The battle of Clontarf (A.D. 1014) is frequently represented as a great fight between Pagan and Christian, but this point of view is hardly confirmed by the historical facts. It is true that the Norsemen numbered among their supporters such prominent upholders of heathenism as Sigurthr, earl of Orkney, and Broder—who had been a mass-deacon, but “now worshipped fiends, and was of all men most skilled in sorcery,” yet it must be remembered that the Leinstermen, under their king Maelmordha, also formed part of the Norse army on the same occasion. Moreover, both the Norse and Irish accounts of the battle agree that Gormflaith, who had been the wife of Brian Borumha, inspired by hatred of Brian, was mainly responsible for the renewal of hostilities between the two peoples. Her son, Sihtric Silken Beard, who was most active in mobilising the Norse troops, must have been a Christian, since the coins which were minted in Dublin during his reign are stamped with the sign of the cross. In 1028 he visited Rome, and there is record of another visit some years later.[215] His death is entered in the Annals under the year 1042, in which same year his daughter, a nun in an Irish convent, also died.[216]
It was probably on his return to Dublin from Rome in 1036 that Sihtric gave “a place on which to build a church of the Blessed Trinity,” afterwards known as Christchurch Cathedral, and “contributed gold and silver wherewith to build it.”[217]
The Norsemen would seem to have regarded the Irish Church with no friendly feelings. The first Norse bishop, Dunan or Donatus, was on intimate terms with Lanfranc, and when the next bishop, Patrick, was chosen by the clergy and people of Dublin, he was sent, with a letter professing their “bounden obedience” to Lanfranc for consecration (A.D. 1074).[218] His successors, Donatus (d. 1095), Samuel (d. 1121), and Gregory (d. 1162) were also consecrated at Canterbury, and acknowledged the supremacy of the archbishop. An interesting letter addressed to the Archbishop of Canterbury by the priests and citizens of Dublin in 1121 is still extant: “You know,” the letter runs, “that the bishops of Ireland, more especially the Bishop of Armagh, is extremely angry with us because we will not submit to his decrees, and because we always wish to remain under your authority.”[219]
Bishoprics were founded at Waterford and Wexford later than in Dublin. Malcus, the first Bishop of Waterford, was consecrated at Canterbury, and on his arrival in Waterford in 1096, he began to build a church, dedicated, like that of Dublin, to the Holy Trinity.[220]
Some years later we hear of a Bishop of Limerick, Gilla or Gilbert, who does not seem to have been consecrated in England, but who was in close touch with the Archbishop of Canterbury.[221] He it was who convoked the synod at Rathbresail, at which it was decided to divide Ireland into dioceses: “there,” says Keating, “the sees and dioceses of the bishops of Ireland were regulated; Dublin was excluded, because it was not customary for its bishop to receive consecration except from the Archbishop of Canterbury.”[222] Limerick and Waterford were placed under the jurisdiction of the Bishop of Cashel, but this decree seems to have been ignored by the people of Limerick, for they elected their next bishop, Patrick, in the ordinary way and sent him to England for consecration.[223] It is uncertain whether the Waterford people obeyed, as the records merely mention the names of the succeeding bishops.
A still more important synod was held at Kells in 1132. There the decision of the previous synod regarding the division of the country into dioceses was ratified, and archbishoprics were established at Dublin, Armagh, Cashel, and Tuam. Henceforth the bishops of Dublin, Limerick, and Waterford were consecrated in Ireland, and this marked the close of the connection between Canterbury and the Celtic Church.
FOOTNOTES
[149] Only one reference is to be found in the Annals. See Annals of the Four Masters, A.D. 728.
[150] Eoin MacNeill: “The Norse Kingdom of the Hebrides” (Scottish Review, Vol. XXXIX., pp. 254-276).
[151] It is interesting to recall that a new development in shipbuilding, probably due to the same causes, was taking place in England about the same time. The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle first mentions a naval encounter with Vikings under the year 875, and some twenty years later describes the long ships, “shaped neither like the Frisian nor the Danish,” which Alfred had commanded to be built to oppose the oescs, or Danish ships.