 |
 |
|
||
|
|||
Dublin, 1171These forerunners of the English forces of seven centuries consisted of forty knights, sixty other horsemen and some 500 archers. They had chosen what was militarily a good place of entry to Ireland, although they probably did so not so much with that in mind as for the reasons that it lay opposite south Wales, whence they came, and that it was close to Dermot's former seat of power. Eastward of Bannow lay the river Slaney, the valley of which had been at the beginning, deep woods, great areas of bog, much rough ground, many mountains. Roads, tracks or paths thus remained few, narrow and difficult. Progress away from these roads was an uncertain matter not ordinarily attempted by travellers; it could seldom have been attempted by marching armies. The result was the abiding danger of the 'pass'. Passes were narrow ways through woods, defiles between hills, cause-ways over bogs; places, that is, where ambush was always a possibility. Because tracks were constricted at such places march formation had to be changed to negotiate them, which usually meant that the moving column became more vulnerable. Earth-works and plashing strengthened the defences and further increased the dangers of the pass. In Tudor as in Norman times there were marching armies and hostile forces to dispute their progress. It would be inconceivable that, in the intervening period, the 'primitive tactics' of the prepared ambush should have been given up. Indeed there was nothing primitive about them; they were still suggested in Elizabeth's time by an unchanged terrain.But the methods of early times, and those only, did not, in fact, continue in use for centuries. There was progress. What seems to have led historians to think otherwise is the fact that basic methods of fighting, which favoured defence rather than aggression and which took advantage of terrain, were not given up; they were, rather, developed. It is possible to be misled too by the wealth of contemporary descriptions of sixteenth-century fighting in contrast to the paucity of earlier records. It is easier, when similarities are encountered at intervals of centuries, to suppose a complete absence of change than to search among unpromising material for evidence of growth and development. The warfare of the early part of the fourteenth century, the period of the Bruce invasion of Ireland and of the waning of the power of the descendants of the Normans, saw the use by the Irish of methods that were quite different from those that had earned them defeat in Strongbow's time. After that there was a notable addition to the personnel of the fighters and notable develop-ments in arms and in tactics, culminating in the extraordinary sixteenth-century changes that produced the great armies of Hugh O'Neill, Earl of Tyrone and of Hugh O'Donnell. The battle of Dysert O'Dea, fought in Co. Clare on 10 May 1318 between Richard de Clare and the O'Briens, O'Deas and provided a pathway into the interior. Westward lay the estuary of the three great rivers, Suir, Nore and Barrow, the valleys of which offered still greater facilities of penetration into the heart of the country. Since the Norsemen, the intruders of an earlier age, commanded these two entries from their settlements at Wexford and Water-ford, and furthermore held the harbours so necessary for com-munications with Wales, the first clash of the Norman invaders was with them. Joined by Dermot MacMurrogh, they took Wexford. They then penetrated twice into Ossory-the present Co. Kilkenny-the allegiance of which Dermot claimed, and raided North Leinster. With such assistance Dermot soon re-established himself in his kingdom. At this stage the High King Rory led a hostile force as far as Ferns, which was the centre of Dermot's power; but Dermot was now willing to temporise and the High King-according to the accepted practice-was satisfied to take hostages for Dermot's good behaviour. There was no fighting. Such compromise was, in the twilight of the existence of their office, typical of the High Kings. It argues a higher regard for negotiation than those who call the Irish a warlike race would perhaps allow. Unfortunately, it also provides an explanation for the failure of the Kings to overcome their 'opposition'. The more realistic Normans were soon to use more brutal, but more effective, methods than these to gain their ends. Fitz-Stephen was now reinforced by the arrival in Wexford of Maurice, the first of the great FitzGerald family destined later to play so notable a part in Irish history. He brought ten knights, thirty other horsemen and a hundred archers. Accompanied by his powerful auxiliaries, Dermot MacMurrogh again descended in the following year on a Norse settlement over which he claimed suzerainty and which commanded an entry from the sea. He marched to Dublin, overawed the town and secured its submission. The history of the Battle of Dublin, 1171 continues here Taken from Irish Battles by G.A. Hayes-McCoy, published by Appletree Press. Further reading: A Little History of Ireland by Martin Wallace with illustrations by Ian McCullough. Click here for more information on the book. Battle of Dublin: Part 1 | Part 3 | Part 4 | Part 5 | Part 6 | Part 7 | |
[ Back to top ]
All Material © 1999-2009 Irelandseye.com and contributors
