Notes On The Family of de Lacy in Ireland

Notes on the Family of De Lacy in Ireland
Author(s): Nicholas J. Synnott

Source: The Journal of the Royal Society of Antiquaries of Ireland, Sixth Series, Vol. 9, No. 2
(Dec. 31, 1919), pp. 113-131
Published by: Royal Society of Antiquaries of Ireland
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/25514534 .
Accessed: 21/10/2014 06:47
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 of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
Royal Society of Antiquaries of Ireland is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to
The Journal of the Royal Society of Antiquaries of Ireland.
http://www.jstor.org
This content downloaded from 193.1.234.18 on Tue, 21 Oct 2014 06:47:06 AM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
THE
JOURNAL
OF
THE ROYAL SOCIETYOF ANTIQUARIES
OF
FOR
IRELAND
THE
YEAR
1919
-*o*4???
VOL.
XLIX,
(VOL. IX SIXTH SERIES-VOL.
PART
XLIX
II
CONSEC. SERIES)
NOTES ON THE FAMILY OF DE LACY IN IEELAND

Nicholas
By
J. Synnott,
Fellow.
account of
in these pages, to give an historical
It is not proposed,
of the several members
of the great
the work and achievements
house of De Lacy, who took such a prominent part in the Norman
subjugation of Ireland during the first century of its progress, but
and genea
to piece together and record the personal
to attempt
The great families of De Clare
logical history of the Irish branch.
"
in Ireland with
the name of
") and of
Strongbow
(associated
Marshall have been made the subject of special study; and year by
with its
year, to this day, the history of the family of Fitzgerald,
is being probed out, and set in its true features.
numerous branches,
of
and the absence or destruction
The lapse of eight centuries,
make
tecords,
rection
It
by
such
any
newly-discovered
is remarkable,
importance
as
the
that
FitzGeralds,
in the case
with
and
tentative,
investigation
material.
an
of a family
unbroken
liable
to
cor
of such historic
male
descent,
and
who have been, and are, loyal custodians

of its
members
-archives, it is only of recent years that the true origin and early
out. It is not surprising, then, that
have been made
descents
to the
errors have crept
in and have been repeated, relating
and alliances of the family of De Lacy, who shared the
descent
of so many great Norman
fate, though not so prematurely,
families,
of having their great
and the Marshall*,
such as that of Strongbow
it
with

114 EOYAL SOCIETY OF ANTIQUAEIES OF IEELAND

divided
possessions
co-heiresses,
up among
failure
through
of male
descendants.
be seen from the accompanying
It will
some
statements
Cox,
made
and
O'Donovan,
De Lacy
and
recent
Baron
particular
to be corrected
and notes,
pedigree
as
writers
about
Lodge,
family will have
evidence
such
by
of
members
in view
that
Ware,
Finglas,
the
of contemporary
investigations.
The subject is, however,

still very obscure,
and the writer
is
conscious that it invites a more thorough search of original records
than he has time or opportunity
to make.
Mr Orpen has recently brought out in clear light, that many
of the conventional
views of the Norman
conquest of Ireland con
tained in still current manuals
and epitomes should be re-written.
It is perhaps not surprising that in certain historical
summaries
undue
has
prominence
been
given
to
the
achievements
of
Strong
bow and his followers,

seeing that for the early period, we have
on
to
the
old
French poem, based on the chronicle of
chiefly
rely
Began,
who
father-in-law);
the exploits
early
Norman
was
and
of Dermot
secretary
on Giraldus,
who
of his kindred,
McMurrough
cannot
desist
so numerously
represented
(Strongbow's
from
extolling
amongst
the
leaders.1
he was a military
Though Strongbow was not a Geraldine,
ally
of that clan before the Irish invasion; and he gave his
daughter,
in marriage
to a grandson of Gerald of Windsor, Eaymond
Basilia,
Fitzwilliam
called le Gros), probably the ablest soldier
(commonly
of the Geraldine
family.
for less than two
Strongbow died in 1176, having been Viceroy
years; but as late as 1174 the native Irish had defeated his forces,
and he had to retreat to Waterford,
whilst Eory O'Conor of Con
followed up with a destructive
raid into Meath.
naught
At the
time of Strongbow's
death a considerable
portion of his nominal
of Leinster
had not been parcelled
out or taken posses
Lordship
sion of by his subfeudatories;
in fact, the Norman
settlement was
It was
the century
only then beginning.
during
succeeding
death that such settlement
was carried out; not, in
Strongbow's
the main, by or under the direct control of the
English
Sovereigns,
interference
to have retarded
seems, indeed,
(whose fitful
the
and able men,
work), but by the energy of a few determined
and
their
personal
followers.
1 See
Ireland
Under
the Normans,
vol.
Orpen,
i, for pedigree
show
of early
Geraldine
ing relationships
of Strongbow,
followers
also
&c.;
to Giraldus's
prefixed
pedigree
Conquest
of Ireland
(Bohn
p.
Series),
which
no
shows
that
183,
less than
male
of Nesta,
descendants
twenty
three
took
in
the
including
generations,
several
part
to
expeditions
Ireland.

THE FAMILY OF DE LACY IN IEELAND
115
these Norman
leaders the De Lacys were perhaps the
Amongst
most conspicuous.
Their tenure of power lasted much
longer than
the
that of the Marshalls,
and of the other great feudatories,
of
in
them
the
of
their
alone
excelled
Burghs
length
Connaught
At this time the numerous
scions of the Geraldine
family sway.
in their own
stock were
themselves
chiefly busy in establishing
fiefs at Naas, Ossory, Wicklow,
it was not
and elsewhere;
whilst
until about a century later that Kildare and Desmond
attained an
almost regal power, and the rival Butlers
came into
of Ormonde
For
about
from
the
of
the Lord
prominence.
grant
seventy years,
of
Meath
to
in
1172
to
de
the
elder
the
death of
ship
Hugh
Lacy
in 1241, and of his son Hugh Earl of Ulster
his son Walter
in 1242,
the members
of this, the senior branch of the family, from ftieir
positions,
and
possessions,
were
activities,
the
most
conspicuous
of the Norman Chiefs, and if these were intermissions

in their sway,
this was due to the fitful suspicions
and jealousy of King Henry
his
and
who
successors,
saw
in
them
rivals.
successful
held large possessions

branch, the De Lacys of Eathwire,
for about half a century after the extinction
in the male
elder
junior
in Meath
line of the
branch.
in 1172-1173,
Hugh de Lacy the elder was three times Justiciar,
and again in 1181-1182,
and his son Hugh was Chief
1177-1181,
in 1208. The Lordship
Governor
of Meath, which was granted by
or Palatinate
the King in 1172, with semi-regal,
powers, comprised
some 800,000 acres, covering, besides
the the modern
County of
extensive
and
of Westmeath,
King's
portions
County,
Longford.
With
the grant of Ulster to Hugh de Lacy the younger in 1205,
and further grants in Connaught,
the De Lacys held princely juris
diction over about a fifth of the total area of Ireland, being more
In their vast
than a third of the conquered portions of the country.
territories,
peace and
they levied their own armed forces; made
war, with little interference by the Crown; held their own courts,
their own revenues;
and made
civil and criminal; collected
large
Meath,
feudal
sub-grants
to
them
families
of
existing
to this day,
to
these
Parliamentary
their
whose
nominees,
to the rank of Baron?a
entitled
subfeudatories
acknowledged
for
centuries,
in many
tenure
position
and
by the Crown
recognised
in
several
cases
in the
cases,
as the root of title
peerage.2
2 The
Killeen
of Delvin,
and Dunboyne
Baronies
(or Rathregan),
of Meath.
to grants
from
Lords
the
The
to owe
their
origin
or
seem
all
Irish
feudal
to be
the
Baronies
prescriptive
following
of Leinster),
the Duke
Gor
(held
by
:?Ophaley
Kingsale,
surviving
Delvin
Killeen
manston,
(Earl of Westmeath),
(Earl of Fingal),
Dunsany,
of
and Dunboyne.
Of these
and Lixnaw
Lahsdowne),
(Marquis
Kerry
seem


of the great
and achievements
To understand
the position
and to grasp the true course
Norman
leaders such as the De Lacys,
of Irish history we must
bear in mind that these immense grants
of lands and Palatine
in the
privileges were largely speculative,
sense that the subject-matters
of the gift were seldom at the time
or power, but had to be won
of the grant in the King's possession
and held by the sword of the donee and his followers.
The description
of the grant of Ulster to John de Courcy in the
of
Dermot
shows
that it was left to the grantee himself
to
song
over the lands given: ?
make effectual his dominion
To one John he granted Ulster,
// he could conquer it by force;
John de Courcy was his name,
Who afterwards
suffered many a trouble there.3
Another
aspect of the conquest, which
only recent historians
have brought out clearly, shows us that the relation of
and
Henry
his early successors
to his grantees, was that of feudal overlord,
rather
than that of Sovereign.
II never
Henry
proclaimed
himself King of Ireland, nor was he so styled in the charters and
and others.
grants to Hugh de Lacy
"
John was only
Dominus Hiberniae,,,
and is so styled in the
to Hugh
de Lacy
in 1205, though he was then
grant of Ulster
in a true perspective,
the invasion of
King of England.4
Thus,
and
the
of
Meath
and the coast
Ireland,
Leinster, Ulster,
Conquest
the work of Norman
feudal lords, and not
cities, was principally
that of English
In England
arms, or of an English
the
sovereign.
new race of Norman
kings exercised their dominion over the whole
Ireland, direct exercise of strictly sovereign rights was
country?in
limited in action, fitful, arbitrary, and not complete for centuries.
To appreciate
the position of Henry
II and his successors we
must
approach it from the more central point of view developed
such as Sir James Eamsay
and Miss Norgate,5 who
by historians
show that the Continental
as head of the
of
possessions
Henry,
all except
were
summoned
in 1489 by Henry
VII
to a Parlia
Dunboyne
ment
at Greenwich,
no
are
these
Baronies
though
patents
creating
known.
The Lord
of Ophaley
sat as Earl
of Kildare.
There
is no doubt
a
was
feudal
was
a re-grant
Dunboyne
there
peerage
originally;
though
in 1541.
See Complete
vol.
and p. 458;
Peerage,
by Gibbs,
i, p. xxix
vol.
also Lynch,
iv, p. 516;
Institutions
and
Feudal
Legal
Baronies,
p. 151.
3
Dermot
and
the Earl,
199.
Orpen,
of
Song
p.
4
"
"
John made
a number
of grants
in Ireland
as
Dominus
before
he
became
Mr
has
shown
that
was
no
there
King.
Orpen
of
grant
Sovereignty
over Ireland by the Pope to Henry
Ireland
Tinder
the Normans,
bilitur,'
vol.
i, p.
various
in the C. Gormanston
grants
Register,
p.
5
Under
the Angevin
Norgate,
England
Kings,
James
H. Ramsay,
The Angevin
Empire.
II by the Bull " Lauda

300.
175,
vol.
See
the
text
of
et seq.
Sir
ii, p. 185, &c.

117
than his English

House
of Anjou, were far more extensive
lands;
and that his title to Touraine, Maine, Brittany,
and other Angevin
States was far better, and his control and possession
there far more
in
than
the
British
outside
of
effective,
Isles,
any part
England
proper. As Henry was content to be overlord of his various Angevin
so was he content
to be overlord over such part of
dominions,
At no time
Ireland as his feudal barons could conquer for him.
did he claim to be King of Ireland any more than of Scotland or of
Wales.
The feudal tie, by which the King as overlord could exact ser
vice in other countries where his feudal lands lay, imposed obliga
tions on tenants in chief, which prevented
the great Norman
leaders
to the administration
of their Irish
giving continued attention
lands, when "(as in the case of the De Lacys and others) possessions
or Normandy
in England
involved duty of service there. Thus we
see the De Lacys and many others of the King's vassals in Ireland
summoned
to his French possessions
to help him in his
frequently
wars
or
to
down
put
revolt
there,?thus
involving
constant
The feudal relation

change of Irish governors and administrators.
between the overlord and tenant in chief was inmany respects more
The
and binding than that between King and subject.
"important
"
Dominus
Hiberniae
was
important
to him
than Ireland,
at
rate,
any
the
alternate
far
away,
and
neglect,
engaged
and
concerns
more
of King
John,
with
in the person
of
interference
capricious
the Sovereign
(as Mr Orpen has clearly shown) struck the first
of Ireland by the Norman Barons/
blow to the feudal organization
If the great leaders, like Strongbow, De Lacy, the Burgos,
and
Irish
wives
the
of
had
married
Celtic
who
FitzGeralds,
reigning
families, had been allowed (so to speak) to work their own salvation,
at any rate,
the era of fighting, bloodshed and confiscation might,
and some compromise
limited and shortened;
have been much
have
might
been
come
to
in
respect
of
to
and
pro
was then want

and confiscation
Cromwell might
found impossible
execute.
Hugh de Lacy, the first of

one of those eminently
fitted
vaders and the native Irish. He
of Eoderic
of
O'Conor, King
King's
his name who came to Ireland, was

the interests of the in
to reconcile
married an Irish wife, the daughter
incurring the
Connaught,
thereby
displeasure.7
c
Ireland
Orpen,
7 The O3Conors
p.
laws,
language,
prietary rights (for the bone of religious contention

ing), and" the fatal policy of religious persecution
and
Settlement
"), by Tudors, Stuarts,
(yclept
or would have been
have been never inaugurated,
the Normans,
Under
Bv
of Connaught.
vol.
ii, cxxii
CVConor
Don,
and
p.
54.

xxiii.
74.
Orpen,
II,

of
in spite of his family leanings,
speaks glowingly
% Giraldus,
4.the liberality and courtesy with which he won the hearts of the
Irish people,
and drew round him
leaders "?
their natural
''
care
it
the
his
first
to
restore
and
order, reinstating
making
peace
to the conquerors,
peasants,
who, after they had first submitted
were violently
from their districts?and
expelled
restoring confi
dence by his mild administration
and firm, adherence
to treaties.8
To come to the personal and genealogical
history of the family.
The first of the De Lacy name who appears in English history is the
or de Lascy
Walter
de Lacy,
in
(the original form of the name),
the attached pedigree.
There is little known of his origin, except
that he came from a place called Lascy,
or Lassy,
in the Canton of
in
Conde-sur-Moireau,
The
old castle
the
Arrondissement
or Manor-house
of Vire,
"), near
(" manoir
in Normandy.
the church,
is
said to have been destroyed

in 1855.9
This Walter
de Lacy accompanied
the Conqueror
to England
and acquired large estates on the Welsh
border, the principal being
the grant of
Ewyas Lacy, Staunton Lacy, and Ludlow.
Probably
these lands entitled the possessor
to a feudal Barony
in England,
though he retained the name of his Norman
Seigneurie?at
any
rate we find his descendants
in England.
The
recognised as Barons
date ofWalter's
death is variously given as 1084, 1085, and 1089.10
Walter had a brother or cousin, Ubert, who also came over with
the Conqueror,
and became possessed
of the Lordship
of Ponte
tract, and other lands in the County of York. A descendant
of this
John
Ilbert?namely,
de
Lacy,
Constable
of
Chester?was
ap
de Bee,
pointed
custodian
of Dublin Castle,
jointly with Eichard
and John's grandson afterwards
became Earl of Lincoln.11
The
branch of De Lacys
English
to disappear
in the
(soon, however,
male line) in course of time held an enormous
territory, extending
from Pontefract
into Wrest Lancashire.
Kirkstall
Abbey, York
shire, and Whalley
were founded by them, and
Abbey, Lancashire,
to this day the signboards of old hostelries
in the North of England
"
for example,
in the town of
De
Whalley,
bearing the title of the
Lacy arms," record the ancient
of
the
An
importance
family.
account of the descendants
of Ilbert cle Lacy will be found in The
Gentleman's
for 1866, p. 687.
Magazine
Walter
de Lacy, above named, had three
sons, Eobert or Boger,
8
Giraldus,
Conquest
of Ireland,
cxix.
9
Recherches
sur les compagnons
Historiques
de Guillaume
le Con
qiterant,
par Etienne
Dupont,
part
ii, p. 45.
10
"
vol.
Dugdale
i, p. 95, sub tit.
(Baronage,
Laci
the
of
date
") gives
his
death
at
1084, Nicolas
ed. by
(Peerage,
1084, The
Courthorpe),
D. A7. B.,
1085; and Orpen
1089.
Some
account
of the De Lacys
is to be
found in the Battle

Abbey Roll, by the Duchess
in various
11
Nicolas
particulars.
(Courthorpe),
p.
276.
Dugdale,
of Cleveland,
Baronage,
sub

tit.
incorrect
"
Laci."
119
and Walter,
and a daughter, Emma or Emmeline.
Eobert
Hugh,
his father as second Baron,
succeeded
but after his
(or Boger)
rebellion against William
Bufus
(in which he was joined by his
cousin Eobert de Lacy, Lord of Pontefract),
his lands were seized
in
the
Crown
and
to
his
brother Hugh, who
1091,
by
granted
became
third Baron.
endowed
the Abbey
of
Hugh
largely
and died some time before 1121.
The next brother,
Llanthony,
was
in Holy Orders, was Abbot
of St Peter's Abbey,
Walter,
and died in 1139.12
Gloucester,
The fourth Baron was Gilbert,
the son of Emma,
and, there
of Hugh,
the third Baron.
The name of Emma's
fore, nephew
husband is not known. Gilbert assumed the name of De Lacy, and
succeeded
to the Barony?an
early example. of acquisition
jure
rather the correct interpretation
is that the
uxoris; or, perhaps,
of the feudal lands, in days when
tenure was all im
possession
portant, entitled the holder to the feudal rank of Baron.
Gilbert was succeeded
as fifth Baron.
The
by his son Hugh
seem
of
lands
his
father
to
have
English
been, for a time, in the
hands, but they were recovered before 1163, and in 1165
King's
of more than 58 Knight's
fees in Shropshire.13
Hugh had possession
then
fifth
Baron
de Lacy
came over to
Hugh,
by tenure,
as we have stated, with Henry
a grant of
and
had
Ireland,
II,
in 1172 from the King.
Meath
The terms of the grant do not ex
include
pressly
those
or Palatinate
semi-regal
in fact, exercised by De Lacy

and recognised
by the Crown,
that Hugh de Lacy
is to have
as Mucardus,
heirs
my
after him
(or O'Melaghlin)
that
the
Hugh
'*
had
was
or was
hercdibus
was
grantee
O'Melaghlin
formerly
to have
able
suis
or
Hu-Mulachlyn,
held the same." u

was King of Meath,
better
to have
"
to have."
"?i.e.,
such
possessed.
all
which
powers,
were,
and his descendants

for centuries,
but the text of the grant provides
*'
and hold the lands
from me and
liberties
The
to heirs
power
the
princely
Moreover
and customs
grant,
other
any
before
and
as Hu-Mulachlyn
Inasmuch
it may have been intended
it
and
text
"
is also
authority
provides
which
to be
Henry
noticed,
as
that
II
is
general.
Hugh de Lacy appears to have had a sister, Bosea, whom he

afterwards
to Gilbert de Nugent,
first Baron of
gave in marriage
Delvin.
The Nugents
and De Lacys were already blood relations,
for it is stated that Bosea was Gilbert's
cousin.15
12
Chron.
13
Eyton,
14For
St Peter,
Gloucester
Ser.
Rolls,
i, 15-17.
v. 253
Shropshire,
see Lynch,
text,
and
Calendar
Gormanston
pp.
140,
150,
pp. 6, 177, 178.
Register,
15
The
Earls
are
of Westmeath
p. 356.
Giraldus,
descended
from
brother
of Gilbert
de Nugent.
The
account
of the
Richard,
in Lodge
descent
of the Barony
of Delvin
be compared
should
with
the* observa
tions
and
in the Complete
criticisms
ed. by Gibbs,
sub
tit.
**
Peerage,
Delvin."


or Eose de
died in 1186, having married
Hugh
(1) Eoheis
of
and
Monemue
about
1180,
Eose,
daughter
(Monmouth),
(2)
Eoderic O'Conor, King of Connaught.
who
had four sons?(1)
Walter,
By his first wife, Hugh
of
succeeded him in the Barony
of de Lacy,
and in the Lordship
in
Ulster
Earl
of
created
and
Meath;
1205,
appointed
(2) Hugh,
in 1208;
Justiciar
and (4) Eobert.
is not
Gilbert
(3) Gilbert,
nor by Cox, and
in his Breviate,
mentioned
by Baron Finglas
several other authorities,
but of his existence
there can be no doubt,
for it appears on record that in 1222 the King directed Hugh de Lacy
"
to place faith in his brother Gilbert
Irish
regarding the King's
affairs."16
of the Calendar
for the publication
But
of the Gormanston
He
of Eobert.
Register we should not have known of the existence
must have died before 1234, as in that year Walter
de Lacy, Lord
"
of Meath,
makes
grant
for
the
souls,
of
others,
amongst
Eobert
de Lacy, his brother."

(Page 8, Cal. Gorm. Reg.)
Hugh, first Lord of Meath, had a daughter, Elayne, who married
de Beaufoi;
Eichard
and also a daughter
is not
(by which wife
who
married
William
FitzAlan.
clear)
(Eyton, V, 240.)
con
celebrated without Henry's
By his second wife, (amarriage
a
a
had
who
the
in
took
son,
William,
Hugh
sent)
part
prominent
to William
resistance
and was killed in battle in 1233,
Marshal,
against Cathal O'Eeilly.
fighting
Three brothers of this William
de Lacy are mentioned,
two of
whom,
have
Eose
Thomas
but
were
Henry,
been half-brothers
O'Conor,
is not
and
of William.
whether
by Hugh
"
17
Blund."
styled
They were
de Lacy
or
They
a second
may
sons of
certainly
husband
clear.18
To return to the later descendants

of Hugh,
by his first wife,
his eldest
of William
son, married Margaret,
Walter,
daughter
de Braose,
and had a son, Gilbert, who died in his father's lifetime.
Gilbert
is stated
in his Historic
by Nicolas
Peerage
(and by
but
others)19 to have married Isabel, daughter of Sir Ealph Bigod;
Mr Hamilton
Hall has recently given strong reasons for concluding
that this Isabel was not a daughter of Sir Ealph
if a Bigod at
Bigod,
all.20
By this marriage
daughter of Theobald
Gilbert
Butler,
had a son, Walter,

who* married
but died without
issue.
16
Cal. B. I.+ vol.
1074.
Sweetman,
i, no.
17
Cal. B. I., vol.4,
no. 1203.
Sweetman,
18
Ireland
Under
the Normans,
vol.
Orpen,
19
Historic
Nicolas,
Peerage
(Courthorpe),
20 The
Marshall
Journal
Pedigree,
B.S.A.I.,
ii, p." 111.

tit.
Fitzjohn,"
vol. xliii,
p.

p.
13.
195.



121
The lands and Lordship

of Meath were inherited by Gilbert's
two daughters, Margaret
and Matilda,
who effected a partition of
their lands, and obtained each a moiety
of the Lordship of Meath?
the former getting chiefly the lands inWestmeath,
the latter those
in the modern County of Meath.
Numerous
entries in Sweetman's
and the recently-published
Calendar of the Gormanston
Calendar,
seem to show conclusively
in
that each of these moieties
Register,
the
hands
of
their
coparceners
and
their
descendants,
were
recog
nised as separate Lordships,

the holders of which were recognised,
in their respective
territories, as having the same palatinate powers
and jurisdiction as were exercised in the undivided Lordship.21
Similar privileges were allowed in the case of the partition
of
the Leinster Lordship
the
Marshall
in
co-heiresses.
An
amongst
of feudal custom
is here raised.
the
teresting question
Probably
large extent of the territories, even after division, gave the separate
a customary
possessors
right to have the ancient powers and juris
diction
left unimpaired'?the
service to the overlord
stipulated
being left secured by the amplitude of the divided possessions.
The descendants
of
the eldest
who
daughter,
Margaret,
married John de Verdon, were traced by the Eev. D.
in
Murphy,
an article in this Journal on the De Verclons of
Louth,22 Margaret's
which
included a great portion of Westmeath,
with
its
moiety,
otherwise
castle, Loughseady,
principal
Ballymore
Loughseady,
in the male line until Theobald Verdon,
passed to various Verdons
who died in 1317, leaving four
co-heiresses.
The article
daughters
states that the senior co-heir to the
Barony of Verdon is the present
Lord Mowbray,
and Stourton,
Segrave
through the families of
and Stourton,
Furnival, Neville,
Talbot, Howard,
being descended
from Theobald de Verdon's
first wife.
This first wife of Theobald
was Maude de Mortimer,
who was descended
from Matilda, Gilbert
de Lacy's
so that the Verdon descendants
younger daughter,
by
this
marriage
have
two
strains
of De
Lacy
blood.
de Lacy's
second daughter
Matilda, Gilbert
and co-heiress,
married Geoffry de Genneville,
brother of the famous Sire de Join
and historian of St Louis.23
ville, the companion
The Castle of Trim, with Matilda's
of the Lordship
and
moiety
to the family of Mortimer,
lands, descended
of
by the marriage
of Geoffry and Matilda,
Joan, granddaughter
to Eoger Mortimer,
-1 Cal.
Gormanston
Begister,
pp.
7,
178,
etc.
in 1252,
III,
Henry
allows Geoffrey
" de Geynvill and Matilda de Lacy his wife to exercise in
their lands
the liberties by their own writs/' which Walter de
Lacy
was
accustomed
to use.
22
Journal
B. S. A. I. for 1895, p. 317.
23
Cal. Gormanston
p. 5, and Sweetman,
Begister,
Cal. passim.
The
of Matthew
Paris
"statement
(followed
that Matilda
by others)
married
de Geneve,
Peter
a native
of Provence/'
seems
without
foundation.


Earl of March.
Anne Mortimer,
sister and eventually
sole heir of
Edmund Mortimer,
to
5th Earl of March,
afterwards
succeeded
was finally
the Trim Lordship,
which
inherited
by Eichard
of York,
Duke
the son of Anne Mortimer
ITantagenet,
by her
with
Earl
Eichard
of
marriage
Plantagenet,
Cambridge.
Eichard, Duke of York, also succeeded to the Earldom of Ulster,
Anne Mortimer.
(of the second
creation) through his mother,
Anne was
the granddaughter,
and finally heiress,
of Edmund
Earl of March,
and also Earl of Ulster,
in right of his
Mortimer,
wife, Philippa,
only child of Lionel, Duke of Clarence, by Elizabeth,
de Burgh, 3rd Earl of Ulster. When
daughter and heiress ofWilliam
the son and heir of this Eichard of York came to the throne in 1460,
as Edward IV, the Earldom
of Ulster and the Trim moiety
of the
Meath Lordship were merged
in the Crown.24
The moiety
of Meath,
of which
the Caput was Loughseady,
descended
from Margaret
de Lacy to the Talbots Earls of Shrews
VIII
under
the Statute
of
bury, and was resumed
by Henry
Absentees.25
WTe now come to the descendants

of Hugh de Lacy, second son
of Hugh, first Lord of Meath.
Hugh II was created Earl of Ulster
in 1205, by Charter of John?the
earliest example, as Lynch points
a dignity
in Ireland.
out, of a recorded grant creating
John
de Courcy whose possessions Hugh de Lacy II thus
acquired, does
not appear to have obtained any formal grant of the Earldom.
The
text of Hugh's
grant may be seen in the Calendar of the Gormans
ton Register
it may only be noted
(page 141). For our purposes
that the grant of the dignity is to heirs general.
Earl Hugh
married
of
(1) (circ 1194) Lesceline,
daughter
Bertram de Verdon,26
and (2) Emmeline,
de
daughter of Walter
Eiddlesford.
Neither Dugdale,
in his Baronage
nor the
Dictionary
De
mention
of National
the De Verdon
Biography
(tit.
Lacy),
marriage,
are
there
though
clear
records
of
it.27
as to the issue of these

Statements
marriages made by Baron
and
Finglas,
repeated by W^are, Cox, O'Donovan,
Lodge, Butler,
and by the usually accurate
have recently been proved by
Lynch,
Mr H. J. Knox and Mr
Orpen to be inaccurate.
They have shown
the incorrectness
of the statement
that Hugh Earl of Ulster had
24
pp.
111.
Lynch,
pp.
143,
245, 246.
25 28
VIII,
Henry
26 See
Notes
and
146, Complete
c.
iii;
Falkiner's
Peerage,
by
Gibbs,
Illustrations
11, sec.
Queries,
ix, pp.
130,
re Lesceline
p. 54, for correspondence
de Verdon.
27
Cal.
Sweetman,
1, p. 200; Cal.
Gorm.
Reg.,
Ireland
Under
the Normans,
II, p. 121.
2nd
Ed.,
of Irish
255,
pp.
&c,
iii,
History,
and
3 and

vol.
11 sec.
144; Orpen,
p.
x,
123
a daughter and heiress, Matilda,

de Burgh,
who married Walter
and that thus Walter
(in right of his wife) and his descendants
is want
of Ulster.
obtained the Earldom
evidence
Contemporary
a
of
that
de
de
married
Walter
ing
Hugh
Burgh
daughter
Lacy,
and there is positive proof that Matilda,
eldest daughter of Hugh
married
David,
of Naas.
Baron
It
clear
is, moreover,
that,
even
a daughter of Hugh,
ifWalter
de Burgh had married
he did not
in right of his wife, for Hugh
obtain Ulster
de Lacy died in 1242,
and it was not until 1264 that Walter
obtained Ulster,
and that
a
to
have
been
appears
by
special grant.28
as to the alleged acquisition,
There are other difficulties
jure
uxoris, of the Earldom by Matilda de Burgh, even if the unrecorded
marriage
with
a De
Lacy
were
fact.
In the first place, Hugh

de Lacy II had two other daughters
so that Walter
in the annexed pedigree,
named
de Burgh's
sup
wife
not
could
have
been
sole
and
the
title was never
posed
heiress;
called out of abeyance.
the lands of the Earldom were
Secondly,
clearly not inherited by any of the daughters of Hugh de Lacy.
In those days, when
to tenure, the
importance was attached
fact that the feodum had gone would have been an
insuperable bar
to the sequence of the dignity, though the grant, as I have
pointed
out,
was
to heirs
general.
In Appendix H to the 4th volume

of the Complete Peerage
shown that the
(Ed. Gibbs) (p. 655 n) it seems to be conclusively
title of Earl could certainly pass
through an heiress to her descen
dants, and probably also could pass to an heiress direct, but that
what really mattered
was the inheritance
of the lands.
If the
estates of the Earldom were for any reason
lost, the Earldom was
lost, at any rate in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries.
In the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries we find the
importance
of tenure ceasing, and we have thus the
example,
already referred
of Ulster passing through
to, of the Earldom
(1) the heiress of the
De Burghs,
(2) the heiress of the Mortimers,
though the lands were
retained by the heir male of the Clanricardes.
Though Ulster was restored to Hugh de Lacy in 1227,29 it would
seem to have been for his life
only, (under some special arrange
for this territory was
ment);
in the King's
hands from Hugh's
death in 1242 until 1254, when
it was granted to the
son,
King's
Edward, who had possession
until 1264, when
(as we have stated)
Walter de Burgh by a new
grant obtained the lands and Earldom.30
28
Journal
R.S.A.L,
1898, p.
29
Cal. Gormanston
Register,
30
The
Earldom
Orpen,
of
34, 35. F
vol.
414, Ibid,,
p. 142.
Journal
Ulster,
xliii
(1913),
R.S.A.L,

p.
vol.
34, &c.
xliii,
pp.
124 EOYAL SOCIETY OF ANTIQUAEIES OF IRELAND

the eldest daughter of Hugh de Lacy, Earl of Ulster,
Matilda,
3rd Baron of Naas.
before
married
(as
stated) David Fitzwilliam,
descended
From this marriage were ultimately
(in the female line)
the
of
Prestons
who
Gormanston,
thus
senior
the
represent
co
heiress of the Barony

of Naas, and also (as the editors of the
Gormanston
the senior co-heiress of
point out) Matilda,
Register
first Baron of Naas, the
the senior male line of Maurice FitzGerald,
senior line of the Irish FitzGeralds.31
that though the original grant of the Earldom
It is noticeable
of
was
Ulster
have
the
been
senior
to heirs
made
no
general,
the
Prestons
by
Sir
co-heiress.
claim
to
the
Christopher
who
de Preston,
ever
seems
Earldom
of Gormanston,
who
to
represented
that
married
and by his compilation

of the Eegister
showed his great
co-heiress,
interest in the descent and honours of his family, would not have
been slow to assert his wife's rights, if he had thought them valid.
He may have been well aware of some of the facts we have stated;
in particular,
he would certainly know that his ancestor, Matilda
de Lacy, never inherited the lands which were the feodum of the
Earldom
of Ulster.
Two other sons of Hugh
de Lacy are also mentioned.
The
infers that they were probably
Dictionary
of National
Biography
because
lands or
illegitimate
they did not inherit their father's
but this inference seems too sweeping,
in view of the
Earldom,
in respect of the Ulster lands to which we have
special arrangement
their father, but
already referred.
They may have predeceased
they were certainly alive in 1226.32
de Lacy II does not seem to have had any children
Hugh
by
his second wife, Emmeline
de Ridcllesford,
and I cannot find
in the Dictionary
authority for the statement
of National Biography
which implies that there were such children.
Emmeline
re-married
with Stephen de Longespee,
apparently under strong pressure from
the King.
The record of the King's mandate
on the matter
is in
structive,
social
as
showing
the
ancient
power
of
interference
in
certain
relationships:
"
The King to the Justiciary
of Ireland.
"
By the law and custom of Ireland the King may distrain
widows by their lands to take husbands
of the King's
choice, pro
vided the widows be not
Mandate
that if A [meline],
disparaged.
31 C.
Gormanston
Baronies
of Naas
herited
Begister,
pp.
and Loundres
by Sir Robert Barnewell,
xi, xii,
is stated
and
by
p. 146.
Lynch
A moiety
of
to have
been
1st Lord Trimleston
the
in
in right of his
wife.
Lynch,
Legal
le Gros,
of
Institutions,
who was
p. 181.
Raymond
the senior
line of the descendants
of Nesta,
died
without
and
the
issue,
Barons
of Knocktopher,
also of this senior
in 1247.
extinct
line, became
See Journal
vol. xxii
of B.S.A.I.,
(1892), p. 358.
?2
no.
I>.
Cal.
1372.
Sweetman,
I.,

125
the wife of Hugh de Lacy, will not take for her husband
as the King hath
de Longespee,
her, the
requested
Stephen
of
to
the
Custom
to
do
her
shall
distrain
so,
according
Justiciary
who was
Ireland."33
To return to the history of other issue of Hugh de Lacy (I) Lord

of Meath.
We have seen that Hugh had a son, William,
by his
second wife, the daughter of Boderic O'Conor, King of Connaught.
to the Four Masters
in his notes
O'Donovan,
(sub anno 1186),
of Duald Macfirbis
the authority
for the statement
that
quotes
a leading rebel against
Pierce Oge Lacy of Bruff, Co. Limerick,
at the end of the sixteenth
Elizabeth
in
century, wras eighteenth
descent from the above-named William
de Lacy.
This descent is also referred to in Lenihan's History
of Limerick
and in the Dictionary
with an allusion to a
of National Biography,
in the British Museum,
sketch pedigree
wrhich in all
printed
material
seems to have
This pedigree
parts is here reproduced.
been compiled in 1847, largely from hearsay and family tradition,
and may be accurate
in recording
from the sixteenth
descents
us
but
does
to
to
fill the gap between
onwards,
century
nothing
help
William
de Lacy, who died in 1233, and Pierce Oge Lacy, who died
in 1601. That gap would seem difficult, if not impossible, to fill up.
I have been unable to find any evidence
that the descendants
of
William
de Lacy
or
(if any) ever settled in the County Limerick,
that the Limerick Lacys had any connection with the great
family
who
came
over
with
the
Conqueror.
If we may
judge the accuracy of this sketch pedigree by other
statements
in it, its historical value is of small account.
It asserts
"
that
from said Walter
(Lord of Meath)
descended Hugh
Lacy
in the time of Queen
Lacy, the Protestant
(sic) Bishop of Limerick
Mary, who refused to take the oath and was imprisoned
in 1577."
As a matter
of fact, Hugh Laey, Bishop of Limerick, was not
only
not a Protestant,
but was imprisoned and deprived of his
Bishopric
for refusing to subscribe to the King's
by Henry VIII
supremacy.
Eestored
under Mary, he was again driven from his See
by Eliza
beth, put to prison for adhering to the Boman
Catholic faith, and
died
there.34
Field Marshal,
Count Peter de Lacy
(1678-1751) named in the
in the Bussian
himself
pedigree,
distinguished
service, especially
at the battle of Pultowa,
and the Conquest of the Crimea in 1737.
This Field-Marshal's
son, Joseph Francis Maurice,
Count de Lacy,
had an equally distinguished
career in the Austrian
ser
military
p.
33
Cal. D. L,
Sweet-man,
H
Spicilegium
Ossoriense,
:>6. Our Martyrs,
by Rev.
i. 2600.
by Cardinal
Denis
Murphy,
Mor
an, vol.
S.J., p. 96.
i, p.

84;
vol.
iii,

in 1762, and died in Vienna
in
vice; was created a Field-Marshal
1801. A cousin of the above, General Maurice
de Lacy of Grodno,
career in Eussia,
after a long military
died in 1820 unmarried.
we
not
have
the
clear
of these
Though
proof of the descent
from the Limerick
who
Eussian
and Austrian
Generals
Lacys,
were established
in County
at Bruff, Ballingarry,
and elsewhere
in the sixteenth century, it is possible, nay probable, that
Limerick
before admission
such proofs of descent were forthcoming
to the
of
rank
commissioned
in the
officers
and
Eussian
services.
Austrian
seem to have disappeared

in that county
The Limerick
Lacys
at any rate) after the Cromwellian
and
(as men of consequence
Williamite
the last one of note being Lacy of Kil
confiscations,
in 1647,
mallock, who was one of the Supreme Council of Kilkenny
in
James's
of Cavenagh's
Lieutenant-Colonel
King
Army,
Infantry
in James's Parliament.35
and M.P.
for Kilmallock
staff at
de Lacy Evans,
who was on Wellington's
General
in the Crimea,
is
the Second Division
and commanded
Waterloo,
in the female line from the Limerick Lacys.
stated to be descended
An account of the De Lacy-Evans
family is to be found in O'Hart.36
We
of the Limerick
have dealt on the improbability
Lacys
from
descended
the
Meath
De
being
Lacys, amongst other reasons,
inasmuch as there is no evidence
that any member
of the latter
If one may speculate
in
family ever settled in County Limerick.
it is possible that the Limerick Lacys have a different
this matter,
from the family of De Lees, whose name from an
origin?namely,
Norman
period down to the reign of Henry VI, constantly
early
in
appears
sixteenth
be
century,
corruption
If I have
Limerick
and
documents
The Lacys
Limerick.37
Lacys,
Leash,
of Lees.
failed
But
this
branches
Lacy,
surmise.3S
of male
of
the
County
their name
as
is mere
the chain
Irish
spelt
the
to
belonging
Bruree,
as well
Leashe
to find
or other
as
records
of Bruff,
and
descentname,
Leash
between
and
the
in the
may
the
great
I should be slow to state that the

feudal lords of Meath and Ulster,
in the Austrian
and
be found.
link may not somewhere
Possibly
Eussian
archives materials may be found to fill up the gap, and at
at any rate to throw further light on the history, of the Limerick
that the rules which
We must
remember,
however,
Lacys.
35 D'Alton.
vol.
ii, p. 389.
List,
James,
Army
King
36 Irish
See also Webb,
Irish
Landed
&c,
p. 625.
Gentry,
Biography.
37 See Black
Book
p. 310, &c.
of Limerick;
Lynch,
38
in 1762, speak
p. xx),
of Ireland,
writing
(History
MacGeoghegan
as to whether
leaves
it an open
question
Lacys,
ing of the Limerick
"
or English
De Lacys;
ils sont en etat de
from
descend
the Irish
they
ou F autre
on vient
a Tune
des deux maisons
dont
leur genealogie
monter
or
com
de Lacy,
Ilbert
to Walter
both
de rendre
"; i.e., either
compte
of William
the Conqueror.
panions

127
"
"
for ten rank of officer in European
noblesse
required proof of
as
in the case of the
were
not
Courts,
strictly enforced
probably
"
"
and other exiles, as in the case of natives of France*
Wild Geese
in the countries of their own allegiance.
Spain, Austria and Eussia,
For most exiled Irish officers in a foreign land it would have been
in the sixteenth
to furnish
and seventeenth
centuries
impossible
strict proof of their right to bear arms, stripped as they were of their
and
papers,
possessions,
title
deeds.
There was another family of De Lacys

settled from an early
which was granted to Eobert de Lacy by Hugh
period at Eathwire,
as set out in the Song of Dermot.
Lord of Meath,
is in the parish of Killucan, Barony of Farbill, County
Eathwire
and
Westmeath,
Mr
us
informs
Orpen
the mote
that
and
founda
tions of the Castle still remain.

Eobert was probably a kinsman
of Hugh,
is not known.
Eobert was
though the exact relationship
one of the Barons
of Meath mentioned
in King John's mandates
in 1200 and 1207 (Sweetman,
Cal. Docts.
Ireland,
134, 329), and
seem to have been amongst the Chief Lords
the Lacys of Eathwire
of the Pale some half century or more after the extinction
of the
male line of the first Lord of Meath.
was summoned
Walter
to Wogan's
Parlia
Lacy of Eathwire
ment
in 1295, and Walter
and Hugh
to the Council or Parliament
that was held in Kilkenny
in 1310.39
At various dates from 1309
onwards
their
at
Eathwire
and
were
elsewhere
con
possessions
"
as they were
in rebellion with the Scots."
Their in
and their rising against the King, seem to have
trigues with Bruce,
been partly inspired by their discontent
at seeing the great Lord
of
founded
their
over to the
Meath,
ship
kinsman, handed
by
De Yerdons
and De Gennevilles,
of
failure
heirs
male of
through
the head of the house.
In the Patent Rolls of 11 Ed. II appear various entries
showing
of lands in the Counties
of Dublin, Meath,
and else
re-grants
forfeited by the De Lacys
of Eathwire,
where,
and the Sheriffs
fiscated
of
various
bodies
Blund.40
counties
of Walter,
As
were
ordered
Hugh,
family
we
to
seize
and Almeric
can
trace
the
goods,
de Lacy
no
them
chattels,
and
and of Walter
de
name
of
more.
The
from Elizabeth
Lacy does not occur in the Chancery Inquisitions41
to William
and Mary for Leinster,
under Dublin, Meath, Kildare,
or King's
but in Co. Westmeath
it appears that Edward
County;
and lands at Ballrath,
Lacy was, before 1629, seized of messuages
near Clonlost, and at Blackcastle.
39
pp. 309, 313.
Lynch,
40
Cal. Bot.
Cancell.
Pat.,
41
Chancery
Inquisitions,
Hib.,
James
nos.
I,
a.d.
114, 193,
1629.
195,

202.

In 1242, after seventy years of semi-regal state and power, the
De Lacy houses of Meath
and Ulster became extinct in the
and so many
line, sharing the fate of the family of Marshall
as
In the case of the De Lacys,
Norman chiefs in Ireland.42
or foreign hus
the co-heiresses married English
the Marshalls,
as Chief Baron
in his Breviate,
laments
who,
bands,
Finglas
*'
in
of
their
own,
having grete possessions
England
regarded little
-the defence of their lands in Ireland, but took the profits of the
great
male
other
with
same
for
a while
as
they
could,
and
some
of
them
never
saw
Ireland."
de Lacy has been

from Hugh
Another
claim of male descent
and
made on behalf of the Lynch
family of Galway by O'Flaherty
author
of
Cambrensis
Eversus.**
the
O'Flaherty
by Lynch,
the son
from William
de Lacy,
asserts that the Lynchs
descend
of Hugh by Bose, the daughter of Boderic O'Conor.
The Bev. M.
seems to support this suggestion
in a recent article in the
Devitt
Kildare Archaeological
Journal,*4, recalling the fact that fixed sur
names were not generally
in the twelfth century.
This
adopted
true
of
be
the
and
De
FitzGeralds
but
others,
may
Lacy (though
spelt Lasy, Laci, Lacey) was certainly fixed as a name
variously
several generations
stronghold)
(derived from the family Norman
before Hugh I came to Ireland; and Leyns or Lynch appears in the
surname
from the early part of the
records as a distinctive
de Lacy died in 1233, yet very shortly
thirteenth century. William
as Mr Hardiman
afterwards,
points out, the name Lynch appears
in Galway
the
No reason is suggested
for
amongst
early settlers.
the change of name from De Lacy, arfd it is incredible that a family
from Hugh,
and Justiciar,
Lord of Meath
claiming descent
by a
with
the
house
of
hide
it
would
under
marriage
Connaught,
Eoyal
an altered patronymic.
It is noticeable
that Hardiman,
in his
two
for
other
descents
the
of
History
Galway,
gives
Lynchs
(1)
from the Le Petits,
(2) from a Governor of Lintz in Upper Austria.
in such matter,
the arms of the Galway
If arms tell anything
Lynchs,
azure,
chevron
between
three
no resemblance
to the Lkn Bampant
There is another De Lacy descent
trefoils,
slipped,
or,
bear
of the De Lacys.45
in the female line, vouched
"
42Giraldus
"?
of the English
Power
four pillars
had noticed
that
le Gros,
de Montmorenci,
and
John
Raymond
Harvey
FitzStephen,
a
no lawful
He
adds
de Courcy?had
issue
afterwards
by their wives.
FitzHenry.
fifth?namely,
Meyler
43
Irish
of Connaught,
p.
36;
Archaeological
Society,
Description
Kirovani
Ed., p. 24.
Vita, Median's
44Vol.
vi, pp. 269, 270.
45
see Rev.
7 and
M. Devitt's
18; and
Hardiman,
Galway,
pp.
Argu
Kild.
Arch.
supra,
ment,
p. 270.
Soc,
Journal,



129
some difficulties.46
He states that
for by Lodge, which presents
came to Ireland
son of Sir Formal Netterville,
Eichard Netterville,
"
of
married Catherine,
in the reign of Henry
II, and
daughter
This daughter is not mentioned
Hugh de Lacie, L.J. of Ireland."
cited.
Lodge pro
(as we have seen) in the previous authorities
fesses to follow the family pedigree, which may be right in this
in the case of other parts
particular,
though it is obviously wrong
of the early descent,
note.
for the reasons stated in Archdall's
There is, however, other authority for a De Lacy descent
in this
in the following
of an official character,
recital to the
family,
in 1622, the original of which is in the
Patent creating the Peerage
of the writer.
possession
. . .
James by the Grace of God, &c,
Translation:?"
duly
our
that
beloved Nicholas Netterville
of Dowth
in the
considering
...
.is born and descended
from an ancient
County of Meath
raee and illustrious
stock, and that the first progenitor
(primus
of that family in the Kingdom
of Ireland, being the
antecessor)
47
of Hugh de Lacy, formerly Earl of Ulster,
and
grandson
(Nepos)
....
Lord of Connaught
and Meath,
under the auspices of our
illustrious ancestors,
sailed (transfretavit)
to the aforesaid Kingdom
of Ireland, for the purpose of bringing that nation under the yoke
and allegiance
of the Eoyal Crown, and there with the said Hugh
de Lacy performed
the greatest
from the time of which
services;
the ancestors
of the aforesaid Nicholas Netterville
have
conquest
to this day held the ancient
inheritance at the time bestowed
on
them for their deserts."
is in some measure
Seeing that this recited De Lacy descent
made a foundation
for the grant of the peerage,
there
presumably
was an official investigation
of the matter;
and it is to be noticed
that it appears on the face of the Patent that it was enrolled in the
office of the Auditor
the antiquarian
ana
by Sir James Ware,
in 1628.48
historian,
The Hugh de Lacy referred to in the Patent
is probably Hugh I,
"
"
Lord of Meath,
as the
inasmuch
antecessor
of the
primus
41
"
Lodge's
Peerage,
by Archdall,
1781, vol.
iv, p. 202, tit.
Viscount
Netterville.''
'
'
"
"
"
47
is thus
translated
Nepos
Grandson
in the Report
of the
and
on
Solicitor-General "
the
Attorneyclaim
in
"
"
but
peerage
1829,
also mean
may
and
has
been
used
" nepos
to mean
nephew,"
descendant."
49
Hugh de Lacy is described
in the Patent
as Earl of Ulster
and Lord
of Meath
and Connaught.
The
first Hugh
de Lacy
was
not Earl
of
nor Lord
of Connaught.
Ulster,
Confusion
of the titles
of the elder
and
has
younger
been made?
Hugh
frequently
e.g., by Walter
and in
Harris,
own
our
day
and
by Gilbert,
(Viceroys),
by
Stokes,
Anglo-Norman
Church,
p. 235.


must have been contemporaneous
Nettervilles
with, or have been
in Ireland prior to, 1207, when it is recorded that Luke de Netter
ville was Archdeacon
of Armagh,
or, at any rate, prior to 1217,
when this Luke was appointed Archbishop
of Armagh.
It appears
a De Verdon charter
also that one Nicholas de Netterville
witnessed
with Luke the Archbishop,
which must have been before 1226, the
date of Luke's death.49
Hugh de Lacy II, Earl of Ulster, did not
Netterville
with the
marry until 1194; and the first
(consistently
"
"
above dates) could hardly be
or grand
nepos
(whether
nephew
"
"
the
of
second
Primus
antecessor
of course,
son)
Hugh.
may,
mean, not the first of the name who settled in Ireland, but the first
who obtained the patrimony
of Dowth,
and the exact date of this
is not known,
the Patent
that the
acquisition
vaguely
stating
"
from the time of the subjugation and conquest."
possession dated
It is to be noted that if the statement
in Lodge be correct that
"
a
father
of
Nicholas
married
Henry,
Netterville,
Agnes, daughter
of Eichard
de Burgo,
ancestor to the Earl of Clanricarde,"
this
shows a descent of Nicholas
from Hugh de Lacy I.50
We have already seen that Egidia, daughter of Walter
de Lacy,
and grand-daughter
of Hugh
I, Lord of Meath, married Eichard
so that if this particular statement
de Burgo,
of Lodge be correct,
the above-named
Nicholas Netterville
would be fourth in descent
from Hugh de Lacy, Lord of Meath.
The short pedigree annexed
illustrates this.
"
If." nepos
be taken in the primary sense of
the solu
nephew,
tion may be that the father of Nicholas
who witnessed
Netterville,
the De Verdon
charter in 1226, and possibly of Luke,
Archbishop
of Armagh
a sister
(appointed
1217), may have married
(unre
corded) of Hugh de Lacy, Lord of Meath.
Hugh
_;_
Walter
Egidia?'
de Lacy I,
Lord of Meath
de Lacy, Lord of Meath, m. before

Margaret de Braose
1200
"i
Hugh de Lacy II,

Earl of Ulster
m. Richard de Burgo
in or before 1225
Agnes
m. Henry
Nicholas
de Netterville
de Netterville.
*9
St
Beg.
Abbey
50
Lodge,
Peerage,
ed. Gilbert,
Thomas,
Dublin,
vol.
iv, p. 202.
by Archdale,

p.
43,

The following are some of the authorities
the De Lacy pedigree: ?
consulted
131
in compiling
Calendar of Gormanston
edited
Register,
Dugdale,
Baronage;
and M. J. M'Enery,
1916;'Ey ton's Shropshire;
by James Mills
Calendars of Documents
Sweetman,
relating to Ireland, vols, i and
ed.
1789; Butler's " Trim; Journal of
Archdall,
ii; Lodge's Peerage,
Earls of Ulster ";
the Royal Society of Antiquaries,
1913, article,
Kildare
vol. vi;
Journal
the
Archaeological
Society,
County
of
2
and
Under
the
Ireland
1911;
vols.,
Normans,
Song of
Orpen,
Feudal
Dermot
and the Earl,
Tenures;
Stokes,
1892; Lynch,
Church; Lenihan, History
of Limerick;
Dictionary
Anglo-Norman
Four Masters,
sub-tit. "Lacy "; Donovan,
of National Biography,
De
of
the
Printed
and
III,
Lacy family in the British
Pedigree
Museum.


Notes On The Family of de Lacy in Ireland

Transféré par

Informations du document

Description originale:

Titre original

Copyright

Formats disponibles

Partager ce document

Partager ou intégrer le document

Options de partage

Avez-vous trouvé ce document utile ?

Ce contenu est-il inapproprié ?

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Notes On The Family of de Lacy in Ireland

Transféré par

Droits d'auteur :

Formats disponibles

Notes on the Family of De Lacy in Ireland

Author(s): Nicholas J. Synnott

This content downloaded from 193.1.234.18 on Tue, 21 Oct 2014 06:47:06 AM

(VOL. IX SIXTH SERIES-VOL.

NOTES ON THE FAMILY OF DE LACY IN IEELAND

who have been, and are, loyal custodians

This content downloaded from 193.1.234.18 on Tue, 21 Oct 2014 06:47:06 AM

114 EOYAL SOCIETY OF ANTIQUAEIES OF IEELAND

be seen from the accompanying

family will have

The subject is, however,

bow and his followers,

This content downloaded from 193.1.234.18 on Tue, 21 Oct 2014 06:47:06 AM

THE FAMILY OF DE LACY IN IEELAND

of the Norman Chiefs, and if these were intermissions

held large possessions

to the rank of Baron?a

as the root of title

This content downloaded from 193.1.234.18 on Tue, 21 Oct 2014 06:47:06 AM

116 EOYAL SOCIETY OF ANTIQUAEIES OF IEELAND

over Ireland by the Pope to Henry

II by the Bull " Lauda

This content downloaded from 193.1.234.18 on Tue, 21 Oct 2014 06:47:06 AM

THE FAMILY OF DE LACY IN IEELAND

than his English

The feudal relation

was then want

Hugh de Lacy, the first of

his name who came to Ireland, was

prietary rights (for the bone of religious contention

This content downloaded from 193.1.234.18 on Tue, 21 Oct 2014 06:47:06 AM

118 EOYAL SOCIETY OF ANTIQUAEIES OF IEELAND

said to have been destroyed

found in the Battle

This content downloaded from 193.1.234.18 on Tue, 21 Oct 2014 06:47:06 AM

THE FAMILY OF DE LACY IN IEELAND

in fact, exercised by De Lacy

held the same." u

and his descendants

Hugh de Lacy appears to have had a sister, Bosea, whom he

This content downloaded from 193.1.234.18 on Tue, 21 Oct 2014 06:47:06 AM

120 EOYAL SOCIETY OF ANTIQUAEIES OF IEELAND

de Lacy, his brother."

To return to the later descendants

had a son, Walter,

ii, p." 111.

This content downloaded from 193.1.234.18 on Tue, 21 Oct 2014 06:47:06 AM

This content downloaded from 193.1.234.18 on Tue, 21 Oct 2014 06:47:06 AM

This content downloaded from 193.1.234.18 on Tue, 21 Oct 2014 06:47:06 AM

This content downloaded from 193.1.234.18 on Tue, 21 Oct 2014 06:47:06 AM

THE FAMILY OF DE LACY IN IEELAND

The lands and Lordship

nised as separate Lordships,

This content downloaded from 193.1.234.18 on Tue, 21 Oct 2014 06:47:06 AM

122 EOYAL SOCIETY OF ANTIQUAEIES OF IEELAND

WTe now come to the descendants

as to the issue of these

This content downloaded from 193.1.234.18 on Tue, 21 Oct 2014 06:47:06 AM

THE FAMILY OF DE LACY IN IEELAND

a daughter and heiress, Matilda,

In the first place, Hugh

In Appendix H to the 4th volume