‘GAME OF THRONES’ BATTLE OVER THE NORMAN WAY
FIREDUP: COUNCILRESPONDSTOATTACKBYHISTORIAN
WEXFORD County Council and one of the county’s most-noted historians are locked in a game of thrones over the much-vaunted Norman Way which encourages tourists to explore the places trodden by the invaders more than 900 years ago.
Historian and author of two books on Strongbow, Nicky Furlong says some of the council’s publicity material heralding the Norman Way is wrong.
The council says it’s Nicky who is mistaken.
However, there are signs of a thaw in relations between the feuding sides after County Hall offered to drop the words ‘inheritance and thrones’ from a vital piece of text at the heart of the dispute.
Perhaps though, it’s a case of never the twain shall meet because the unabashed historian reiterated his claims at a high-powered heritage conference at St Edan’s Cathedral at Ferns over the past weekend
Speaking from the floor, Nicky said he wanted to address the attendance which included the royal personage of David, The Ó Morchoe and his wife .
‘I wish to report in the presence of The Ó Morchoe, the direct descendant of Murrough, king of Ui-Chennsellagh, King of Leinster and King of Norse Dublin, the disgraceful distortion in the recently- published materials, memorials and websites of the Norman Way in which Strongbow, a mercenary, a captain of foot-soldiers was said to have inherited the throne of Leinster when he was not of royal blood.’
The council’s director of service Eamonn Hore, who invested many hundreds of hours in the Norman Way project, rebutted many of the points made by Nicky in an article published by this newspaper last month:
The article states: ‘ There are claims that the windmill at Tacumshane was inspired by the Normans whereas it was built in the 19th century and was of Flemish inspiration’.
Response: ‘We explicitly say on the interpretive panel and website that “Tacumshane Windmill is not from Norman times, it was built in 1846”. On the panel, we make the connection between the technologies the Normans brought to Ireland and this more modern windmill, using the vertical tower technology, introduced to Ireland by the Normans.’
The article states: ‘ They say the claim is spurious that the Normans improved agricultural and food production. The Normans hired were veteran soldiers, not farmers.’
Response: ‘Here, the.. interpretation of what we are calling the ‘Normans’ is reductive. The ‘Normans’ as we use the term throughout our content does not exclusively refer to the soldiers and knights that first arrived in Wexford in 1169. Rather, we are referring also to the generations of Normans that followed and that were the descendants of these initial Norman military forces.
‘We are not saying Strongbow and his contemporaries immediately improved farming and food production upon their arrival but we are saying that the Norman culture and wayof-working that integrated with the country’s existing practises, and was instigated by the Normans. We make it explicitly clear on all of the panels and on the website that the Norman Way is about the Norman way of life that informed this corner of Ireland over the centuries.’
The article states: ‘ The website claims Bannow Bay was the first landing point and settlement of the mercenary Normans into Ireland in 1169. They say there was no Norman settlement in Bannow at that time’.
Response: ‘ Neither the website nor the panel says any such thing. It and the panel actually say: Bannow - The Normans built a settlement here (including this church), just a few hundred metres from the site of the first landing of Norman forces in Ireland.’
The article states: ‘ The website says that Stongbow married Diarmait MacMurrchada’s daughter and in 1189 William Marshall signator of the Magna Carta married Strongbow’s daughter. However, the historians say it fails to say that Diarmait’s daughter was Aoife and that William Marshall married Aoife daughter Isobel’.
Response: ‘ The eight information panels at St Mary’s Church (the magnificent Church built by William Marshal and Isabel) cover this story and much more about William Marshal, Isabel and New Ross in great and exciting detail.’
The article states: ‘Mr Furlong and other historians, some members of Wexford Historical Society, point out that Strongbow could not have inherited the kingship of Leinster as the right to elect a king of Leinster belonged
only to regnal members of the MacMurrough royal family.
However, the county council information states: ‘After Diarmuid died, the Norman knight Richard de Clare (known as Strongbow) inherited the throne of Leinster and the Normans never left’.
The historians say there was no throne and that he did not and could not inherit royal power.’
Response: ‘ This statement taken from one of the promotional leaflets and information panels seems to have caused the greatest adverse reaction. I would contend that this seemingly ‘appalling gaffe’, this ‘puerile but gross error’ is perhaps not as appalling as claimed.
‘Having read and thoroughly enjoyed Nicholas book on Diarmuid MacMurrough ‘Dermot – King of Leinster and the Foreigners’, published in 1973 and also read and studied Nicholas’ paper published in the Journal of the Bannow Historical Society entitled ‘Bannow Dermot MacMurrough and Established errors’ I have no doubt that Dermot (Diarmuid) had no intention of relinguishing the kingship of Leinster to Strongbow, despite his promise to so do and despite his ‘giving’ Aoife in marriage to Strongbow.
‘However I am equally convinced that Strongbow intended to ‘ take’ the kingship of Leinster on the death of Diarmuid to make good the false promise, to impose Norman laws and mores and to assume the rule of Leinster by force, swordland and conquest.
‘ Thus depending of whether you take a ‘ Norman’ perspective or an ‘Irish’ Brehon Law perspective it could well be argued that there were two Kings in Leinster for a short time following the death of Diarmuid as set out by historian Robin Frame in his paper, ‘ Two Kings in Leinster: The Crown and the Mic Mhurchadha in the Fourteenth Century’.
‘James Lydon, formerly Lecky Professor of Modern History, Trinity College Dublin, sets out that ‘Strongbow brought over 1,000 men, including 200 knights. This was no mere band mercenaries, but an invading army.
‘He came as an ally of MacMurrough, lured in part by marriage to the king’s daughter and the promise of succession in Leinster.
They quickly showed their power.. the second Scandinavian City, Waterford, was taken. There Strongbow married Aoife, the daughter of MacMurough and became heir to Leinster’.’
In a very detailed response, Mr Hore asks the question: Appalling gaffe or an interpretation of history informed by perspective?
And offering an olive branch or two, he said that ‘in recognition of the legitimate concerns expressed in relation to the use of the words ‘inheritance’ and ‘ throne’, we propose to change from ‘After Diarmuid died, the Norman knight Richard de Clare (known as ‘Strongbow’) inherited the throne of Leinster and the Normans never left’ to ‘After Diarmuid died, the Norman knight Richard de Clare (known as ‘Strongbow’) became the de facto ruler and Lord of Leinster and the Normans never left.’
Another change is to the common side panel and on the promotional booklet for The Norman Way.
Currently it says: ‘In 1169, Diarmuid McMurrough, the ousted ruler of a kingdom in Ireland called Leinster, brought Norman knights here to help him wrestle back his throne from his enemies;’ and it is being changed to ‘In 1169, Diarmuid McMurrough, the ousted ruler of a kingdom in Ireland called Leinster, brought Norman knights here to help him wrestle back his kingdom from his enemies’.