three unpublished cistercian documents

County Louth Archaeological and History Society

Three Unpublished Cistercian DocumentsAuthor(s): Fr. ColmcilleSource: Journal of the County Louth Archaeological Society, Vol. 13, No. 3 (1955), pp. 252-278Published by: County Louth Archaeological and History SocietyStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/27728883 .

Accessed: 14/06/2014 21:17

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].

.

County Louth Archaeological and History Society is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extendaccess to Journal of the County Louth Archaeological Society.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 195.34.79.223 on Sat, 14 Jun 2014 21:17:28 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

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

http://www.jstor.org/stable/27728883?origin=JSTOR-pdf

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


?jree (Hnpublt?iitb Cisterctan ^Documents

By Rev. Fr. Colmcille, O.Cist.

In a former issue of this Journal I printed seven original documents concerning Mellifont Abbey. I had hoped to publish in this issue the Cistercian documents

contained in the Armagh Episcopal Registers, at least those in the volume commonly known as Octavian 's Register, most of which are concerned with the abbey of

Mellifont and all of which have a most intimate bearing not only on the history of

that house, but on the whole state of the Cistercian Order in Ireland during the

closing decade of the fifteenth century. Unfortunately I have not had time to

complete my examination of the Cistercian material in the register and am conse

quently compelled to defer my proposed contribution on these documents till another

occasion. Meantime I have thought it advisable to print in this issue of the Journal

transcripts of three hitherto unpublished Cistercian documents, two of which concern

the abbey of Our Lady of Mellifont. The first of these documents is a copy of a charter

given by Hugh de Lacy the Younger to the Cistercian monks of Mellifont. It is, in

fact, a grant of the lands of Ballymascanlon, and is of the greatest interest. For

knowledge of the existence of this document I am indebted to Dr. E. St. John Brooks,

by whose death Irish scholarship has suffered a heavy loss. The copy of the

thirteenth-century grant is found in the Cotton MS. Titus B.XI, f. 258 (Ware MS.) in the British Museum and there is a microfilm copy in the National Library of

Ireland (N.L. Neg. 1173-4; pos. 1374-5).

The second document, though not connected with Mellifont, is of great historical

interest. It belonged to the archives of the abbey of Citeaux before the Revolution

and is now preserved with the other Cistercian documents which survive from those

archives in the Departmental Archives de la Cote-d'Or at Dijon, France (Fonds de

Citeaux: 11 H 20). The MSS. of Irish interest in these archives have been microfilmed

and the films are available in the National Library of Ireland (Fonds de Citeaux.

Pos. 3288). I am indebted to M. L. Delessard, Archiviste en Chef de la Cote-d'Or, and to M. Jean Richard, Keeper of the Archives at Dijon, for permission to

reproduce this seventeenth-century letter addressed by a group of Irish Cistercian

abbots to the Most Reverend Abbot of Citeaux, Abbot General of the Order.

The third and last document is another letter written to the Abbot of Citeaux.

The writer was Andrew Matthews last titular abbot of Mellifont, a sketch of whose

252



THREE UNPUBLISHED CISTERCIAN DOCUMENTS 253

career by the late Father Laurence Murray appeared in a former issue of this Journal.1 The original is preserved in the Archives de l'Aube in the city of Troy es in France and

must have come there on the suppression of Clairvaux, together with the archives of

that house. How it came to be in the Clairvaux archives is another question. As it is

addressed to the Abbot of Citeaux we should expect to find it in the Archives de la

C?te-d'Or at Dijon where what remains of the Citeaux Archives are preserved. It is

probable that the Abbot of Citeaux had forwarded this letter to the Abbot of Clairvaux

who was the immediate superior of Andrew Matthews, Mellifont Abbey being a

daughter-house of Clairvaux. I am indebted to the Archiviste en Chef de l'Aube, M. E. Poulie, for permission to publish the letter of Abbot Andrew Matthews.

My thanks are also due to Father M. Placide, O.C.S.O., Librarian of the Abbey of

Citeaux, who obtained for me the microfilm of MS. 3H 210 from the Archives de

VAube and who also was instrumental in obtaining information concerning the

Citeaux documents of Irish interest from M. Jean Richard, Keeper of the Archives at

Dijon. In conclusion I wish to acknowledge my indebtedness to the Rev. Aubrey

Gwynn, S.J., who has very kindly checked my transcripts of the documents here

printed and made many valuable suggestions.

1. THE LANDS OF BALLYMASCANLON : CHARTER OF HUGH DE LACY II TO THE CISTERCIANS OF MELLIFONT (c. 1232-42)

In the year 1233 Hugh de Lacy the younger petitioned the General Chapter of

the Cistercian Order concerning the construction or, rather, foundation of a new

abbey.2 The petition was entrusted by the Chapter to the Abbots of Inch, Gray Abbey and Comber, from which it may be inferred that the site of the proposed new abbey was somewhere in the North of Ireland in or bordering on the present County Down,

County Armagh or North Louth. Nothing appears to have been done about the

petition for the question came before the Chapter again in 12343 and 1235.4 In the

latter year the same three abbots were commissioned to proceed to the site of the

proposed monastery and, having investigated it, to report the result of the inspection to the next General Chapter. It transpired at the Chapter of 12365 that the three

abbots who received the commission had not carried out the instructions of the

General Chapter in the matter. The Abbot of Mellifont had been commanded to

inform them of the commission of the Chapter and it may be that he had failed to

perform this duty in which case he, and not the three abbots who received the com

mission, was responsible for the failure to carry out the wishes of the General Chapter.' In the event the Chapter decreed punishment for the three abbots provided that the

decree had, in fact, been announced to them by the Abbot of Mellifont. If the Abbot

r. VIII, 3 (1935). PP- 223-233. 2. Statuta Capitulorum Generalium Ordinis Cisterciensis, edited by D. Joseph Canivez,

O.C.S.O. (Louvain; 7 vols.), 1233: 25.

3. ibid., 1234: 23. 4- Ibid., 1235: 34. 5- Ibid., 1236: 25.



254 COUNTY LOUTH ARCHAEOLOGICAL JOURNAL

of Mellifont was himself at fault he was to be punished and the other abbots were to

be immune. The foundation does not seem to have been proceeded with.

As a grant of lands was made by Hugh de Lacy the Younger to the abbey of

Mellifont about this period it may well be that these were the lands on which it was

proposed to make the new foundation, and one of the reasons for not proceeding with

the original plan may have been the feeling that the lands donated were too near the

abbey of Newry. For it would seem that to this period must be referred the undated

deed of Hugh de Lacy by which he grants and confirms to God, the Blessed Mary and the monks of the Cistercian Order of Mellifont, the lands of Ballymascanlon. This deed may well have been drawn up in 1232-3. As we have seen, negotiations for the foundation of a new abbey on lands granted by Hugh de Lacy had been going on since 1233, though the Abbot of Mellifont did not appear in the proceedings until 1235.1 After 1236 we hear no more of the proposed foundation. We have,

however, a deed belonging to this period by which the same Hugh de Lacy makes over certain lands in County Louth bordering on Armagh and Down to the Cistercians

of Mellifont. It is, I think, reasonable to suppose that the lands of Ballymascanlon

represent the lands with which it was intended to endow the foundation that was

never made. As Hugh de Lacy the Younger died in 1242 the deed may be dated

circa 1232-42. The text, which is full of obvious blunders, is printed as it stands

without emendation, the contractions being expanded.

Universis sancti matris ecclesie filiis tarn presentibus quam futuris ad

quos presens carta pervenerit. Hugo de Lacy salutem. Noverit universitas

vestra, me pro salute anime mee et antecessorum et successorum meorum,

concessisse et hac presenti carta mea confirmasse Deo et Beate Marie et

monachis Cisterciensis ordinis de Mellifonte Ballymascandlan cum tota terra

inter aquam quod vocatur Adbui et rivulum qui vocatur Ad?neme sicut

utraque aqua cadit in mari et sicut Aqua qui vocatur extendit a mari usque ad Algarchan et sicut rivulus de Ad?neme extendit a mari usque ad fossetum unum quod extendit a rivulo illo ultra Munardnebrac usque in eundem

rivulum iterum ubi fuit molendinum Hukinhocled et sic per rivulum ilium

usque ad Ynesmoil lither, et sic per directum usque ad Banauela (?) et sic

usque ad Kilsagart, et sic per magnam viam usque ad Crosmoy, et sic per

montes usque ad Algarchan iterum, tenendum et habendurn sibi et success

oribus suis in puram et perpetuam elimosinam, libere et quiete, pacifice in

omnibus liber tatibus et liberis consuetudinibus ad eandem spec tan tibus, in

bosco et piano, in pratis et pasturis, in ecclesiis et capellis, in aquis in

stagnis et molendinis et piscariis, in moris et maricis et turbariis, in aquis dulcibus et salcis et in omnibus aliis libertatibus que infra terram illam

i. ibid., 1235: 34.




sunt vel fieri possunt, sicut aliqua elimosina melius et liberius dari vel

possideri postest et ut hec nostra concessio rata et inconcussa permanere

reper . . . earn sigillo meo appocicione munivi. His testibus Domino Waltero

de Lacy, Roberto de Lacy, Rogero Pippard, Gaufridus de Costetin et Dardis,

Philippus de Nugent, Nycholaus de Nutrevile, Roberto de Mandeville, Henricus filius Hay, Henricus Beg, Ric(ard)us filius Humphrid, Thomas

sacerdote, Philippus sacerdote, Willelmo Noell et multis aliis.

The foregoing deed grants to the monks of Mellifont Ballymascanlan with all the land between the water of Adbui (a) and the river of Ad?neme (b) as each water falls into the sea, and as the water of Adbui extends from the sea to Algarchan (c), and as the river of Ad?neme extends from the sea to

a bog which extends from that river beyond Munardnebrac until it returns

to the same river again where was the mill of Hukinhocled, and so by that

river to Ynesmoil lither, (d) and so directly to Banuela, (e) and so to Kil

sagart, (f) and so by the high road to Crosmoy, and so by the mountains to

Algarchan again, to have and to hold to themselves and their successors, in

pure alms for ever, freely, quietly and peacefully, with all the liberties and

free customs pertaining thereto, in wood and plain, in meadows and pastures,

in churches and chapels, in waters and millponds, in mills and fisheries, in

moors and marshes and turbaries, in fresh and salt waters, and in all other

liberties which are or may be within the same land even as any frankalmoign may better or more freely be given or possessed, and that this my grant may remain forever firm and valid I have caused my seal to be affixed thereunto.

Witnesses: Walter de Lacy, Robert de Lacy, Roger Pippard, Geofrey de

Costetin and Dardis, Philip de Nugent, Nicholas de Nutrevile, Robert de

Mandeville, Henry fitz Hay, Henry Beg, Richard fitz Humphrey, Thomas

the priest, Philip the priest, William Noell and many others.

The text of the above grant, together with the description of the meares of the

manor of Ballymascanlon given in the Inquisition of 21st January, 1606, which we

reprint below, helps us to define the extent of the manor of Ballymascanlon as it was

before 1654. The boundaries of the lordship of Ballymascanlon as depicted on the

Down Survey Map do not contain the entire area as defined in the inquisition of 1606

and as may be deduced from a study of the present text. The following notes will

help to clarify a few points.

(a) An English version in summary of this grant is to be found in Patent Rolls

James I, p. 275. It names the water of Adbur but there can be no doubt that Adbui

is the correct reading. From this grant we learn that the river Adbui extends from

the sea to Algarchan. The inquisition of 1606 describes this river (wrhich it names the

river of Abny alias Ballabuoy) as bounding the lands of Ballymascanlon on the east

and north between the same and the lands of Cooles on the east and the lands of

O'Hanlon's country on the north. The boundary is said to continue along the same




river as far as the "

glinn of Algarthan," through the said "

glinn "

and from thence

through the mountains directly to Crossmoy, "

being in the highway leading between

Dondalke and the Newry, and from thence along the said highway towards Dondalke

as far as Kilsagart." This makes it clear that the river now called the Big River was

the boundary between the lands of Ballymascanlon and the lands of Cooley. The

boundary line shown on the Down Survey map corresponds with this on the east

and north.

(b) Ad?neme. The description in the grant as well as the references in the

inquisition of 1606 makes it clear that the river here named Ad?neme formed part of

the western or rather south-western boundary of the lordship of Ballymascanlon, and

all the evidence seems to point to the small river which divides the baronies of Upper and Lower Dundalk.

(c) Algarchan : The inquisition of 1606 has the form Algarthan and states that

it was a glen through which the river Adbui flowed and which formed part of the

eastern boundary of Ballymascanlon. The Down Survey map shows that the bound

ary of the lordship ran through Glenmore and this, indeed, may be the "

glinn of

Algarthan "

referred to in the inquisition.

(d) Ynesmoil lither appears in the Patent Rolls as Ynesmoillicher.

(e) Banuela (?) or Banavela (?): The Patent Roll reads: "

and so directly to

Advanaucla "

as does the English translation in the Cotton MS. but the "

ad "

in

this word seems to be due to an error of the translator who took the "

ad "

of the

Latin phrase "

usque ad "

as part of the following word and read "

usque advanaucla "

instead of "

usque ad banauela." The inquisition of 1606 mentions the "

foord of

Aghbanavela alias Belarevin." Perhaps the translator, aware of the existence of this

ford, was led thereby to read Advanaucla instead of (usque) ad banauela. It is very

likely that the first element in the name Aghbanavela (agh) stands for the Irish ath, a ford, and that the second element is the same place-name which appears in a some

what different form in the charter of Hugh de Lacy (Banauela, the reading I have

printed in the foregoing Latin version is, however, very doubtful). Stubbs, in his

Place Names in the County of Louth, tells us that Belarevin (which the inquisition of 1606 equates with Aghbanavela) is a river north of and not far from Dundalk and

the lands of the manor of Ballymascanlon. This would confirm the impression already noted that there is question here of the stream which forms the boundary between

the baronies of Upper and Lower Dundalk.

(f) Kilsagart is undoubtedly the modern Kilnasagart in County Armagh. For the reader's convenience the inquisition so often alluded to in the foregoing

notes is reprinted here :

Tempore Jac. I Regis Ballmacscanlon 21st Jan. 1606

The manor of Ballinescanlon al' Ballymacscanlon in the countie of Lowthe. and

the demesne lands thereof are meared and bounded on the east and north side by a




small river or streame called the river of Abny al' Ballabuoy, and so the meare of

the said lordship and landes, betweene the same and the lands of Colles1 on the east, and the lands of O'Hanlon's countrie on the northe, continueth along the said river

even from the sea as far as the glinn of Algarthan,2 and so thorogh the said glinn, and

from thence through the mountaines directlie to Crossmoy3 being in the high way

leading betweene Dondalke and the the (sic) Newry, and from thence along? the said

highway towardes Dondalke as far as Kilsagart, and from thence along the same

high way unto the foord of Aghbanavela al' Belarevin.

The small river, roninge from the foord of Belatourey to the see, is the meare

between the landes of the towne and corporacon of Dondalke, and the landes of the

said manor or lordshipp of Ballinescanlon aF Ballymacscanlon, leaving the Mearsies

and Knockorise on the sowth west side of the said river. After the death of one

John Whitt late of Ballaboy, an inquisicon was taken, finding that the said John Whitt died seised of six skore acres of lands in Proly, and as to the trueth of all things

contaynned in the said inquisicon the jurors doe referr themselves to the view of the

same. The said man nor or lordship of Ballinescanlon al' Ballymacscanlon and all

the lands thereof were, at the time of the surrender of the abbey of Mellifont, parcell of the possessions of the said late abbey.

2. LETTER FROM ABBOT LUKE ARCHER, VICAR GENERAL OF THE CISTERCIAN ORDER IN IRELAND, AND OTHER IRISH CISTERCIAN

SUPERIORS TO THE LORD ABBOT OF CITEAUX (31st JULY, 1628)

To understand the circumstances in which the following letter was written it will

be necessary to recall to our minds the suppression of the Irish monasteries under

Henry VIII in 1539. In the years immediately preceding the suppression of the

monasteries a reform movement had been set on foot in the Cistercian Order and very

serious efforts were being made to reform the Irish houses among others. The Abbots

of Mellifont and Dublin were for a time associated in this work as joint reformers of

the houses of the Order in Ireland. The Henrician schism had, however, put an end

to all this and had sounded the death-knell, not only of the Cistercians, but of the

other monastic orders in Ireland. When we next meet with an attempted reorganiza

i. "

The lands of Colles on the east." By Colles we must understand Cooley. 2.

" The Glin of Algarthan." Mr. H. G. Tempest has suggested that this may be represented

by the modern Windy Gap. This seems to me very probable.

3. Crossmoy. Mr. Tempest suggests that this may be the modern Carrickarnan. It has occurred to me that the second syllable of the word Crossmoy represents the Irish Magh, often

anglicized moy, and if this be the case I would suggest that the word is still preserved in the modern place-name Meigh (Irish, Magh) in County Armagh. This lies on the old road from Dundalk to Ne wry and besides being

" in the highway leading between Dondalke and the Newry

"

as noted in the inquisition, it also lies between Kilnasagart and NewTry, which would correspond exactly to the situation of Crossmoy.




tion of the Cistercian Order in this country it is being carried out under changed conditions; the Irish monasteries have now been lost to the Order, their lands confis

cated and their revenues seized. A small band of Cistercian monks remains in the

country working in scattered groups, but the majority of these monks, though Irish

by race, have come from Spanish monasteries. They belong to the reformed Spanish

Congregation of Castile.

In 1615 a new reform was begun at Clairvaux which soon grew into a new

congregation known as the Strict Observance and which in 1623 received the approval of the Abbot of Citeaux, The Irish houses being mostly of the Clairvaux line it was

but natural that they should have become associated with the Strict Observance in

the course of time. The nucleus of the reorganized and reformed Cistercian Order in Ire

land was the small community which weathered the storm of persecution in the Abbey of Holy Cross, County Tipperary, thanks to the connivance of the Earl of Ormond.

The Abbot of Holy Cross in 1618 was Luke Archer who in that very year had succeeded

Abbot Paul Ragget, titular Abbot of St. Mary's Abbey, Dublin, as Vicar General of

the Irish Cistercians, Abbot Paul having been captured by the English authorities

and banished from Ireland. The novitiate over which Abbot Luke Archer presided at Holy Cross served not only for the novices of that particular house but even as

a central or general novitiate for all the Irish Cistercians. In 1623 the Irish Cistercians

addressed a petition to Rome asking permission in times of war and schism when it

would be impossible for them to dwell in their cloisters according to rule, to acquire secular houses and there carry out the offices and other religious exercises to which

they were obliged by their profession, without having to obtain the licence of the

local ordinaries.1 It was probably in virtue of a permission received as a result of this

petition that Abbot Archer moved his little novitiate and community from Holy Cross

Abbey to Kilkenny city, where he hired a house which he fitted up as a place of refuge.

This letter to the Abbot of Citeaux is signed by Luke Archer, seven other abbots

and a prior, who inform the Abbot General that they come to him with their troubles

like children to their mother, urgently entreating him to extend to them the helping hand of his paternal kindness so that they may be delivered from the various trials

and tribulations which beset them as well as from the hands of wicked and deceitful

men. They venture to call themselves his children because they have been begotten and conceived in the bosom of Citeaux, the best of mothers, having been nourished

by her milk and planted in this desert land under her care and protection. Here, in

their monasteries and houses of refuge, they have grown and have borne fruit worthy

of God, and although their houses are scattered throughout the land the religious, nevertheless, are not dispersed but know how to walk worthy of their vocation in

the spirit of unity. Supported by the divine assistance they are tearing out by the

roots and utterly extirpating the thorns and brambles of worldly desires from the

i. IVadding Papers, 1614-38, edited by Brendan Jennings, O.F.M., No. 25, pp. 69-70.




sterile soil of the human heart, sowing in their place the fruitful seed of the divine word

which they have received. They are also enlightening with the light of faith and the

clarity of knowledge the minds of the. faithful which for long have been darkened,

driving far away the gloom which had enshrouded them. They give instruction to

youth according to the pattern of the holy rule and order which they have received

from him (the Abbot of Clairvaux), and by vigilant care and assiduous study impart to them a knowledge not only of mental and natural philosophy but even of the

spiritual and mystical life for their own great profit as well as for the advantage and

utility of the whole Irish Church.

The Cistercians themselves are by no means neglectful in urging one another on

from virtue to virtue by the mutual stimulus of charity, while they apply themselves

in every direction to the salvation of others by pious and devout exercises according to the talent entrusted to them. These, they inform the Most Reverend Father

General, are a summary of the efforts by which they endeavour to promote the work

of the Lord and to discover with all humility what is the good, acceptable and perfect will of God. This relation of their activities they present, they say, to the Most

Reverend Abbot General for his perusal, sending them through the bearer of the

present letters, Father John Cantwell,1 their reverend confrere and fellow abbot, the

integrity of whose life and the sincerity of whose religious deportment have long been

put to the test and have been attested too in Clairvaux where he filled faithfully the

office of spiritual master and prudently ruled the novitiate for about twTo years with

the approval of all. They have committed to him to be delivered to his Most Reverend

Lordship by word of mouth certain matters which it is not allowable to set down in

writing concerning the trials, tribulations, and vexations which they suffer unjustly from some who profess to be children of their common mother, the Church of Rome,

doubting not that his Lordship will favour their humble supplications, suffering in

fellowship with his own, not separated but united together, the members adhering to the head who will lovingly take pity on these orphan children and will neither

desert them nor cease to favour them with his paternal counsel and aid, whether in

the Roman Curia or in France.

This letter, which is dated from "

the place of our peregrination "2

(e loco

peregrinationis nostrae) on July 31st (Pridie Kalendas Augusti), 1628, was signed by Luke Archer, Abbot of Holy Cross; Laurence Fitzharris, Abbot of Suir; James

Fitzgerald, Abbot of Baltinglass ; Thomas Madan, Abbot of Mothel3; Gerard Purcell, Abbot of Lege Dei (Abbeyleix) ; Donatus or Dio (no surname given), Abbot of the

i. Not to be confused with another abbot of the same name who succeeded Luke Archer a3

Abbot of Holy Cross.

2. This might imply that already at this date the Cistercians had transferred from Holy Cross to the rented house in Kilkenny over which Luke Archer was to preside for the space of twenty years. They had probably gone there in 1624.

3. Moth el was an Augustinian abbey (Canons Regular) in Co. Waterford which replaced an

older Irish foundation.



2?0 COUNTY LOUTH ARCHAEOLOGICAL JOURNAL

Rock of Cashel (Hore Abbey); Bernard (O'Lemy or Leamy),1 Abbot of Kilcooly;

Stephen Shortal, Abbot of Bective; and Malachy Hartry, Prior of the monastery of

St. John the Evangelist, Waterford.2 Before printing the full Latin text it may be

well to say a few words on each of the superiors named above. Luke Archer, who

had been a member of the secular clergy and Archdeacon of St. Canice's church in

Kilkenny, received the Cistercian habit in 1610 and made his profession in the

the following year.3 In 1614 he was appointed Vicar Apostolic of Leighlin4 and after

the death of the Vicar General of Ossory was unanimously chosen to fill that position also. In 1618 he succeeded Abbot Paul Ragget as Vicar General of the Irish Cis

tercians5 being at that time Abbot of Holy Cross to which abbacy he had been

appointed by Apostolic authority in 1611. He continued to act both as Abbot of

Holy Cross and Vicar General of the Irish Cistercians until the year 1637 when, owing to his advanced age and ill-health, he resigned the burden of office6 or rather, withdrew

from the active exercise of his office in favour of John Cantwell, who was chosen

unanimously as his coadjutor and successor." It was said of Abbot Archer that while

he held the vicariate of his Order and the government of the Abbey of Holy Cross (l

he never showed himself slow or inactive," but "

as often as there was need ... he

did not heed bodily hardships, he did not dread the extremes of summer or winter

during his long journeys, rendered most difficult by the snow and floods, in ordsr to

promote in person the reform of the Order. . . ."8 During his term of office as Vicar

General of the Order in Ireland he formed a general novitiate for the training of the

aspirants in the Cistercian life and it was his care to appoint regular abbots to as

many of the ancient houses of the Order as possible and to restore in some cases

communities which had been long dispersed such as those of Mellifont and St. Mary's

Abbey, Dublin.9 Where this was not practicable he sought at least to appoint one or

i. Bernard was his religious name, his baptismal name being Thomas, as we learn from

Malachy Hartry. 2. This had been attached to a Benedictine priory but the Benedictines had long since

disappeared. The Cistercians claimed it in the seventeenth century and a very heated contest arose between the Cistercians and Bishop Comer ford of Water ford who wrent to the length of

placing the Cistercians and the church under interdict. The Cistercians themselves had based their claim to this church on a grant made them by the Wyse family which had obtained possession of the monastic property after the dissolution. The case was brought before a committee of the Confederate Council in the period 1641 -43 and the Cistercian claim was disallowed.

3. Malachy Hartry in his Synopsis gives details of this abbot's life. The Synopsis, as well as the larger work on Holy Cross Abbey (Triumphalia Monasterii Sanctae Crucis in Hibernia) has l5een printed by Rev. Denis Murphy, S.J., with an English translation and notes. The notice of

Abbot Archer is found on pages 284-7 of the printed edition.

4. Spicilegium Ossoriense, i, p. 127.

5. Triumphalia, p. 86-7. 6. ibid., pp. 11, 87.

7. ibid., p. 219.

8. ibid., p. 87.

9. The appointment of Patrick Barnewall as Abbot of Mellifont was followed by the erection in Drogheda of a Cistercian oratory. In Dublin, Patrick Plunkett, after his appointment as

Abbot of St. Mary's, built a new oratory of modest dimensions within the walls of the old

monastery. In both cases small Cistercian communities were established and novices received.



THREE UNPUBLISHED CISTERCIAN DOCUMENTS 2?I

two priests who would serve the parishes formerly attached to the now abandoned

abbeys.1 It was mainly through his endeavours that the new Irish Congregation of

SS. Malachy and Bernard was formed in 1638. On the iSth of September in that year the capitulars assembled for the erection of the said congregation unanimously chose

Abbot Patrick Plunkett as their first Superior General and in March of the following

year the acts of this chapter were approved and confirmed by Rome.2 Abbot Luke

Archer died on December 19th, 1644, and was buried in his Abbey of Holy Cross "

amid a great concourse of the clergy and laity."3

The next name among the signatories is that of Laurence Fitzharris, Abbot of

Suir (Inislounaght). We have but few particulars of this abbot. He succeeded to the

Abbacy of Inislounaght after the death in 1617 of Nicholar Fagan but we have no

record of the date of his appointment, which was probably made by Apostolic

authority. W7e learn from Malachy Hartry, a contemporary Cistercian writer and

one of the signatories of this letter, that Laurence Fitzharris, who was a native of

Ross, received the abbatial blessing on the feast of the Most Holy Trinity, 1625, at the

hands of the Most Reverend Thomas Fleming, Archbishop of Dublin, in the church

of St. John the Evangelist in Waterford, then in the hands of the Cistercians.4 The

abbot's name is found affixed to an attestation drawn up by the Cistercian abbots of

Ireland at Jerpoint (2nd October, 1626) in favour of Archbishop Fleming,5 and to

another attestation drawn up in 1631 in connection with the so-called f<

Irish

Propositions."6 In 1633 we find him exercising the functions of Vicar-General and

Commissary of the Cistercian Order in Ireland, England, Scotland, Denmark and the

adjacent islands and provinces of the North, in virtue of which office he conferred

authority on Gerald Purcell, Abbot of Leix, to rule all the Cistercian houses in

England.7 As all those houses had long since been dissolved this appointment meant

little in practice. The remainder of Abbot Pur cell's life seems to have been spent in

the London district. Laurence Fitzharris continued to act as Abbot of Suir until he

was thrown into prison during the Cromwellian regime.H Banished from 1 reland in 1650, he is said to have returned in 1655.9 Certain it is that in the latter year Colonel

i. We learn from the pages of Malachy Hartry's work, as well as from contemporary docu

ments, that Cistercian priests were at this period labouring in many of the parishes that represented, the ancient monastic possessions.

2. Triumphalia, p. n^.

3. ibid., p. 287.

4. ibid., p. 107.

5. Wadding Papers, No. 112, pp. 231-232. 6. ibid., No. 354, pp. 5S9-90.

7. Vatican Library: MSS. Barberini Latini, Vol. 8642, f. 77 rv. X.L.L Microfilm: Pos. 876, Neg. 2462.

8. Lynch, in his Supplement to the Aliihinologia, mentions the abbot's imprisonment? diuturnum carceris squalorem passus?but he calls him Abbot of Tintern.

9. So Dr. Grattan Flood, in an article writen for An Sleibhteanach, the Mount Melleray College Annual, in 1926.




Overstreet was commanded to have him shipped "

in the first vessel that sets sail for

France or Spain." He is stated to have been still living in 1660.1

The third signature affixed to the letter is that of the Abbot of Baltinglass who,

though he here signs himself James Fitzgerald (fr. Jacobus fitz Gerald) appears in

other documents of the same period as James Barron (fr. Jacobus Barro and fr.

Jacobus Barron).2 The Barron family, indeed, was but a branch of the Fitzgeralds and this accounts for the double form of the name. Abbot James was born, according to Hartry, in the castle of Acadhbronagh in the vicinity of Tralee, County Kerry.3

He received his early education in Ireland and then going overseas completed his

studies in the University of Douay, joining the Cistercian Order in the Abbey of

Clairvaux. He was appointed Abbot of Baltinglass by Apostolic authority and though the year of his appointment is not stated we learn from the letter written by the

Cistercians in favour of Archbishop Fleming in 1626 that he was then Abbot-elect.

This phrase, however, may mean no more than that he was abbot de jure, having

been appointed by Papal provision and recognized by the legitimate authority in the

Order, though he had not as yet received the abbatial blessing.4 In 1630 or 1631 the

abbot became personally involved in the controversy then going on between the

Cistercians and the secular clergy regarding the right of the abbots to rule the parishes

belonging to the suppressed houses of the Order and to appoint monks to the cure of

souls in such parishes. One of the first cares of Abbot Luke Archer when he became

Vicar General of the Irish Cistercians had been to make a visitation of the various

houses of the Order in this country and this he carried out so zealously that he

actually visited the very ruins and appointed superiors ad nutum wherever he judged it necessary. We are told that he encountered much opposition both from the

bishops and from secular priests who had been appointed by them to the care of souls

in Cistercian parishes. Such priests were considered to be holding those abbeys to

which the said parishes belonged in commendam and much friction occurred between

the Cistercian superiors and the Irish bishops in consequence of such appointments. The churches of the Cistercians, including those to which parochial rights belonged, came under the jurisdiction not of the bishop, but of the religious superior, so that it

pertained to the abbot to visit such churches and to correct any abuses that may have

existed.5

i. ibid., where he quotes the State Papers as his source of information.

2. Wadding Papers, pp. 231, 563, 566.

3. Triumphalia, p. 273.

4. From a letter written b)r the abbot on August 21, 1631 (Wadding Papers, No. 334, PP- 5D3-506) we learn that he had received the abbatial blessing previous to the events therein

described.

5. By a decree of 28th September, 1487, Pope Innocent VIII granted to all Cistercian abbots

quasi-episcopal jurisdiction not only over their own monks but also over their tenants, vassals,

subjects and servants. These were all freed and exempted from "

all jurisdiction, superiority, correction, visitation, subjection and power of Archbishops, Bishops and their Vicars, etc." and

subjected immediately to the Holy See. (Privilegia Ordinis Cisterciensis, p. 179).




This claim of the Cistercians soon brought Abbot Archer into conflict with the

Archbishop of Cashel, Dr. Kearney. The priest in charge of the parish of Holy Cross was a subject of the archbishop and claimed to derive his jurisdiction over the

parishioners, not from the Abbot of Holy Cross by whom, in fact, he had been

appointed, but from the archbishop himself. A long dispute resulted which was finally

brought to a head by the drastic action of the abbot who, "

after long and careful

discussion of the controversy and very many friendly admonitions ... at last

employed extreme remedies . , . using the censures of excommunication against the

aforesaid priest, in virtue of the authority which he possessed, and the sentence of

anathema was pronounced in a house within the crumbling walls of the monastery

by Matthew Roch, then Vicar General Apostolic of the Diocese of Leighlin."1 The

secular priest later submitted and was permitted by the abbot to remain in charge of

the parish for two years more until he was replaced by a Cistercian. In 1631 Arch

bishop Walsh, who had succeeded Archbishop Kearney, rekindled the fires of contro

versy by appointing another secular priest to the charge of Holy Cross. The abbot

refused to recognize the right of the archbishop of make this appointment and

another period of strained relations set in. Such was then the position when, in 1629, that same Matthew Roche who had excommunicated the secular priest in the Abbey of Holy Cross because of his usurpation of the rights of the monks, himself entered the

conflict as one of the most determined opponents of the Cistercian claims. This

dignitary fulminated censures against the Cistercians and the Franciscans in a docu

ment dated 12th March, 1629 (old style), which gave great scandal to all Catholics

by its offensive tone. The purpose of the document was, in the words of the Vicar

Apostolic of Leighlin "

to stopp the most insolent, seditious, and over scandalous incrochement of

Sir Luke Archer the assuming abbot, and his licencious retinue, on this

jurisdictione and diocese of Laghlin, togither with the pernicious accesse of

the still disordered company of Kilkenny Cordeliers' continuall assistance

of the supposed Cistercians afore mentioned in theyr proudest project and

perverse practises. ..."

The subjects of the diocese of Leighlin were strictly forbidden under pain of the

heaviest ecclesiastical censures to hear Mass, sermon or exhortation, whether public

or private, or to receive any sacrament from any of the said "

irregular cloystrers,

for being all of them manisfestly disloyal to God, his holly church, our sacred king and kingdomes, forbidding likewise as meerely immeritorious the relieving of the sayd rebels with corne, cattle or mony for which those Pharisees doe fish, though much

with theyr lippes they seeme to honour God, from whom theyr hearts are moste

remote, and therefore they not safely to be accounted of by any that is truly devoted

in the service of either King celestiall or terrestrially'2 Referring to this production

i. He had succeeded Luke Archer himself as Vicar.

2. Wadding Papers, No. 208, p. 369.




a report sent to the Nuncio at Brussels on the secular and regular clergy in Ireland

(22nd August, 1630) * declared that it was issued against an abbot who was a man of

excellent life and highly commended throughout the kingdom but who, by this action

of the Vicar Apostolic was, with the said Franciscans, in danger of losing his liberty from the fact that he and they are therein described as rebels against the king and

the state. All Catholics, the report continues, were offended at the tone of this

document, fearing that if they should afford succour to these religious in spite of the

prohibition contained in the mandate they would be regarded as favouring rebellion

and would in consequence suffer imprisonment and the confiscation of their property.

That the Vicar Apostolic was not content with uttering threats against the

Cistercians, nay, that he did not rely exclusively on spiritual weapons, may be

gathered from the fact that he actually beat one of the Cistercian abbots with a

cudgel ! This we have on the authority of Archbishop Fleming of Dublin, as well as

of the reverend abbot himself, who was none other than James Fitzgerald or Barron,

Abbot of Baltinglass, the subject of the present notice. Writing to Father Luke

Wadding on July 30th, 1631, the archbishop complains vehemently of the conduct

of Matthew Roche, the Vicar Apostolic of Leighlin:2 "

Math ewe Roche shames us all/' he writes, "

Hee bett latly a reverend

good abbot with a batt. I often complayned of him to the cardinal pro tector, but without answeare. I dare not medie with him, therfore hee must

be removed from thence or cited thether under payne of suspensione or

excommunicatione, with an expresse order for placinge an nother (if hee

doe not obey) omni appellations remota. ..."

The abbot himself made a similar complaint writing on the 21st August of the same year to the Cardinal Protector. Having pointed out that the Cistercians and

other regulars had been labouring for many years in the mission field in Ireland with

the approbation of Rome, he states they had now to suffer persecution and tribulation

not only from heretics but even from those of the faith, even, as he says, from priests in the ranks of the secular clergy. For many years the religious were labouring almost

alone as the secular clergy were few and far between; but of late the secular clergy

have been multiplied by the exertions of the bishops, and some of the secular priests, moved by envy, apparently, not only attack the regulars but seem to approve of the

destruction of the monasteries and the suppression of the monastic order by the

heretics, while they even go so far as to assert that the Cistercians have no right to

and do not legitimately possess the monasteries of the Order which had been granted them by the Holy See whether in titulum or in commendam. They assert, moreover, that the Cistercians have no right in the said monasteries even though by authority of the Holy See they appoint abbots to those monasteries and have their abbots

blessed by the bishops. For all those monasteries, they say, come under the temporal

i. ibid., No. 226, pp. 393-404. The case of Matthew7 Roche is mentioned on page 401. 2. ibid.. No. 329, p. 557.




power, and were lost to the Order after the suppression and the subsequent dispensa tion granted by Cardinal Pole, a dispensation which Abbot James Barron called a "

pretended "

one, probably on the ground that the said dispensation did not affect

Ireland. He adds that these priests teach that the Cistercians ought not to be called

monks and that they should be treated as seculars or laymen. Amongst those who

propound these errors openly and publicly is a certain "

trumpeter "

(buccinator), one Matthew Roche, Vicar Apostolic of Leighlin, who did not shrink from laying violent hands on the writer of this letter and beating with a cudgel this priest of

Christ, a professed monk and an abbot who had received the abbatial blessing from a bishop by the authority of the Holy See.l

The complaints made by this and other abbots throw light on the concluding

portion of the letter which we print below from Luke Archer and his fellow abbots to

the Abbot of Citeaux. The matters committed to the bearer of that letter to be

delivered orally to the Most Reverend Father General of the Order and which it

seemed to the writers should not be set down in writing, probably concerned these

painful controversies with the secular clergy and some of the bishops, those who, as

the letter states, inflict various trials, tribulations and vexations on the monks

unjustly while professing to be children of their common mother, the Church of Rome.

Abbot James Fitzgerald continued for some years to labour with the Irish Cistercians

and played no small part in the establishment of the new congregation. Towards the

end of his life he became weighed down by painful infirmities during which he is said

to have shown the most extraordinary patience. He died in his father's castle and

was buried "

with his ancestors "

in the parochial church of his native parish on

31st July, 1639.2 The next signatory to the letter, Father John or Thomas Madan, was a native

of Waterford city. Going to Spain at an early age he there entered the Cistercian

monastery of Matta Plana in the diocese of Palencia, making his profession under

the name of Brother Thomas. In due course he was sent back to Ireland by his

superiors and laboured with his fellow Cistercians on the Irish mission. He worked in

Waterford with Father Malachy Hartry and when the persecution was at its height hired an underground dwelling and erected an altar there

" for the solace of the

Catholics."3 We have a pen-picture of this little oratory in the pages of his com

panion's history of the Irish Cistercians of those days: "

There was no daylight in it "

(the oratory) he writes, "

but by means of candles lighted throughout the day he and

I recited the divine office, celebrated Mass, preached, and administered the sacraments

to the very great joy and comfort of the faithful, and so cheered the hearts of the

sorrowing Catholics. ''4 It is said that Thomas Madan was elected Bishop of Wraterford

i. ibid., p. 564. 2. Triumphalia, p. 275.

3. ibid., p. 289.

4. ibid.




and Lismore in 1629 or perhaps earlier, but that he was set aside in favour of Patrick

Comerford of the Order of Canons Regular of St. Augustine, with whom he was

afterwards engaged in a somewhat heated controversy. Abbot Madan signs himself

Abbot of Mothel in the letter we are now considering. He had, in fact, been blessed

Abbot in the church of St. John the Evangelist in Waterford on the feast of the

Holy Trinity, 1625. But the Cistercians had really no right to the monastery of Mothel

which was a house of Augustinian Canons. Bishop Patrick Comerford was himself an

Augustinian and Vicar General of his Order in Ireland, and so he soon found himself

engaged in a fierce dispute with the Cistercian abbot regarding the possession of the

church of Mothel. From the moment he became Bishop of Waterford Patrick

Comerford set himself to resist the claims of the Cistercians and finally succeeded in

convincing them that they had indeed no right to the church in question. Thomas

Madan and other Cistercians later became involved in another controversy with the same bishop concerning the church of St. John the Evangelist where they were then

ministering. This had formerly been a Benedictine foundation but the Benedictines

disappeared at the time of the suppression of the monasteries and had never returned.

Thomas Madan was still styling himself Abbot of Mothel in 1631l but he later resigned all claims to that house and was appointed abbot of the Cistercian monastery of

Graiguenamanagh.2 Dying in the sixtieth year of his age on the 22nd February, 1645, he was buried in the church of St. John the Evangelist in Waterford.3

Little has been recorded of the next signatory to the letter, Abbot Gerard

Purcell. He was one of the signatories to the petition of the Cistercians in favour of

Archbishop Fleming in 16264 and his name appears also on the letter written by the

Cistercian superiors in 1631 regarding the so-called "

Irish Propositions."5 In 1633 he was charged with a serious crime before a court of abbots and religious superiors.

A copy of the sentence declaring his innocence is preserved in the Vatican Library, MSS. Barberini Latini, Vol. 8642 (ff. jjv-j8v). The sentence was given in Kilkenny on 2 ist June, 1633 and the letter was signed by Luke Archer, Abbot of Holy Cross, five other abbots and three monks. We learn from Malachy Hartry that he was a

Doctor of Theology and that he dwelt in London from 1633 until his death in 1639.6

Following him in the list of signatories is "

frater Dio alias Donatus "

who is described as Abbot of the Rock of Cashel. This is evidently the Prater D. alias Donatus G asan

who signed the attestation in favour of Archbishop Fleming drawn up at Jerpoint in

1626 and who there describes himself (or is described by the transcriber ?) as Abbot of

Rimpila (abbas monasterii de Rimpila, Cist[erciensis] ordinis) which is almost certainly a mistake for de Rupe (Casseliae) that is, the monastery of the Rock of Cashel, by

i. Wadding Papers, No. 354, p. 580. 2. Triumphalia, p. 107.

3. ibid., p. 291.

4. Wadding Papers, p. 232.

5. ibid., p. 590.





which name Hore Abbey was known to the Cistercians.1 Nothing further is known

of this abbot and he is not mentioned at all by Hartry. The next signature is that of Father Bernard, Abbot of Kilcooly, whose surname

we learn from Hartry, was O'Lemy or Leamy.2 Brother Thomas Bernard OXeamy seems to have been the first aspirant admitted into the restored abbey of Holy Cross

by Abbot Richard Foulow on March 3rd, 1603. In 1606 he was sent to Clairvaux to

obtain a more perfect training in the Cistercian way of life and there he imbibed the

spirit of the Order under the rule of the devout Abbot Denis Largentier who, ten years later, was to introduce the Strict Observance. He was appointed Abbot of Kilcooly in 1622 and continued to hold that office until his death in the Cistercian house set up

by Abbot Archer in Kilkenny city. Dying on the 25th July, 1636, he was buried in

his monastery of Kilcooly amid a great concourse of the clergy, both secular and

regular, as well as of the laity.3

Stephen Shortal, who signs himself Abbot of St. Mary of Bective, was born in

Kilkenny but, leaving Ireland while still a youth, he entered the monastery of Nogales of the Cistercian Order in Spain and having completed his novitiate studied philosophy and theology in company with his fellow-countryman and Cisterican, Malachy Hartry, who was later to be his biographer. He is said to have received a good education in

Kilkenny where, among other subjects, he was taught the arts of poetry and music.4

During his term in Spain he is said to have taken a special delight in poetry, being accounted one of the best poets in the Congregation of Castile, and is credited with

writing a history of the feast of Corpus Christi in verse5 as well as a biography of

Candidus Furlong, another Cistercian who had belonged to the Spanish Congregation before coming back to the Irish mission where he died as titular Abbot of Mellifont.6

Returning to Ireland in 1619 in company with Fr. Malachy Hartry, he was soon

afterwards appointed Abbot of Bective by Apostolic authority, and an instrument of

the year 1621 to which he was witness7 shows that even then he was abbot-elect of

that monastety. After his appointment he went to the old monastery, now deserted

and bereft of its community, and, settling down in the neighbourhood, devoted

i. It was sometimes called also de Rupibus Coeli (Statuta Cap. Gen. Ord. Cist., 1276: 23). 2. He is called indifferently O'Leamy and Leamy (Leamy on pp. 45, 184 and 186 of the

Triumphalia and O'Leamy on pp. 74 and 92. In the Wadding Papers the name is printed O Laemy on p. 232 (Attestation of the Cistercians in favour of Thomas Fleming) and O Larng on p. 590 (letter on the

" Irish Propositions "). In the letter sent to the Abbot of Citeaux in 1628 the

surname is omitted.


4. ibid., p. 277.

5. Charles de Visen, S.O.C., Bibliotheca Scriptovum Sacri Ordinis C ister ciensis.

6. ibid., cf. L.A.J., Vol. VIII, No. 4 (1930) where Rev. Laurence Murray writes on the last abbots of Mellifont. A very full account of Candidus Furlong has been published by the Cistercian

writer, Henriques, in his Fasciculus Sanctorum Ordinis Cister ciensis, of which account the Rev. Ailbe J. Luddy, O.C.S.O., has given a summarized translation in the 1919-20 volume of An Sleibhteanach under the title of

" A Forgotten Irish Thaumaturgus."

7. Given in the Triumphalia (copy), p. 92.




himself to the care of souls. Unfortunately, he soon came into conflict with the

Bishop of Meath, the Most Reverend Thomas Dease, who was noted among his

contemporaries for the "

rage of animosity

" which he .showed to the regulars.1

In consequence of the bishop's attitude Abbot Stephen was forced to leave the

diocese. He was one of the signatories to the attestation of 1631 regarding the "

Irish Propositions "

and there he styles himself Abbot of Bective in the Diocese of

Meath, but it would not be safe to conclude from this that he was still in the diocese

at that time. Flis death seems to have occurred in Kilkenny2 and we may assume

that after his enforced exile from Bective he returned to his native city where he

lived a life devoted to the Order, giving himself up to the study of the Sacred Scrip tures and Canon Law, in which he is said to have been well versed.3 His last years

were spent in continual pain and infirmity, yet he ceased not to afflict his weak body with disciplines and hair-shirts, and when he passed away on December 3rd, 1639,

an

iron chain was found around his body.4

The ninth and last signatory to the letter of 1628 was Father Malachy Hartry who subscribed himself Prior of (the monastery of) St. John the Evangelist. To this

one individual more than any other we owe practically all that we know of the Irish

Cistercians of those troubled years. In his famous work De C ister ciensium Hibernorum

viris Illustrious, he has left us a short account, not only of the most notable of his

contemporaries in the Irish province of the Order, but of himself, though he nowhere

mentions himself by name in that narrative. He does indeed, at the conclusion, give us the name of the writer?Brother John, alias Malachy Hartry, Cistercian, etc., but

he does not say that the certain Brother 1\\, whose activities he summarizes in his

last page was, in fact, himself. He was born in Waterford about 1579 and at an early

age went to Spain. He studied for some time in the Irish College at Lisbon and

entered the monastery of Palacuel in the Diocese of Falencia in Spain, where he made

his profession, returning to Ireland in 1619.5 He seems to have laboured for some

time in Holy Cross and later in Kilkenny and was sent with Patrick Barnewall, the

newly-appointed Abbot of Mellifont, to form a community near the site of the former

monastery.6 Actually the two Cistercians built a modest orator}7 in the town of

Drogheda, completing the work in the autumn of 1623. On October 20th of that year Father Malachy brought the first two novices for the new foundation from Kilkenny to Drogheda7 and continued to act as Master of Novices at Drogheda for some years

i. Spicilegium Ossoriense, I, p. 205. 2. He is said to have been buried in the ruined monastery of St. Dominic, and though the

name of the place is not given the reverend editor of the Triumphalia concludes that the writer

speaks of the Dominican church at Kilkenny.

Triumphalia

ibid., p. 279

ibid., p. 277

ibid., p. 283

ibid., p. 103

p. 189, 277.




until he was transferred to Munster, where we find him holding the office of Prior of

Mothel (County Waterford) in 1626. He was one of the superiors who met at Jerpoint on the 2nd of October of that year when the attestation was drawn up in favour of

Archbishop Thomas Fleming which Malachy, in common with the other Cistercian

superiors, signed.1 In 1628 we find him holding the office of Prior in the Cistercian

church in Waterford city and after that he disappears from our ken.2 That he was

still alive in 1651 is clear from the fact that the concluding words of the epilogue to

his Synopsis (otherwise De Cisterciensium Hibernorum Viris Illustrious) show that it

was not completed until April 18th of that year.3 We do not know if he was then at

Waterford or had returned to Holy Cross, though the fact that the manuscript was

later found in that abbey would seem to show that he returned there before his death, which probably occurred soon after 1651. Father Malachy seems to have devoted a goodly part of his time to literary labours and though only two of his works have come down to us we learn from his own account4 that he wrote many others. The

two which have survived are entitled, respectively, Triumphalia Chronologica Monasterii Sanctae Crucis in Hibernia (being an account of the history of Holy Cross

Abbey) and Synopsis NonnuUorum Illustrium Cisterciensium Hibernorum (which is an account of the more illustrious members of the Irish houses of the Order) and the

latter work is especially valuable for the light it throws on the work of the Irish

Cistercians of the seventeenth century and for the information it supplies relating to

the abbots and monks who laboured on the Irish mission fields in those days of

persecution.5

After this long introduction we give here the text of the letter addressed

by Abbot Luke Archer and his fellow superiors to the Abbot of Citeaux. It is dated

the 31st July, 1629, but is endorsed "

Reverendissimo in Xpo Patri ac Dno Dno

Abbati Cistercii nostro General. 31 August 1628. 10 Abbates Hiberni." There are

two mistakes here. The proper date is the 31st July, not August (the letter itself

has Pridie Kalendas Augusti) and the letter was not signed by ten Irish abbots, but

by eight abbots and one prior, though it was brought to Citeaux by another abbot.

I have expanded the contractions of the original.

Frater Lucas Archer vicarius, cum nonnullis aliis, praecipuis tarnen

huius Regni Abbatibus Reverendissimo in Christo Patri ac Domino D.

Abbati Cisterciensi generali nostro, salutem et debitum filiorum honorem

et obedientiam.

Reverendissime Pater ac Domine. Cum filiorum dolores naturali

compassionis affectu matrum corda in tantum p?n?trent, ut non minus

i. Wadding Papers, p. 232. He signed himself Prior of Mothel.

2. Letter to Abbot of Citeaux preserved in Archives de la Cote-d'Ov.

3. Triumphali a, p. 297.

4. ibid., pp. 295-7.

5. We have quoted both works indifferently here under the title Triumph alia, giving the

pagination of the printed edition.



27O COUNTY LOUTH ARCHAEOLOGICAL JOURNAL

propriis affectionibus, quam illorum molestiis discrutientur, si quovis modo

contigat illorum anxietates et tribulationes quae patiuntur in matris

devenire noticiam. Deveniat ergo necesse est in conspectu tuo Reverend

issime et amantissime Pater, clamor filiorum tuorum a finibus terrae ad te

clamantium et auxiliatrices paternae pietatis vestrae manus omni qua

possunt submissionis devotione effl agit ant ium, quatenus de ore leonis, de

manibus quaerentium animas eorum, ab hominibus iniquis et dolosis et de

portis tribulationum quae eos circumdant eruantur; filios nos Reverendissi

mae Paternitatis vestrae fiducialiter ausi sumus nuncupare, utpote, de

optimae matris Cistercii gremio geniti et procreati, eius lacte nutriti, sub

eius tutela et auspiciis plantati in hac terra deserta, digne Deo excrescentes

et fructificantes in monasteriis et refugiorum domibus quibus per totam

patriam licet sparsi non tarnen dispersi noscimur digne vocatione nostra in

unitatis spiritu ambulare; extirpantes et eradicantes quas divino fulti

adiutorio possumus spinas et tribuios mundanae cupidatatis a sterili

humani cordis terra, et eorum loco divini eloquii semen frugiferum quod vobis acceptum referrimus seminantes ; necnon et obtenebratas diu fidelium

mentes, caligine longe propulsa, fidei lumine, et seientiae claritate illustrantes

iuventutem quoque nostram ad ordinis et sacrae regulae normam quam a

vobis accepimus, vigilan ti cura et solerti studio, non minus spirit uali seu

mystica quam rationali ac naturali philosophia ad maximum illorum

profectum sed et insuper ad omnis ecclesiae Hibernicanae laudem et utili

tatem; nosmetipsos mutuis charitatis stimulis de virtute in virtutem haud

segniter assidue incitantes; aliorum denique saluti pro talento nobis cr?dito

pus et devotis exercitiis passim insistentes; Haec sunt, Reverendissime Pater,

compendia studiorum nostrum, quibus nitimur affectionum pedes in

testimonia Domini convertere, et humiliter inquirere quae sit voluntas

Dei bona, beneplacens et perfecta. Hae inquam rationes temporis nostri

elabentis quas tibi omnium Patri Reverendissimo et magistro ?ptimo prout ordinatae subiectionis lege qua obligamur par est discutsiendas offerimus et

transmissimus per praesentium latorem Patrem Johannem Cantwell

Reverendum Confratrem et coabbatem nostrum cuius vitae probitas et

religiosae conversations sinceritas probata dudum et comprobata est apud

Claramvallem ubi spirituaiis magisterii clavum in novitiorum celia, biennio

circiter, omnium applausa, fideliter tenuit et prudenter rexit. Uli, aerumnas,

tribulationes, angustias, necessitates, et vexationes quas non minus illicite

quam iniuste patimur ab his qui se filios communis nostrae et illorum

matris Ecclesiae Romanae profitentur, Reverendissimae Paternitatis

vestrae referendas et quae scripto non licuit oretenus insinuanda commisimus

nihil dubitantes quin Reverendissima Dominatio vestra quae Ecclesiae

Militantis secundarii capitis nomen, et omen, haud iniuste sibi absque ulla

contradictorum invidia vendicare potest, illius imo (?) nos tris favebit



THREE UNPUBLISHED CISTERCIAN DOCUMENTS 2J1

supplicibus votis; potius vero suis-ipsis compatietur, non divisis, sed unitis,

et capiti cohaerentibus membris, filiorum licet orphanorum pie miserebitur nee eos deseret, aut des ti tuet fovere consilio et auxilio paterno, si ve in

Romana Curia sive in Gallia, et orabimus prout nunc oramus pro Reverend

issima Dominatione vestra et vestris, ut aererna memoria dignos vos, ipsa

aeternitas habeat, cui et pro qua temporaliter laboratis. In Christo vale. E loco peregrinationis nostrae, pridie Kalendas Augusti, 1628.

Reverendissimae Dominationis ves trae humiles filii.

fr. Lucas Archerus, Abbas de Sancta Cruce, etc.

fr. Laurentius fits Harries Abbas fr. jacobus fitz Gerald Abbas de de Surio Valle Salutis

fr. Thomas Madan Abbas de fr. Gerardus Purcell De Lege Dei Mothalibus Abbas

fr. Dio alias Donatus Abbas de fr. Tho. Bernardus Abbas de

Rupe Caseliae Kilcouly fr. Stephanus Shortal Abbas fr. Malachias Hartry Prior Sancti

Sanctae Mariae de Beatitu- Johannis Evangelistae dine

In dorso : Reverendissimo in Xpo Patri ac Dno Dno Abbati Cistercii nostro General.

Cistercium.

31 Augusti, 1628 10 Abbates Hiberni

The reader will have noticed, possibly with some surprise, that the bearer of the

above letter to the Abbot of Citeaux, an Irish abbot by name John Cantwell, had held

for the space of two years the very responsible position of Master of Novices in the

famous abbe}/ of Clairvaux and had, we are told, fulfilled that function to the satis

faction of all. It is a fact of no small significance that an Irish Cistercian should have

been chosen for such a responsible position at Clairvaux which was then, under the

rule of Abbot Denis Largentier, renewing the splendour of its ancient discipline ; for

it was this abbot who introduced first into his own monastery and then into various

other houses of that line the general movement for reform which led to the founding of what later became known as the Strict Observance. Already in the year 1618 there were eight monasteries besides Clairvaux following the reform and by the time

Abbot John Cantwell was made the bearer of the letter from the Irish abbots to the

Abbot of Citeaux the number of houses which had adopted the Strict Observance was close on fifty. Strange to say we have no knowledge of Abbot Cantwell apart from this reference to him in the said letter. We are not even told of what monastery he was abbot. It is true that Father Malachy Hartry has given a fairly circumstantial account of the Reverend Father Louis (John) Cantwell, the successor of Abbot Archer




in the abbacy of Holy Cross,1 but it is clear both from the chronology and from the

fact that the said John or Louis Cantwell came to Ireland from one of the Spanish houses, as well as from the silence of Malachy Hartry regarding any connection of

this Louis (John) Cantwell with Clairvaux that he w7as indeed an altogether distinct

person.2 We have, however, a letter written in 1631 which bears, among other

signatures, that of John Cantwell, Abbot of Owney (frater Joannes Cantuoel)3 and

Lynch, in the Supplement to the Alithinologia (p. 37) clearly distinguishes between

John Cantwell, Abbot of Owney, and Louis Cantwell, Abbot of Holy Cross. Was this

John Cantwell of Owney the John Cantwell of our letter ? It seems to me very

probable that he was. An earlier letter (1626) bears the signature of Bartholomew

O'Hogan Praeses of Owney. When did Bartholomew O'Hogan cease to be superior

and give place to John Cantwell as abbot ? We do not know; but O'Hogan is not one

of the signatories to the letter of 1628 printed above, a fact which would suggest that

he had already disappeared by that time. On the other hand Abbot John Cantwell

is mentioned in the letter of 1628 though he did not sign it; he was actually the bearer

of the letter. That this John Cantwell was quite a different personage from the man

who later became Abbot of Holy Cross may be taken as certain. The question is

which was which ? Malachy Hartry, in his account of the successor of Abbot Luke

Archer, says that he had been eight years in the Order when he came to Ireland from

Spain in 1633.4 This, indeed, contradicts another and earlier statement made by the

same writer when he says that John Cantwell entered the Order in 1628,5 for if he

was eight years in the Order in 1633 he must have entered in 1625. But even had he

entered in 1625 he could not have been the same John Cantwell who, as abbot in 1628, is described as

having been one-time novice master at Clairvaux for a period of almost

two years. It is also noteworthy that Father Malachy, when telling of the choice of

John (Louis) Cantwell to be coadjutor and successor of Abbot Archer, calls him simply the Reverend Brother John and neither states nor implies that he then bore or had

i. Triumphalia, pp. 217-219. 2. It may also be noted here that in a list-of alumni of the Irish Colleges in the Low Countries

printed in 1622 and which must have gone to print before 5th May, 1621 (see Archivium Hiber

iricum, XIV "

The Irish Colleges in the Low Countries," by Rev. John Brady, B.A.) three Cistercians are mentioned, all of whom were abbots but only one of whom (Patrick Barnewall) is

called an abbot in the printed work. We know that Patrick Barnewall was appointed abbot

in 1620. Neither Laurence Fitzharris nor John Cantwell, the other two Cistercians mentioned, wrere then abbots at the time the book was sent to print. Fitzharris was, indeed, a priest, but Cantwell seems to have been as yet only a simple monk for he is described as F(rater) loannes Cantuel in contradistinction to his two fellow-Cistercians, one of whom is called R. P. (Laurentius Fitz-Haries) and the other R. D. (Patritius Barneuallus) Abbas ordinis S. Bernardin. John Cantwell was then a monk in 1621 and so cannot be the John Cantwell who later became Abbot of Holy Cross for the latter could not have been even a novice before 1625 at the earliest. We may conclude, therefore, that the John Cantwell listed among the alumni was the Abbot John Cantwell of the letter written by Luke Archer and his fellow abbots to the Abbot of Citeaux, the same who

is elsewhere described as Abbot of Owney.

3. Wadding Papers, p. 590.


5. ibid., p. 217.




for some time borne the dignity of abbot either of Owney or of any other monastery. In addition we may consider that if this John Cantwell who succeeded Abbot Luke

Archer, had spent two years in Clairvaux as master of novices, Fr. Malachy Hartry

would not have omitted such an important detail from his account. For all these

reasons I think it most probable that the Abbot John Cantwell referred to in the letter

to the x\bbot of Citeaux was the same whose signature is appended to the letter of 1631 as Abbot of Owney and that he became abbot of that house some time between

1626 and 1628. That he was still Abbot of Owney when the Cromwellian conquest took place and suffered imprisonment at that period as did his fellow-abbots, Louis

Cantwell of Holy Cross and James Tobin of Kilcooly,1 is clear from Lynch's reference

already noted and from the fact that his name is affixed to a letter dated January 24,

1648, where he is described as Abbot of Owney and President of the Congergation of SS. Malachy and Bernard.2

3. LETTER FROM ANDREW MATTHEWS, ABBOT OF MELLIFONT, TO THE ABBOT OF CITEAUX

In an article which appeared in a former issue of this Journal3 the late Fr. Laurence

Murray, who was at that time the editor, gave an outline of the career of Andrew

Matthews (or Mathew) the last titular Abbot of Mellifont. Born at Haggardstown in 1649, he entered the Cistercian Order at an early age and was ordained by the

Primate, Blessed Oliver Plunkett, in November, 1672, when he was made parish priest of Coll?n and Tullyalien. Father Murray quotes a record which tells that this young Cistercian was presented to the

" benefice and dignity

" of the Abbacy of Mellifont

which "

is almost the most celebrated in the kingdom/' At the time of Andrew's

ordination the Catholics of Ireland were enjoying a period of comparative tranquillity but in 1673, with the return to power of Ormond, the persecution began again. All

bishops and priests were ordered to leave the country under penalty of being treated as traitors. Matters gradually grew worse until, in 1681, the persecution culminated

in the martyrdom of Blessed Oliver. The position of the Catholics became much

easier after the Primate's execution, for the persecution slackened and the outlook

i. James Tobin succeeded Bernard O'Leamy; from a letter in the Vatican Archives (Arch. Seer. State: Nunziature Inghilterra 9, f. 28v to the Nuncio in Ireland, 6th April, 1647) it appears that he petitioned for the right to use the mitre and crozier in 1647. cf. Analecta Hibernica,

No. 16, p. 44. 2, Commentarius Rinuccinianus, HI, p. 11. It is to be noted that this John Cantwell signs

himself Abbot of Owney and Superior General of the Irish Congregation of SS. Malachy and Bernard. In Volume IV, pp. 323 and 325 the signature of John Cantwell, Abbot of Holy Cross, appears (13th December, 1649) and he also signed the decrees published by the Ecclesiastical

Congregation of Bishops and other Prelates at Clonmacnoise on December 4th of the same year, where he again signed himself simply Abbot of Holy Cross. The inference is that there were two distinct abbots bearing the same name.

3. VIII, 3 1935).




became more favourable. Following on the death of Charles II and the coming to

the throne of the Catholic, James II, full toleration was allowed. This lasted, however,

only till the defeat of James and the capitulation of Limerick. In 1697 all bishops, vicars general, and regulars were banished from the kingdom and Andrew Matthews,

as a Cistercian, came under this law. He was actually brought to trial but for wrant of

sufficient evidence was acquitted. The report of the trial describes him as "

commonly called the Abbot of Mellifont." In 1704 a law was passed for the registration of all

priests and Andrew Matthews had himself registered as Parish Priest of Mellifont,

Tullyallen and Coll?n, no mention being made, of course, of his abbatial dignity. This is all that has been known with certainty of Abbot Andrew Matthews and

we are indebted to the labours of the late Father Laurence Murray for bringing to

light, not only the details he published concerning the last Abbot of Mellifont, but the

fact that there was such an abbot there at all. The last certain reference we have to

Abbot Matthews is that in the register of 1704. Father Murray, indeed, suggested that a list of

" Regulars and reputed Friars in Co. Louth

" forwarded to Dublin by

the High Sheriff of Louth in 1743 contained a possible reference to the abbot. One of

the names on the list was Anthony Matthew of Knockbridge and Father Murray

thought it possible that the names Anthony and Andrew might have become confused

and that this might be Andrew7 Matthew, the Abbot of Mellifont. He would then

have been ninety-four years of age. Wnile I was writing this paper I received a

communication from the Reverend Father Thomas Fee informing me of the existence

in the Archives of Propaganda of a document which not only shows that the Anthony Matthew of Knockbridge who lived in 1743 was quite a different person from Abbot

Andrew Matthews, but throws light on the end of the line of titular abbots of Mellifont.

Father Fee's information is taken from a rough Catalogue of some Irish material in

the Propaganda, which catalogue itself seems to be based on an Index in the Archives.

Page 126 of the index gives a summary of the information contained in the Ada

Sacrae Congregationis, 313, 27.x It is concerned with the death of the Abbot of

Mellifont who was parish priest of the two parishes of "

Callanmor and Tullyalen "

which had always belonged to the Order. We learn from this summary that the

Primate of Ireland had appointed Father John Macabe to the parish pro interim in

default of another religious of that abbey. He asked, moreover, that he might be

granted the faculty of conferring it freely on the said priest without prejudice to the

(rights of) the Cistercian Order.2 The date given on the list makes it probable that

the death of Andrew Matthews occurred either in 1718 or 1719, certainly not later

than the latter date.3 The reply seems to have been favourable, for John MacCabe

1. Father Fee writes: "

There is no way for me to decide which of these (313, 27) is the

number of the volume and which the page." 2. ". . . . senza pregiudizio dell' ordine Cisterciense."

3. Referring to the summary of information re Andrew Matthew's death and the appointment of John MacCabe, Fr. Fee writes:

" It is given in my list under the year 1718, but as 1718 appears

twice and 1719 does not appear and the above paragraph appears in the second section, I feel that there is at least a possibility that it should be referred to 1719."




did, in fact, become the first non-Cistercian parish priest of Coll?n and Tullyallen, and the parish has been lost to the Order ever since. Father John MacCabe himself

died in 1744 and is buried in Coll?n graveyard.

The letter which we print here is the only one of Abbot Andrew Matthew's which

is known to exist. Though the day of the month is noted in this letter the year,

unfortunately, is not stated. From a reference made by the writer to the long

persecution and to the fact that the situation had now so far improved that the Irish

Cistercians wTere attempting to renew the Congregation of SS. Malachy and Bernard

of which the Abbot of Mellifont was at this time Superior General and had even, as

it seems, opened a novitiate and admitted some of their novices to profession, it

would appear probable that the letter was written some time after the persecution which led to the death of Blessed Oliver and either in the closing years of the reign of King Charles or the opening of the reign of King James. The name of the Abbot's

secretary is given as Bernard Stafford. It may be a coincidence, but Archbishop Brennan of Cashel, writing to Monsignor Cerri, Secretary of Propaganda, in 1673, states in reference to a Cistercian abbot who was exercising his functions in the

diocese of Ferns at the time, that "

a Bernardine Abbot, by name James Stafford,

grants dispensations . . . notwithstanding that he has been forbidden to do so. This

he did once during the past summer, as the Coadjutor of Ferns informs me, in which

diocese the said Abbot lives/'1 It is true that Abbot Stafford's name is said to be

James, while Abbot Andrew's secretary is named Bernard, but it must be remembered

that the latter name was a common one among the Irish Cistercians and may have

been James Stafford's name in religion. The Abbot James Stafford mentioned by

Archbishop Brennan in his letter as exercising jurisdiction in the diocese of Ferns

may have been acting either as Abbot of Dunbrody or of Tintern.

The purpose of the letter written by Abbot Andrew Matthews to the Abbot of

Citeaux is to pray the latter to admit into one of his monasteries in France or elsewhere

on the Continent a newly-professed monk and acolyte, Bernard Echingham by name,

the bearer of the letter. Abbot Andrew has had this young man professed expressly for the abbey of Dunbrody and he wishes him to receive a thorough training in letters

and hopes he may acquire the spirit of the Order so that, filled with the spirit of the

virtues, he may be able to return to his fatherland with the paternal blessing of the

Abbot of Citeaux. Abbot Andrew commends him very much in the Lord to his

Most Reverend Lordship as well as to all the faithful of Christ, and especially to the

Cistercians with whom he may be brought into contact, that they may deign to

fulfil towards him the offices of charity and humanity, not doubting that they shall

receive a reward from the Lord. It is of interest to note that the abbey of Dunbrody for which Bernard Echingham made profession was granted by Henry VIII to

Sir Osborne Itchingham or Echingham and his heirs by letters patent dated 4th Oct

i. Very Rev. Canon Power: A Bishop of the Penal Times, p. 44.




ober, 1545. *

Echingham himself had originally received a grant of the dissolved

monastery of Nenay (de Magio) in County Limerick. Writing to the King in Feb

ruary, 1544-5 he prayed that he might obtain of his Highness "

a wast lordship callid Dunbrody

" declaring that he desired this

" for that this lordship here lyeth

amongist the willd Irysh and now moch wastid where I wollde trust in God to do good

servyce and bryng the same to better manewrance. . . ."2 Though the Bernard

Echingham who is mentioned in Abbot Andrew's letter can hardly be the direct

descendant of the Echingham who received the grant of Dunbrody since the latter's

last male representative, John Itchingham,3 is said to have died in 1650 leaving only one child, a daughter named Jane, he may have been and probably was a member

of the same family by collateral descent. Abbot Andrew's letter is as follows:

Reverendissimo in Christo Patri ac Domino D. Abbati Cistercii totius

ordinis Cisterciensis Generali etc.

fr. Andreas Matheus Abbas Mellifontis et praeses general is congrega tionis SS. Malachiae et Bernardi ordinis Cisterciensis in Hibernia salutem

in eo qui est vera salus.

Reverendissime Pater ac Domine. Cum Dei providentia et paterno zelo praedecessorum vestrorum Abbatum Cistercii et Clarevallis a tempore

suppressionis et persecutionis Henrici octavi Regis Angliae et successorum

eius hucusque in hoc regno tanquam lilium inter spinas haeresum et perse

cutionum ordo noster gemens floruit, sed modo aliquantulum laetantes

refiorescere sperantes post tot persecutionum genera sub vestrae Reverend

issimae Dominationis protectione et paterna charitate de novo renovare

congregationem vestram quam possedistis ab initio conamur. Quare nomine

vestro laxavimus rete pauperis novitiatus ubi aliquos ad professionem

admissimus de quorum numero dilectum nobis in Christo harum latorem

fratrem Bernardum Echinghamum Accolitummonachum expresse professum

monasterio Beatae Mariae de Dunbrodio; ad vestram Reverendissimam

Dominationem mittimus et humiliter deprecamur ut illum dignetur ad

mitiere in aliquo monasterio vestro ubi splendorem et spiritum ordinis ac

literarum studia ediscat et aemuletur, ut virtutum spiritu imbutus ad

patriam cum vestra paterna benedictione remeare val eat. Et illum quam

plurimum in Domino vestrae Reverendissimae Domination! sicut et omnibus

Christi fidelibus et praecipue nostris Cisterciensibus ad quos divertere

contingerit commendamus, quatenus illi charitatis et humanitatis officia

impender? dignentur, mercedem a Domino copiosam recepturi non diffiden

dum. Datum eo loci (a) nostrae mansionis die 22 Septembris sub manu et

sigillo nostris et Secretarii nostri subscriptione.

i. Morrin: Cal. Pat. and Close Rolls Chancery Ireland, Vol. I, p. ii .

2. State Papers Henry VIII, XII, No. 2, P.R.O., London.

3. Gilbert: 57. Mary's Abbey, Dublin : Chartuiaries, Vol. II, Preface, c.




fr. And; Mathew Abbas Mellifontis praeses congregationis Cisterciensis

in Hib.

De mando. Dni Abb. praesidis Generalis L3ernardus Staffordus

Secretarius.

(a) Eo loci : One would expect to find here ex loco masioms, etc., but the reading is quite certainly eo loci. The phrase eo loci is used by Cicero in the sense of in stich

a position. Perhaps it is used here in the sense of in this place or perhaps it is nothing more than a

slip on the part of the writer.

Translation

To the Most Reverend Father and Lord in Christ the Lord Abbot of

Citeaux, Abbot General of the whole Cistercian Order, Brother Andrew

Matthews, Abbot of Mellifont and President General of the Congregation of

SS. Malachy and Bernard of the Cistercian Order in Ireland, health, in him

who is the true health.

Most Reverend Father and Lord, by the providence of God and the

paternal zeal of your predecessors the abbots of Citeaux and Clairvaux, our

Order has flourished with sighs (b) in this kingdom as a lily among the thorns of heresies and persecutions, from the time of its suppression and

persecution by Henry VIII King of England and his successors down to the

present day. Now, however, rejoicing somewhat and in the hope that it will

begin to flourish once more after so many kinds of persecutions, we are

attempting to renew, under the protection and paternal charity of }^our

Most Reverend Lordship this your congregation which you have possessed from the beginning. Wherefore in your name we have let out the net of the

novitiate where we have admitted some to profession, one of whom, our

beloved brother in Christ, Bernard Echingham, the bearer of these presents, an acolyte and monk expressly professed for the monastery of the Blessed

Mary of Dunbrody, we send to your Most Reverend Lordship, humbly

praying that you may vouchsafe to admit him into one of your monasteries

where he may receive a thorough training in letters and endeavour to acquire

the splendour and the spirit of the Order, so that, filled with the spirit of

the virtues, he may be able to return to his fatherland with your paternal blessing. And we commend him very much in the Lord to your Most

Reverend Lordship as well as to all the faithful of Christ and especially to our Cistercians with whom he may be brought into contact, that they may

deign to fulfil towards him the offices of charity and humanity, not doubting that they shall receive a reward from the Lord.

Given in this place of our dwelling, the 22nd of September, under our

hand and seal and the signature of our Secretary.




Br. Andrew Mathew (c) Abbot of Mellifont, President of the Cistercian

Congregation in Ireland.

By command of the Lord Abbot the President General. Bernard

Stafford, Secretary.

(b) One might be inclined to think that perhaps the gemens here might be for

gemmens in which case the reading would be : Our Order has flourished budding (or

blossoming in this kingdom, etc. However the word is certainly gemens in the original and is unlikely to have been a slip on the part of the writer. It refers to the persecu tion under which the Order was groaning in those years.

(c) Note that the Abbot does not spell his name Matthews (with an s) but

Mathew.

