The Irish standard., 1901-05-25

i'll Latin, Cambria, from whence is de-
rived the name Cambrensis, under
which he is known, was the first stran-
ger who undertook to write the history
of Ireland in order to perpetrate the
calumnies Which his countrymen had
already published against it's inhabi-
tants." This man C;t,nbrensis was Il
most disreputable character, and an
unscrupulous harpy in the service of
Henry II. He wrote his work in Latin,
comprised Of five volumes, and he nev-
er failed to SANDER the Irish nation to
suit the morbid taste of his master,
Henry H., and was the first author to
publish this spurious bull of Adrian
lV. to the world.
Let us hear MacGeoghegan again:
'"rlie English having in the twelfth
century put an end to the Irish mon-
archy and wishing to give color of
justice to their usurpation and to the
ty tyranny which they exercised against
the inhabitants Of the country, have
without any other title than fictitious
bull of Adrian w." etc. 'Were we to
compare this bull (of Alexander I'LL
and the preceding one (of Adrian 1V.)
with the treatise OH Ireland conquered,
composed at the same time by Giraldus
Cambrensis, we should discover great
similarity of style between them, and
if they are not by the same writer,
they appear at least to have been COM
posed to maintain each other mutu-
ally, and thereby acquire a degree Of
credit among the public" and hence
the conclusion that it is forgery.
'"These bulls have in fact all the ap-
pearance of forgery. They are not
to be met with in any collection. It
appears also that Henry ii. considered
them so insufficient to strengthen his
dominion in Ireland, that he solicited
Pope Lucius I'LL, who succeeded Alex
ander, to confirm them, but that Pope
was too just to authorize his usurpa-
tion and paid no regard to consider
able money which the king had sent
him."
1 herewith again quote from the cele-
brated Irish scholar Gratianus Lucius:
'The bull from Adrian Nv. to Henry
II. was spurious" The eminent DR..
Moran, professor of Irish history and
editor of the Irish Ecclesiastical Rec
ord, characterizes it as "the spurious
bull Of the much maligned Pontiff
Adrian w." DIR. Moran's dissertation
is one Of the most scholarly works on
Irish church history of the nineteenth
century. The learned Irish historian,
DR.. Thomas N. Burke, in memorable
and matchless historical lectures, de-
livered in the Academy Of Music, New
York, in November, 1872, in reply to
the English historian Froude, proved
with unequaled eloquence and logic
the spurious character and fraud of
the alleged bulls of Adrian Nv. and
Alexander III. to Henry II. The great
scholar, William Bullen Morris, Shows
in masterly manner the forgery. and
fraudulent character Of these bulls. I
will not here attempt to follow the ar
guments advanced by these master
minds to sustain their positions. Time
and space forbid it. Many other Irish
scholars and historians may be ad-
duced to show the spurious character of
these alleged bulls, but what is the use
of wasting time and energy OH an old
question that has been discussed for
centuries, often with much malice and
bitterness by the enemies of Ireland,
and once again revived in this COM
munity by the Rev. Van Allen and his
auxiliary ''Historicus' with his stale
and oft-disproved contentious? The
incentive to this forgery and fraud on
the part of Henry II. was obviously to
steal the government Of Ireland and
rob the people Of their property and
rights, but any student of Irish history
can see that the Irish as a nation never
surrendered their national or religious
rights to Henry Plantagenet or his
Norman successors, whom they fought