Irish Family Names

Irish Jesuit Province

Irish Family NamesAuthor(s): John RyanSource: The Irish Monthly, Vol. 45, No. 525 (Mar., 1917), pp. 180-189Published by: Irish Jesuit ProvinceStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/20504754 .

Accessed: 16/06/2014 20:48

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

Irish Jesuit Province is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The Irish Monthly.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 91.229.248.68 on Mon, 16 Jun 2014 20:48:27 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=ijp

http://www.jstor.org/stable/20504754?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp


[ 180 J

IRISH FAMILY NAMES BY JOHN RYAN.

T HE namiie an Irishman bears is of importance to him.

By its means he can often obtain a vast amount of

knowledge regarding the country, the origin alnd the history of his anicestors. A short historical account of sonme

Irish surnames and of the families with which they are

connected will, it is hoped, be read with pleasure by many.

In order that the reader may understand the peculiar signifi

cance of Irish fanmily namies, it will be useful, anid indeed

necessary, to describe in a few words sonme features of the

Celtic polity of ancient Ireland-features which are, alas!

misunderstood by the majority of Irishmen to-day. In the first place, the organiisation of ancient Ireland was

not " tribal.'' The words ' tribe," ''tribal" as applied to

a body of people, are often, of course, used very vaguely, but

they generally suggest th:ree thlilngs-first, the descent of all the tribesmen fromi the sanme ancestor; secondly, the hold

ing of lands in comimon, involving redistribution eitlher on the death of every tribesman or at fixed intervals; thirdly, a prinitive and savage nmode of existence. Tribal organi

sation of this kind is still be fotund amiiong uncivilised peoples

-among, for exanmple, the Basuitos of Africa and the Dyaks

of 13orneo. Each tribe of the Basutos lives in a smlall village

consisting of a numiber of houses built rouind a circular pen. Within this pen the flocks, constituting the clhief wealtlh of

the tribe, are enclosed. Rouind the village lie the lands which the chief divides among hiis people. When a tribes man dies or leaves the village, the land reverts to the chief, who proceeds at once to make a new allotment. The Dyaks also live in villages, each formed like a large house.

What mnay be called the private apartnments of the tribe occuipy in each village a space about 100 feet long and 10 feet broad, wlhence it is easy to see that the number of people in a tribe is quite small. That each tribe is descended

from a common ancestor, and that consequiently all the

tribesmen are united by ties of blood is a first principle among these and like peoples.



IRISH FAMILY NAMES 181

With these examples of tribes and tribal organisation in the strict sense before our eyes, we turn to ancient Ireland. The middle of the third century of our era is given by the best authority, Professor Eoin MacNeill, as the earliest period of our history of which we can speak with certainty. Did tribal organisation exist in Ireland at that time? Cer tainly not. Did tribal organisation exist in Ireland at any period between the 3rd and the 17th centuries? Certainly not. Th-ie statement that it did is simply a glaring error in ouir histories-though found alike in symnpathetic and in hostile writers.

The circumstance whence this false notion arose can be easily traced. In Ireland, when a strong king conquered a new territorv, his custom was, as a general rule, to place a nmember of his own family in it as " overlord." This lord

with his family settled in the conquered district, and, as the power of his house grew with time, placed sons and grandsons here and there, as opportunity offered, in various parts of it. Each of these subordinate rulers would be a " mean-lord " between the original conqueror (i.e., his father or grandfather) and the inhabitants of the newly-con quered district. As time went on, the new rulers, if able,

might make similar grants to other members of their family. All these minor lords, with the chief lord, would thus hold the position of a sept of nobles in the territory, though, of course, they and their families would form but a fraction of the entire population.

Now, it was a very general custom for the whole district over which members of any particular family held sway in the manner just described, to be named after the original founder of that family. Thus, the term UI Maine, better known in its English form Hy Many, means, in the first place, the sept of nobles of which Maine was the ancestor; and secondly, the country over which these nobles ruled. This MAine lived in the 5th century. The Cineal Eoghain and the Cin6al Conaill of Northern and Western Donegal would be also examples of the prevalence of this custom in the 5th century. Eoghan settled in the peninsula now known as Inishowen, and Conall settled amid the Western hills of Donegal. We are not to suppose that these districts



182 THE IRISH MONTHLY

were uninhabited in the early fifth century, the time of this settlement. As a matter of fact, the settlement of the brothers, Eoghan and Conall, was effected by means of an

army placed at their disposal by their father, Niall, the

High-King, and it was effected in the face of very stubborn resistance from the old populationi. The brothers settled as lords in the territory they had won, but the old population remained, and their families increased and multiplied, just as did those of the sons of Niall. Many instances of the same kind could be quoted, ranging in date from the early fifth century to the days of Shane O'Neill.

It may be stated with certainty that the general body of the inhabitants of any particuilar state were not bound to their lord by ties of blood, did not look to their lord as chief representative of a common family, and did not regard themselves as bouind one to another in a tie of kinship.

An Irish state, then, however small, was not a "tribal" institution. The fact that the very small group of its rulers formned a sept of nobles with a common ancestor, and that the territory often bore the name of that ancestor gave rise to the modern vague and false idea that the entire popula tion of the territory was descended from a common ancestor, and that the lands of the territory were held and transmitted according to the "tribe" system.

Supposing for a moment that in ancient Ireland the land was held in common, and was therefore liable to constant re-allotment, how often and according to what principle did such re-allotment take place? Did it take place on the death of every man who during life had a share in the land,

or did it take place at one, two, five or ten years' intervals? Taking the average state as equal in extent to a modern Barony, it is obvious that a scheme of division at the death of every land-owning man would be quite unworkable, for such deaths would be a matter of almost daily occurrence.

Redistribution at long intervals is still more unlikely. In the first place, a system of constantly recurring migrations from one district to another would hardly have been toler ated by settled communities stuch as inhabited the Irish states. Again, such a system could not be forced upon them by their lords, for the Irish were a free people, making




their own laws, and unpopular law was unknown amongst them. Moreover, the tenacity with which they cling to the land, and the almost savage dislike with which they regard any interference with their tenure of it, are ancient as well as modern characteristics of our people, and it is

consequently most improbable that they would have intro duced or have submitted to any system which did not guar

antee fixed possession. Finally, a general disturbance of this kind would certainly have been an event of much importance, productive of consequences worthy of record in our Annals. Yet not a single mention of such a redistri bution or of any event arising ouit of such a redistribution is chronicled in them. The fact is that, in ancient Ireland, lands were not held in common, and, in consequence, no system of redistributioni was needed.

The Celts, of course, as very probably all other ancient peoples, had at one time "tribal" institutions. Traces of these are to be found in Ireland within the historic period, one example being a conception of the family for which I know no parallel in modern times. Everywhere, nowadays, the family group consists simply of father, mother and children; in ancient Ireland, however, the group was consti tuted in quite a different way. When complete it consisted of a man and his sixteen nearest male direct descendants. This family group or fine was broken iup into four sub-divi sions, the geilfine, deirbhfine, iarfine and indfine. The geilfine consisted of the man and his four nearest male descendants, generally, therefore, his four eldest sons. The3 deirbhfine consisted of the next four; and so on. The fine couild be incomplete or die out, for collaterals were not allowed in. The exact position, privileges, functions, duties, etc., of each sub-division are not easily ascertained from the Laws, but there is no need to discuss these matters -here. The important fact is that this large family group is a relic from the days when "tribal" instituitions prevailed amnong our Celtic forefathers. These institutions were, lhowever, swept away at a date probably long previous to the Celtic settlements in this island.

The "clan-system" is another term often vaguely used with reference to Celtic organisation in Ireland. This term



184 TIIE IRISH MONTHLY

owes probably its existence, and certainly its vogue, to Sir Walter Scott. As a political term, it is absolutely unknown

to the Irish language, thouglh this language has a super abundance of technical political expressions. Generally speaking, writers on Irislh hiistory use it to denote the fact

of Ireland being divided into a large number of " states," i.e., of independent or quasi-independent political units.

The term is misleading, and ought not to be uised. The first opportunity of studying in detail the great

variety in Trish surnamnes is afforded by English documents of the Tudor period. Oni examining these docturments the reader who hlas the current false niotions as to " tribal"

organisation, etc., will finld much to surprise hin. In any given state, which from its name he miglht suippose con tained people of one surname only, he will find not one, btut an extraordinary number of sturnames differing absolutely one from another! When we reflect that from, at latest, the middle of the third centurv of our era to the time at

whiich these documents were penned, there was no great disturbance of the population in any part of the couintry, we may safely say that this variety of names existed during the whole historical period of Celtic administration in Ireland. In other words, we can conclude that from the earliest times every territory of appreciable extent contained both a large number of distinct families forming the general body of the population, together with a small number of ruling families, each ruiling over a separate portion. As a general term for these latter ruling families, we may employ the word " Bepts." This variety in names is not apparent from the Annals where, with few exceptions, none but events connected with members of important families are thought worthy of commemoration. The spread of maniy of the great families is explained by the process before nmentioned, whereby powerful kings and lords settled scionls of their houses in districts subject to their sway; depressing, of course, the older nobility wlho until then were supreme in those territories. Keeping in mind these characteristics of old Irish polity, we are in a position to understand better

the significance of an Irish family-name.




When did surnames, as we understand them, come into use? What was used in their stead during the previous period? In very ancient times, here as everywhere else, a man probably had but one name. This system, however, would naturally soon be modified by the addition of a dis tinguishing soubriquet. A good example of such a name is

Nuadu Airgetlam, "Nuadu of the Silver Hand," one of our ancient traditional High-Kings. Among the Irish Celts the use of "mac, "son," in names of persons is found as early as the Ulster Cycle, the celebrated northern king, Conchobar rnac Nessa, being one of the best known examples. In

Ruch names, however, as " Conchobar mac Nessa " and

"Cormac mac Airt,"' "mac Nessa" and "mac Airt" are not

surnames, so that the correct anglicised rendering is "Con chobar, son of Nessa" and "Cormac, son of Art."

Shortly before the introduction of Christianity, another system of nomenclature, consisting of the word "moccu" prefixed to the " sept " name, makes its appearance.

Examples are "Dubhthech moccu Lugair," one of St. Patrick's first converts; " Miliucc moccu Buain," St. Patrick's master; " Muirchu moccu Machtheni," his biographer, and " UltAn moccu Chonchobhair, " the well known bishop of Ardbreacan. The origin of this prefix "moccu" is unknown. It later became corrupted to "maccu," and later still to "mac uf," "son of the grand son -a form which often reveals artificiality in genealogies. This form of surname seems to have fallen into disuse about the beginning of the eighth century. A gap of two and a-half centuries here intervenes, during which the older

methods seem to have been revived, "mac" in its literal sense, and descriptive epithets added to personal names being used.

Surnames of the modern type appear about the middle of the tenth century. Needless to say, a full account of families and surnames, with their genealogical and historical connections, would probably occupy a hundred good-sized volumes. As, unhappily, no such work exists, a short and scattered account of some families and surnames in a few typical Irish counties will be of interest to Irishmen.

74




DONEGAL.

Passing over the mythological cycle in which many events of no small importance are said to have occurred within the bounds of modern Donegal, the history proper of the county begins with Niall of the Nine Hostages. That great monarch, having grown very powerful in his own territory and in the territories around him, determined to extenld his influence far and wide throughout Ireland. Three of his sons, the Eoghan and Conall already mentioned, and a younger one named Eanna, he despatched into the North west, where they acquired between them dominion over the territory which is now more or less the County of Donegal.

Others of his sons acquired in the same way territory in Meath and Westmeath, and formed therein the septs, after wards generally termed the Southern ul N6ill. The North ern and Southern branches of Niall's descendants regarded their interests as identical for about two centuries, during

which time they secured the High-Kingship of all Ireland for themselves. This they held until A.D. 1002. Then troubles arose between the Northern and Southern branches, and, more grievous still, the Southerns, too, became divided.

In the north the family of Eanna soon went under, their

territory being taken over by the Cineal Eoghain. The combined forces of the Cineal Eoghain and the Cin6al Conaill

fought a great battle against the Ulster Picts in A.D. 563,

winning for themselves a large stretch of territory west of the Bann in modern Co. Derry. For some reason or other

the Cineal Eoghain, not the Cin6al Conaill, settled there. Hitherto the Cineal Boghain had possessed merely a small extent of territory in Donegal; with this acquisition of new lands in Derry may be said to begin the great expansion

which was afterwards to take them over much of Ulster.

Inishowen remained the chief seat of the family, certainly to A.D. 1000. Later, when the Cineal Eoghain had spread

widely in Ulster, and changed the chief seat of their power to what we now call Tyrone, the Cineal Conaill took over

the old lands of Cineal Eoghain in Donegal, and all that

county came to be known as Tir Conaill.

The first instance of a modern surname in Donegal, and

one of the first instances in all Ireland, is that of Domhnall




O Neill, which occurs about A.D. 940. This Domhnall

became King of Ailech or Donegal on the death of his father,

Muirchertach "of the Leather Cloaks," at the hands of the

Norse, A.D. 943. He further became High-King of Ireland on the death of the reigning monarch, also at the hands of

the Norse, A.D. 956. This Domhnall took his surname from his grandfather, King Niall, "Black Knee" of the

Cin6al Eoghain. Just at this period also, surnames begin

to appear amongst the Cineal Conaill. The earliest of note is 0 Maeldoraidh, anglicised O'Muldorry. The king of the

Cin6al Conaill, captured by Brian Boromha, bore that name.

This family of 0 Maeldoraidh was later set aside by their

near relations, the O'Cannanainns (brutally anglicised

Cannon), which family had in its turn, in the early thirteenth

century, to give way to the O'Donnells, a sub-branch of the

Cin6al Conaill in no way distinguished before that time.

Genealogically connected with the O'Donnells were the O'Gallaghers, O'Dohertys, O'Boyles and O'Friels. The pos sessions of the O'Grallaghers lay to the extreme south, near

Ballyshannon, and also in the neighbourhood of Raphoe. The O'Dohertys' lands lay in the extreme north. At some comparatively late period these seem to have obtained the lordship of all the original Tir Eoghain, for we find them

mentioned as chiefs of Inishowen in the reign of the English king, James I. The two families of O'Gallaghers and O'Dohertys were second in importance only to the O'Don nells themselves, and their descendants at the present day far outnumber those of their former chiefs. The lands of the O'Boyles lay to the south-west between Gweebarra Bay

and Donegal Bay. Representatives of the family in great numbers are still happily to be found in the old lands of their fathers. The O'Friels are also still fairly numerous in Donegal. To their chief once belonged the honour of inaugurating The O'Donnell. Of families genealogically connected with the O'Neills (i.e., the descendants of

Domhnall 0 N6ill mentioned above) the chief are the Mac Sweeneys, O'Gormleys, Mac Laughlins, O'Donnellys, O'Connors and O'Kellys. The Mac Sweeneys were divided into three important families; the first settled in the south near Malin Bay; the second west of Lough Swilly, round




Rathmullen; and the third, Mac Sweeney 'of the Battle Axes," west, ne.ar Bloody Foreland. A branch of this family settled in Cork in the thirteenth century, and became

military commanders under the Mac Carthys. The Mac Laughlins (also called O'Loughlins) shared the kingship of the Cin6al Eoghain with the O'Neills in early times, but are not found doing so after A.D. 1241. The family is still very strong in Donegal. The O'Connors and O'Kellys in these districts have no connection with other families of the same name, five distinct dynastic families of O'Connors

and innumerable small families of O'K(ellys being found in various parts of Ireland. The O'Donnellys were a distin guished literary family, and later spread over much of

Ireland, especially throuLghout Middle and Eastern Ulster. Donegal, too, is still the stronghold of the great bardlic family of Mac an Bhaird, called in English Ward, who for

many centuries acknowledged no superiors in the gentle realm of song. Other old Ulster families still well repre sented are the McGinleys, also known as McKinleys and Finlays, the MacMenamins and the Campbells. The O'Duffys, found here in considerable strength, belong to the old Leinster family of that name whiclh migrated in numbers to the North and West in comparatively modern times.

One well-known Donegal family, that of 0 Mael Fhabhaill (anglo-gallicised Lavelle) disappeared from Inishowen, but reappeared in great strength in Mayo. Whether trans planted or otherwise, it is impossible to say; many others, such as the O'Donnells, O'Gallaghers and MacDevitts, certainly were transplanted. An interesting Donegal family is that of the Dunleavys. These were the principal people of the Ulaidh, who formed a state lying along the Eastern seaboard of Co. Down. At some unknown but early period many of these Dunleavys migrated west to Co. Donegal, where, curiously enough, they are still known as "na h-Ultaigh," "the men of Ulaidh." In documents of the reign of James I., suich names as Gillieduff, Shane and

Deirmot Ultagh are frequently met with. The MacFadden family, so common in Donegal, Antrim and Derry, is

probably quite distinct from families of the same name in Connemara and in Munster. Outside of Ulster, the




name has, however, almost disappeared. The surnames,

McGeady, McGettigan and McNelis, are not found outside

of Donegal. The form MacCambridge is simply a ridiculous

rendering of the Irish mac Ambrois. The era of confiscation

is commemorated by such names as Wray, Bustard, Grant

and Alcorn. Speaking generally, the surnames in Donegal

are extremely Irish in character.

(To be continued).

PLEADING

Tfhe souls of some wlho find repose Beneath the daisied grass,

That sways in every breeze that blows And gleams when sujnbeams pass,

Make moan with souls whose bodies lie 'Neath marble white and cold,

Where myriads throng and organs sigh In cloisters dim and old.

Could we but hear them pray and plead In suffering and in woe

For comfort in their direful need To mortals here below.

Maiden and wife, prelate and peer, The nmonarch and the slave,

Statesman and nun, and monk austere, Wise sage and soldier brave

Look earthward still in hope and fear For Masses, prayers, and doles,

That make the way to Heaven clear,

That ransomed prisoned souls. And lhard and harsh of heart indeed

Is matron, man or maid

Wlho will not heed the souls that plead For earthly help and aid.

MAUDALEN Roc.



Documents

Irish Family Names