The Irish standard., 1897-07-03

rest of the book, and so utterly out of
keeping, that judicious writer's are of
opinion that John himself is not the au-
thor at all of this last chapter. At any
rate, the date of the book is at the lat
est, l160. five years after the supposed
grant.
But the first time we get the actual
text of the Bull is not until Girarldus
Cambrenss, who inserts 1t in his "Ex-
pugnatio Hibernica" llSS-12O9). But
no one who knows the author attaches
weight to his statements. The editors
of the Roll Series edition of the Welsh
historian say in their preface: Truth
was not his main object; he says he
compiled the works for the purpose of
sounding the praises of Henry H."
(Vol W, PIP. 69-70) From such men
as John of Salisbury and Gerald of
Wales the story has come down to us,
The pretence is bolstered up by a Bull
said to have been issued by Alexander
III in confirmation of Adrian's grant.
But Giraldus himself, the authority for
this second Bull, allows in one of his
later works that 1T was obtained, as
some assert or imagine, while others
deny that 1t was ever obtained" Now
there are three letters of this last Popes
concerning the affairs OF Ireland. They
bear the date of Sept 20 and are general
ly supposed to belong to the year ITO.
They tend to throw discredit upon the
grant of Adrian w. for they don't men
tion It, and recognize the only right
submission Of the chiefs. These letters
are dated from Tusculum, where we
know Alexander was. But the Bull is
dated from Rome, two years after these
letters Now. as matter of fact, Alex
ander had been driven out of Rome, and
did not return till six years later.
So much for the Bull and it's princi-
pal authorities. Let us see what can be
got from the other persons in the drama
Henry II would have found the Bull very
useful In 1167, when some Of his follow
ers Joined the Irish chieftain Dearmid.
But we never heard of 1t then although
1t Is supposed to have been granted
twelve years previously. Again 1t would
have been most useful when he went
over to receive the homage of the con-
quered race; and also in 1172, when the
Papal Legate presided at the Synod of
Cashel. The conclusion forced upon lis
Is that he did not at those dates possess
any such Bull, or he would have certain
ly produced 1t. Then, as regards the
confirmation by Alexander III, Henry
was not favorite with The Pope by any
means He was known to have support
ed an anti-pope upon the death of Adrian
w, 1853; and then, in 11G6, another
against the claims of Alexander himself.
In ITO 1.-TWO years before the supposed
date of the confirmation) Henry was the
most execrated monarch in Europe for
In that year he brought to an end his
persecution Of Thomas a Beckett by
numbering him. Already had he been
playing fast and loose with the Pope,
who therefore was not likely to look up-
on the English king as fitting apostle
Of order and religion to the Irish. Again,
In August, 1172, the very year of the
supposed confirmation, Henry in the
Cathedral of Avranches took oath of
fealty to Alexander. But In the oath
there is not word about Ireland, al
though mention is made of England"
and Kings of England"
What has been said is sufficient to
show that the story, as now received, is
nothing but clumsy forgery. But, as
lie is only perversion of the truth,
let us see what Is the grain of truth in
this matter. Did Henry II ever ap-
proach Adrian Nv upon the subject of
Ireland? And did the Pope ever send
reply? We do find that In 1155 (the
year John of Salisbury mentions).
Henry did send an embassy to Adrian.
But the names of the ambassadors
Rotrodus, Bishop of Eyreux, Arnold,
Bishop Of Lisieux, the Bishop of Mans,
and Robert, the Abbot of St. Albans-
| are known, while that of John of Sails
bury is conspicuous by It's absence. or
course he may have gone in the posi-
| tion of some kind of humble retainer,
| and would, therefore, likely enough,
| spread travellers tales of the wonders
of his Roman visit on H. return. From
all the records of the embassy nothing
whatever appears about Ireland. But
in 1853 Rotrodus was sent upon an
! other embassy to Rome this time as
the ambassador not only OF Henry ii,
but at the same time of Louis VII of
France. The two monarchs. now be-
come friends, were about to make hos
tile expedition together and sent to
ask the Pope's blessing. 10 quote from
/ an able article by Dom GasQuet, o. S. b.,
on the subject: What this project was
does not absolutely appear, but there can
be little doubt that 1t was really the in
vasion OF Ireland upon which the mind
! of Henry was intent. In order to give
/ color to the pretensions, it was neces-
sary to represent 1t as being intended in
reality as a crusade in favor of religion
| The Pope however, would not enter in
/ to the designs Of the two kings, and re-
fused to be party to such injustice. He
not only refused the request of Bishop
Rotrodus but wrote to Louis at some