We conclude the trilogy of papers on early Irish monasticism by Father Jerome Fahy with his examination of its liturgical, musical and canonical traditions. He again takes the view that Saint Patrick was personally responsible for the introduction of some of these from the east and ends by proclaiming his pride in what he sees as a uniquely wonderful expression of Christianity in early medieval Ireland:

PRIMITIVE IRISH MONASTERIES— No. III.

“Ris reve mirabilis quod sic cum Deo perpetuo Collequobantur”

IT should be unnecessary to add that those Sacred practices which form a necessary part of our holy religion are strongly inculcated in St. Ailbe’s Rule. Many would dwell with a particular pleasure on the evidences which this ancient document afford for showing that the Holy Mass, the practice of Confession, Prayers for the Dead, and the like, were for our ancestors over a thousand years ago, all that they are for us. We must, however, limit our remarks in this concluding paper, to the study of the recitation and chant of the Divine Office, as observed by our early monks. It is certain that the recitation of the Divine Office was regarded by them as a most important daily duty. In St. Ailbe’s Rule, it is even represented as amongst the most important. In Strophe 22 —

“The perfect observance of the Canonical hours is reckoned as the chief rule.”

And in another passage the religious is cautioned against a neglect of this important duty.

” The Canonical hours he should not neglect.”

We are informed by a learned writer on this subject that the office recited then “was chiefly composed of Psalms and of lessons borrowed from the inspired writings of the Old and New Testament.” And we find in St. Ailbe’s Rule that the number of Psalms recited at Matins alone was thirty. We know on the authority of St Augustine, that in his time, as now, the “Venite Exultemus” was the prelude to the Canonical hours. Even the portions of the Canonical hours referred to in St. Ailbe’s Rule are designated “Matins,” “Tierce,” “None,” &c., as in our own times. It would also seem that the recitation of Matins for a particular day might be anticipated as in modern times; for we find it fixed for

“The close and the beginning of the day.”

The privilege of chanting the Divine Office was highly prized by the monks of our early Irish Church. No doubt they experienced those holy sentiments regarding Sacred Psalmody which caused St. Chrysostom to exclaim: ” Oh, wonderful goodness of Christ! The host of angels sing glory to God in Heaven! Choirs of men in the Churches imitate their chant on earth The same thrice holy hymn, which Seraphim chant in Heaven is sung by multitudes of men on earth. Earth unites with Heaven, and men form one choir with the angels”. And we may infer even from the legendary history of our Church, with what touching sweetness the Divine praises were chanted in those days.

Carthage, afterwards celebrated as the holy founder of the Monastery of Lismore, was, while yet a boy, engaged in keeping his father’s flock; while thus occupied on a certain occasion, a Bishop with his retinue of Ecclesiastics passed by, engaged in singing the Divine praises. So enchanted was the youth by the Sacred melody, that he abandoned his herds, and followed the religious to their Monastery, where he was afterwards found by his anxious friends. When urged to return the boy refused ; and, resisting all entreaties, he added: ” I want but one thing, to learn the chant which I have heard sung by the saints of God.” Indeed we shall see that a love of Sacred music was widespread throughout Ireland in this early period, and that its practice was cherished and encouraged by our Monasteries.

It should be remembered that a passionate love of music has been from the remotest periods an Irish National characteristic. That it had largely developed itself in the pagan period of our history, is a fact strongly attested by the learned O’Curry. He writes: ” If there ever was a people gifted with a musical soul and sensibility, in a higher degree than another, I would venture to assert that the Gael of ancient Erin were that people.” Extraordinary indeed must have been their success if, as O’Curry assures us, the attainments of the Ollamhs in music should be such that they could, by their musical strains move their hearers to tears or laughter, or cause them to sink into a delicious slumber, according to their good pleasure.

The conversion of the nation, far from impeding largely, helped to cherish, develop, and consecrate this love of music. That it was actively encouraged by our National Apostle is proved by the Canons of a Synod celebrated by St Patrick, A.D. 450. The converted bards were amongst the most zealous in consecrating the art of music to the honour of religion and the glory of the one true God. As remarkable instances of this holy zeal, we might refer to Fiach, Bishop of Hetley, and to Duvach, Chief Poet of our first Christian King. There is therefore abundant evidence to show that from the earliest period of our Christian history Sacred music was assiduously cultivated in Ireland in our monasteries. Ireland was the instructor of the surrounding nations in music also, as in science : Caradoc and Venerable Bede declare that Wales and England are indebted to Ireland for their early knowledge of music. The same is incontestably true of Scotland. The Irish Missionaries invited to England by King Oswald, were careful to instruct their pupils in Sacred music throughout all the schools which they established among the Anglo-Saxons Nor was the duty of instructing in Sacred music committed solely to lay teachers, or even to the inferior clergy, it was frequently discharged by Abbots and by Bishops themselves. In the Bards they had also powerful and skilled assistants. The protection extended to that body through St. Columba, at the Convention of Dromceata, effected an enduring union between the Church and the Bardic order, while it secured for the Monasteries the most accomplished teachers of the sister arts of Poetry and Music

In this connection it may be interesting to inquire to what extent instrumental music was utilised by our early Church. It is certain that in this country the Christian poet and pagan druid were alike familiar with the use of the harp. Our National Apostle learned to wake the melody of its chords. Following his example, many of our Abbots and bishops not merely loved its weird strains but became themselves skilled performers. St Kevin, of Glendalough, is referred to as an instance: and it is well known that the number of bishops and of other high ecclesiastical dignatories who at the period of the English invasion were skilled performers on the harp, elicited the unwilling admiration of Gerald Barry. It is much to be regretted that not even one specimen of those early harps has been preserved to us among the many priceless relics of that remote period, now happily treasured in our National Museum. O’Curry, writing upon this subject, says, with the true spirit of an enthusiast for our ancient music,” I confess I would rather have preserved the harp of the Apostle Patrick, or that of the gentle Kevin of Glendalough, which we know to have been so long preserved, than their bells, shrines, or crosses, or any other of their relics.”

It was not for purposes of mere recreation that the ecclesiastics of our early Church devoted portions of their precious time to instrumental music. The most tender strains of their harps were inspired by their private devotions. But though instrumental music was regarded as commendable in domestic psalmody, it was not tolerated in the public services of religion in the early ages of the Church. And this prohibition, which continued in force for “more than six hundred years,” included even the harp. It was owing to the popular association of instrumental music with Jewish worship, and partly, too, owing to a knowledge of the base purposes to which it was degraded by paganism, that its use was strictly prohibited in the public worship of the early Church.

But the simple chant of our primitive Church had a beauty of its own, through which the most sublime and sacred thoughts found harmonious expression — an expression which proved to be both the happy medium through which the soul might be wed to the elevating influence of religion, and the most tender piety find expression for its yearnings and its love. Indeed, such was the universally acknowledged influence of this simple religious chant, that in those Monasteries in which the inmates were sufficiently numerous, the Divine praises were publicly chanted without intermission, night and day. in such Monasteries the brethren were divided into seven choirs, each of which was to engage in turn, in choir duty; and thus the praises of the Most High were ever heard before the altars. This beautiful practice, known as the Laus Perennis, and worthy of the deep pity of our early saints, was observed in the Monasteries of Bangor, of Lismore, and Clonard. The three thousand monks of Bangor were, we are assured, divided into choirs of three hundred singers each. And when St. Columbanus founded his celebrated Monastery at Luxeil, he established there the same religious observance; so that the solitudes of the Vosges soon became familiar with the “voices of the monks, unwearied as those of angels,” in chanting their sacred anthems.

Evidence reach us which show that the same practice prevailed in some of the earliest Monasteries of Egypt and Palestine. The sister of St. Gregory, of Nysa, devoted her days and nights to prayer and psalmody. A Syrian monk named Alexander, who died A.D. 430, founded a Monastery on the river Euphrates, and a second at Constantinople, in which this observance was maintained ; and such was the zeal of his monks in sustaining the Laus perennis that they received in consequence the designation of “Aermetes,” or the sleepless. In a life of St. Mary of Egypt, we are informed that the same practice was observed in a Monastery near the Jordan.

It was perhaps inevitable that simultaneous efforts made for the development of music in different countries, and by individuals independent of each other, should lead to a diversity of method in sacred chant. Such diversity was naturally regarded as out of harmony with that spirit of unity which forms a striking characteristic even of the Church’s discipline. Hence, from an early period, the manner of chanting the Divine praises in the public churches was regulated, not merely by local custom, but also by positive ecclesiastical enactments. The most famous patriarchs of Monasticism also laboured zealously for the advancement of sacred music, and the establishment of uniformity. St. Athanasius laboured zealously at Alexandria, and Flavian laboured at Antioch for the promotion of the same object ; while the energies of St. Basil and St. Gregory Nasiansen were also directed to its advancement. It would appear that the system then advocated by St. Basil had much in common with that of Flavian, and was general from the Nile to the Euphrates.We think it extremely probable that the system of sacred chant prevalent in the East, was introduced into Europe wherever the rules and Monastic traditions of the East were accepted. In Europe, however, it must be said that it was the Ambrosian reform which first stamped sacred music with a character which, in course of time, became permanent and universally accepted. This harmonious uniformity effected at Milan, was soon after perfected at Rome by Pope Gregory, of holy memory. Indeed, admirable as were the reforms of St. Ambrose, it was the authority of the Pope alone which secured for it universal acceptance. Dr. Renehan, in his “History of Music,” refers to the Councils of Vannes, Gironne, Tours, Auxerre, and others, celebrated in the fifth and sixth centuries, the canons of which insist strongly on a uniformity in ”choral service.” The necessity of such decree would seem to argue that the acceptance of the Ambrosian reform was not as general on the Continent, even in the sixth century, as is generally believed. And hence we think it may be argued, that the opinion generally accepted, that St. Patrick introduced the Ambrosian chant to Ireland, may be fairly questioned. Dr. Renehan, who adopts the opinion, and who by its adoption gives it perhaps its highest sanction, states that our Apostle was instructed in that system at Tours. Contrary to his custom, however, he quotes no authority for this statement. On the other hand, we think it can be shown, by reference to accessible evidences regarding the character of our primitive Irish chant, that it had much in common with the sacred chant prevalent in the early Eastern Church. It shall be also seen that in the liturgical remains of our primitive Church, there are no evidences of Ambrosian reform.

It is admittedly difficult to form a correct idea of the musical tones adopted in the service of the early Church The broad fact of its extreme simplicity is, however, well established. Few of the Eastern Fathers laboured more assiduously for the cultivation of Sacred music, than did St Athanasius. Of the character of the Sacred Chant which he established at Alexandria, St Augustine speaks in the following words : ”The psalms were chanted with so slight an inflection of the voice, that it was more like reading than singing.” Dr. Renehan insinuates that each composer adopted the system prevalent in the particular province or country in which he lived ; and that therefore the Greek system of music was very commonly used in the early Eastern Church. Indeed the rules of Grecian and Roman melody would have been lost to us, had they not been embodied in the hymns of the Catholic Church, and in her ”Canto firmo,” which still supplies a nearer approximation, and a more useful clue to the musical system of the Greeks than any other record of antiquity extant.”

The foregoing quotations may aid the reader in estimating that simplicity which formed one of the chief characteristics of the music of the early Church. Now in estimating the character of primitive Sacred music in Ireland, it is a fact worthy of special notice, that the characters used by the Irish for writing their music resembled the musical accents of the Greeks, “which the Irish are said to have learned from the early Latin clergy.” Dr. Sullivan, in his laboured introduction to O’Curry, seems to imply, that in early Irish music the same affinity to classic melody may be traced. And considering the fact that Ireland received her Monastic rules from the East through Gaul, it is not unnatural to suppose that the Sacred Chant which our Apostle had learned at Tours, was that with which SS. Athanasius and Cassian had made the West familiar. And this opinion receives additional confirmation from an ancient ” Tract on various Liturgies,” fortunately published in Dr. Moran’s valuable essays. It has merited the attention of Usher, as well as of modern scholars. It is said to have been copied from a manuscript supposed to belong to the seventh century. Under the title of “Cursus Scotorum,” it speaks at considerable length of the Irish Liturgy. It tells us that it originated with the Evangelist, St. Mark, by whom it was spread throughout Egypt and Italy; and that it was adopted in the East by St. Gregory and St. Basil, St. Anthony, St. Paul, and the early monks. It was subsequently introduced into Lerins by St.Cassian and St. Honoratus, where it was still followed when St. Germanus — one of the principal Masters of our Apostle in spiritual life — was a student there. St. Patrick adopted the same Liturgy, and by him it was “CHANTED ” in Ireland.

It is very noteworthy that Mc Geoghegan advances the same opinion, and quotes Usher in support of his views. ”The first and most ancient Liturgy of this new Church,” (writes M’Geoghegan) ”took its origin from St. Mark. It was introduced into Provence, Languedoc, and some other provinces by St. Cassian and St. Honoratus, St Germanus and St. Lupus established it in Gaul: and St. Patrick brought it into Ireland, where it has been scrupulously observed by his disciples.” We can conclude therefore, if not with certainty, at least with a high degree of probability, that the sources from which our Apostle received his knowledge of Sacred Chant were the same from which he received his knowledge of Liturgy ; that his knowledge of Liturgy and Sacred Chant reached him through the most celebrated patriarchs of Monasticism in the East. And if our early Christian art and architecture, our early Monastic rules and Monastic observances, bear upon them the impress of Eastern influence, it is not strange that our early Ecclesiastical Chant should have much in common with the system of Sacred Chant prevalent in the East, and with which the West was made familiar through Cassian and Athanasius. The esteem in which those holy men were held at Rome, and throughout the West, was at once the source and explanation of their influence.

It is hardly necessary to advance any proofs for the purpose of showing that in the remains of our early Irish liturgy, no evidence of the Ambrosian reforms can be discovered.

The Missal of St. Columbanus is justly regarded as amongst the most ancient and valuable of the interesting memorials of our Early Church. It was in the beginning of the last century pronounced by Mabillon to be more than a thousand years old. The opinion of the learned Bishop of Ossory regarding this venerable memorial of our Early Liturgy, may be cited here, both for its intrinsic interest, and for the light which it casts on the subject of our inquiry. “Everything connected with it,” he says, “bespeaks its Irish origin: its material writing is that of the ancient Scotic school ; its special forms of Latinity, are those peculiar to Irish writers; its multiplicity of prayers was a characteristic feature of the Irish Liturgy; whilst its penitential Canons strikingly and unmistakably proclaim its origin in our island. In a word, the whole Missal attests its connection with St. Columbanus, and probably it was used by him in his Monasteries of Luxieu and Bobbio, to both of which, as is recorded by a writer of the seventh century, he bequeathed the Irish Liturgy.” Mabillon, indeed, contends that its origin is Gallican; and proves that it was not Ambrosian. But while thus asserting the claims of the Church of Gaul to the Missal, “the learned Benedictine candidly acknowledges that in many important points it was entirely at variance with every text known to represent the Gallican Liturgy.” Dr. Moran, however, urges with much force, that it was natural certain points of affinity should exist between the Irish Liturgy and those known to us as Gallican. Considering our Apostle’s connection with the great Saints of Gaul, who were his masters in sacred learning, and as St. Germanus and St. Martin of Tours were in communication with the Holy See it was natural perhaps inevitable, that the knowledge of liturgy which our apostle should receive from them should combine many features common to the approved liturgies of Rome and Gaul. “Now,” continues Dr, Moran, “the liturgy of Bobbio is precisely such as we should expect to arise from a combination of Gaul and Rome, retaining the chief prayers and Canon of Rome, and adopting from the Gallican Liturgy, all that it had most beautiful in its outward arrangement of the Sacred Festivals.”

The Stowe Missal may be referred to as a still more ancient monument of our Early Liturgy. Dr. Todd considered that it might be regarded older that the sixth century. And he even thinks it not impossible that it may have been the Missal of St. Ruadhan, who died A.D. 584. It is particularly note-worthy that the Stowe Missal strikingly coincides with that of Bobbio. “Indeed,” writes Dr. Moran, “the coincidence of the Bobbio Missal with that of Stowe is so frequent and so striking, that it supplies a clear proof of the question which we are examining.” This similarity of character clearly argues identity of origin. Our learned men, therefore can trace no affinity whatever between the Ambrosian and Early Irish Liturgies. These facts must be regarded as a strong negative argument to show that the Liturgy which St. Patrick ” CHANTED ” in Ireland was not Ambrosian.

The simplicity which I have already referred to as a striking characteristic of early Church music, is not, perhaps, likely to be duly appreciated in modem times. Yet, simple as it was, it was capable of exciting the highest and purest emotions of the soul. Now its tones come upon the ear softly as the whisperings of a ”gentle breeze;” or as the breaking of the wavelets on the shores of some sheltered bay. Again they would swell in power and volume, till they recall the deep and far-sounding murmurs of the ocean. Borne aloft, as it were, on the wings of hope, the ” congregational Amen” bursts upon the ear like a thunder peal, as if conscious of the all-sufficient power of earnest, heartfelt prayer. Such were some of the qualities of early Church music which even St. Ambrose and St Jerome considered worthy of special notice, and which may we think, be fittingly referred to here. Its powerful pleadings were frequently attested by the penitent’s tears, and by the joy with which it filled holy souls. Its sacred power proved an effective means of elevating the will, and of intensifying the longings of the soul for the pure and enduring harmonies of the New Jerusalem. Such, however, are results which the far more complex development of modern music can but seldom flatter itself on effecting.

We have written at greater length than we intended on this important subject, and yet we feel that our sketch of early monastic life in Ireland is very incomplete. We have left many things unsaid, which might with interest be referred to, if space permitted. Yet in our brief review of the lives of austere penance — of poverty and constant prayer — of heroic devotion to the claims of charity — of unselfish interest in the religious and social well-being of Eruope — led by our early monks — we have, perhaps, said enough to establish the justice of the record of their triumphs, which we read with pride in the Litanies of Aengus and in the Martyrologies of Talaght and Donegal. The strength and character of the Nation’s supernatural life was shown by its wonderful religious activity, and by the grand results of its elevating and energising influence. And though the brightness of that period was frequently-obscured by the crimes of ambitious chiefs, and of their turbulent followers — in a word, by such blemishes as are inseparable from human history — still we shall look in vain among the nations for the counterpart of the picture which Ireland presents in the early centuries of her Christian history. J. A. F.

THE IRISH ECCLESIASTICAL RECORD, Vol. 4 (1883), 508-517

Content Copyright © Omnium Sanctorum Hiberniae 2012-2015. All rights reserved.

We continue the series on early Irish monasticism by Father Jerome Fahy with a paper looking at the contribution made by monastic schools to learning, art and literature. His pride in these achievements comes across, even if modern scholars have questioned the Irish credentials of Sedulius, author of A solis ortus cardine. The author does not shy away though from laying out the realities of the monastic rule and ends by crediting Saint Patrick personally for giving Irish monasticism its eastern-style ascetic character.

PRIMITIVE IRISH MONASTERIES.— No. II.

“Insula Sanctorum et Doctorum.”

THE Chief Schools of Ireland were Monastic. It must, however, be remembered that after the convention of Drom Ceata there were established several secular schools, which retained, at the same time, a strictly Christian character. For the maintenance of such schools the State made generous provision. They were generally placed under the control of the Bards.

The privileges then guaranteed by law to the Bards were very important. The chief poet ranked next to the king. At the royal table his place was next the monarch. He was provided with a stud of six horses, and allowed a large retinue to whom the doors of the nobles of the land were always hospitably open. In the Chieftain’s territory he could claim annually as emoluments thirty cows and the grass. And such was the esteem in which the Bards were held, that the high privilege of personal sanctuary was conceded to them.

Below is the first in a trilogy of papers on early Irish monasteries published in 1883 by Father Jerome Fahy (1843-1919).  Father Fahy is perhaps best known for his work on the diocese of Kilmacduagh, but in this series of papers he takes a closer look at the early Irish monasteries. His byline ‘Hibernia Sacra’ (Holy Ireland) gives an indication of the tone of his approach which reflects the contemporary romantic and somewhat chauvinistic pride in the early Irish church and its contribution to religion and learning:

PRIMITIVE IRISH MONASTERIES.— No. I.

HIBERNIA SACRA.

IT was the privilege of our National Apostle to scatter the fruithful seed of saving faith throughout the length and breadth of Ireland. The soil proved to be generous and productive. The seeds which he planted and watered, rewarded him with their bright promise of an abundant harvest even long before he was summoned away from the scene of his apostolic labours. He saw the nation to which he preached, not merely yielding obedience to the Divine precepts, but evincing an anxiety to follow the Gospel counsels. It was an unprecedented change. The sons of the Irish without distinction of rank began to embrace the religions state, and the daughters of princes to seek consecration as virgins of Christ. In a word, Ireland through the apostolic labours of St. Patrick, not only embraced the true faith, but also quickly became the most celebrated centre of monastic life in Christendom. This development of monasticism, which was a crowning joy to our Apostle in his old age, was destined to receive a still greater development during the two succeeding centuries: — a development which was alas I destined to be impeded by domestic strife, and destroyed by invasion. Our Apostle’s work was fruitful; after he himself had passed away to his merited reward, his blessing was like a fertilising dew on the land. Religious vocations continued to increase, monasteries continued to spring up on all sides ; so that Ireland soon won for itself the enviable title of “the Thebaid of the West.”

Columba seems to have inherited our Apostle’s rigid spirit of asceticism; and though destined to labour, during the most eventful years of his life, far away from his beloved Ireland, yet even in Ireland as many as thirty-seven monasteries claim him as their founder. Bangor and Lismore soon rose to eminence as centres of learning and sanctity. Their students were numbered by thousands; and not much less numerous were the loving disciples who gathered round St. Kyran at Clonmacnoise to be made familiar there, with those lessons of wisdom which he himself had received from St. Enda on the sanctified soil of Aranmore.

St. Finnean’s Monastery at Clonard was amongst the most remarkable of which even that bright period could boast. St. Brendan and St. Jarlath had founded their most celebrated monasteries, respectively at Clonfert and Tuam. Meanwhile the monasteries of Durrow and Armagh attained a position of eminence among them all, which merited for them the proud designation of “Universities of the West.”

But besides those monasteries, the fame of which is familiar to all who are even moderately versed in Irish History, there arose a vast number of religious houses, the names of whose founders are well-nigh forgotten. However, some idea of their number may be formed from a statement of St. Bernard, regarding a monk of Bangor, named Molua, who according to the abbot of Clairvaux, founded no fewer than one hundred monasteries. But it would perhaps be tedious to recount how monasteries were multiplied in remote glens and picturesque valleys, and in the islands which stud our bays, our lakes, and rivers. In any case it is more pertinent to the scope of this paper to ascertain the character of Irish monastic life during the period under review: and to realise as far as may be, to what extent religious life in our primitive monasteries came to constitute an important factor for three centuries, in the vitality and action of the Irish Church.

With this object we may dwell briefly on the circumstances which, at that period, specially favoured the growth of monastic life in Ireland. The rude simplicity of our primitive monasteries will be found worthy of attention; and may help to remind us of structures similar in design and purpose which the spirit of monasticism created in other lands. The influx of foreigners to our shores, as to ” The storehouse of the past and the birth-place of the future,” will serve to remind us of the studies sacred and profane, which engaged the attention of our early monks. The austere religious observances then enforced by Irish monastic discipline, may be found worthy of the reader’s attention. And as the student who might wish to dwell on the early glories of our monasteries, would recall with a melancholy pleasure the sacred chant with which they were once resonant, we shall endeavour to ascertain the true character of Irish Church music at that remote period.

The fifth century was for Europe a period of calamitous change. The reign of disorder was in the ascendant. The pagan world, undermined by its innate corruption, was in the throes of a mighty change which seemed likely to reduce society into chaos. The greatest empire which the world ever saw was about to perish, and with it those evidences of greatness which a refined pagan civilization had stamped upon it. The barbarians exulting in their new conciousness of power, revelled in the ruin which they caused. And as if to give a still more ruinous completeness to their excesses, their hostility to the Church was bitterly intensified by the poison of heresy which they had largely imbibed. Hence, Churches were destroyed, and monasteries plundered and committed to the flames. ”In such a state of things,” writes Dr. Newman, “the very mention of education was a mockery : the very aim and effort to exist was occupation enough for mind and body. The heads of the Church bewailed a universal ignorance which they could not remedy.

It was a great thing that scholars remained sufficient for clerical education: and this education was only sufficient, as Pope Agatho informs us, ”to hand on the traditions of the Fathers without scientific exposition or polemical defence.” Under those circumstances it was inevitable that monasticism should have shared in the general decadence of religious influences Ireland, remote, and isolated in the northern seas, was unaffected by the lamentable events which proved so prejudicial to social and religious interests in the south and east. Within its tranquil shores religion was free to assert its influence, and bring with it in its train those blessings which Christian civilization confers. Within the precincts of its monasteries, science found a peaceful asylum, and piety a home. It was under those circumstances that Irish monastic life put forth all its youthful vigour; and combined the early fervour of the east with the strength and vitality of western asceticism. It was then that our country merited for herself the proud title of “Island of saints and scholars,” willingly accorded to her by the historians of Europe, and still fondly cherished by her children.

In estimating the numbers with which our primitive Irish monasteries were thronged, it must be borne in mind that there were amongst them many natives of the principal European countries. Hither thronged the English, “as to a fair, to purchase knowledge.” Foreigners came from Gaul and Germany, to be made familiar with the secrets of Divine and human science taught in our monasteries. Our Martyrologies show with what success even Romans and Egyptians learned here the science of the saints. Neither must it be forgotten, that the manner in which foreigners were received by the Irish, was worthy of a nation whose hospitality was proverbial. Our monasteries were open to all, without distinction of race, rank, or country: and to all, knowledge and hospitality were gratuitously extended. To this Venerable Bede bears flattering and willing testimony ” The Scots (Irish) willingly received them all, and took care to supply them with food, as well as to furnish them with books to read, and their teaching gratis.” We should not therefore be surprised at the very large numbers with which we find our monasteries thronged at this period. As many as three thousand students attended each of the monasteries of Bangor and Lismore. In Armagh, the numbers must have been higher still. The number that attended there, even in the ninth century, was computed at 9,000. Such great centres of religious life, and literary activity, as Armagh, Bangor, and Lismore, which were thronged both by lay and ecclesiastical students, must have been in some respects different from the less remarkable monasteries, which were more exclusively devoted to religion. Where eminent teachers attracted large numbers of students, special rules were rigidly enforced regulating the intercourse of the students with each other, and with the public. At Lismore, women were entirely excluded from that portion of the monastic city which was devoted to religion and study. Nor is there any reason to assume that this rule was peculiar to Lismore. We find also that portions of the city of Armagh were set aside exclusively for foreigners. What was then the English quarter, was known as “Trian Saxon,” and comprised a third of the entire city. It may be assumed, with a fair show of probability, that the customs sanctioned in those cities were adopted by other monasteries when similar exigencies rendered their adoption necessary.

And here the question naturally suggests itself, how was accommodation provided for such large numbers? What was the style or character of the structures which usually afforded them shelter ? Little indeed remains to remind the traveller of the extent, or style, of those famous monasteries, which, according to Montalambert, possessed religious communities ”the most numerous ever seen in Christendom.” Some have entirely perished; of others only a few crumbling ruins remain. Yet, from what remains of our ancient monasteries, and from the light which history casts upon them, our antiquarians have been able to form a fair idea of their general form and character.

But we must carefully distinguish the primitive monasteries, of which I write, from those imposing structures which still remain to us, as precious memorials of the zeal and skill of our mediaeval monks. It must not be forgotten that primitive Irish monasteries boasted a venerable antiquity, even before St. Francis or St. Dominick were raised up by God for the honour of His Church. We do not, therefore, refer to those magnificent piles which were raised in Ireland by the great Mendicant Orders of the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries, in which pointed arches and graceful columns, and sculptured capitals, and ornate tracery, still proclaim the art of the builders. Neither do we refer to the chaste structures erected earlier still by the Cistercians and Canons Regular; and which are still imposing even in their ruins. Many generations had received their religious and secular training in our primitive monasteries, long before Gothic architecture, even in its simplest form, was known or adopted.

Our earliest monasteries were marked by a rude simplicity of style. Many of them, indeed, consisted of a wooden church or churches, around which were grouped wooden cells for the accommodation of the religious and students. Such was the church which King Diarmait found St. Kiaran constructing at Clonmacnoise. “As he approached he found St. Kiaran planting the first pole of a church.” It is the opinion of O’Curry that a sculptured panel on the ancient Celtic cross which still stands among the venerable ruins of that holy place, commemorates the event. Such, too, seems to have been the monastery constructed by St. Columba at Iona. Nor was this method of construction entirely peculiar to Ireland. The monastery founded by St. Martin at Marmoutier was also of wood. His oratory was of wood; such also was his little cell, and these might have been regarded by the fathers of Irish monastic life, as models for the construction of their humble religious establishments. It is true that such rude wooden shelters would appear to modem taste as but ill-calculated to afford suitable accommodation to the students who rushed to these monasteries for education. Let us remember, however, that the requirements of the past cannot be estimated from the of the over-fastidious period in which we live. Even in the palmy days of Athens’ literary fame, the student’s lodgings there, are described “as but a crib or kennel,” in which he sleeps when the weather is inclement on the damp ground — “in no respect a home”.

Considering the large number of monasteries said to have been founded by our early saints, the construction of all in masonry of even the simplest kind, would have been practically impossible. It is, however, certain they were frequently of stone. And as time permitted, the perishable wooden structures used as oratories were gradually superseded in many places by structures of solid masonry. Those stone oratories built after the massive style of the most ancient Pelasgic remains, must necessarily appear to us as rude. But though rude, they were enduring; and in their severe simplicity they were well suited to the heroic and penitential spirit of the period. Among the most ancient of our oratories are those of a conical or beehive-shaped form. The stone cells grouped around those oratories were frequently of a similar shape, and were often inclosed with their oratories within strong fortifications of Cyclopean masonry termed “Caisseals.” Such groups of cells, designated ”Cloghans ” by the peasantry, may still be seen in considerable numbers in Kerry, also in Mayo, Galway, Clare, and Cork. The rectangular oratory, with its solitary entrance in its western gable, is somewhat more recent, as it is also more commodious. Considerably larger than the oratory was the church (Diamliag). But considering the custom of stone roofing then prevalent in Ireland, even the churches were necessarily small. We frequently find churches and oratories in the same monastic group. It is not improbable they were thus multiplied to meet the exigencies of the community. Though a simple oratory might have been sufficient for a small community, several such churches should have been necessary for such communities as by reason of their reputation for piety and learning grew into remarkable centres of education.

We are fortunate in having from the pen of Dr. Petrie, a description of one of those ancient groups of monastic ruins. As it represents a considerable section of our stone-built primitive monasteries, the sketch may be given here without apology : —

” Of such anchoretical (sic ?) establishments, one of the most interesting and best preserved in Ireland, or perhaps in Europe, is that of St. Fechin, in Ardoilen, off the coast of Connemara, on the north-west of the coast of Galway…

The church here is amongst the rudest of the ancient edifices which the fervour of the Christian religion raised on its introduction into Ireland. Its internal measurement in length and breadth, is but twelve feet by ten, and in height ten feet.

“The chapel was surrounded by a wall allowing a passage of four feet between them, and from this a covered passage about fifteen feet long by three wide leads to a cell which was probably the Abbot’s habitation. This cell, which is nearly circular and dome-roofed, is internally seven feet by six, and eight high. It is built like those in Arran, without cement and with much rude art. On the east side there is a larger cell, externally round, but internally square, of nine feet, and seven feet six inches in height. On the other side of the chapel are a number of smaller cells, which were only large enough to contain each a single person. They are hat six feet long, four feet wide, and four feet high, and most of them are now covered with rubbish. They formed a lavra like the habitations of the Egyptian ascetics.”