The entire history of the O’Sullivan clan has been carefully recorded by the annalists of old Ireland but the validity of these records has been questioned by most English-speaking historians. Rather than treating the Irish native heritage with the reverence that it deserved, the invading English dismissed it as a compilation of fantasies and outright lies, written by a race that was utterly incapable of distinguishing truth from fiction.
The people of Ireland and the people of Britain had been struggling to dominate each other for thousands of years, all the while defending their own shores from foreign invaders. While the Irish successfully repelled their enemies, the Romans, the Angles, the Saxons, the Danes, and finally the Normans subjugated the British. Until the very end of the twelfth century, the Irish remained the dominant force and superior culture. Even today Ireland remains the purest Celtic nation on earth.
Unfortunately, one hundred years after they soundly conquered the British, the Normans invaded Ireland in 1169 AD. The Irish proved to be much more difficult to vanquish than their Anglo-Saxon neighbors, however, and a 550 yearlong war ensued that the Normans would ultimately win. By 1650 AD, the thoroughbreds Gaelic Celts were finally forced to bend their proud knee to the mongrel races of England. The noble had finally been conquered by the vulgar.
Of course the victor writes the history, and the history was written in English. The genealogies of the royal families of Ireland were discredited as fantasy and invention to validate the right of the illegitimate Norman kings to subjugate the Irish. When Henry II arrived in Ireland in 1171 AD, he was fully cognizant of the fact that the Irish royal families were much more ancient and noble than his own house.
Henry II’s complicated genealogical line started with a Norman woman of dubious character named Emma. She was both shameless and resourceful. Emma first married Ethelred, a Saxon king of England. After having a child with him, an albino named Edward; she took up with Canute, a Danish king of England. After having a child with him, named Hardicanute, she started sleeping with King Magnus of Norway.
Emma favored her second son and so Hardicanute became king of England upon his father’s death. When Hardicanute died, however, Edward, the Saxon, assumed the throne. Like several other English royals, Edward was homosexual and he never consummated his marriage to the queen. When Edward died his brother-in-law, Harold, assumed the throne. Edward’s Norman cousin, William, the bastard son of a tanner’s daughter, subsequently killed Harold at the Battle of Hastings, and became king. Thus, ‘William the Bastard’ became better known as ‘William the Conqueror’.
In 1087 AD William the Conqueror died and his son William Rufus assumed the throne of England. William II was a red-faced, brutish, and cruel homosexual who was ultimately murdered by his younger brother, Henry. Henry also killed his other brother, Robert, in order to fully secure his claim to the throne.
Henry I married a woman named Edith of Scotland but his only legitimate son William drowned at a young age. Unfortunately, Henry I managed to sire at least 22 bastards during his busy lifetime, many of them ancestors of the present British aristocracy. When Henry I died his daughter Matilda wanted to be queen but was beat to the throne by her cousin Stephen. After Stephen’s death, Matilda’s son Henry II became king in 1154. It was Henry II who would later invade and subjugate the ancient royal families of Ireland.
So Henry II, the great Norman conqueror of Ireland, was the son of a non-crowned daughter of the murderous younger brother of a childless homosexual king, who was in turn the son of a non-royal bastard who was only a cousin of a celibate, childless, king, who was the son of a harlot. Henry’s family had only been “royal” intermittently for about a century when it invaded Ireland.
In comparison, the Irish royal family could trace its uninterrupted and legitimate blood-line back for twenty-five hundred years. This is why it was imperative that the English dishonor the rightful Irish kings and their ancestors. They needed to bury the fact that Gaelic society supported professional genealogists whose sole function was to maintain an accurate history of the ruling families. They accused the Irish of inventing their pedigrees and were very successful in portraying the Irish as ignorant and primitive savages reigned over by whoever was the strongest brute at the time.
The eloquent Irish language, the mother of poetry, was outlawed. The advanced legal system that had maintained relative order and peace and had allowed art, music, and religion to flourish was deemed primitive and destroyed. The great Gaelic clan of O’Sullivan was forced to scatter around the world like “wild geese”. Those who remained in Ireland were mercilessly oppressed and submerged into the murkiest depths of poverty and privation.
While the English warlords decimated the native culture, their literary compatriots churned out a copious flow of anti-Irish propaganda and slanted ‘histories’. In the seventeenth century, as the old Gaelic order sighed its last breath, an Anglo-Irish Catholic priest named Geoffrey Keating lifted his pen in the defense of truth and nobility. He railed against the dishonesty of his malignant English countrymen and carefully recorded for posterity the true history of Ireland. These are his words:
“WHOSOEVER proposes to trace and follow up the ancient history and origin of any country ought to determine on setting down plainly the method which reveals most clearly the truth of the state of the country, and the condition of the people who inhabit it: and forasmuch as I have undertaken to investigate the groundwork of Irish historical knowledge, I have thought at the outset of deploring some part of her affliction and of her unequal contest; especially the unfairness which continues to be practiced on her inhabitants, alike the old foreigners who are in possession more than four hundred years from the Norman invasion down, as well as the native Irish who have had possession during almost three thousand years. For there is no historian of all those who have written on Ireland from that epoch that has not continuously sought to cast reproach and blame both on the old foreign settlers and on the native Irish.
Whereof the testimony given by Cambrensis, Spenser, Stanihurst, Hanmer, Camden, Barckly, Moryson, Davies, Campion, and every other new foreigner who has written on Ireland from that time, may bear witness; inasmuch as it is almost according to the fashion of the beetle they act, when writing concerning the Irish. For it is the fashion of the beetle, when it lifts its head in the summertime, to go about fluttering, and not to stoop towards any delicate flower that maybe in the field, or any blossom in the garden, though they be all roses or lilies, but it keeps bustling about until it meets with dung of horse or cow, and proceeds to roll itself there in. Thus it is with the set above named; they have displayed no inclination to treat of the virtues or good qualities of the nobles among the old foreigners and the native Irish who then dwelt in Ireland; such as to write on their valor and on their piety, on the number of abbeys they had founded, and what land and endowments for worship they had bestowed on them; on the privileges they had granted to the learned professors of Ireland, and all the reverence they manifested towards churchmen and prelates: on every immunity they secured for their sages, and the maintenance they provided for the poor and for orphans ; on each donation they were wont to bestow on the learned and on petitioners, and on the extent of their hospitality to guests, insomuch that it cannot truthfully be said that there ever existed in Europe folk who surpassed them, in their own time, in generosity or in hospitality according to their ability. Bear witness the literary assemblies which were proclaimed by them, a custom not heard of among any other people in Europe, so that the stress of generosity and hospitality among the old foreigners and the native Irish of Ireland was such that they did not deem it sufficient to give to any who should come seeking relief, but issued a general invitation summoning them, in order to bestow valuable gifts and treasure on them.
However, nothing of all this is described in the works of the present day foreigners, but they take notice of the ways of inferiors and wretched little hags, ignoring the worthy actions of the gentry: yet as far as regards the old Irish, who were inhabiting this island before the Norman invasion, let it appear whether there has been in Europe any people more valiant than they, contending with the Romans for the defense of Scotland.
For they compelled the Britons to make a dyke between their portion of Britain and Scotland, to protect Britain from the incursion of the Irish; and notwithstanding that there were usually fifty two thousand of a Roman army defending the dyke, and two hundred scouts riding about, and twenty three thousand foot and thirteen hundred horse with them besides, defending the frontier and harbors of the country against the violent attacks of the Scots and of the Picts; yet, with all that, the Irish would burst over the dyke, and the country would be harried by them, despite these great hosts, according to Samuel Daniel in his chronicle. Cormac, son of Cuileannan, says also in his ‘Saltair,’ that, as a result of the violence of the Irish (Scots) and of the Crutheni (Picts) against Britain, the Britons three times conspired against the Roman governors set over them, as a means of purchasing peace with the Scots and Picts.
Your ever faithful poor friend till death,
GEOFFREY KEATING.”
The Irish eventually lost their war with England and in so doing lost their credibility as a civilization. Since English subsequently became the world language, all of the British prejudices against the ancient Irish were universally circulated and accepted as fact. Sadly, there are people with Gaelic surnames still writing ‘history’ in English and unwittingly perpetuating this anti-Irish propaganda.
The native history of Ireland can not and should not be dismissed. Like all ancient history, it is not exact and it was certainly colored by myth and contemporary politics, but no more so than the ancient histories of England, China, Egypt, Japan, Greece, or Israel. The contention that all of the Irish annals were medieval inventions is ludicrous. The ancient Irish accounts should be accepted with the cautious respect with which all other ancient histories are accepted.
