Lawlor — Notes on S/. Bemnnfs Life nf St. Mahich/. 237 



College (MS. Ij. 1. 1) there is a note in the liisli lanf^iiage of imuli liistorical 

 importance, which I believe has never l)ecn used to illustrate the passages 

 which I have quoted. It is written on a Ijlank page opposite tlie opening 

 leaf of the Calendar, and has evidently been copied from an early document 

 the latter part of which has not been transcribed — the scribe having stopped 

 at the end of a line, and in tlie middle of a sentence.^ It is dated 1 Jan. 1170, 

 and eulogizes Donnchad O'Cearbhill, King of Oriel, who died in 1168. He 

 is described as a reformer of the Church, and the founder of Alellifont Abbey 

 and other ecclesiastical institutions, and was evidently a supporter of Malachy. 

 His kingdom included a large part of the diocese of Armagh as it existed in 

 the time of Cellach and Malachy.- Among the reforms which are placed to 

 his credit are these : " In his time tithes were received, and marriage was 

 assented to, and churches were founded." This, be it remembered, is the 

 statement of a natix'e Irish writer, and, so far as it goes, it corroborates 

 St. Bernard. It implies no less than what he says. If lie gives an exaggerated 

 account of the state of the dioceses of Armagh and Down, and of Malacliy's 

 labours in them, we need not doubt that he faithfully reproduced the reports 

 of his Irisli informants. The exaggeration is to be attributed not to him, 

 but to the autliority on which he relied. 



But let us return to St. Bernard's remarks on the system of hei'editary 

 succession. The more clearly we recognize that behind them lies a good 

 document used with care, the more we are amazed to find among tliem state- 

 ments which are absolutely unhistorical. I have already remarked that 

 St. Bernard substituted "metropolitan " for some other word in the text on 

 which he worked — probably " comarb of Patrick " or a Latin equivalent. 

 Now a metropolitan is a bishop, and accordingly St. Bernard gives us to 

 understand that the eight lay predecessors of Cellach were pseudo-bishops. 

 He even goes so far as to say that they allowed none to be bishops who were 

 not of their family. The manifest implication is that for a century and a 

 half there were no bishops at Armagh. The episcopal prerogatives were 

 usurped by laymen of a privileged sept. Now this is absolutely contrary to 

 fact. The Annals give no hint tliat there was any irregularity in the position 

 of the lay abbots. But that is not all. They actually name liishops of 

 Armagh contemporary with them. The Annuls of Ulster mention the 

 following: — 



Cathasach. Died 966. 



Mael Muire. Died 994. 



' For this note see G. Petrie, Ecdesiastkal Architecture nf Ireland, p. 389, whore it is 

 not made clear that nuly part of it is copieJ. There is a revised transl.-iliim in Whitley 

 Stokes' Martyrolagij of Uunnan, p. xx. 



^ See Louth Archueoloijical Journal, iv, l;55 U' 

 R.r.A. ntoc, VOL. xxxv, sect. c. [38] 



