Chapter 4

The Scythians Colonists--Testimony of Josephus--Magog and his Colony--Statements of our Annals confirmed by a Jewish Writer--By Herodotus--Nennius relates what is told by the "Most Learned of the Scoti"--Phoenician Circumnavigation of Africa--Phoenician Colonization of Spain--Iberus and Himerus--Traditions of Partholan--Early Geographical Accounts of Ireland--Early Social Accounts of Ireland.

The writer of the article on Ireland, in Rees' Cyclopædia, says: "It does not appear improbable, much less absurd, to suppose that the Phoenicians might have colonized Ireland at an early period, and introduced their laws, customs, and knowledge, with a comparatively high state of civilization; and that these might have been gradually lost amidst the disturbances of the country, and, at last, completely destroyed by the irruptions of the Ostmen." Of this assertion, which is now scarcely doubted, there is abundant proof; and it is remarkable that Josephus[42] attributes to the Phoenicians a special care in preserving their annals above that of other civilized nations, and that this feeling has existed, and still exists, more vividly in the Celtic race than in any other European people.

The Irish annalists claim a descent from the Scythians, who, they say, are descended from Magog, the son of Japhet, the son of Noah. Keating says: "We will set down here the branching off of the race of Magog, according to the Book of Invasions (of Ireland), which was called the Cin of Drom Snechta."[43] It will be remembered how curiously O'Curry verified Keating's statement as to the authorship of this work,[44] so that his testimony may be received with respect. In the Scripture genealogy, the sons of Magog are not enumerated; but an historian, who cannot be suspected of any design of assisting the Celts to build up a pedigree, has happily supplied the deficiency. Josephus writes:[45] "Magog led out a colony, which from him were named Magoges, but by the Greeks called Scythians." But Keating specifies the precise title of Scythians, from which the Irish Celts are descended. He says they had established themselves in remote ages on the borders of the Red Sea, at the town of Chiroth; that they were expelled by the grandson of that Pharaoh who had been drowned in the Red Sea; and that he persecuted them because they had supplied the Israelites with provisions.

This statement is singularly and most conclusively confirmed by Rabbi Simon, who wrote two hundred years before the birth of Christ. He says that certain Canaanites near the Red Sea gave provisions to the Israelites; "and because these Canaan ships gave Israel of their provisions, God would not destroy their ships, but with an east wind carried them down the Red Sea."[46] This colony settled in what was subsequently called Phoenicia; and here again our traditions are confirmed _ab extra_, for Herodotus says: "The Phoenicians anciently dwelt, as they allege, on the borders of the Red Sea."[47]

It is not known at what time this ancient nation obtained the specific appellation of Phoenician. The word is not found in Hebrew brew copies of the Scriptures, but is used in the Machabees, the original of which is in Greek, and in the New Testament. According to Grecian historians, it was derived from Phoenix, one of their kings and brother of Cadmus, the inventor of letters. It is remarkable that our annals mention a king named Phenius, who devoted himself especially to the study of languages, and composed an alphabet and the elements of grammar. Our historians describe the wanderings of the Phoenicians, whom they still designate Scythians, much as they are described by other writers. The account of their route may differ in detail, but the main incidents coincide. Nennius, an English chronicler, who wrote in the seventh century, from the oral testimony of trustworthy Irish Celts, gives corroborative testimony. He writes thus: "If any one would be anxious to learn how long Ireland was uninhabited and deserted, he shall hear it, as the most learned of the Scots have related it to me.[48] When the children of Israel came to the Red Sea, the Egyptians pursued them and were drowned, as the Scripture records. In the time of Moses there was a Scythian noble who had been banished from his kingdom, and dwelt in Egypt with a large family. He was there when the Egyptians were drowned, but he did not join in the persecution of the Lord's people. Those who survived laid plans to banish him, lest he should assume the government, because their brethren were drowned in the Red Sea; so he was expelled. He wandered through Africa for forty-two years, and passed by the lake of Salinæ to the altars of the Philistines, and between Rusicada and the mountains Azure, and he came by the river Mulon, and by sea to the Pillars of Hercules, and through the Tuscan Sea, and he made for Spain, and dwelt there many years, and he increased and multiplied, and his people were multiplied."

Herodotus gives an account of the circumnavigation of Africa by the Phoenicians, which may have some coincidence with this narrative. His only reason for rejecting the tradition, which he relates at length, is that he could not conceive how these navigators could have seen the sun in a position contrary to that in which it is seen in Europe. The expression of his doubt is a strong confirmation of the truth of his narrative, which, however, is generally believed by modern writers.[49]

This navigation was performed about seven centuries before the Christian era, and is, at least, a proof that the maritime power of the Phoenicians was established at an early period, and that it was not impossible for them to have extended their enterprises to Ireland. The traditions of our people may also be confirmed from other sources. Solinus writes thus: "In the gulf of Boatica there is an island, distant some hundred paces from the mainland, which the Tyrians, who came from the Red Sea, called Erythroea, and the Carthaginians, in their language, denominate Gadir, i.e., the enclosure."

Spanish historians add their testimony, and claim the Phoenicians as their principal colonizers. The _Hispania Illustrata_, a rare and valuable work, on which no less than sixty writers were engaged, fixes the date of the colonization of Spain by the Phoenicians at 764 A.C. De Bellegarde says: "The first of whom mention is made in history is Hercules, the Phoenician, by some called Melchant." It is alleged that he lived in the time of Moses, and that he retired into Spain when the Israelites entered the land of promise. This will be consistent with old accounts, if faith can be placed in the inscription of two columns, which were found in the province of Tingitane, at the time of the historian Procopius.[50] A Portuguese historian, Emanuel de Faria y Sousa, mentions the sailing of Gatelus from Egypt, with his whole family, and names his two sons, Iberus and Himerus, the first of whom, he says, "some will have to have sailed into Ireland, and given the name Hibernia to it."

Indeed, so strong has been the concurrent testimony of a Phoenician colonization of Ireland from Spain, and this by independent authorities, who could not have had access to our bardic histories, and who had no motive, even had they known of their existence, to write in confirmation of them, that those who have maintained the theory of a Gaulish colonization of Ireland, have been obliged to make Spain the point of embarkation.

There is a curious treatise on the antiquities and origin of Cambridge, in which it is stated, that, in the year of the world 4321, a British prince, the son of Gulguntius, or Gurmund, having crossed over to Denmark, to enforce tribute from a Danish king, was returning victorious off the Orcades, when he encountered thirty ships, full of men and women. On his inquiring into the object of their voyage, their leader, _Partholyan_, made an appeal to his good-nature, and entreated from the prince some small portion of land in Britain, as his crew were weary of sailing over the ocean. Being informed that he came from Spain, the British prince received him under his protection, and assigned faithful guides to attend him into Ireland, which was then wholly uninhabited; and he granted it to them, subject to an annual tribute, and confirmed the appointment of Partholyan as their chief.[51]

This account was so firmly believed in England, that it is specially set forth in an Irish act (11th of Queen Elizabeth) among the "auncient and sundry strong authentique tytles for the kings of England to this land of Ireland." The tradition may have been obtained from Irish sources, and was probably "improved" and accommodated to fortify the Saxon claim, by the addition of the pretended grant; but it is certainly evidence of the early belief in the Milesian colonization of Ireland, and the name of their leader.

The earliest references to Ireland by foreign writers are, as might be expected, of a contradictory character. Plutarch affirms that Calypso was "an island five days' sail to the west of Britain," which, at least, indicates his knowledge of the existence of Erinn. Orpheus is the first writer who definitely names Ireland. In the imaginary route which he prescribes for Jason and the Argonauts, he names Ireland (Iernis), and describes its woody surface and its misty atmosphere. All authorities are agreed that this poem[52] was written five hundred years before Christ; and all doubt as to whether Iernis meant the present island of Ireland must be removed, at least to an unprejudiced inquirer, by a careful examination of the route which is described, and the position of the island in that route.

The early history of a country which has been so long and so cruelly oppressed, both civilly and morally, has naturally fallen into disrepute. We do not like to display the qualifications of one whom we have deeply injured. It is, at least, less disgraceful to have forbidden a literature to a people who had none, than to have banned and barred the use of a most ancient language,--to have destroyed the annals of a most ancient people. In self-defence, the conqueror who knows not how to triumph nobly will triumph basely, and the victims may, in time, almost forget what it has been the policy of centuries to conceal from them. But ours is, in many respects, an age of historical justice, and truth will triumph in the end. It is no longer necessary to England's present greatness to deny the facts of history; and it is one of its most patent facts that Albion was unknown, or, at least, that her existence was unrecorded, at a time when Ireland is mentioned with respect as the Sacred Isle, and the Ogygia[53] of the Greeks.

As might be expected, descriptions of the social state of ancient Erinn are of the most contradictory character; but there is a remarkable coincidence in all accounts of the physical geography of the island. The moist climate, the fertile soil, the richly-wooded plains, the navigable rivers, and the abundance of its fish,[54] are each and all mentioned by the early geographers. The description given by Diodorus Siculus of a "certain large island a considerable distance out at sea, and in the direction of the west, many days' sail from Lybia," if it applies to Ireland, would make us suppose that the Erinn of pagan times was incomparably more prosperous than Erinn under Christian rule. He also specially mentions the fish, and adds: "The Phoenicians, from the very remotest times, made repeated voyages thither for purposes of commerce."[55]

The descriptions of our social state are by no means so flattering; but it is remarkable, and, perhaps, explanatory, that the most unfavourable accounts are the more modern ones. All without the pale of Roman civilization were considered "barbarians," and the epithet was freely applied. Indeed, it is well known that, when Cicero had a special object in view, he could describe the Celtae of Gaul as the vilest monsters, and the hereditary enemies of the gods, for whose wickedness extermination was the only remedy. As to the "gods" there is no doubt that the Druidic worship was opposed to the more sensual paganism of Greece and Rome, and, therefore, would be considered eminently irreligious by the votaries of the latter.

The most serious social charge against the Irish Celts, is that of being anthropophagi; and the statement of St. Jerome, that he had seen two Scoti in Gaul feeding on a human carcass, has been claimed as strong corroboration of the assertions of pagan writers. As the good father was often vehement in his statements and impulsive in his opinions, he may possibly have been mistaken, or, perhaps, purposely misled by those who wished to give him an unfavourable impression of the Irish. It is scarcely possible that they could have been cannibal as a nation, since St. Patrick never even alludes to such a custom in his _Confessio_,[56] where it would, undoubtedly, have been mentioned and reproved, had it existence.

FOOTNOTES:

[42] _Josephus_.--Con. Apionem, lib. i.

[43] _Snechta_.--O'Curry, p. 14.

[44] _Work_--See ante, p. 43.

[45] _Writes_.--Josephus, lib. i. c. 6. Most of the authorities in this chapter are taken from the Essay on the ancient history, religion, learning, arts, and government of Ireland, by the late W. D'Alton. The Essay obtained a prize of £80 and the Cunningham Gold Medal from the Royal Irish Academy. It is published in volume xvi. of the Transactions, and is a repertory of learning of immense value to the student of Irish history.

[46] _Sea_.--Lib. Zoar, p. 87, as cited by Vallancey, and Parson's Defence, &c., p. 205.

[47] _Sea_.--Herodotus, l. vii. c. 89.

[48] _Me_.--"Sic mihi peritissimi Scotorum nunciaverunt." The reader will remember that the Irish were called Scots, although the appellative of Ierins or Ierne continued to be given to the country from the days of Orpheus to those of Claudius. By Roman writers Ireland was more usually termed Hibernia. Juvenal calls it Juverna.

[49] _Writers_.--The circumnavigation of Africa by a Phoenician ship, in the reign of Neco, about 610 B.C., is credited by Humboldt, Rennell, Heeren, Grote, and Rawlinson. Of their voyages to Cornwall for tin there is no question, and it is more than probable they sailed to the Baltic for amber. It has been even supposed that they anticipated Columbus in the discovery of America. Niebuhr connects the primitive astronomy of Europe with that of America, and, therefore, must suppose the latter country to have been discovered.--_Hist. of Rome_, vol. i. p. 281. This, however, is very vague ground of conjecture; the tide of knowledge, as well as emigration, was more probably eastward.

[50] _Procopius.--Hist. Gen. d'Espagne_, vol. i.c.l. p.4.

[51] _Chief.--De Antiq. et Orig. Cantab_. See D'Alton's _Essay_, p. 24, for other authorities.

[52] _Poem_.--There has been question of the author, but none as to the authenticity and the probable date of compilation.

[53] _Ogygia_.--Camden writes thus: "Nor can any one conceive why they should call it Ogygia, unless, perhaps, from its antiquity; for the Greeks called nothing Ogygia unless what was extremely ancient."

[54] _Fish_.--And it still continues to be a national article of consumption and export. In a recent debate on the "Irish question," an honorable member observes, that he regrets to say "fish" is the only thing which appears to be flourishing in Ireland. We fear, however, from the report of the Select Committee of the House of Commons on the question of Irish sea-coast fisheries, that the poor fishermen are not prospering as well as the fish. Mr. Hart stated: "Fish was as plenty as ever; but numbers of the fishermen had died during the famine, others emigrated, and many of those who remained were unable, from want of means, to follow the pursuit." And yet these men are honest; for it has been declared before the same committee, that they have scrupulously repaid the loans which were given them formerly; and they are willing to work, for when they can get boats and nets, _they do work_. These are facts. Shakspeare has said that facts are "stubborn things;" they are, certainly, sometimes very unpleasant things. Yet, we are told, the Irish have no real grievances. Of course, starvation from want of work is not a grievance!

Within the few months which have elapsed since the publication of the first edition of this History and the present moment, when I am engaged in preparing a second edition, a fact has occurred within my own personal knowledge relative to this very subject, and of too great importance to the history of Ireland in the present day to be omitted. A shoal of sprats arrived in the bay of ---- and the poor people crowded to the shore to witness the arrival and, alas! the departure of the finny tribe. All their nets had been broken or sold in the famine year; they had, therefore, no means of securing what would have been a valuable addition to their poor fare. The wealthy, whose tables are furnished daily with every luxury, can have but little idea how bitter such privations are to the poor. Had there been a resident landlord in the place, to interest himself in the welfare of his tenants, a few pounds would have procured all that was necessary, and the people, always grateful for kindness, would long have remembered the boon and the bestower of it.

[55] _Commerce_.--"Phoenices a vetustissimis inde temporibus frequenter crebras mercaturæ gratiâ navigationes instituerunt."--Diod. Sic. vers. Wesseling, t.i.

[56] _Confessio_.--Dr. O'Donovan states, in an article in the _Ulster Archæological Journal_, vol. viii. p. 249, that he had a letter from the late Dr. Prichard, who stated that it was his belief the ancient Irish were not anthropophagi. He adds: "Whatever they may have been when their island was called _Insula Sacra_, there are no people in Europe who are more squeamish in the use of meats than the modern Irish peasantry, for they have a horror of every kind of carrion;" albeit he is obliged to confess that, though they abuse the French for eating frogs, and the English for eating rooks, there is evidence to prove that horseflesh was eaten in Ireland, even in the reign of Queen Elizabeth.