between incomers and natives were common. There does not appear to have been any suggestion that the native Irish nobles were in any way inferior to those nobles who came from England. The newcomers intermarriage with the native ruling classes provided an opportunity of forming political alliances with existing power structures and opened up opportunities for land, wealth, and prestige. In some cases defence needs were more of a priority than allegiance to overlord. From a native point of view the motivation for the arranged marriage was to assure the continuity of the native family’s political power under rapidly changing circumstances and to form an alliance with the new powers in the land.
At the top of the social scale the most powerful families intermarried. De Lacy and Ua Conchobair were both high status individuals. Normans had previously married Welsh royalty and even Irish nobility. In the late eleventh century Bernard de Neufmarché of Herefordshire married a daughter of Gruffyd ap Llywelyn of Gwynedd. In 1101 the daughter of Muirchertach Ua Briain married Arnulf de Montgomery from Wales. Gerald of Windsor, constable of Pembroke castle had married Nesta, daughter of Rhys ap Tewdwr, prince of Deheubarth at the start of the twelfth century. Nesta later became the mistress of Henry I. The sub-king of north Wales, Dafydd ab Owain, married Henry II’s half sister, Emma in 1174. At the royal level marriages provided for political alliances, all the English kings after Henry I to 1464 had non-native queens.
Ua Conchobair concluded the marriage alliance with de Lacy in order to strengthen his own position within the kingdom of Connacht. Ua Conchobair’s sons were opposing him for the throne, squabbling among themselves as to who should rule Connacht. Ruaidrí’s son, Murchad, secured support from the Anglo-Normans in 1177 in an attempt to overthrow his father. In such a situation Ruaidrí might have preferred to have his new son-in-law succeed him. De Lacy was the strongest power in the land and Ruaidrí may have had expectations of military aid from him as none was forthcoming from Henry II. With this marriage alliance Ua Conchobair was acknowledging the reality of the take-over of Leinster and Mide. His new son-in-law’s lands bounded his to the east and the alliance might inhibit the Anglo-Norman lords moving westwards.
Ruaidrí had been closely aligned with the previous ruler of Mide, Tigernán Ua Ruairc, and had married Ua Ruairc’s daughter, Dub Coblaid, in the 1150s. His wife may not have been in favour of the marriage of one of her daughters or step daughters to the murderer of her father but she would have been powerless to prevent it. In any case Dub died in 1181, shortly after the marriage took place.
The motivation may have been securing the protection of Mide’s western boundaries while de Lacy attempted to secure a peaceful co-existence with his Irish subjects. By befriending Ua Conchobair de Lacy made firm his grip on Mide.
By the time of his marriage de Lacy may have recognised that his best hope for maintaining control was to adopt an Irish system of government. By the time of his death he was being recognised by the Irish as king of Mide. Strongbow ruled the Leinster Irish as if he were their king and de Courcy ruled Ulster in a fashion similar to an Irish king.
It is unlikely that de Lacy wished to succeed to Connacht. Irish law did not recognise inheritance in the female line. In Wales kingdoms had been united by marriage but this had never happened in Ireland although Strongbow had succeeded to Leinster through his marriage to the king’s daughter.
Marriage to the high-king’s daughter added to de Lacy’s status amongst the Irish and possibly among the Anglo-Normans in Ireland. It would have strengthened de Lacy authority through his link to Ua Conchobair and perhaps prevented any further Irish complaints to the king.
De Lacy may have been re-enforcing his position with regard to the English king. Henry had made his son, John, lord of Ireland in 1177 and this would have been a threat to the position of de Lacy as the most important noble in Ireland. By marrying Ua Conchobair’s daughter de Lacy was reinforcing his position without actually confronting the king.
The king had the right to control the marriage of his major barons and they could not marry without his permission so de Lacy had married without the permission of his overlord. The king’s control of marriage was a crucial factor in his control of his kingdom; through it he could exert patronage, reward his followers and influence the personnel of his kingdom. However marriage without the permission of an overlord was a common practice. In 1152 Henry had married Eleanor of Aquitaine without the permission of his overlord, the king of France.
Rumours began to spread that de Lacy wished to have himself crowned king of Ireland. Henry’s court was full of intrigue and conspiracy. There were fears in England that de Lacy aspired to succeed Ua Conchobair as king of Connacht and overlord of the Irish kings. De Lacy’s close relationship with the Irish inspired fears that he was acting as if he were a provincial Irish king rather than a feudal subject of the king. De Lacy’s marriage must have reminded Henry of Strongbow’s marriage and de Lacy was left under a cloud of suspicion with gossip circulating at the court that he had a crown made to create himself king of Ireland. The king of England feared that de Lacy might establish a separate kingdom in Ireland to rival his own. Henry’s Irish policy was created as a reaction to events such as de Lacy’s marriage rather than as a complete worked out policy. Henry was already uneasy about de Lacy having received complaints of his conduct in 1179 and may have feared that de Lacy could succeed to Connacht as Strongbow had done in Leinster. In order to secure Strongbow’s support to regain his kingdom, Diarmait Mac Murchada had offered him his daughter’s hand in marriage and the kingship of Leinster after his death. In early Irish law a daughter was only entitled to a life interest in her father’s lands. Mac Murchada was offering something which was not his to give, succession to kingship was usually elective with kingship being restricted to male descendants of previous kings. These rules were no longer fixed and other claimants were becoming successful.
Flanagan concluded that Mac Murchada’s offer of the kingship of Leinster was not as radical a departure as some historians have suggested. Mac Murchada was creating Strongbow his tánaiste, his expected successor. The determining factors for succession to kingship by a claimant in Gaelic Ireland was the nearness to the power-centre and control of resources combined with political ability. Strongbow with the exception of a direct blood link fits all of these factors perfectly. De Lacy’s role as ruler of Meath and constable of Dublin could fit the factors for the high-kingship of Ireland but he was not nominated Ua Conchobair’s tánaiste. None of the Irish contemporary sources comment on the legality of Dermot’s agreement with Strongbow. With Mac Murchada’s death Henry became alarmed at the success of Strongbow and feared the establishment of a rival monarchy in Ireland as had happened in Sicily. One English chronicler described Strongbow as ‘now nearly a king’. Strongbow refused to challenge Henry and even before the king arrived in Ireland he had submitted and agreed to hold Leinster as Henry’s vassal. Henry tested Strongbow’s loyalty and obedience by calling on him to fight in Normandy. Restored to the king’s affection Strongbow became the king’s principal officer in Ireland from 1173 until his death in 1176. As in the case of Strongbow de Lacy would have had the sons and other relatives of the king of Connacht to contend with if he had pressed his claim to the kingship after Ua Conchobair’s death.
De Lacy must have realised that Henry would not be pleased with his unauthorised marriage, yet he must have been confident enough that while it might cause difficulties his loyalty would be recognised. De Lacy had a personal bond of loyalty to the king. Others such as Strongbow, Hugh Mortimer and the rebels who supported the young king in 1173-4 had all taken action against the king’s wishes and had even entered open rebellion but had been pardoned and received back into the king’s favour. To offend the king could mean exile and financial ruin so it is improbable that de Lacy would cut himself off from his valuable lands in Normandy and England.
Henry ordered de Lacy to England to account for this unlawful marriage. It would appear that de Lacy was reluctant to appear before the angry king and allowed a suitable time for the king’s temper to cool. Henry removed him as constable of Dublin but later restored him to that position, just as he had in the case of Strongbow. Having assured the king of his loyalty de Lacy continued to be powerful in Ireland. Henry forgave de Lacy and appeared to restore him to his affections. Henry did not usually punish those who rebelled against him, having acknowledged his supremacy they were often restored to their previous positions.
In the aftermath of the marriage de Lacy was instrumental in restoring Ua Conchobair’s relationship with Henry. The king allowed the ‘tribute of Connacht’ be paid to the lord of Mide. A possible long-term result was the visit of Henry’s son, John, to establish a royal government in Ireland.
In 1181 after the marriage of de Lacy the Connacht army attempted to invade Donegal but were defeated. Ua Conchobair’s hold on power was in decline and in 1182 he abdicated. De Lacy did not attempt to take over the kingdom. Ruaidrí’s son, Conchobhar Maenmhaighe Ua Conchobair, became king of Connacht in 1183 and in 1184 made an alliance with Máel Sechlainn Beag Ua Máel Sechlainn to raze the castle belt in west Mide during 1184. De Lacy may have become disenchanted with his alliance with Ruaidrí Ua Conbchobair as he supported Máel Ísu Ua Cerbaill rather than Ruaidrí’s nephew for the postion of archbishop of Armagh. Ruaidrí attempted unsuccessfully to recover the kingship with the assistance of an Anglo-Norman force and again unsuccessfully after the death of his son but he was never to regain his position.
Irish women entered irregular marriages with nobles in the hope that their sons would be entitled to a share in the father’s name, property and power. There is no record of Ua Conchobair’s daughter protesting or being forced to marry de Lacy. She was still alive in 1224, being cared for by her son, William. Strongbow’s wife too lived a comfortable life after his death. In law a widow was left with a life-interest in a third or half of her dead husband’s property. When de Lacy was assassinated in 1186 his widow was left with a young family. Her step sons were almost of age. De Lacy’s son, William, by his marriage with Ua Conchobair’s daughter, was raised as a noble so it is likely that his mother remained within the Anglo-Norman sphere of influence rather than returning to her father’s house. Although deemed to be illegitimate, William played the role of a younger son of the family. In Norman life, illegitimacy was part of the structure of society, illegitimate children were not concealed or rejected, they were just as noble as other offspring and their birth allowed them certain prerogatives but with no hope of succeeding to the estate.
As a newcomer de Lacy formed alliances with the native Irish nobility, creating the impression of having great ambitions but ultimately proved himself loyal in his allegiance to the king. While de Lacy’s marriage aroused suspicions de Lacy seems to have continued to enjoy the support of their king.
The Visit of John, Lord of Ireland, 1185
‘The son of the King of England then returned to England, to complain to his father of Hugo de Lacy, who was the King of England’s Deputy in Ireland on his (John’s) arrival, and who had prevented the Irish kings from sending him (John) either tribute or hostages.’ Annals of the Four Masters, 1185.
Henry intended to divide his territories among his sons and having provided for his three eldest sons, he decided to allocate Ireland to his youngest son, John. At the Council of Oxford in May 1177, Henry had created his nine year old son, John, lord of Ireland and all the Irish grantees had to swear allegiance to both royals, as king and lord of Ireland respectively.
In 1184 Henry decided that it was time for John to take an active role in his position of lord of Ireland and proposed a visit to reinforce his control. By 1185 John was eighteen years of age, old enough to undertake a personal visit to his lordship. Henry felt that Ireland required a personal royal presence to control and secure the territory for the Angevin family.
The marriage to Ua Conchobair’s daughter was a cause for concern as was de Lacy’s growing power. Rumours circulated that de Lacy intended to make himself king of Ireland. De Lacy was described as ‘king of Erinn when the son of the king of the Saxons came’ by native chroniclers. An interpretation of this term is that de Lacy was acting king of Ireland but subject to Henry as his agent. John was despatched to Ireland to restrict the power of de Lacy and ensure that there would be no attempt to seize the kingdom. In 1183 Ruaidrí Ua Conchobair abdicated without a clear successor to the throne of Connacht or the defunct position of high-king, an event which would have de-stabilised the situation and increased de Lacy’s influence. Ua Conchobair’s re-emergence in 1185 further complicated the unsettled condition of the country.
Henry may have planned the creation of a new unified kingship for Ireland including both Anglo-Norman and Irish subject to his son, John, as king of the separate kingdom of Ireland. This arrangement would have been a clear threat to the position of de Lacy. Henry may have decided to despatch John to Ireland, rather than agree to the proposal of Heraclius, the patriarch of Jerusalem, that one of Henry’s younger sons be sent to lead the crusades in the Holy Land. Plans to expand the royal control over additional Irish lands, particularly in the Munster area, may also have been among the reasons for John’s visit.
Following the death of Lorcán Ua Tuathail John Cumin was appointed archbishop of Dublin in September 1181 and for the next two years remained at the king’s side in Normandy and England. Cumin was despatched to Ireland in the summer of 1184 to prepare the way for the forthcoming visit of John. De Lacy would have met Cumin while he was preparing for John’s visit. Cumin remained in Ireland after John’s return and although there is no direct evidence for his involvement in secular administration, his experience as court official would have made his advice valuable to de Lacy. Cumin had a number of his charters witnessed by de Lacy.
In 1184 Philip of Worcester was appointed justicar in place of de Lacy and one his first acts was to reclaim lands belonging to the king which de Lacy had taken into his control. De Lacy’s power as justicar was being removed in addition to king’s assets he had at his disposal.
John’s visit was planned on a lavish scale with English sheriffs raising well over £400 towards his expenses. John would have expected to be well received as he was visiting a settled country where there were significant royal estates and the Anglo-Norman lords, subjects of the king, were secure in their possessions. Henry knighted John in March 1185 and despatched him to Ireland. The king despatched Giraldus Cambrensis as part of John’s court, providing John with an adviser who was related to many of the settlers in Ireland.
John departed from Pembroke and landed at Waterford on 25 April 1185. A massive military force and a hierarchy of officials accompanied John providing him with all the necessary power and resources to establish a court, administrative structure and government for Ireland. De Lacy as a royal servant, holding the title of constable, and a major subject would have been expected to be in the greeting party for the royal visitor.
Hoping for protection from the encroachment of the Norman lords, a number of Irish petty kings arrived at Waterford to pay homage to John but he and his companions mocked them, pulling some of them about by their unfashionable Irish-style beards. The chieftains left in disgust at their treatment by such a ‘mere youth’ whom they felt would not be able to provide stable government or wise counsel. The petty kings approached the major Irish kings and organised resistance to the John’s plans.
From Waterford John made a progress though the surrounding area, replicating the journey of his father in 1171. A priority was the defence of the Waterford area with new castles at Tipperaghny, Ardfinnan and Lismore being erected to protect its borders and the royal port of entry at Waterford. These sites had been visited by Henry II in 1171 and de Lacy was in his retinue at that time. As a noted castle builder John might have asked de Lacy’s opinion as to the construction of these castles. There is a motte, with ditch and bank and a half-moon bailey at Tipperaghny and a motte and bailey, named Round Hill, at Lismore. John did not undertake any serious military action, although the garrisons of the new castles took part in skirmishes with the forces of Ua Briain.
John granted lands in Tipperary to William de Burgh, Theobald Walter and Ranulf de Glanville, justicar of England. This created a buffer zone between the existing Anglo-Normans of Leinster and the native rulers of Munster and introduced an area of royal influence in the lower Shannon area between Munster and Connacht. The Tipperary grants would have limited de Lacy’s expansion southwards as he began to settle the area of Offaly and would also have created a royal influence on the borders of Connacht, where de Lacy may have had aspirations of influence through his wife, the daughter of Ua Conchobair.
Lands were granted to John’s supporters in the north-east, in Airgialla. The Irish king, Murchad Ua Cerbaill, was allowed to retain his lands in Airgialla during his lifetime and then his lordship was to be divided between Gilbert Pipard and Bertram de Verdon. John granted the bridge of Drogheda, on the north side of the Boyne, to de Verdon, placing him on lands which had been developed by de Lacy. Pipard’s grant at Ardee bordered lands in the possession of de Lacy. Pipard had been sheriff of Hereford from 1171-73 and so would have been known to de Lacy. John made grants to the abbey of Mellifont. Drogheda and Mellifont were adjacent to de Lacy’s lands thereby making him nervous of interference. The grants in Louth would have restricted de Lacy’s borders to the north-east.
John’s grants would have encircled Mide and Leinster limiting de Lacy’s prospects for expansion. John’s objective may have been the provision of a protective cordon around the English controlled parts of the country in Mide and Leinster rather than a limitation of de Lacy.
John marched onto Kildare where he issued a charter in relation to Dublin in precisely the same terms as his father had done, thereby confirming the link with Bristol. Hugh de Lacy was the first witness, naming himself constable. Proceeding to Dublin where he spent the autumn and early winter, John established a mint at Dublin which issued silver halfpence coins, thereby increasing potential for trade. As constable of Dublin de Lacy would have hosted John in the city. John departed for England on 17 December, having been in Ireland for nearly eight months.
The combined roles of lord of the extensive lands of Meath and chief royal official in Ireland made de Lacy the most powerful man in Ireland. The arrival of a superior, and particularly such an inexperienced young man as John, was bound to make de Lacy uneasy.
Witnessing eight of the twenty-one extant charters issued by John in Ireland in 1185 de Lacy was present with John for a substantial part of his visit. De Lacy was in attendance on John at Waterford, Ardfinnan, Lismore, Kildare and Dublin. De Lacy headed the list of lay witnesses in eight charters, taking precedence over Bertram de Verdon, John’s seneschal. In two charters issued by John relating to the area outside Dublin, de Lacy is styled constable and in four others relating to Dublin he is also designated with that position. John does not appear to have deprived him of this position and acknowledged it by allowing de Lacy sign his charters in this format. De Lacy was powerful enough to resist his overlord and still maintain and use his title.
John concentrated his castle construction in the south away from de Lacy’s immediate sphere of influence. The appointment of newly arrived young nobles to positions of power and the granting of major lands would have created resentment against John amongst the earlier settlers and de Lacy may have harnessed this feeling to limit John’s plans.
John discovered he was unable to take control due to the power and influence of the lord of Mide. De Lacy seemed to have been resistant and un-co-operative and John was probably wise to avoid a confrontation with an older man, who controlled the local scene. John flinched from taking decisive action against de Lacy, because he feared de Lacy would not obey him. There was no open act of rebellion. De Lacy, like others with a new superior, tested the mettle of John and found him lacking. Warren suggested that there was a conspiracy by both Anglo-Norman and Irish to undermine John’s authority. De Lacy’s leadership drew the personal allegiance of the Irish leaders and they would not transfer that allegiance to John without de Lacy’s approval.
John is portrayed as having taken a strong dislike to the lord of Mide, claiming de Lacy was usurping the royal role in Ireland and reporting to his father that ‘it was Hugh de Lacy was king of Ireland’. De Lacy was acting as a royal representative as he was receiving the tribute that Connacht was paying to the king.
It is difficult to access their relationship as there must also have been elements of co-operation between the two men, as de Lacy attended on John and witnessed many of his charters.
John seems to have been supportive of de Lacy, confirming Hugh’s grants to Mellifont. While in Ireland John made a grant to de Lacy’s preferred monastery of Llanthony, granting St. Patrick’s church, Wicklow and lands nearby to Llanthony at Gloucester. De Lacy made a grant of the tithes and ecclesiastical benefits of Saithne, the land of Ua Cathasaigh in north Dublin to Llanthony, which John confirmed when he returned to England. On his return to England John also confirmed de Lacy’s grant of St. Peter’s Drogheda to Llanthony. John granted and confirmed the grant of the church of St. Cianán of Duleek and the house at Colpe to Llanthony. This was property in the seigniorial manor of Duleek, land and property in de Lacy’s control and it is unlikely that John could have done this without the consent of Hugh or perhaps this was a confirmation of an earlier grant by de Lacy.
The court chronicler, Giraldus, portrayed the visit as a total political disaster and that has been how it was represented by chroniclers and historians. John’s youth and inexperience, his interest in pleasure rather than work, and his disdain for the Irish and their strange customs, were all to lead to the visit being unsuccessful in many ways. John and his entourage alienated Irishmen who had been loyal or wished to be loyal to the English king. Giraldus portrayed those who had arrived with John as interfering administrators who limited the expansion of the noble and brave lords, his relatives, who were expanding the territory under the control of the crown. A large number of these mercenaries were left unpaid, deserted and were then employed by Ua Conchobair of Connacht. De Lacy may have had a role in promoting service in Connacht to the deserters. John may not have taken his responsibilities seriously, having more interest in pleasure than royal duties. He had his sportsmen, horses and dogs transported over from England. John failed to undermine de Lacy’s position. John found himself isolated and impeded by locals in Ireland and blamed de Lacy for obstructionism.
While John’s visit has been portrayed as a disaster his actions in Ireland had a lasting impact. Improvements in civil law procedures, central and local government were likely to have been part of the initiatives undertaken by John and his administrators during his visit. The Irish exchequer, a judicial system and a system of government may have been established during John’s visit marking a significant step in the development of a royal administration. John introduced new men whose families would play an important role in Irish affairs in the future. William de Burgo’s descendants became powerful in Connacht and Ulster. Theobald Walter was the ancestor of the Butler family. John’s grants of lands provided bases for further expansion into Irish occupied areas, thereby increasing the size of the lordship and providing a new impetus to the conquest of Ireland. John was not unskilled in the art of administration having expended the previous three years in the service of Ranulf de Glanville, the king’s justicar in England. Henry provided his son with experienced administrators and advisers in John Cumin, Bertram de Verdon, and Gilbert Pipard so his entourage was not entirely composed of immature youths. The visit was planned by the experienced de Glanville who accompanied the group as far as the port of embarkation at Pembroke.
Giraldus, who accompanied John, would have become acquainted with de Lacy at close quarters during the visit, if he had not met him on his earlier visit in 1183. Giraldus was educated at the Benedectine abbey of Gloucester and so the two men may have had common acquaintances. Giraldus remained in Ireland after John had returned to England and was possibly a guest of de Lacy in Mide and Dublin. Giraldus witnessed a grant by de Lacy of all the ecclesiastical rights over Saithne, the land of Ua Cathasaigh, to the priory of Llanthony.
De Lacy was one of the informants for the writings of Giraldus. Giraldus recounted a story in Topographia of a wolf who spoke to a priest in 1183 in a wood on the borders of Meath. The Norse version of this story tells of a whole race of Irishmen who opposed the teaching of St. Patrick and some of whose descendants were punished by being turned into wolves every seven years. Another version of the story places it in Ossory. Two further stories recorded by Giraldus, related to the mill and church at Fore. At St. Fechin’s mill one of de Lacy’s archers raped a woman, was stricken by a burning heat in ‘his member’ and died that night. De Lacy prohibited his forces from stealing corn from the mill or church at Fore but two men disobeyed him and fed the grain to their horses. One horse went mad immediately and died that night while the second died the following morning. These tales re-enforced the concept of Hugh’s respect for the property of the church and influenced Giraldus positively in his writing about de Lacy.
Politically John’s visit was a serious reverse and Henry proposed to send John to Ireland again the following year after de Lacy’s death but with the death of Geoffrey, Henry’s son, John was retained in England. Henry had requested a crown for John from Pope Alexander in 1177 but a crown from the papacy did not arrive for John until January 1187 which was too late as Ireland was no longer one of Henry’s main priorities.
John did returned to Ireland in 1210 as king, to again limit the power of the de Lacys, the sons of Hugh, who managed to become involved in an open rebellion against the crown. The de Lacy castle at Trim is commonly called King John’s castle in memory of that visit although he stayed in the fields opposite rather than in the castle.
De Lacy Assassinated!
‘Hugh de Lacy, a man never safe from the enemy’s axe, beheaded by the treachery of his own followers at Durrow.’
Expugnatio, p. 235.
On 26th July 1186 Hugh de Lacy was assassinated at Durrow. De Lacy was in the process of erecting a motte at Durrow to protect the southwest portion of his lordship. De Lacy and three companions were examining the completed motte when he was approached by an Irish youth. Producing an axe the assassin struck de Lacy one blow, severing his head from his body, both body parts falling into the ditch of the castle. The assassination was carried out by Gilla-gan-inathar Ua Miadhaigh of Tebtha but planned by the Sinnach Ua Catharnaigh. Ua Miadhaigh fled from his Anglo-Norman and Irish pursuers into the woods of Kilclare. The accuracy of this account may be judged by the detail given, Kilclare is the name of a nearby townland. Other versions state that de Lacy was demonstrating how to use a pickaxe to a labourer and as he bent down he was decapitated. There is a local tradition that de Lacy was murdered not at Durrow but at a rectangular platform fort in Ballybought townland, known as Shancourt/Meeneglish/Rosdeala castle about a two kilometres distant from Durrow. A fort in Pallas townland is also locally identified as the site of the assassination.
The Offaly area was largely covered by peat bogs and forest creating a difficult and inaccessible terrain. However there was a corridor of open fertile land which ran from Clonfad and Tyrrellspass to Birr. This midland corridor provided a route from Mide into Munster, without having to go through Leinster. De Lacy’s lordship included a strip of this route reaching to Durrow which dominated this strategically important corridor. With Leinster, Louth and Connacht closed as options was de Lacy considering further expansion into Munster? Geographically Durrow was the meeting place of a number of kingdoms. At the busy crossroads where the provinces of Mide, Munster, Connacht and Leinster met tensions in the area were high due to the advance of the Anglo-Normans towards the Shannon. Native rulers realised that their positions were threatened.
The monastery of Durrow was founded by St. Columba on a site granted by the chieftain of Tebtha in the sixth century. In 1144 Murchad Máel Sechlainn, king of Mide, founded the Augustinian priory of St. Mary of Durrow. The monastery at Durrow was enclosed by an impressive earthen boundary. The monastery became the centre of patronage for the Ua Máel Sechlainn with Murchad, king of Mide, being buried there in 1153 and his son interred there two years later. In 1175 the monastery and its hinterland had been laid waste by the Anglo-Normans.
The assassination could be viewed as treachery as de Lacy was assassinated by what he would have considered one of his subjects. Giraldus stated that de Lacy was killed by his Irish followers. Giraldus wrote that the Irish carried an axe like a staff which allowed them to use it quickly. De Lacy must have been caught unawares and given no chance to defend himself. He must have felt safe and must have had his attention elsewhere to miss a man running at him with an axe. The axe would have to be swung at a force to remove de Lacy’s head in one blow. With a long hafted axe all the force of the blow is concentrated into a small section of the blade, so the axe has enough power to punch through a helmet or mail. Axes with smaller heads had shorter hafts and were used one handed, while longer hafted weapons were used two handed. The Bayeux Tapestry depicts a Saxon thengn cleaving through a Norman knight and his horse with one blow of an axe. Welsh tradition tells the story of Hywel ap Grufydd who is said to have dismounted the French king by cutting off his horse’s head with one blow with his battle-axe at the Battle of Poitiers in 1356 thereby acquiring the nickname “Hywel y Fwyall” (the Axe), but this event is unlikely to have happened. Giraldus, in one translation, stated that the ravens and owls of Ireland had young at Christmas, an incident which foretold the assassination of de Lacy.
The taking of stone from the holy monastery of Durrow and the sacrilege of this sacred place was one of the suggested motives for the assassination. This suggestion provided the Irish with the high moral ground but it would appear to be propaganda as de Lacy had founded and restored churches and monasteries in Mide and allowed existing pilgrimages to continue. With many of the Anglo-Norman settlements were located at or on the site of monasteries de Lacy may have been attempting to annexe the rich resources at Durrow as not all church land had yet been formally vested in the new diocesan structures. Durrow was a favoured monastery of the rulers of Mide, the Ua Máel Sechlainn family and by creating a settlement there de Lacy was directly seeking a complete overthrow of the old system.
The assassin, Ua Miadhaigh, was the foster son of the Sinnach Ua Catharnaigh. Ua Catharnaigh was chieftain of Tebtha and de Lacy was invading his territory by erecting a castle at Durrow. The assassination was carried out to stop the onward expansion of the Anglo-Normans and it successfully achieved that aim. The Ua Miadhaigh family were numerous in the vicinity of Killare where de Lacy had erected a castle in 1184. This new settlement may have resulted in resentment by the Ua Miadhaigh family.
Another possible motive could be revenge for the death of Muirchertach, son of the Sinnach, in 1178 when he was killed by Art Máel Sechlainn, the Ui Failge and the Anglo-Normans. Fergal Ua Braoin (O’Breen) of Conmaicne had been killed by the foreigners of Trim in 1175.
There is no record of what happened the assassin or indeed if there were any reprisals taken against the perpetrators of the assassination. De Lacy died at the height of his powers having made east Mide secure and was seeking to expand his control over further territory. His death was unexpected and it did set back the Anglo-Norman campaign in Mide. Almost all the leaders of the first conquest were now dead and few left sons to succeed them. The loss of one individual with the ability and status of de Lacy did stagger the advances of the Anglo-Normans. ‘There ended the conquest’ is the comment attached to the death of de Lacy in one of the annals.
The removal of de Lacy allowed Conchobar, king of Connacht, and Ua Máel Sechlainn Beg, the opportunity to make an attack in west Mide, destroying Killare castle.
De Lacy’s assassination was said to have been avenged by John de Courcy at a later period by the conquest of the Foxes.
A number of the English chroniclers record the murder of de Lacy indicating its importance. Henry rejoiced openly on hearing of the assassination. Henry considered sending his son, John, back to Ireland to secure de Lacy’s lands. De Lacy’s English lands were taken into John’s control in August 1186. John’s agents, including Bertram de Verdun and Robert le Poer, seem to have had charge of de Lacy’s lands after his death.
De Lacy was buried at the cemetery of Durrow, although some versions suggest that his body was retained by the Irish. If the body was concealed or buried it would have been very difficult to identify it at a later period. Nine years after his death in 1195 Muirgheas Ó hÉanna, archbishop of Cashel, the papal legate and John Comyn, archbishop of Dublin, caused the body to be removed and had the body buried in Bective Abbey in Mide and the head in the abbey of St. Thomas the Martyr, in the tomb of Rose de Monmouth, his first wife. Archbishop Cumin had met de Lacy in 1185 when John visited Ireland and would have known de Lacy well. Ó hÉanna was a monk of the Cistercian abbey of Holy Cross, Tipperary and this may have influenced the decision to bring the body of de Lacy to the Cistercian abbey of Bective despite Hugh not having any strong links to the foundation. Bective, the first daughter house of Mellifont, was founded in 1147 by Murchad Ua Máel Sechlainn, the king of Mide and was now to be the burial place of another ruler of Mide. Tradition places de Lacy’s burial site at Bective on the south side of the later cloister. This removal and solemn burial may be linked with assumption of the full lordship of Mide at this time by Hugh’s son, Walter.
A dispute arose between the canons of St. Thomas and the monks of Bective concerning the right to the body. Simon de Rochfort, bishop of Meath and Gilbert, the prior of Duleek, were appointed judges in the case by Pope Innocent III in 1205. Gilbert had been prior of Duleek in 1185 and so would have known de Lacy personally. The decision was made in favour of the abbey of St. Thomas. The dispute may have been related to the prestige of being the monastery with the remains of such a distinguished man or may have been related to rights to certain lands which had been granted to Bective, because it contained the remains of de Lacy.
De Lacy had been closely associated with St. Thomas’s while alive. The Augustinian priory of St. Thomas the Martyr was founded in March 1177 by William fitz Aldelin, acting on behalf of Henry II. In May 1177 Hugh de Lacy attested to the royal charter granted to St. Thomas’s. There are important grants by the sons of de Lacy with Walter and Hugh making grants in memory of their father. By 1187 grants from Meath included the grange of Dunshaughlin; the church of Dunshaughlin with the chapel of Ratoath; the church of Greenock; the church of Donaghmore; and the church on the land of William de Scurlage. Lands at Delvin, Donaghmore, Scurlogstown, Killegland, Knockmark, Derrypatrick, Greenogue and Laracor were some of the grants made by de Lacy’s knights, whether for themselves and their families or for the soul of Hugh. The graveyard was to the east side of the monastery and Rose de Lacy’s grave was marked by a wooden cross. St Thomas’s provided a safe, secure and dignified place of burial where prayers could be said for their souls long after their deaths. De Lacy’s death was commemorated in England as well with a ceremony each 26 July in Hereford cathedral.
Hugh’s children
‘Walter de Lacy – ‘the most eminent of the nobles in Ireland’
Mat. Paris quoted in Richard Butler, Some notices of the Castle and the ecclesiastical buildings of Trim (Trim, 1854), p. 19.
Hugh de Lacy – ‘A hosting by Ugo the son of Ugo De Lacy with a force of Foreigners of Meath into Ulidia, so that they expelled John De Courcy out of Ulidia’
Annals of Ulster, 1204
William de Lacy – ‘the chiefest champion in these parts of Europe and the hardiest and strongest of any Englishman from the Nicene sea to this place, or Irishman’
Annals of Clonmacnoise, 1233
Hugh de Lacy had a number of children by both his wives. With his first wife, Rose, he had sons, Walter and Hugh. He may also have had five daughters and two more sons by Rose. These children were born in the 1160s and 1170s. Rose died before 1180 when Hugh married the daughter of Ruaidrí Ua Conchobair, by whom he had two more children, William de Lacy and Ysota de Lacy. The lives of Hugh’s sons were replicas of their fathers. The brothers attempted to carve out and conquer new lands in Bréifne and Ulster, married outside their ethnic identity, ran foul of their royal masters, Richard and John but went beyond their father and were actually dispossessed of their lands for their disloyal deeds. The brothers loyally supported each other throughout their lives.
Walter, Hugh’s eldest son, was named after his great grandfather, who died in 1085. A minor when his father died in 1186 he succeeded to his father’s estates in England, Wales and Normandy in 1188/9 but he had difficulty in being restored to Meath because John, as lord of Ireland, sought to retain it in his own possession. Walter did issue grants for Meath in 1190. By 1194 Walter had assumed the lordship of Meath. One of the first tasks he undertook was to retrieve his father’s remains and give them a proper burial. Walter’s inheritance was vast and unwieldy but he managed to consolidate the estate and power. Walter continued his father’s work in organising Meath, granting charters to Trim, Kells and Drogheda in his first years in control. When Clonard was burned by the Irish in 1200, Walter supported the development of a diocesan centre at Newtown Trim.
By 1194 Walter had joined John de Courcy in attacking the lands of John who was in rebellion against his brother, King Richard. The king appointed Walter joint justicar with John de Courcy for a brief period. Walter returned to England with King John in 1200 who soon after arranged the marriage of Walter to Margaret de Braose, the daughter of one of the king’s closest confidants, William de Braose, lord of Abergavenny and newly created lord of Limerick.
In 1201 Walter returned to Ireland. Walter guarded de Braose’s Irish interests including Limerick. Walter supported his brother, Hugh, in his campaign to take Ulster. Walter’s father-in-law held Ludlow on behalf of the king until 1207 when Walter made peace with King John. In 1208 Walter received a new charter for Meath from John, curtailing his rights. Walter may have acted as justicar for a brief period in 1208 following the dismissal of Meiler fitz Henry.
Walter gave shelter to his father-in-law William de Braose, who had fallen foul of John in England. Walter’s brother, Hugh, offered his support. This act of defiance was to bring about a clash with John who travelled to Ireland to restore his authority in 1210. Walter and Hugh were dispossessed and banished from Ireland. The brothers journeyed to France, where they took refuge in the monastery of St Taurins, working as lay brethren until their identity was eventually discovered by the abbot.
By 1215 Meath had been restored to Walter, after which he remained in the favour of King John, being appointed sheriff of Hereford in 1216. Walter’s half brother, William, returned to Ireland in 1215 to govern Meath. By 1220 Walter de Lacy had returned to take control of his Irish lands. Invading Bréifne Walter granted it to his vassal, Philip de Angulo but within three years it was under the control of his half-brother, William.
Walter had to support the actions of the justicar, William II Marshal, against his brother Hugh whose campaign had caused devastation in Meath and Ulster. In 1230 Walter campaigned in Connacht with the Lord Justice, Geoffrey de Marisco, and Richard de Burgo.
Walter, like his father, was a benefactor of the church making a number of grants to Llanthony Prima and Secunda, the family’s favoured monastery in the Welsh Marches. He founded a Benedictine nunnery at Ballymore Loughswedy, in Westmeath and a Cistercian house at Beybeg. He also made grants to Fore and St. Thomas’s, Dublin. In 1234 Walter made a grant of lands at Marinerstown (now Mornington) to the abbey of Furness for his soul and the souls of his late wife, his father and mother, his brother, Robert and his son, Gilbert.
Walter is said to have died “blind and infirm” early in 1241. Walter and Margaret had a son, Gilbert, born about 1206, who married Isabel Bigod of Norfolk. Gilbert died in 1234 and was buried in Llanthony. Gilbert and Isabel had a son, Walter, who died before 1243 and two daughters, Margery and Maud.
Hugh, son of Hugh de Lacy and his wife Rose of Monmouth, was named after his father. A minor on his father’s death, Hugh had to depend on his brother’s generosity to grant him an estate or he had to go out and conquer lands for himself. From his brother, Walter, he received the barony of Ratoath and lands at Morgallion.
About 1194 Hugh married Lesceline, daughter of Bertram de Verdon, and as part of the dowry a large part of the Cooley peninsula and lands north of Dundalk were granted to de Lacy by Bertram’s son, Thomas de Verdun. In his new lands in Louth Hugh erected a castle at Carlingford which in 1229 he granted together with the town to David, baron of Naas, upon his marriage to his daughter, Matilda.
Connacht was the first area where Hugh attempted to carve out a lordship. In 1195 he campaigned in Connacht with John de Courcy. At this time Hugh was granted ten cantred in Connacht by William de Burgh. Richard de Burgh granted Hugh five cantreds, amounting to what today is county Sligo. In 1201 in alliance with John de Courcy, Hugh marched into Connacht in support of Cathal Crobderg but they were defeated.
The story relating to Horseleap may relate to this Hugh de Lacy rather than his father. There is a tradition that Hugh de Lacy leaped with his horse over the drawbridge of Ardnurcher castle, in escaping from close pursuit. Hugh did capture the castle at Ardnurcher in the de Lacy dispute with Meiler fitz Henry in 1207.
King John had grown suspicious of de Courcy and Hugh seized the opportunity and with a force from Meath invaded Ulster to dispossess de Courcy in 1203 and 1204. By 1205 de Courcy had been was forced off his lands and Hugh was created earl of Ulster. Hugh provided a refuge for William de Braose who had fallen foul of John and was Walter’s brother’s father-in-law. In 1210 John arrived in Ireland to force the de Lacys to submit. Having banished Walter de Lacy John marched to Carrickfergus where he banished Hugh.
Hugh de Lacy travelled to France, where he and his brother took refuge in the monastery at St Taurins. In 1212 Hugh joined the Albigensian Crusade, led by Simon de Montfort. Walter was restored to his lands but John retained Hugh’s lands in Ulster. After John’s death moves to restore Hugh’s Ulster lands failed.
In 1222 Hugh became involved with his brother’s father-in-law, Llewelyn, in his campaigns against the Marshal castles on the Welsh borders. Hugh sought help from Wales, Scotland and Norway to recover his lands in Ulster. Hugh landed in Ireland in 1223 and using Meath as a base he and his half-brother, William, began an invasion of Ulster with the support of Áed Ua Néill. In 1224 a new justicar, William II Marshal, was despatched to Ireland to crush the rebellion. Walter was restored to Meath and eventually Hugh was forced to surrender. He was restored to his earldom in 1227 having handed over hostages and provided sureties for his future behaviour. During the following years he consolidated his control of Ulster. Following the death of the chieftain, Áed Ua Néill, Hugh and Maurice fitz Gerald encouraged a succession dispute and invaded the Ua Néill territory in 1238. Hugh married secondly Emmeline, daughter of Walter de Riddlesford. In 1242 Hugh died without a male heir and Ulster escheated to the Crown.
William Gorm was de Lacy’s son by his wife, the daughter of Ruaidrí Ua Conchobair. The term fear gorm in the Irish language is used for a black person and it is possible that William inherited the dark looks of his father. In the Icelandic Sagas and Swedish history ‘Bluemen’ is the name always given to Moors or Africans.
William’s mother, the daughter of Ua Conchobair, re-married after her husband’s death and she had three more sons, Thomas, Henry and an unnamed brother, all with the surname Le Blund. William was sometimes documented with this surname.
William witnessed Walter’s grant of a charter to Trim c. 1194. About 1222 William married Gwenllian, illegitimate daughter of Llywelyn ap Iorwerth, prince of Gwynedd in north Wales. William acquired manors near Denbigh through his marriage and was granted Britford in Wiltshire by his half-brother, Walter. William assisted Llewelyn in his attacks on the Anglo-Normans of Wales.
William supported his half-brother, Hugh, in his campaigns. William was taken prisoner by King John in 1210 and held in England until 1215. When William’s half-brother Walter was still in England, there were disturbances in their Irish lands. Walter did not take possession of Meath until 1220 but his half-brother William, who had been released on the surety of Walter and others in 1215 went to Ireland and ran his half-brother’s estates. William not only took over control of Meath but also attempted to restore the de Lacy control of Ulster. In 1217 William attacked and captured Carlingford and Dundrum, castles previously held by his brother, Hugh.
Walter de Lacy constructed a motte and bailey at Kilmore in 1211 as part of a chain to control and contain the area as he had ambitions to carve out a lordship for himself in Bréifne and Conmaicne. This brought him into conflict not only with the O’Reillys but also the Ua Conchobair kings of Connacht. In 1220 Walter led an invasion of Bréifne which he granted to his vassal, Philip de Angulo, but it seems that William was to be true master of the newly conquered territory.
William supported his brother, Hugh, in his invasion of Ulster in 1223. In 1224 the Ó Ragallaighs in combination with William Marshall, the king’s justicar, attacked the de Lacys. William’s stronghold at the crannog in Loch Oughter in Cavan was captured and his female relatives who had taken refuge there were taken prisoner. These included William’s wife, his mother; the daughter of Ruaidrí Ua Conchobair and widow of his father; and the wife of his half-brother, Thomas Blund. William’s castle at Kilmore although guarded by his half-brother, Henry Blund, was attacked and taken. At one point William was forced to kill his horse, abandon his arms and flee into a bog to escape. The de Lacys created havoc, destroying the castle at Coleraine and seizing portions of Leinster. Walter was appointed keeper of Ulster under Hugh in 1226.
Becoming again a loyal subject William served the king in Brittany and Wales. In 1233 William de Lacy led an army from Meath into Bréifne but as it withdrew with its booty it was attacked. William, ‘the chiefest champion in these parts of Europe and the hardiest and strongest of any Englishman from the Nicene sea to this place, or Irishman,’ was wounded and shortly afterwards died from these wounds.
Robert was a family name, Hugh I granted Rathwire to his cousin, Robert. Hugh de Lacy, his wife Rose and son, Robert, granted the priory of Monmouth an annual rent of three shillings in Lideney. This grant must have been made in Rose’s lifetime and so would be prior to 1180. Robert appears as a witness to a deed between his brothers, Walter and Hugh, which is dated to 1190. Robert de Lacy appeared as a witness to a grant by his brother, Walter, of lands at Lough Sewdy, west Mide, at a date between 1194 and 1207. Robert appeared as a witness on grants to St. Thomas’s Abbey, Dublin. Robert is mentioned as one of the barons of Meath in a letter by King John in 1206. Meiler fitz Henry was directed to take hostages from Walter’s brother, Robert, and from seven of Walter’s Irish barons. Robert held lands at Rathfeigh from his brother, Walter. He must have died before 1234, as in that year Walter de Lacy, Lord of Meath, makes a grant for the souls, amongst others, of ‘Robert de Lacy, his brother’. Robert was commemorated in Hereford Cathedral on the 26th July, the same date his father was commemorated.
Gilbert was named after his grandfather. Gilbert is mentioned as one of the barons of Meath in a letter by King John in 1206. In 1222 the King directed Hugh de Lacy ‘to place faith in his brother (Gilbert) regarding the King’s Irish affairs’.
A Symon de Lacy witnessed Walter’s grant of a charter to Trim c. 1194. Robert and Simon de Lacy witnessed a grant of lands at Greenogue and Donaghmore to St. Thomas’s Abbey, Dublin.
Hugh had a daughter, Elayne or Ellen, who married Richard de Beaufoi. Richard appeared as witness to Hugh de Lacy grant of Skryne to Adam de Feipo. De Lacy’s infant daughter married William fitz Alan of Clun at a date between May 1175 and 1177 with six Shropshire manors going with her as a dowry. De Lacy may have been a tenant of the fitz Alans prior to his succession to the family estate. Hugh may have had a daughter, Catherine, who married into the Netterville family while another writer suggested it was a sister of de Lacy. Hugh had a daughter, Alice, who married Roger, the son of Gilbert Pipard.
Despite Giraldus’s contention with regard to de Lacy’s womanising as far as is recorded de Lacy produced no bastard children.
The Irish career of the de Lacy family was short. Walter de Lacy’s death in 1241 brought to an end the Irish connection of the de Lacy family. The name failed due to an absence of a direct male heir of the body and the lordship of Meath descended to the de Verdon and the de Geneville families through marriage with Walter’s heiresses, the daughters of his son Gilbert, Maud and Margery.
Man of flesh and blood
‘If you wish to know what Hugh’s complexion and features were like, he was dark, with dark sunken eyes and flattened nostrils. His face was grossly disfigured down the right side as far as his chin by a burn, the result of an accident. His neck was short, his body hairy and sinewy. If you further enquire as to his height, he was a short man; if you want a description of his build, he was misshapen, and as to his character, resolute and reliable, restrained from excess by French sobriety. He paid much attention to his own private affairs, and was most careful in the administration of the office entrusted to him and his conduct of public affairs. Although extremely well versed in the business of war, he was not a success as a general, for he often suffered heavy losses on his expeditions. After the death of his wife he was a womanizer and enslaved by lust, not just for one woman, but for many. He was avaricious and greedy for gold, and more ambitious for his own advancement and pre-eminence than was proper.’
Expugnatio, p. 193
Giraldus presented a vivid pen picture of Hugh de Lacy. Giraldus would have met de Lacy on his second visit to Ireland when he accompanied John in 1185. Giraldus passed through Meath in 1185 and may have met Hugh on a number of occasions. Giraldus was biased in favour of his relatives but he does give due credit to de Lacy.
De Lacy’s face was disfigured by a major burn. Burns may impart a masklike sensation to the face, distorting features and limiting facial expression. A facial burn is caused by heat but facial burns rarely occur as isolated injuries so as his body was misshapen it too may have suffered burn injury. The nature of the accident that resulted in the burn is not outlined, it could have been the result of a domestic accident or through warfare. Deeper burns such as de Lacy’s take longer to heal. Burns in the medieval ages were treated with vinegar plus any one of a number of herbs. Alternatively a salve might be used. A serious burn as described by Giraldus would have been difficult for an infant or child to survive and so it would seem that the burn occurred when de Lacy was an adult and therefore it would seem most likely to have resulted from warfare. His dark colouring resulted in his son, William, being described as gorm or black in Irish.
Possessing a strong personality Hugh was resolute and persistent when he felt he was in the right. He fought a long struggle with the bishop of Hereford over the liability to perform the service of two knights for the manor of Holme Lacy. This conflict lasted at least from 1166 until 1177 when de Lacy surrendered but he had succeeded in hanging on to an indefensible position for a long time. A single minded character he was decisive, when he decided to marry Ruaidrí Ua Conchobair’s daughter he went ahead and did it and sorted out the problems afterwards. A man of vision and remarkable energy he was adaptable to cope with the different systems of control in Ireland, England, Wales and Normandy. Violent when it was required De Lacy eliminated his rival, Tigernán Ua Ruairc, by having him assassinated.
De Lacy was reliable as he was tireless in his devotion to his task of conquering and controlling Mide and Ireland. De Lacy preferred a world that was structured and organized. He supported his superior, Henry, rejecting the praise of Beckett in his confrontation of the archbishop at Canterbury.
De Lacy was a solemn or dignified person being ‘restrained from excess by French sobriety.’ He was probably moderate in his consumption of alcohol and in his feasting.
Restless and energetic, by the time of his death the whole of Mide from the Shannon to the sea was full of castles and foreigners. An entrepreneur, de Lacy found a challenge and an opportunity in Ireland. He was prepared to introduce new ideas such as towns, castles and the feudal system to his newly conquered lands. A natural leader and organiser de Lacy paid careful attention to his own affairs. The organising of Mide, following its take-over, was one of the notable achievements of de Lacy. A superb administrator de Lacy organized Mide into a smooth-functioning systems. As chief agent of Henry he brought the country to an ordered state. De Lacy was a natural leader, vigorous and restless. He devised the long-term strategies and their derivative tactics, logistics, and consequences. Decisive, de Lacy saw what needed to be done and he directed the forces under his control to achieve his objectives. Intolerant of inefficiency he died according to one source showing an Irishman how to use a pick.
De Lacy had to play the role of politician and statesman as constable of Dublin and as Henry’s agent in Ireland. Giraldus wrote that he settled the country and reduced it to a peaceful state. A born leader, he saw what was necessary to be done and assigned duties to his followers which he richly rewarded. Firm minded and determined he saw where the problems with his tasks were and went about removing any barriers to solutions. Ua Ruairc was ruthlessly removed to clear the way for the take-over of Mide. Seeking out a position of responsibility and enjoyed being a leader, as a ruler de Lacy was a very competent administrator.
An experienced and efficient military commander, Hugh’s ancestors were members of a military aristocracy. His father and grandfather both chose to fight for their rights. His grandfather, Robert, had taken part in two rebellions against the king and had been prepared to ally himself with the native Welsh on both occasions. His father, Gilbert, had to fight to regain the family’s lands in England. Wightman suggested that it may have been the dullness of settled life which drove Gilbert and Hugh to take up arms in the search for excitement. A trained fighter Hugh de Lacy took part in the Welsh campaign of 1165, the campaign in Normandy in 1173 and conducted his own campaign to conquer Mide. The design of Trim castle and his use of mottes throughout his territories placed him at the cutting edge of military engineering and technology. Giraldus suggested that de Lacy had suffered heavy losses on his expeditions yet not one loss is recorded in the annals or any other contemporary source. This description may have been an attempt to lessen the success of de Lacy to further enhance Giraldus’s relations. Henry II was not very successful militarily, never fighting a major battle in his 35 year reign. The Song described de Lacy as bold or fierce.
His larger than life personality may have influenced Giraldus in his description of de Lacy as a womaniser and also encouraged him to tell stories to Giraldus which were not completely true. Giraldus may have been influenced by the irregular union de Lacy entered into with Ruaidrí Ua Conchobair’s daughter.
De Lacy like every other medieval lord was anxious for property and development opportunities. Avaricious and greedy for gold, through his appetite he amassed power and influence. He was a consummate opportunist exploiting the chances he was given to increase his property and power.
De Lacy was successful and this may have generated the jealous comment from Giraldus ‘More ambitious for his own advancement and pre-eminence than was proper.’ An astute courtier de Lacy must have been noticeable for Henry to select him for the grant of Mide. Ireland was to be the field for his ambition. Audacity was required to secure control of Mide and Ireland and de Lacy was able to cope with the interpersonal conflict which arose with Henry when he married the daughter of Ruaidrí Ua Conchobair. Being in control he was reluctant to release that control even to his king’s son, whose arrival in 1185 was met by subversion rather than rebellion. Living life on an epic scale it was even suggested that he was ambitious for a crown for himself. While being ambitious he proved himself loyal to Henry and never took part in open rebellion against his king. Giraldus described de Lacy as ‘a man possessed of great honesty and good sense.’ That good sense sometimes made him wily, a characteristic displayed in his response to the visit of John.
De Lacy was respected and well liked by his subordinates and fellow lords as displayed by the amounts of lands granted to Llanthony in his memory after his death.
A tolerant and conciliating lord, Hugh, worked with both Irish and Anglo-Norman to secure the ends which he desired. He went to great trouble to conciliate those who had been conquered by others and forcibly ejected from their lands. He was manipulative in that this conciliation was for the purpose of deriving a profit from his investments.
De Lacy’s Legacy
De Lacy left enduring mark on Meath and Ireland. The introduction of feudalism brought Mide and Ireland into a European system. He accelerated the diffusion of the cultural, economic and technological innovations from continental Europe. The introduction of towns made Mide and Ireland an integral part of mainstream European development and culture and gave Mide a commercial advantage over the areas where urban development did not occur until centuries later.
Changing the face of the landscape de Lacy changed the composition of the people who lived there and changed the patterns of agriculture and trade. Families such as Nugent, Cusack, Hussey, Fleming and Nangle were introduced by Hugh and their descendants are still present in the area today.
De Lacy changed the settlement map of Ireland; changes which he made are still the important considerations in settlement today. The settlements which de Lacy established are still the most important central places in Meath today. Settlements which were established by de Lacy or under his direction including Trim, Kells, Navan, Athboy and Drogheda. Hugh was also responsible for the development of smaller settlements at Slane, Nobber, Dunshaughlin, Dunboyne, Duleek, Skreen and Ratoath. His division of Mide is still influencing us today – his baronies, his manors, his parishes.
De Lacy changed the very landscape of Mide and Ireland with his castles, towns and agricultural innovations. Towns, castles, mottes and monasteries were the physical product of Hugh de Lacy together with the clearing of land for increased agricultural usage. Trim castle, which still dominates the modern skyline of Trim town, is a physical expression of his power.
As a great economic developer de Lacy presided over a spectacular expansion of the economy. The development of towns display that de Lacy was prepared to use different means to generate revenue. His layout of the medieval street patterns continue to influence development in modern urban areas. His foundation of the town of Drogheda places him in the international category of town developer.
Ireland had been adapting to European cultural, religious and economic changes before the arrival of de Lacy but with his arrival all these changes were speeded up. There was a large element of continuity from Gaelic Ireland into Anglo-Norman Ireland with land divisions and settlements continuing in use. Existing settlements were adapted to serve new functions changing from monastic proto-towns to chartered towns. De Lacy set back the natural political development of the native Irish and stymied the possible development of a unified Irish crown but he did not set out to destroy the Irish or their culture. The upper class in society was transformed but the lower groups and the bulk of their material culture was affected much less.
The great risk taker de Lacy managed to secure great rewards in Ireland, placing him at the centre of the conquest of the country. The outstanding man in his period he was the architect of Anglo-Norman Mide and through that the architect of modern Meath.
Sources
PRIMARY SOURCES – PRINTED
Butler, Richard. (ed), Annales Hiberniae. James Grace of Kilkenny (Dublin, 1842)
Clarke, M.V. (ed.) Register of the priory of the Blessed Virgin Mary at Tristernagh (Dublin, 1941)
Curtis, Edmund. (ed.) Ormond Deeds (Dublin, 1932)
Curtis, Edmund. and R.B. McDowell, (eds) Irish Historical Documents 1172-1922 (London, 1943)
Dugdale, William, Roger Dodsworth, John Stevens, John Caley, Sir Henry Ellis, Bulkeley Bandinel and Richard C. Taylor (eds) Monasticon Anglicanum: a History of the Abbies and other Monasteries, Hospitals, Frieries, and Cathedral and Collegiate Churches, with their Dependencies, in England and Wales (London, 1817-1830)
Eyton, Robert William. Court, household and itinerary of Henry II (London, 1878)
Flanagan, Michael (ed.) ‘Letters containing information relative to the antiquities of the county of Westmeath collected during the progress of the Ordnance Survey in 1837’, 2 vols. (Bray, 1931)
Freeman, A. Martin (ed.) Annals of Connacht (Dublin, 1944)
Gilbert, John T. (ed.) Historical and municipal documents of Ireland AD 1172-1320 (London, 1870)
Gilbert, John T. (ed.) Chartularies of St. Mary’s Abbey Dublin … and the Annals of Ireland, 1162-1370, 2 vols. (London, 1884-6)
Gilbert, John T. (ed.) Register of the Abbey of St. Thomas, Dublin (London, 1889)
Gilbert, John T. Calendar of ancient records of Dublin, 7 vols. (Dublin, 1889-98)
Giraldus Cambrensis Opera, (ed.) John F. Dimock (London 1877)
Giraldus Cambrensis, Topographia Hibernica: The History and Topography of Ireland (ed.) John J. O’Meara (Dundalk, 1951)
Giraldus Cambrensis, Expugnatio Hibernica: The Conquest of Ireland (eds) A.B. Scott and F.X. Martin (Dublin, 1978)
Hall, Hubert. (ed.) Red Book of the Exchequer, i, (London, 1896)
Hayden, Alan. ‘Preliminary report on archaeological excavations at Trim Castle, Co. Meath, 1995-96’ (1996, not published)
Hennessy, William M. (ed.) Annals of Loch Cé. A chronicle of Irish affairs from A.D. 1014 to A.D. 1590 2 vols, (London, 1871)
Hennessy, William M. and B. Mac Carthy. (eds) Annals of Ulster – Annala Uladh. Annals of Ulster, otherwise Annala Senait, Annals of Senat; a chronicle of Irish affairs A.D. 431-1131: 1155-1541 4 vols. (Dublin, 1887-1901, repr. Dublin, 1998)
Herity, Michael. (ed.) Ordnance Survey Letters, Meath, (Dublin, 2001)
Hogan, Arlene. The priory of Llanthony Prima and Secunda in Ireland: Land, patronage and politics (Dublin, 2008)
Jones, Thomas. (ed.) Brut y Tywysogyon, Red Book of Hergest Version (Cardiff, 1955)
Kemp-Welch, Alice. (ed.) The history of Fulk Fitz-Warine (Ontario, 2001)
Lawlor, Hugh Jackson. (ed.) ‘A calendar of the liber Niger and liber Albus of Christchurch, Dublin’ in R.I.A. Proc., xxvii, C (1908), pp 1-93.
McNeill, Charles. (ed.) Calendar of Archbishop Alen’s Register c. 1172-1534 (Dublin, 1950)
Mills, James. and M.J. McEnery (eds) Calendar of the Gormanston Register, (Dublin, 1916)
Mullaly, Evelyn, (ed.) The Deeds of the Normans in Ireland (A new edition of the chronicle formerly known as The Song of Dermot and the Earl) (Dublin, 2002)
O’Donovan, John. (ed.) ‘The Irish charters in the Book of Kells’, in The miscellany of the Irish Archaeological Society i (Dublin, 1846), pp 127-58.
O’Donovan, John. (ed.) Annals of the Four Masters Annala Rioghachta Eireann: Annals of the kingdom of Ireland by the Four Masters, from the earliest period to the year 1616 7 vols, (Dublin 1848-51; repr. Dublin, 1856; repr. Dublin, 1990.)
Ó hInnse, Séamus. (ed.) Miscellaneous Irish Annals – Miscellaneous Irish Annals A.D. 1114-1437. (Mac Carthaigh’s book) (Dublin, 1947)
‘Original Charter granted by John Lord of Ireland to the abbey of Mellifont’, ed. A. Smith, in The miscellany of the Irish Archaeological Society i (Dublin, 1846), pp 158-60.
Orpen, Goddard H. (ed.) The song of Dermot and the Earl (Oxford, 1892)
Pipe Roll – The Irish pipe roll of 14 John (ed.) O. Davies and D. B. Quinn, in Ulster Journal of Archaeology, 3rd series, iv, (1941)
Potter, Kenneth R. and Ralph H.C. Davis (eds) Gesta Stephani (Oxford, 1976)
Reports from commissioners appointed to inquire into corporations, Ireland, first report, supplement and appendix, H.C. 1835, xxvii.
St. John Brooks, Eric. ‘A charter of John de Courcy to the abbey of Navan’ in JRSAI lxiii (1933), pp 38-45.
St. John Brooks, Eric. ‘The grant of Castleknock to Hugh Tyrel’ in JRSAI lxiii (1933), pp 206-220.
St. John Brooks, Eric. (ed.) Register of the hospital of St. John the Baptist’s, (Dublin, 1936)
St John Brooks, Eric. (ed.) The Irish Cartularies of Llanthony Prima and Secunda (Dublin, 1953)
Sheehy, Maurice P. (ed.) Pontificia hibernicia. Medieval Papal Chancery documents concerning Ireland 640-1261 vol i (Dublin, 1965)
Stokes, Whitely. (ed.) Annals of Tigernach – The Annals of Tigernach, (Revue Celtique 16 (1895) 374–419 [Rawlinson B 502]; 17 (1896) 6–33, 116–263, 337–420; 18 (1897) 9–59, 150–303 [Rawlinson B 488], repr. 2 vols, Felinfach 1993)
Stubbs, William (ed.), Chronica magistri Roegeri de Hovedene, 4 vols (London, 1868-71)
Stubbs, William (ed.), Gesta Regis Henrici Secundi et Gesta Regis Ricardi Benedicti abbatis, 2 vols (London, 1867)
Sweetman, H.S. (ed.) Calendar of Documents relating to Ireland 1171-1251 (London, 1875)
William of Tyre, Historia Rerum in Partibus Transmarinus Gestarum, Rectueil des historiens de croissades: historiens occidentaux (Turnhout, Belgium, 1986)
THESES
Dermot Kelly, Medieval Trim/Porchfield/Newtown-Trim, The significance of the medieval heritage in the modern town of Trim-Newtown Trim (M.A. Thesis, UCD, 2003)
RADIO PROGRAMMES
Willie Cumming, ‘The Architect’s Eye,’ RTE Radio, broadcast 15 February 2007, http://www.rte.ie/radio1/podcast/podcast_architectseye.xml;
WEBSITES
Archenfield Archaeology – Longtown and Clodock
http://www.archenfield.com/Longtown.htm viewed 10 April 2008
SECONDARY WORKS
Aalen, F.H. A. Man and Landscape in Ireland (London, 1978)
Allen Brown, R. ‘A list of castles, 1154-1216’ in The English Historical Review, vol. 74, no. 291 (Apr. 1959) pp 249-80.
Anderson, John Corbet. Shropshire: Its Early History and Antiquities (London, 1864)
Andrews, J.H. ‘A Geographer’s view of Irish history’ in T.W. Moody and F.X. Martin The course of Irish history (Cork, 1967), pp 17-29.
Andrews, J.H. and K.M. Davies Mullingar – Irish Historic Towns Atlas (Dublin, 1992)
Archdall, Mervyn. Monasticum Hibernicum (London, 1786), 3 vols.
Armitage, Ella S. The early Norman castles of the British Isles (London, 1912)
Ballard, Adolphus. ‘The Law of Breteuil’ in The English Historical Review, xxx, no. 120 (Oct. 1915), pp 646-58.
Barker, Philip and Robert Higham, Hen Domen Montgomery A timber castle on the English-Welsh border (London, 1982), vol 1
Baker, Philip. ‘Hen Domen revisited’ in J.R. Kenyon and R. Avent (eds) Castles in Wales and the Marches: essays in honour of D.J. Cathcart King (Cardiff, 1987), pp 51-4.
Barlow, Frank. ‘Becket, Thomas (1120?–1170)’, Oxford Dictionary of National Biography, (Oxford, 2004)
Barrow, George Lennox. The round towers of Ireland: A study and gazateer (Dublin, 1979)
Barry, Terence B. ‘Anglo-Norman Ringwork castles: some evidence’ in Terence Reeve-Smyth and Fred Hamond (eds) Landscape Archaeology in Ireland (Oxford, 1983), pp 295-314
Barry, T. B. The archaeology of medieval Ireland (London, 1987)
Barry, Terry. ‘Rural settlement in medieval Ireland’ in Terry Barry (ed.) A History of Settlement in Ireland (London, 2002), pp 110-123.
Bartlett, Robert. The making of Europe: Conquest, colonization and cultural change 950-1350 (London, 1993)
Bartlett, Robert. England under the Norman and Angevin kings 1075-1225 (Oxford, 2000)
Bateson, Mary. ‘The Laws of Breteuil’ in The English Historical Review (1900), pp 73-78, 302-318, 496-523, 754-757; (1901), pp 92-110, 332-345.
Berman, Harold Joseph. Law and Revolution: The formation of Western Legal Framework (Harvard, 1983)
Bhreathnach, Edel. Authority and supremacy in Tara and its hinterland c. 950-1200 (Dublin, 1999), pp 1-24
Bradley, John. Urban Archaeology Survey County Meath (Dublin, 1984, not published)
Bradley, John. Urban Archaeology Survey County Meath (Dublin, c. 1985 not published)
Bradley, John. ‘‘Planned Anglo-Norman towns in Ireland’ in H.B. Clarke and Anngret Simms (eds) The comparative history of urban origins in non-Roman Europe: Ireland, Wales, Denmark, Germany, Poland and Russia from the ninth to the thirteenth century (Oxford, 1985), ii, pp 411- 67.
Bradley, John. ‘Archaeological remains of the Llanthony granges at Duleek and Colp’ in John Bradley (ed.) Settlement and society in Medieval Ireland: Studies presented to F.X. Martin o.s.a. (Kilkenny, 1988), pp 316-26.
Bradley, John. ‘The medieval towns of County Meath’ in Ríocht na Mídhe viii, no. 2, (1988/89), pp 30-49.
Bradley, John. ‘Anglo-Norman towns’ in Michael Ryan (ed.) The Illustrated Archaeology of Ireland (Dublin, 1991), pp 177-180.
Bradley, John. Walled towns in Ireland (Dublin, 1995)
Bradley, John. Drogheda: Its topography and medieval layout (Drogheda, 1997)
Bradley, John. ‘The medieval boroughs of county Dublin’ in Conleth Manning (ed.) Dublin and Beyond the Pale (Bray, 1998), pp 129-144.
Bradley, John. ‘Early urban development in County Laois’ in Pádraig G. Lane and William Nolan (eds) Laois History and Society (Dublin, 1999), pp 257-82.
Bradley, John. ‘A tale of three cities. Bristol, Chester, Dublin and the ‘coming of the Normans’’ in Howard B. Clarke and J.R.S. Phillips (eds) Ireland, England and the continent in the Middle Ages and beyond (Dublin, 2006), pp 51-66.
Brady, Conor. The medieval town walls of Drogheda (Bray, 2003)
Brady, John. ‘Anglo-Norman Organization of the Diocese of Meath’ in Irish Ecclesiastical Record lxvii (1946), pp 232-7
Brady, John. ‘Origin and growth of the diocese of Meath’ in Irish Ecclesiastical Record, lxxii (1949), pp 1-13, 166-76.
Brady, John. ‘The kingdom and county of Meath’ in Ríocht na Midhe (1956), pp 6-13.
Brady, John. ‘The medieval diocese of Meath’ in Ríocht na Mídhe (1957), pp 34- 40.
Brady, John. ‘Anglo-Norman Meath’ in Ríocht na Mídhe (1961), pp 38 – 45.
Brindley, Anna and Annaba Kilfeather, Archaeological Inventory of County Carlow (Dublin, 1993)
St. John Brooks, Eric. ‘The Tyrels of Castleknock’ in JRSAI lxxvi (1946), pp 151-4.
Buckley, Nigel. and Johnson, Andy. ‘Geology, building stone and water supply’ in Ron Shoesmith and Andy Johnson (eds) Ludlow Castle its history and buildings (Logaston, 2006) pp 1-4.
Buckley, Victor M. and Sweetman, P. David. Archaeological Survey of County Louth (Dublin, 1991)
Butler, Richard. Some notices of the castle and of the ecclesiastical buildings of Trim (Trim, 1854)
Byrne, F.J. ‘The trembling sod: Ireland in 1169’ in Art Cosgrave (ed.) A new history of Ireland II: Medieval Ireland 1169-1534, (Oxford, 1987), pp XXXX
Byrne, Francis John. ‘Two lives of St. Patrick: Vita Secunda and Vita Quarta’ in J.R.S.A.I. (1994), pp 5-117.
Byrne, Francis John. Irish Kings and High Kings (Dublin, 2001)
Callery, R.R. ‘The territory of ancient Meath’ in Ríocht na Midhe (1955), p. 8.
Candon, Anthony. ‘Power, politics and polygamy: women and marriage in late pre-Norman Ireland’ in Damian Brackan and Dagmar Ó Riain-Raedel (eds) Ireland and Europe in the twelfth century (Dublin, 2006), pp 106-27
Carr, Anthony D. Medieval Wales (London, 1995)
Casey, Christine. and Rowan, Alistair. The buildings of Ireland: North Leinster (London, 1993)
Cathcart King, D. J. The castle in England and Wales: An interpretative history (Kent, 1988)
Clarke, Howard B. ‘The early English pipe rolls as a source for Irish history’ in Gearóid Mac Niocaill and Patrick F. Wallace (eds) Keimelia. Studies in medieval archaeology and history in memory of Tom Delaney (Galway, 1988), pp 416-34
Clarke, Howard B. ‘The 1192 Charter of Liberties and the beginnings of Dublin’s municipal life’ in Dublin Historical Record, xxxxvi, (1993), pp 5-14.
Clarke, Howard B. Urbs et suburbium: beyond the walls of medieval Dublin’ in Conleth Manning (ed.) Dublin and Beyond the Pale Studies in honour of Patrick Healy (Bray, 1998), pp 45-58.
Clarke, Howard. ‘Angliores ipsis anglis: the place of medieval Dubliners in English history’ in Howard B. Clarke, Jacinta Prunty and Mark Hennessy (eds) Surveying Ireland’s past: Multidisciplinary essays in honour of Anngret Simms (Dublin, 2004), pp 41-72.
Clark, Mary. ‘People, places and parchment: the medieval archives of Dublin city,’ in Seán Duffy (ed.) Medieval Dublin III (Dublin, 2002), pp 140-50.
Clinton, Mark. ‘Settlement dynamics in Co. Meath: the kingdom of Lóegaire’ in Peritia, xiv, (2000), pp 372-405.
Clinton, Mark. The souterrains of Ireland (Bray, 2001)
Cogan, Anthony. The diocese of Meath: Ancient and modern (Dublin, 1862), 3 vols.
Cogan, John. Ratoath (Drogheda, n.d. c.1970)
Condit, Tom. ‘Rings of truth at Trim castle, Co. Meath’ in Archaeology Ireland x, 3 (1996), pp 30-3.
Coplestone-Crow, Bruce. ‘From foundation to the Anarchy’ in Ron Shoesmith and Andy Johnson (eds) Ludlow Castle its history and buildings (Logaston, 2006), pp. 21-34
Coplestone-Crow, Bruce. ‘The end of the Anarchy to the de Genevilles’ in Ron Shoesmith and Andy Johnson (eds) Ludlow Castle its history and buildings (Logaston, 2006), pp 35-56
Corcoran, Adrian. ‘The nature of Anglo-Norman settlement in western Offaly’ in Offaly Heritage ii (2004), pp 9-23.
Coughlan, Tim. ‘The Anglo-Norman houses of Dublin: evidence from Back Lane’ in Seán Duffy (ed.) Medieval Dublin I (Dublin, 2000), pp 203-33.
Cox, Liam. ‘The O Maeleachlainn kings of Meath’ in Ríocht na Midhe (1972), pp 22-53.
Creighton, Oliver. and Higham, Robert. Medieval Castles (Princes Riseborough, 2003)
Cronne, Henry A. The reign of Stephen 1135-54 (London, 1970)
Crouch, David. William Marshal: Court, career and chivalry in the Angevin Empire 1147-1219 (London, 1990)
Cumming, Willie and Kevin O’Brien, ‘An introduction to and survey of the keep’ in Trim Castle Masterplan and report (1994, O.P.W. not published)
Cunningham, George. The Anglo-Norman advance into the south west midlands of Ireland 1185-1221 (Roscrea, 1987)
Curtis, Edmund. ‘Norse Dublin’ in Howard Clarke (ed.) Medieval Dublin The making of a metropolis (Dublin, 1990), pp 98-109.
D’Alton, John. The history of Drogheda (Drogheda, 1844), 2 vols.
Darby, Henry C. Domesday England (Cambridge, 1986)
Dargan, Pat. ‘Nobber: An Anglo-Norman village’ in Ríocht na Mídhe ix no. 4 (1998), pp 28-40.
Davies, R.R. Conquest, coexistence and change Wales 1063-1415 (Oxford, 1987)
Davies, R.R. Domination and conquest: The experience of Ireland, Scotland and Wales 1100-1300 (Cambridge, 1990)
de Lacy Bellingari, E. The Roll of the House of de Lacy (Baltimore, 1928)
Dolley, Michael. Anglo-Norman Ireland c1100-1318 (Dublin, 1972)
Dolley, Michael. ‘Coinage, to 1534: The sign of the times’ in Art Cosgrove (ed.) A new history of Ireland II: Medieval Ireland 1169-1534 (Oxford, 1993), pp 816-26.
Duby, Georges. The early growth of the European economy (London, 1974)
Duby, Georges. The knight, the lady and the priest trans. Barbara Bray, (Chicago, 1983)
Duby, Georges. Love and marriage in the middle ages, trans. Janet Dunnett, (Chicago, 1994)
Duckers, Peter and Ann. Castles of Shropshire (Stroud, 2006)
Duddy, Cathal. ‘The western suburb of medieval Dublin: its first century’ in Irish Geography, xxxiv, 2 (2001), pp 157-175
Duffy, P.J. ‘Exploring landscape and space in County Meath’ in Ríocht na Mídhe (2000), pp 187-218.
Duffy, Seán. ‘Ireland’s Hastings: the Anglo-Norman Conquest of Dublin’ in Anglo-Norman studies xx (1997), pp 69-85.
Duffy, Seán. “The key of the Pale: A History of Trim Castle” in Hayden, Trim Castle, Co. Meath: Excavcations, 1995-98, pp 6-28.
Duggan, Charles. ‘Richard (d. 1184)’, Oxford Dictionary of National Biography, (Oxford, 2004)
Edwards, R. Dudley. ‘Anglo-Norman relations with Connacht 1169-1224’ in Irish Historical Studies (1938-9), pp 135-53
Elliott, A.L. The abbey of St. Thomas the Martyr, near Dublin’ in Clarke H. Medieval Dublin, The Living City, (Dublin, 1990), pp 62-76.
Empey, Adrian. ‘Introduction’ in Stuart Kinsella (ed.) Augustinians at Christ Church: the canons regular of the cathedral priory of Holy Trinity (Dublin, 2000), pp 3-9.
Everard, Judith. ‘The “justicarship” in Brittany and Ireland under Henry II’’ in Anglo-Norman studies xx (1997), pp 89-105.
Eyton, Robert William. Antiquities of Shropshire 12 vols (London, 1853-60)
Faraday, Michael. Ludlow 1085-1660: A social economic and political history (Chichester, 1991)
FitzPatrick, Elizabeth. ‘The archaeology of Durrow’ in Michael Byrne (ed.) Durrow in History (Tullamore, 1994), pp 23-38.
FitzPatrick, Elizabeth and Caimin O’Brien. The Medieval Churches of County Offaly (Dublin, 1998)
Elizabeth FitzPatrick, Royal Inauguration in Gaelic Ireland 1100-1600; A Cultural Landscape Study (Woodbridge, 2004)
Flanagan, Marie Therese. ‘Strongbow, Henry II and Anglo-Norman Intervention in Ireland’ in John Gillingham and J.C. Holt (eds) War and government in the Middle Ages (Cambridge, 1984), pp 62-77.
Flanagan, Marie Therese. Irish society, Anglo-Norman settlers, Angevin kingship: Interactions in Ireland in the late twelfth century (Oxford 1989)
Flanagan. Marie Therese. ‘Anglo-Norman change and continuity: the castle of Telach Cail in Delbna’ in Irish Historical Studies, xxviii, no. 112 (Nov. 1993), pp 385-89.
Flanagan, Marie Therese. ‘Irish and Anglo-Norman warfare in the twelfth century’ in Thomas Bartlett and Keith Jefferies (eds) A Military History of Ireland (Cambridge, 1996), pp 52-75.
Flanagan, Marie Therese. ‘Household favourites: Angevin royal agents in Ireland under Henry II and John’ in A.P. Smyth (ed.) Seanchas: Studies in early and medieval Irish archaeology, history and literature in honour of Francis John Byrne (Dublin, 2000)
Flanagan, Marie Therese. ‘Meiler fitz Henry (d. 1220)’, Oxford Dictionary of National Biography, (Oxford, 2004)
Flanagan, Marie Therese. ‘Lacy, Hugh de (d. 1186)’, Oxford Dictionary of National Biography, (Oxford, 2004)
Flanagan, Marie Therese. ‘Lacy, Walter de (d. 1241)’, Oxford Dictionary of National Biography, (Oxford, 2004)
Flanagan, Marie Therese. ‘Ua Conchobair, Ruaidrí Rory O’Connor’, Oxford Dictionary of National Biography, (Oxford, 2004)
Flanders, Steve. De Courcy: Anglo-Normans in Ireland, England and France in the eleventh and twelfth centuries (Dublin, 2008)
Frame, Robin, ‘Aristocracies and the political configuration of the British Isles’ in R.R. Davies (ed.) The British Isles 1100-1500: Comparisons, contrasts and connections. (Edinburgh, 1988), pp 142-159.
Frame, Robin. Colonial Ireland 1169-1369 (Dublin, 1981)
Frame, Robin. The political development of the British Isles 1100-1400 (Oxford, 1990)
Frame, Robin. Ireland and Britain 1170-1450 (London, 1998)
Gelling, Margaret. ‘The Evidence of Place-Names’ in P.H. Sawyer (ed.) Medieval settlement, continuity and change (London, 1976), pp 200-11.
Geoghegan, Fred. ‘Recollections of the history of the townlands of Durrow parish’ in Michael Byrne (ed.) Durrow in History (Tullamore, 1994), pp 51-70.
Gibson, Paul and Rebekah Breen, ‘The internal structure of the Galtrim motte, County Meath, as revealed by ground penetrating radar and electrical restivity geophysical techniques’ in Ríocht na Mide xvi (2005), pp 23-8.
Gilbert, John T. History of the viceroys of Ireland (Dublin, 1865)
Gillingham, John. The Angevin Empire (London, 1984)
Gillingham, John. The English in the twelfth century: imperialism, national identity and political values (Woodbridge, 2000)
Golding, Brian. Conquest and colonisation: The Normans in Britain 1066-1100 (Basingstoke, 2001)
Goodbury, Valerie. Weobley castle and its environs (West Malvern, 2003)
Graham, B. J. ‘Anglo-Norman Settlement in County Meath’ in Proceedings of the Royal Irish Academy, vol.75, sect. C. (1975), pp 223-48.
Graham, Brian. ‘Medieval settlements in County Meath’ in Ríocht na Midhe (1974), pp 40-59.
Graham, Brian. ‘The evolution of the settlement pattern of Anglo-Norman Eastmeath’ in R.H. Buchanan, R.A. Butlin, D. McCourt (eds) Fields, Farms and Settlement in Europe (Belfast, 1976), pp 38-47.
Graham, B.J. ‘The mottes of the Norman liberty of Meath’ in Harman Murtagh (ed.), Irish Midland Studies (Athlone, 1980), pp 39-56.
Graham, Brian. ‘Anglo-Norman colonization and the size and spread of the colonial town in medieval Ireland’ in H.B. Clarke and Anngret Simms (eds) The comparative history of urban origins in non-Roman Europe: Ireland, Wales, Denmark, Germany, Poland and Russia from the ninth to the thirteenth century (Oxford, 1985) ii, pp 355-71.
Graham, B.J. ‘Anglo- Norman manorial settlement in Ireland: An assessment’ in Irish Geography (1985), pp 4-15.
Graham, B.J. Anglo- Norman settlement in Ireland (Athlone, 1985)
Graham, Brian. ‘Twelfth-and thirteenth century earthwork fortifications in Ireland’ in The Irish Sword xvii, 69 (Summer 1990), pp. 225-243.
Graham, B. J. ‘Early medieval Ireland: Settlement as an indicator of economic and social transformation, c. 500-1100 A.D.’ in B.J. Graham and L.J. Proudfoot (eds) An historical geography of Ireland (London, 1993), pp 19-57.
Graham, B.J. ‘The High Middle Ages c.1100 to c.1350.’ in B.J. Graham and L.J. Proudfoot (eds) An historical geography of Ireland (London, 1993), pp 58-98.
Graham, Brian. ‘Urbanisation in Ireland during the High Middle Ages c. 1100 to c.1350’ in Terry Barry (ed.) A History of Settlement in Ireland (London, 2002), pp 124-140.
Gwynn, Aubrey. ‘Ardee in the middle ages’ Journal of the County Louth Archaeological Society xi, (1946), pp 77-89.
Gwynn, Aubrey. ‘The origins of St. Mary’s Abbey, Dublin’ in JRSAI lxxix (1949), pp 110-25.
Gwynn, Aubrey. ‘The early history of St. Thomas’ Abbey, Dublin’ JRSAI, lxxxiv (1954), pp 1-35.
Gwynn, Aubrey. ‘Armagh and Louth in the twelfth century’ in Seanchas Ardmhaca i, (1954), pp 1-11.
Gwynn, Aubrey. ‘Archbishop John Cumin’ Reportorium Novum, i, 2, (1955-56), pp 285-310.
Gwynn, Aubrey. ‘Tomaltach Ua Conchobair, coarb of Patrick’ in Seanchas Ardmhaca viii, (1977), pp 231-74
Gwynn, Aubrey. and R. Neville Hadcock. Medieval Religious Houses: Ireland (Dublin, 1988)
Hadcock, Neville. ‘The origin of the Augustinian order in Meath’ in Ríocht na Midhe (1964), pp 124-31.
Hagger, Mark S. The fortunes of a Norman family. The de Verduns in England, Ireland and Wales, 1066-1316. (Dublin, 2001)
Haliday, Charles. The Scandinavian kingdom of Dublin (Dublin, 1884)
Halpin, Andy. and Newman, Conor. Ireland, An Oxford archaeological guide (Oxford, 2006)
Hayden, Alan. Trim Castle, Co. Meath: Excavcations, 1995-98 (Dublin, 2011)
Hays, L. and E.D. Jones, ‘Policy on the run: Henry II and Irish Sea diplomacy’ in Journal of British Studies, xxix (Oct 1990), pp 293-316.
Healy, John. History of the diocese of Meath (Dublin, 1908), 2 vols.
Healy, Patrick. ‘The town walls of Dublin’ in Howard Clarke (ed.) Medieval Dublin The making of a metropolis (Dublin, 1990), pp 183-92.
Hennessy, Mark. ‘The Priory and Hospital of New Gate: The evolution and decline of a medieval monastic estate’ in William J. Smith and Kevin Whelan (eds) Common Ground Essays on the historical geography of Ireland presented to T. Jones Hughes (Cork, 1988) pp 41-54.
Hennessy, Mark. Trim: Irish historic towns atlas no. 14 (Dublin, 2004)
Herlihy, David. Medieval Households (Cambridge, Mass. 1985)
Hickey, Elizabeth. Skryne and the early Normans (Dublin, 1994)
Hickey, Elizabeth. Clonard. The story of an early Irish monastery 520-1202 (Leixlip, 1998)
Higham, Robert, and Philip Barker, Timber castles (London, 1992)
Hillaby, Joe. ‘Colonisation, crisis-management and debt: Walter de Lacy and the lordship of Meath, 1189-1241’ in Ríocht na Mídhe viii, no. 4 (1992/93), pp. 1-50.
James, T.E. ‘The age of majority’ in The American journal of legal history, iv, (Jan., 1960), pp 22-33.
Kehnel, Annette. Clonmacnoise – the church and lands of St Ciarán (Münster, 1997)
Kelly, Dermot. ‘The Porchfield of Trim – A medieval ‘open-field’ in Irish Geography, xxxviii (2005), i, pp 23-43.
Kelly, Fergus. A Guide to Early Irish Law (Dublin 1995)
Kenyon, John R. Medieval Fortifications (London, 1990)
King, Heather A., Eoin Grogan and John Bradley, ‘Archaeological investigations in the environs of a motte and bailey at Ballinaclogh lower, near Timahoe, Co. Laois’ in Journal of the County Kildare Archaeological Society, xviii (1992-3), pp 8-19.
Kinsella, Stuart. ‘From Hiberno-Norse to Anglo-Norman, c.1030-1300’ in Kenneth Milne (ed.) Christ Church cathedral, Dublin A history (Dublin, 2000), pp 25-52.
Lapsley, Gaillard. ‘Some castle officers in the twelfth century’ in The Historical Review, vol. 33, no. 131, (Jul 1918), pp 348-59.
Latimer, Paul. ‘Henry II’s campaign against the Welsh in 1165’ in The Welsh Historical Review xiv (1989), pp 523-52.
Leask, Harold G. Irish Castles and Castellated Houses (Dundalk, 1951)
Leask, H.G. Fore, Co. Westmeath. Official Guidebook (Dublin, 1938)
Leask, Harold G. ‘The castle of Trim, Co. Meath’ in The Irish Sword: The journal of the military history society of Ireland iv (1961-62), pp 94-97.
Lewis, C.P. ‘Lacy, Walter de (d. 1085)’, Oxford Dictionary of National Biography (Oxford, 2004)Lewis, C.P. ‘Lacy, Gilbert de (fl. 1133–1163)’, Oxford Dictionary of National Biography (Oxford, 2004)
Lewis, Samuel. Topographical dictionary of Ireland (London, 1837)
Leyser, Henrietta. Medieval women: A social history of women in England 450-1500 (London, 1996)
Llyod, David. The concise history of Ludlow (Ludlow, 1999)
Lydon, James. Ireland in the later middle ages (Dublin, 1973)
Lydon, James. ‘The Middle Nation’ in James Lydon (ed.) The English in medieval Ireland (Dublin, 1984), pp 1-26.
Lydon, James. ‘Lordship and Crown: Llywelyn and O’Connor of Connacht’ in R.R. Davies (ed.) The British Isles 1100-1500 Comparisons, Contrasts and Connections. (Edinburgh, 1988), pp 48-63
Lydon, James. The Making of Ireland (London, 1998)
Lydon, James. ‘Dublin Castle in the middle ages’ in Seán Duffy (ed) Medieval Dublin III (Dublin, 2002), pp 115-27.
Lydon, James. The Lordship of Ireland in the Middle Ages (Dublin, 2003)
Lydon, James. ‘The defence of Dublin in the middle ages’ in Seán Duffy (ed.) Medieval Dublin IV (Dublin, 2003), pp 63-78.
McNeill, Charles. ‘Hospital of St. John without the Newgate, Dublin’ in H.B. Clarke (ed.) Medieval Dublin, The living city (Dublin, 1990), pp 77-82.
McNeill, T.E. ‘Trim castle, Co. Meath: the first three generations’ in The Archaeological Journal cxlvii (1990), pp 308-36.
McNeill, Tom. Castles (London, 1992)
McNeill, Tom. Castles in Ireland: Feudal power in a Gaelic world (London, 1997)
Mac Niocaill, Gearóid. Na Burgéisí (XII-XV Aois) (Dublin, 1964)
Mac Niocaill, Gearóid. ‘The colonial town in Irish documents’ in H.B. Clarke and Anngret Simms (eds) The comparative history of urban origins in non-Roman Europe: Ireland, Wales, Denmark, Germany, Poland and Russia from the ninth to the thirteenth century (Oxford, 1985), ii, pp 373-8.
Mac Síthigh, Muiris P. ‘Cairteachta meán-aoiseacha do mhainistir Fhobhair xii-xiii céad’ in Seanchas Ardmhacha iv (1961), pp 171-5.
Martin, F.X. ‘The Anglo-Norman invasion 1169-c. 1300’ in T.W. Moody and F.X. Martin (eds) The course of Irish history (Cork, 1967), pp 123-43.
Martin, F.X. ‘Gerald of Wales, Norman reporter on Ireland’ in Studies (1969), pp 279-91
Martin, F.X. ‘Allies and an overlord’ in Art Cosgrove (ed) A new history of Ireland II: Medieval Ireland 1169-1534 (Oxford, 1993), pp 67-97.
Martin, F.X. ‘Overlord becomes feudal lord, 1172-85’ in Art Cosgrove (ed.) A new history of Ireland II: Medieval Ireland 1169-1534 (Oxford, 1993), pp 98-126.
Masterson, Rory. ‘The Church and the Anglo-Norman colonisation of Ireland: A case study of the priory of Fore’ in Ríocht na Mídhe xi, (2000), pp 58-70
Masterson, Rory. ‘The early Anglo-Norman colonisation of Fore, Co. Westmeath’ in Ríocht na Mídhe, xiii, (2002), pp 44-60.
Meehan, Robert T. and William P. Warren, The Boyne valley in the Ice Age (Dublin, 1999)
Mitchell, Frank and Michael Ryan, Reading the Irish landscape (Dublin, 1997)
Moore, Joseph H. ‘Notices of the town of Navan’ in JRSAI xxiii,, vol. iii, (1893), pp 55-63.
Moore, Michael J. Archaeological Inventory of County Meath (Dublin, 1987)
Moore, Michael. ‘The “Moat” at Castletown Kilberry, Co. Meath’ in Riocht na Mide viii, no. 2 (1988/89), pp 21-9.
Mortimer, Richard. Angevin England 1154-1258 (Oxford, 1994)
Moss, Rachel. ‘Tales from the crypt: the medieval stonework of Christ Church cathedral, Dublin.’ in Seán Duffy (ed.) Medieval Dublin III (Dublin, 2002) pp 95-114.
Murchada, Diarmuid and Muray, Kevin. ‘Place-names’ in Neil Buttimer, Colin Rynne and Helen Guerin (eds) The heritage of Ireland (Cork, 2000), pp 146-55.
Murphy, Margaret. ‘Balancing the concerns of church and state: The Archbishops of Dublin 1181-1228’ in T.B. Barry, Robin Frame and Katharine Simms (eds) Colony and frontier in Medieval Ireland (London, 1995), pp 41-56.
Murphy, Margaret. ‘Ó hÉanna, Muirgheas [Matthew O’Heney] (d. 1206)’, Oxford Dictionary of National Biography (Oxford, 2004)
Murphy, Margaret. ‘Chief governors’ in Seán Duffy (ed.) Encyclopaedia of medieval Ireland (London, 2004), pp 76-9.
Nash, George. and Children, George. (eds) Anatomy of a castle: The Weobley castle project (Herefordshire, 2003)
Neeson, Eoin. A history of Irish forestry (Dublin, 1991)
Nelson, Lynn H. The Normans in South Wales 1070-1171 (Austin, 1966)
Nic Aongusa, Bairbre. ‘The monastic hierarchy in twelfth century Ireland’ in Ríocht na Mide viii, no. 3 (1990/91), pp 3-20.
Nicholls, K.W. ‘Anglo-French Ireland and after’ in Peritia, i (1982), pp 370-403
O’Boyle, Enda. A History of Duleek (Duleek, 1989)
O’Brien, Caimin, and P. David Sweetman, Archaeological Inventory of County Offaly (Dublin, 1997)
O’Brien, Kevin. ‘Survey of the keep’ in Trim Castle Masterplan and report (1994, O.P.W. not published)
O’Brien, Kevin, and Fenlon, Jane, Trim castle, Co. Meath (Dublin 2002)
O’Byrne, Emmett. War, politics and the Irish of Leinster, 1156-1606 (Dublin, 2003)
Ó Cléirigh, Cormac. ‘The impact of the Anglo-Normans in Laois’ in Pádraig G. Lane and William Nolan (eds) Laois History and Society (Dublin, 1999), pp 161-182
Ó Conbhuí, Colmcille, The story of Mellifont (Dublin, 1958)
O’Connell, Philip. ‘Kells, early and medieval’ in Ríocht na Midhe (1959), pp 18-36.
O’Connell, Philip. ‘Kells, early and medieval, part II’ in Ríocht na Midhe (1960), pp 8-22.
O’Conor, Kieran. ‘Castle of Carlow’ in Carloviana (1998), pp 37-42.
O’Conor, Kieran. ‘Anglo-Norman Castle in Co. Laois’ in Pádraig G. Lane and William Nolan (eds) Laois History and Society (Dublin, 1999), pp 183-211
Ó Corráin, Donncha. Ireland before the Normans (Dublin, 1972)
Ó Corráin, Donncha. ‘Women in Early Irish Society’ in Margaret Mac Curtain and Donncha Ó Corráin (eds) Women in Irish Society, the historical dimension (Dublin, 1978), pp 1-13.
Ó Corráin, Donncha. and Maguire F. Gaelic Personal Names (Dublin, 1981)
Ó Corráin, Donncha. ‘Dermot MacMurrough (1126-71) and the Coming of the Anglo-French’ in Ciaran Brady (ed.) Worsted in the Game, Losers in Irish History (Dublin, 1989), pp 21-36.
O’ Doherty, J.F. ‘Historical criticism of the Song of Dermot and the Earl’ in Irish Historical Studies i (1938-39), pp 4–20
O’Hart, John. Irish Pedigrees (Dublin, 1892), 2 vols.
Ó Hoireabhárd, Seán. ‘The Assassination of Tigernán Ua Ruairc, The Last King of Meath’ in Perita, vol. 29, issue1 (2018) pp 111-141.
O’Keeffe, Tadhg. ‘Medieval Frontiers and Fortifications: The Pale and its Evolution’ in F.H.A. Aalen and Kevin Whelan (eds) Dublin City and County: From Prehistory to Present – Studies in honour of J.H. Andrews. (Dublin, 1992), pp 57-77.
O’Keeffe, Tadhg. Medieval Ireland: an archaeology (Stroud, 2000)
O’Keeffe, Tadhg. ‘Architecture and regular life in Holy Trinity cathedral, 1150-1350’ in Stuart Kinsella (ed.) Augustinians at Christ Church: the canons regular of the cathedral priory of Holy Trinity, Dublin (Dublin, 2000), pp 41-54.
O’Keeffe, Tadhg. ‘Concepts of “castle” and the construction of identity in medieval and post-medieval Ireland’ in Irish Geography xxxiv, 1, (2001), pp 69-88
O’Keeffe, Tadhg. Medieval Fore: Heritage Guide no. 28 (Bray 2004)
O’Keeffe, Tadhg. ‘Trim Castle uncovered: some thoughts’ in Riocht na Mide xxiv, (2013), pp 160-8.
Ó Muraíle, Nollaig. ‘Settlement and place-names’ in Patrick J. Duffy, David Edwards and Elizabeth FitzPatrick (eds) Gaelic Ireland – Land, Lordship and settlement c.1250-c.1650 (Dublin, 2001), pp. 223-45
Ó Murchadha, Diarmuid. ‘Odhbha and Navan’ in Ríocht na Mídhe (1992-3), pp 112-23.
Orpen, Goddard H. ‘Mote and bretesche building in Ireland’ in The English Historical Review, xxi, 83 (Jul 1906), pp 417-44.
Orpen, Goddard H. ‘Motes and Norman Castles in Ireland’ in The English Historical Review, xxii, 86 (Apr 1907), pp 228-254.
Orpen, Goddard H. ‘Motes and Norman Castles in Ireland’ in The English Historical Review, xxii, 87 (Jul 1907), pp 440-67
Orpen, Goddard H. ‘Motes and Norman castles in Ireland’ in JRSAI part 11, xxxvii (1907), pp 123-52.
Orpen, Goddard H. Ireland under the Normans 1169-1333 4 vols, (Oxford, vol i and ii 1911; vol iii and vol iv, 1920)
Otway-Ruthven, A.J. ‘Parochial development in the rural deanery of Skreen’ JRSAI xciv, (1964), pp 111-22.
Otway-Ruthven, A.J. ‘The chief governors of medieval Ireland’ in JRSAI, 95 (1965), pp 227-36
Otway-Ruthven, A.J. A history of medieval Ireland (London, 1968)
Otway-Ruthven, A.J. ‘The partition of the de Verdon lands in Ireland in 1332’ in PRIA lxvi, C, 5 (1968), pp 401-55.
Painter, Sydney. Studies in the history of the English feudal barony (Baltimore, 1943)
Perros, Helen. ‘Crossing the Shannon frontier: Connacht and the Anglo-Normans, 1170-1224’ in T.B. Barry, Robin Frame, Katherine Simms (eds) Colony and frontier in medieval Ireland (London, 1995), pp 117-138.
Phillips, J.R.S., ‘The Anglo-Norman nobility’, in James Lydon (ed.) The English in Medieval Ireland. (Dublin, 1984), pp 87-104.
Piers, Henry. A Chronological Description of the County Westmeath (Dublin, 1786)
Pollard, A.F. ‘Monmouth, John of (c.1182–1248)’, rev. R. R. Davies, Oxford Dictionary of National Biography, (Oxford, 2004)
Potterton, Michael. Medieval Trim: History and archaeology (Dublin, 2005)
Pounds, N.J.G. The Medieval Castle in England and Wales: A social and political history (Cambridge, 1990)
Preston, Sarah. ‘The canons regular of St. Augustine; the twelfth century reform in action’ in Stuart Kinsella (ed.) Augustinians at Christ Church: the canons regular of the cathedral priory of Holy Trinity, Dublin. (Dublin, 2000), pp 23-40.
Pryce, Huw. ‘Church and society in Wales, 1150-1250: an Irish perspective’ in R.R. Davies (ed.) The British Isles 1100-1500: comparisons, contrasts and connections (Edinburgh, 1988), pp 27-47.
Remfry, Paul Martin. The Mortimers of Wigmore (Worcester, 1995)
Remfrey, Paul Martin Longtown Castle 1048-1241 (Worcester, 1997)
Renn, Derek. ‘Chastel de Dynan’: the first phases of Ludlow’ in J.R. Kenyon and R. Avent (eds) Castles in Wales and the Marches: essays in honour of D.J. Cathcart King (Cardiff, 1987), pp 55-74.
Renn, Derek. ‘The Norman military works’ in Ron Shoesmith and Andy Johnson (eds) Ludlow Castle its history and buildings (Logaston, 2006), pp 125-38.
Rice, Gerard. Norman Kilcloon 1171-1700 (Kilcloon, 2001)
Richardson H.G. and G. O. Sayles. The administration of Ireland 1172-1377 (Dublin, 1963)
Richter, Michael ‘The Norman Invasion’ in Liam de Paor (ed.) Milestones in Irish History (Cork, 1986), pp 41-51
Robinson, Charles J. A history of the Castles of Herefordshire and their lords (1869, re-printed 2002, Hereford)
Rogers, Randall. ‘Aspects of the military history of the Anglo-Norman invasion of Ireland’ in The Irish Sword xvi, no 64 (Summer, 1986), pp 135-44.
Round, J.H. ‘The staff of a castle in the twelfth century’ in The English Historical Review, vol. 35, no. 137, (Jan 1920), pp 90-97.
Rowan, Alistair. ‘The Irishness of Irish Architecture’ in Architectural History, xxxx (1997), pp 1-23.
Rowley, Trevor. The Norman Heritage 1055-1200 (London, 1983)
Salter, Mike. The castles of Herefordshire and Worcestershire (Malvern, 2000)
Seaver, Matthew. ‘Practice, spaces and places: an archaeology of boroughs as manorial centres in the barony of Slane’ in James Lyttleton and Tadhg O’Keeffe (eds) The Manor in medieval and early modern Ireland (Dublin, 2005), pp 70-102.
Sheehan, Jeremiah. Beneath the shadow of Uisneach (Ballymore, 1996)
Shoesmith, Ron. ‘Ludlow castle’ in Ron Shoesmith and Andy Johnson (eds) Ludlow Castle its history and buildings (Logaston, 2006) pp 15-8.
Simms, Anngret. ‘Continuity and change: Settlement and society in medieval Ireland c. 500-1500’ in William Nolan (ed.) The Shaping of Ireland: The geographical perspective (Cork, 1986), pp 44-65.
Simms, Anngret. ‘The geography of Irish manors; the example of the Llanthony cells of Duleek and Colp in county Meath’ in John Bradley (ed.) Settlement and society in medieval Ireland – Studies presented to F.X. Martin o.s.a. (Kilkenny, 1988), pp 291-315.
Simms, Anngret. ‘Core and periphery in medieval Europe: The Irish experience in a wider context’ in William J. Smith and Kevin Whelan (eds) Common ground: Essays of the historical geography of Ireland (Cork, 1988), pp 22-40.
Simms, Anngret and Simms, Katherine. Kells, Irish Historic Towns Atlas (Dublin, 1990)
Simms, Anngret. ‘Medieval Dublin in a European context’ in Howard Clarke (ed.) Medeival Dublin The making of a metropolis (Dublin, 1990), pp 37-51.
Simms, Anngret. Anngret Simms, ‘The origin of Irish towns’ in Anngret Simms and J.H. Andrews (eds) Irish country towns (Cork, 1994), pp 11-20
Simms, Anngret. ‘Kells’ in Anngret Simms and J.H. Andrews (eds) Irish country towns (Cork, 1994), pp 21-33
Simms, Anngret. ‘Origins and early growth’ in Joseph Brady & Anngret Simms (eds) Dublin through space and time (c900-1900), (Dublin, 2001), pp 15-65
Simms, Katharine. ‘Women in Norman Ireland’ in Margaret Mac Curtain and Donncha Ó Corráin (eds) Women in Irish Society, the historical dimension (Dublin, 1978), pp 14-25.
Simms, Katharine. ‘The O’Hanlons, the O’Neills, and the Anglo-Normans in thirteenth-century Armagh’ in Seanchas Ardmhacha ix, 1 (1978), pp 70-94.
Simms, Katharine. ‘Frontiers in the Irish Church – Regional and cultural’ in T. B. Barry, Robin Frame, Katharine Simms (eds) Colony and Frontier in Medieval Ireland (London, 1995), pp 177-200.
Simpson, Linzi, ‘Forty years a-digging: preliminary synthesis of archaeological investigations in medieval Dublin’ in Seán Duffy (ed.) Medieval Dublin I (Dublin, 2000), pp 11-67.
Simpson, Linzi. ‘Excavations on the southern side of the medieval town at Ship Street Little, Dublin’ in Seán Duffy (ed.) Medieval Dublin V (Dublin, 2004), pp 9-51.
Smith, Brendan. ‘Tenure and locality in north Leinster in the early thirteenth century’ in T.B. Barry, Robin Frame and Katharine Simms (eds) Colony and Frontier in Medieval Ireland (London, 1995), pp 29-40.
Smith, Brendan. Colonisation and conquest in medieval Ireland: the English in Louth 1170 – 1300 (Cambridge, 1999)
Smith, Brendan. ‘Lacy, Hugh de, earl of Ulster (d. 1242)’, Oxford Dictionary of National Biography (Oxford, 2004)
Smith, Nicky. Longtown, Herefordshire. English Heritage Archaeological Investigation Report Series AI/26/2003 (Swindon, 2003)
Smyth, Alfred P. Celtic Leinster: Towards an historical geography of early Irish civilization A.D. 500-1600 (Dublin, 1982)
Smyth, William J. ‘The making of Ireland: Agendas and perspectives in cultural geography’ in B.J. Graham and L.J. Proudfoot (eds) An historical geography of Ireland (London, 1993), pp 399-433.
Spurgeon, C.J. ‘Mottes and castle-ringworks in Wales’ in J.R. Kenyon and R. Avent (eds) Castles in Wales and the Marches: essays in honour of D.J. Cathcart King (Cardiff, 1987), pp 23-46.
Stalley, Roger, ‘The Anglo-Norman keep at Trim: Its architectural implications’ Archaeology Ireland xi, no. 4 (Winter 1992), pp 16-9.
Stalley, Roger ‘The construction of the medieval cathedral, c.1030-1250,’ in Kenneth Milne (ed.) Christ Church cathedral, Dublin A history (Dublin, 2000), pp 53-74.
Stokes, G.T. Ireland and the Anglo-Norman church (London, 1892)
Stout, Geraldine. Newgrange and the bend of the Boyne (Cork, 2002)
Strickland, Matthew. War and chivalry: The conduct and perception of war in England and Normandy 1066-1217 (Cambridge, 1996)
Swan, Leo. ‘Monastic proto-towns in early medieval Ireland: The evidence of aerial photography, plan analysis and survey’ in H. B. Clarke and Anngret Simms (eds) The comparative history of urban origins in non-Roman Europe: Ireland, Wales, Denmark, Germany, Poland and Russia from the ninth to the thirteenth century (Oxford 1985), i, pp 77-102.
Sweetman, P. David. ‘Archaeological excavations at Trim castle, Co. Meath 1971-74’ in PRIA (1978), pp 127-98.
Sweetman, P.D. ‘Excavations of medieval ‘field boundaries’ at Clonard, Co. Meath’ in JRSAI (1978), pp 10-22.
Sweetman, David. ‘Anglo-Norman fortresses’ in Michael Ryan (ed.) The Illustrated Archaeology of Ireland (Dublin, 1991), pp 183-88.
Sweetman, David. Irish Castles and Fortified Houses (Dublin, 1995)
Sweetman, P. David, Olive Alcock and Bernie Moran, Archaeological Inventory of County Laois (Dublin, 1995)
Sweetman, David. The medieval castles of Ireland (Cork, 1999)
Sweetman, P.D. ‘The development of Trim castle in the light of recent research’ in Château Gaillard (XXX), pp 223-8.
Synnott, Nicholas J. ‘Notes on the family of de Lacy in Ireland’ in J.R.S.A.I. xlix, (ii) (1919), pp 113-131
Thomas, Avril. The walled towns of Ireland (Dublin, 1992), 2 vols
Twohig, Dermot C. ‘Norman ringwork castles’ in Bulletin of the group for the study of Irish historical settlement (1978), pp 7-9
Trench, C.E.F. Slane (Slane, 1976)
Tyrrell, Joseph H. A Genealogical History of the Tyrrells (London, 1904)
Veach, Colin. Lordship in Four Realms, The Lacy Family, 1166-1241 (Manchester, 2014)
Tyrrell, Joseph H. A Genealogical History of the Tyrrells (London, 1904)
Veach, Colin. ‘Henry II’s grant of Meath to Hugh de Lacy in 1172: a reassessment’ in Riocht na Mide xxviii, (2007), pp 67-94.
Walker, David. The Normans in Britain (Oxford, 1995)
Wallace, Patrick F. ‘Anglo-Norman Dublin: continuity and change’ in Donncha Ó Corráin (ed.) Irish antiquity: Essays and studies presented to Professor M.J. O’ Kelly (Cork, 1981), pp 247-68.
Wallace, Patrick F. ‘A reappraisal of the archaeological significance of Wood Quay’ in John Bradley (ed.) Viking Dublin Exposed: The Wood Quay saga (Dublin, 1984) pp 112-33.
Wallace, Patrick. ‘The archaeology of Viking Dublin’ in H.B. Clarke and Anngret Simms (eds) The comparative history of urban origins in Non-Roman Europe: Ireland, Wales, Denmark, Germany, Poland and Russia from the ninth to the thirteenth Century i (Oxford, 1985), pp 103- 145.
Wallace, Patrick. ‘The archaeology of Anglo-Norman Dublin’ in H.B. Clarke and Anngret Simms (eds) The Comparative history of urban origins in Non-Roman Europe: Ireland, Wales, Denmark, Germany, Poland and Russia from the ninth to the thirteenth Century ii (Oxford, 1985), ii, pp 379-410.
Walsh, Claire. ‘Archaeological excavations at the abbey of St. Thomas the Martyr, Dublin’ in Seán Duffy (ed.) Medieval Dublin (Dublin, 2000), pp 185-202.
Walsh, Claire. ‘Dublin’s southern town defences, tenth to fourteenth century’ in Seán Duffy (ed.) Medieval Dublin II (Dublin, 2001), pp 88-127.
Walsh, Paul. ‘The ancient boundaries and tribes of Meath’ in Nollaig Ó Muraíle (ed.) Irish leaders and learning through the ages Paul Walsh (Dublin, 2003), pp 62-67
Walsh, Paul. ‘Meath in the Book of Rights’ in Nollaig Ó Muraíle (ed.) Irish leaders and learning through the ages Paul Walsh (Dublin, 2003), pp 72-85
Paul Walsh, ‘The Ua Maelechlainn kings of Meath’ in Nollaig Ó Muraíle (ed.) Irish leaders and learning through the ages Paul Walsh (Dublin, 2003), pp 90-106
Warren, W. L. Henry II ((London, 2000)
Warren, W.L. ‘John in Ireland, 1185’ in John Bossy and Peter Jupp (eds) Essays presented to Michael Roberts (Belfast, 1976), pp 11-23.
Warren, Lewis. ‘The Normans’ in Patrick Loughrey (ed.) The people of Ireland (Belfast, 1988), pp 85-97.
Watt, John. The church in medieval Ireland (Dublin, 1972)
Welch, Robert. and Stewart, Bruce. The Oxford Companion to Irish Literature (Oxford, 1996)
White, Graeme J. Restoration and Reform 1153-1165 (Cambridge 2000)
Wilde, William. Beauties of the Boyne and Blackwater (Dublin, 1850)
Williams, Sterling de Courcy. ‘The termon of Durrow’ (cont.) in JRSAI xxix, (3), (1899), pp 219–232.
Wightman, Wilfred E. The Lacy family in England and Normandy 1066-1194 (Oxford, 1966)
Wood, Herbert, ‘The titles of the chief governors of Ireland’ in Historical research xiii (June 1935), pp 1-8.
Wood, Herbert. ‘The muniments of Edmund de Mortimer, third earl of March, concerning his liberty of Trim’ in PRIA xl, C, 7, (1937), pp 312-55.