Newsletter Archives

Nuachtán No.9 - June/Meitheamh 2001

The June issue has previously been a supplement devoted exclusively to maping the history of Ireland. Our history series will continue for the next few issues, but it will eventually come to a natural end. In advance of that, we will starting with the current issue gradually seek to harmonise the content of the two issues.

Web presence


The Web page has in large part been prepared and uploaded to the net. There are still parts being worked on such as a links page, however it was felt that the omissions did not warrant holding up publication. So far we have had over 550 hits, with very little effort directed towards publicity. This is quite a satisfactory response and as the site becomes more complete, then we will feel more confident to address the need to publicise our presence. One issue which has been left aside for now is incorporating a clan shop into the site. We still remain unconvinced on the security of such sites and there is the question of whether we have the resources to get involved in commercial activities. This is something which requires more research before we commit ourselves.


"Malarkey"

We have been trying to delve deeper into the origins of the term of abuse "Malarkey" to see whether there is a link between the term and our surname.

Most of the standard dictionaries state that the term originates in the USA. The 1933 supplement to the Oxford English dictionary published in England has no mention of the word. Nevertheless by the 1970's the phrase was reasonably well established in England and the 1976 supplement has quite an extensive piece on "Malarkey."

The English dictionaries state that Malarkey, Malaky, Malarky or Mullarkey are slang words originating in the USA, but whose derivation is unknown. The phrase is used to express the view that a statement is thought foolish. It may also refer to some nonsense or humbug.

The earliest written record we have established is in 1929. Then J.P.McEvoy wrote in the American periodical the "Hollywood Girl" Vol vii Page 102 ,

"Its a wonder you noticed me", I told him. "That's a lot of malaky", says he.

Clearly the phrase was well established by that period, as in 1930 there was in Variety magazine for 29th October, the following snippet from a song review:-

"....The song is ended, but the Malarkey lingers on."

The phrase was not just known in acting and literary circles it was also well established in high society as evidenced by the following snippet from Esquire magazine for December 1934 :-

"Daughter of Mrs Sally Alden, father unknown! What malarkey! All hooey, even protected by the official records of a friendly republic."

It's not clear from the evidence so far whether the word evolved from malaky with short flat "a" vowels into mullarkey with much longer open vowel sounds, or whether earlier versions failed to accurately render the word phonetically. In any event by the late thirties we see malakey written as Mullarkey or malarkey. Hence in "Down Beat" magazine for March 1938 there is the following article:-

"We've got to say to the recording companies..'Cut out the Mullarkey and give us some down home stuff !' "

Ther most famous rendition of the phrase the writer of this article can recall is in the novel Cannery Row, written in 1945 by John Steinbeck. In there Steinbeck wrote ,

"He knew God damn well the story was so much malarkey."

One of the earliest renditions of "malarkey" in English newpapers, or magazines, was in The Sunday Times for 20 April 1959. In the article in question the journalist wrote,

"I will only give you the politicians malarky about imponderables and changing circumstances."

The London Times' upmarket readership of the period, would have had sufficient exposure to Americanisms to understand the term. Since then it's use, as in the USA, has filtered through into popular English culture, such that the term was recently used in a TV commercial in Britain. We shall endevour to further research the topic and will try to get more evidence about the origins.

Extracting Indexes of Births, Deaths and Marriages for England and Wales

Currently we are still extracting the Marriage indexes. The progress has been much slower this quarter than expected. Part of the reason for this has been that much effort has been exerted in building and maintaining the web site. However we are also suffering from lull in enthusiasm for the task, following the devastating report of deficiences with the central indexes. Nevertheless we have to accept that the central indexes are the best hope for initially amassing clan data. Once we are further advanced with building individual family trees, we will then begin to discover the scale of the problem. One solution will be to carry out further localised research to help fill in deficencies in the central records. Inevitably this will be a long and more costly exercise.

Prerogative Court of Canterbury Wills

We have also started to look at the records of Wills proved in the Prerogative Court of Canterbury and preserved in the Principal Probate Registry, in London. This has produced an unexpected result. To date we have checked wills from 1383 to 1745. In the1611 index of wills proved at page 294 we came across the following will :-

Mallacke, John, gent., of Crabbyn, Exmouth [sic], [P. A. B. Axmouth], Devon

This initially appeared to be the will of a person called Mullarkey, but having inspected the will, there is no indication of an Irish connection. Indeed a charitable donation by John Mallacke to the local poor points more to his being a local English man. The likelihood is that there is a separate, but similarly spelt English name. The pronunciation of this English name appears to be somewhat different, perhaps pronounced 'malock'. Indeed as we advanced the search through the 17th century we came across more members of the same west country family.

Then we came across the record of the Administration of the estate of a James Mullarkey in December 1744. In the record Prob6 /120 James' estate was listed as being "in partibus transmarinis." That is to say the estate of either a seaman with no fixed aboad, or occasionally to mean someone whose estate was outside England and Wales. The administration, being in absence of a will is very short of details. Nevertheless it does give enough information to get an idea about James Mullarkey. It records that James was a sailor in the Royal Navy. He had served on several notable ships including, HMS Suffolk, HMS Princess Royal and laterly HMS Victory. We need to check out whether this was the same HMS Victory latter commanded by Horatio Nelson at the Battle of Trafalgar. We also find from the letters of administration that James was a single man and that curiously his next of kin was a Dennis McKenna being his "uncle".

This document discloses a number of interesting points. Firstly, it evidences the presence of Catholic Irishmen on major English warships, at a time when Catholics were being severely discriminated against in Ireland. Furthermore it shows from the number of ships served on, that unlike many of their English counterparts, that these Irish sailors were volunteers and not conscripts. The navy attracted many Irishmen, who could thereby escape even worse repression in Ireland. The fact that Irishmen were serving on key English battleships also shows that they were experienced and valued sailors. As the century advanced the percentage of Irish in the navy increased dramatically. By the late 1790's on some ships over 80% of the sailors consisted of Irish volunteers.

The danger this situation posed to England was surprisingly only realised when French revolutionary Republicanism began to take root in Ireland. The conditions of the sailors on board his majesty's ships was poor. The rations were often substandard and sailors were prey to exploitation of unscrupulous navy contractors. Worse still the savage treatment meeted out by the largely English aristocratic officers was often inhuman. Republican cells infiltrated the navy and harnessed this discontent. In an act of unprecedented rebellion, the English fleet at anchor in Nore mutined on 16 April 1797. On 12 May mutiny spread to the the fleet at Spithead. Realising their dependence on the navy for their security, the English military and political establishment were deeply concerned . The navy feared that the Irish mutineers would assist Republican rebellion in Ireland, or worse still that they would sail the entire fleet to France to assist Napoleon invade England. With over 50,000 sailors at mutiny and republican support emerging amongst the poor of London , the English government were close to a state of panic. While travelling through London, the king in his coach was stoned by a mob chanting, "Peace, bread, no war, no king!."

In a state of high secrecy the English establishment agreed to negotiate with the rebels. Many of the rebels demands were met. With the heat difused from the situation, the navy regained control of the ships and just as suddenly the danger averted. The British Carribean fleet commanded by Admiral John Jervis had largely averted trouble because of a combination of strong discipline and attention given to the health and welfare of the crews. Jervis was well aware of the danger of rebellion. By careful movement of officers and segregation of Marines and the forbidding of the use of the Irish language, Jervis was able to forestall mutiny in his own fleet. Nevetheless the fleet was suddenly exposed to the danger of Republican revolt, when the HMS Marlborough arrived from Britain. Republicans on board tried to seize the ship and sail her to Ireland. The plan failed and the ring leader was seized, court martialled and sentenced to death. Jervis made an order for the execution to be carried out the following morning at 8.00am by the man's own ship-mates, 'no part of the boat's crews from other ships to assist in the punishment'. The Captain of the Marlborough (Captain Ellison, an old and severely wounded officer) feared that the crew would not carry out the order. Ellison returned to his ship and carried out Jervis' instructions to close his gun ports and roll back the guns. Next morning the Marlborough was surrounded and orders were given that she was to be pounded by carronades until Jervis' orders were carried out. Resistance aboard collapsed and the prisoner was walked to the cat head, a noose placed around his neck and, as the watch bells tolled for 8.00am, hauled to the foremast yard arm by his ship-mates. On another occasion, three mutineers were convicted on a Saturday, to be executed at 8.00am the following morning. Vice-Admiral Thompson protested about the execution on a Sunday and was immediately overruled by Jervis who had him removed from the fleet. Later in 1797, Jervis wrote to Captain Lord Garlies:

We have had five executions for mutiny and a punishment of 300 lashes given alongside two disorderly line-of-battle ships and the frigate to which the mutineer belonged. He took it all at one time and exhorted the spectators to mind what they were about, for he had brought it upon himself. Two men have been executed for sodomy and the whole seven have been proved to be most atrocious villains, who long ago deserved the fate they met with for their crimes. At present there is every appearance of content and proper subordination.

Because of his success the navy promoted him and applied his methods to the rest of the navy. Admiral Jervis transformed the fleet in the last quarter of the 18th century. Revolutionaries in the navy were soon weeded out and a program put in place to properly recruit and maintain navy personelle. Irishmen would never again dominate the navy and pose such a threat to England.

The historical context in which the Ó Maelearcaidh clan developed in Ireland - Series Issue No. 9

We set out below part 9 of our short Irish history series. In order to place the Ó Maelearcaidh clan data into it's historical and sociological context we shall over several issues set out a history of Ireland, covering the period from approximately 1140 to the early 1800's. Within the context of a general history, we shall provide a more detailed account of events between 1500 and 1700, as this was the defining period during which the Gaelic order, the clan system and culture underpinning it were transformed into the proto system and culture of the modern day.

Despite the set back at Smerwick, local Old English risings continued to occur in Munster throughout the 1580's. The question of religion had emerged in the rebellion by James FitzMaurice Fitzgerald, however it seams to have gained little extra support outside Munster for Old English resistance to the extending power of the New English. Land and inheritance were the essential issues for the Irish. Rebellion in the Province of Munster lasted until 1583, when it was finally put down by the armies of Sir Walter Raleigh, Edmund Spencer and Henry Carew. The aftermath was bloody and the revenge on the people of Munster was severe. The cruel excesses inflicted by the Elizabethean army on the population were on a wholey new level, even by Ireland's bloody standards. This in turn inevitably raised the stakes for victory and defeat.

Sir Walter was rewarded personally by the Crown with a grant of 42,000 acres of land, from the over half a million acres of land confiscated for treasonous rebellion by the Old English, such as the Earl of Desmond and their Gaelic allies. Elizabeth planned a gigantic scale English plantation of Munster on these confiscated lands, with laws strictly excluding natives from the plantations and forbidding inter marriage between Irish and New English. However the plantation failed to realise the expected number of settlers, with less than 50,000 English planters seeking lands in Munster and those who did try to settle the land were soon under pressure to leave by the resurgent Gael. The plantation did establish an historic English and Protestant presence in Munster, but not one which was decisive in changing the character of the Munster identity.

Elizabeth again tried to further enforce her claim for dominion over the Irish of the Western province of Connaught, by forcing the Gaelic princes to make another surrender of lands to the Crown and accept her as their feudal monarch. She also freed the peasants from the rents they paid to the Irish Princes, as a means of pauperizing the Irish nobility, thereby reducing their ability to finance war against her. Her true intentions can be seen in the small print, requiring the heirs of the Irish Princes to be educated in England where they were to be indoctrinated in the new religion, the English language and loyalty to the Crown. These developments caused growing resentment in Ireland, with the Gael equating the new Protestant religion as just another ploy to control them.

In Ireland the Dublin administration ultimately resorted to remove its chief Old English opponents in the Irish Parliament by more physical means. However as the Old English still enjoyed an overwhelming majority in the Pale, these older men were often replaced by younger and more militant Old English opponents. They continued to assert that the English administration was by its very nature inimical to local interests. Sir John Perrott the new Lord Deputy tried in 1584 to introduce sweeping anti-Catholic laws and constitutional amendments. The proposed legislation galvanized the Old English opposition in the Irish Parliament and the act was defeated. To maintain their role as loyal subjects of the Crown, the Old English of the Pale were drawn increasingly to defend themselves as separate from the "wild Irish." But the New English pointed not only to the Old English opposition to both Plantation and the Protestant faith, but also to their use of the language, customs and culture of the natives.

Richard Stanihurst the Old English Palesman countered by documenting the Old English identity in his De Rebus in Hibernia Gestis. In this work he analyzed the Old English as Anglo-Hiberni, a race separate from both the Irish and the English, with their own vibrant Catholic, Gaelic culture, loyal to the Crown and dedicated to the sound government of Ireland. Indeed he saw only the Old English as the logical defenders of the Crown's interest in Ireland. As proponents of the counter Reformation version of Catholicism, the Old English even saw their religious viewpoint as placing clear water between themselves and the unreformed Catholicism of the "meere" Irish.

Whilst the New English administration had been sceptical of the position of the Old English, their unquestioned loyalty to the Crown, convinced the administration that the Old English might be won over to the political and cultural philosophy of the New English. However from the 1580's onwards, following the failed Old English rebellions and successful Old English Parliamentary opposition, the New English position hardened. They increasingly concluded that the creation of a New England in Ireland could only happen with elimination not only of the Gael, but also of the Old English,

"There bee many ill disposed and undutiful persons of that realme, like as in this point there are also in this realme of England, too many, which being men of good inheritance, are for dislike of religion, or danger of the law, into which they run, or discontent of the present government, fled beyond the seas [to the Catholic kingdoms of the continent], where they live under Princes, which are her Majesties professed enemies, and converse and are confederate with other traitors and fugitives which are there abiding. [These persons] nevertheless have the benefits of their lands here, by pretence of such colourable conveyances thereof, formerly made by them unto their privie friends heere in trust, who privily doe send over unto them the said revenues wherewith they are there maintained and enabled against her Majestie." (Sir Edmund Spencer)

Sir Richard Bingham

As a result of the open attack by English privateers on a Spanish treasure fleet returning from South America, Philip II of Spain sought to intimidate Queen Elizabeth I by confiscating all English shipping in Spanish ports. But Elizabeth was resolved to do all in her power to disrupt the Spanish economy, hoping to undermine their war machine, in order to save the Netherlands from conquest by Spain. Elizabeth saw the Netherlands as England's last line of defence on the continent.

Hence despite the threats England entered the treaty of Nonesuch in 1585 with the Dutch. Whilst necessary to formalize English military support to the Dutch, the treaty constituted a declaration of war on Spain. However problems emerged with the English forces sent to the Netherlands. The commander was incapable of dealing with the Dutch and his men largely Catholics conscripted in Ireland from both the Old English and native Irish Gaels were unreliable defenders of the Protestant Dutch. They were known on occasions to sell their defensive positions and towns to the Spanish opposition. However to ram home her defiance, Elizabeth also authorized the formal establishment of a North American colony and sanctioned further raids both on Spanish merchant shipping and on Spanish ports.

The message was understood and Philip began earnest preparations for his planed invasion of England with an informal agreement in October 1585 between Spain, the Vatican and other Catholic allies. The objective was simply the removal of Elizabeth as monarch. By March 1586 an assessment of the resources required for the invasion had been prepared and Philip began the build up a mighty Armada fleet in Lisbon. The actual point of landing and invasion tactics had yet to be agreed, but the die was now cast.

A swift campaign designed to shock Tudor England into quick submission was the basic plan, and to this end, a landing on the Kent coast was the obvious approach, with a rapid advance on London. This was the basis of the early plans, but as time went by the focus switched to the South coast of Ireland. In the end a poor amalgam of two plans emerged involving a landing in Ireland to draw away the English navy linked to a landing of 30,000 troops from Phillip's army in the Netherlands on the south coast of England! The plan had become far to intricate to succeed.

Several plots to assassinate Queen Elizabeth and replace her with Mary Stuart were attempted throughout the 1580's, but all were either intercepted or failed. Mary may not have been directly involved in these, but with the rumours now circulating about a Spanish invasion, she was just too dangerous to the Elizabethan/Protestant cause to live. In 1587 the unfortunate Mary queen of Scots was finally executed after years of plots against her by both Sir Francis Walsingham and William Cecil, Lord Burghley. The execution of Mary sent a shock wave across Europe. Mary was not only a relative of Elizabeth she was a Queen of both Scotland and France. In France the reaction was to incite anti-English riots and to further strengthen the French-Spanish alliance.

On the other hand Mary's son, James VI could now legitimately be said to be king of Scots. Indeed James barely protested at the execution of his mother, not just because of the English subsidies he was paid, but also because the English showed him a letter by Mary, which the English intelligence service had intercepted, describing the contents of her will (never found). In it she appeared to offer to transfer her interest in the English Crown to Phillip II of Spain on her death. It was probably a forgery designed to elicit James' support for the English in the forthcoming conflict with Spain. However James had ambitions to succeed Elizabeth to become king of both Scotland and England. Hence his outrage with his mother. Unlike Mary, James was a Protestant and was indeed viewed by the master intriguers in the English court as a potential long term replacement to Elizabeth, should she not have children. For the first time Scotland's monarch was fully compliant in an alliance with England. James not only refused to help the Spanish, he forcefully opposed those Catholic forces in Scotland who wanted to mount joint action with the Armada forces against the English .

In Ireland resistance by the Irish Princes to the system of surrender and regrant continued on a clan by clan basis, which Elizabeth's forces were able to comfortably suppress. As a result several prominent Gaelic chiefs were executed, including Ó Néill of Clanderboye, Ó Rourke of Breffney and the clan chief of the MacMahon. To strengthen his military options, Sir John Perrott, in October 1587 hatched a plan to ensure the more substantial forces of the Earl Ó Domhnaill of Tyrconnel did not become involved in opposition to the Elizabethan strategy.

Earl Ó Domhnaill's son, Aodh Ruadh Ó Domhnaill was visiting the Carmelite Church of the Blessed Virgin, near Rathmullan with friends. After devotions the party went hunting. Word came that a Spanish ship was in the lough with a cargo of wine. The captain of the ship invited the young prince to sample the wines. After being entertained with marked hospitality, the group became quite drunk, at which time the trap was sprung. The ship set sail and once past the promontory of Dunaff the ship hoisted it's true colours, the English flag. Aodh was placed in heavy chains and the ship made for Dublin, where Sir Perrott had him imprisoned in Dublin Castle. Using his son as a hostage the English were able to keep the Ó Domhnaill and his clan quiet.

Armada

In 1587 to counteract the efforts of the Catholic League in France and make things more difficult for the Spanish to launch their invasion from France, Elizabeth sent extra financial support to the Huguenots so that they could pay for 11,000 German mercenaries to bolster up their forces. Yet despite the help the war in France was one sided affair, as the League continued to defeat the Huguenot forces. The League did however fail to secure the port of Boulogne, which Philip II hoped to use for the invasion of England. This delay in securing Boulogne in 1588 was ultimately to prove fatal to the success of the Armada, justifying the Elizabethen investment.

Elizabeth also aimed to debilitate Philip's capacity to invade England by draining Spain's financial reserves. English intervention in Europe had forced Spain's military expenditure to relentlessly escalate beyond that of the country's economic capacity to sustain. Meanwhile English piracy on Spanish merchant shipping ensured that Spain could not offset the cost of constant war from her overseas empire or international trade. The Spanish economy was beginning to falter under the combined effect. Furthermore, despite the earlier informal agreement with the Pope, the Vatican refused to contribute to the cost of Philip's English expedition in advance. Instead Philip was forced to accept that he would only receive Vatican funds once Spanish troops were actually on English soil. Phillip's financial position was so exposed that he was obliged to spend precious time in finalizing the formal agreement with the Vatican, rather than on reviewing and correcting flaws in the invasion plan. All Spain's resources were tied up in launching the Armada. Worse still the extensive negotiations with the Vatican had publicized the invasion plans to the whole world, so that there could be no element of surprise with the attack.

In England Elizabeth disarmed all known Roman Catholics. English defences were strengthened at the likely invasion points and more warships completed. Francis Drake and his privateers sacked Cadiz and in the process destroyed much of the Armada's essential food supplies. Drake's fleet then hung off the Azores and paralysed much of Spain's international trade, thereby buying England another precious year to prepare for the attack. The strain on Spain to maintain such levels of military effort were stripping the surplus of the country. In Portugal opposition to the economic squeeze became manifest in anti-Spanish sentiment.

But the invasion delay did allow Philip one benefit, it gave him time to review in depth the plan. He came to realize that the agreed Armada plan was poor and that many of his senior commanders doubted it's feasibility. Accordingly changes were made and the destination of the Armada invasion was now to be Margate on the English south coast. Everything again threatened to unravel when typhus hit the Armada troops. The delays, poor weather conditions and diminished food supplies (which were beginning to go bad due to the delays) dispirited and weakened the ailling Spanish troops. Phillip himself was suffering a period of poor health and therefore not fully in control of the situation as matters took their own course. The League in France with yet more Spanish finance had finally secured the French coastal ports, thereby making them available for the Armada.

Despite massive shortcomings and ships which were very inferior to those of the English, the commander of the Armada, Medina Sidonia set sail from Spain, with some 19,000 troops, on 14 May 1588. However the elements turned on the venture as storms scattered Sidonia's ships, leaving them very exposed to attack by the superior English ships. As a result Sidonia was forced to return to Spain and regroup.

The now further weakened Armada, finally set off on the great adventure on 21 July 1588. The Spanish crews were experienced and despite further storms, managed to navigate most of the formation to the English Channel by the end of July. Intermittent sea battles with the English in the Channel were indecisive, though they caused further losses of vital supplies and ships. Nevertheless, and despite the odds against him, Medina Sidonia managed to reach his objective off the coast of Margate. To his distress, the Spanish invasion force from the Netherlands under General Parma were not ready to join him. English ships with their much superior firepower continued to harry the slower, and much inferior Spanish ships. The saving graces for the Spanish were their superior commander and heroic efforts of their sailors. A slow attrition steadily weakened the Armada, while the Spanish ships hung off the Calais coast. With the Spanish laying at anchor, the English sent fireships into their midst, which scattered much of the Armada, leaving a small core open to attack by the entire English fleet. This Spanish core despite all odds somehow managed to hold its own for long enough to enable the Armada to regroup.

Once again Medina Sidonia showed great leadership, as the Armada fought a hit and run battle with the English fleet desperately seeking to link up with Parma's land forces. Apart from his enemy, Medina Sidonia now had worsening weather to cope with. The English fleet managed to finally engage the Spanish fleet at very close range. The vastly superior English firepower (some 30% greater and of both longer range and heavier ship bursting calibre) crippled numerous Spanish ships, though the Spanish crews bravely drove off boarding parties. Over a thousand Spaniards were killed and many thousands were wounded in the engagements. The English only withdrew as they began to run out of ammunition. They left behind them an Armada now scattered, severely mauled and rapidly loosing heart. Medina Sidonia tried one last effort to reorganize his fleet and link up to Parma, but the weather turned against him. Enforcing martial discipline he managed to regroup the fleet, but the storms drove the Armada into the North Sea.

There were still 112 ships afloat, and the plan was to round Britain and Ireland and then to return to Spain to restock for a fresh attempt to link up with Parma. The Armada had failed, but at this point in time the campaign was still far from a disaster. Circumstances changed dramatically as storms hit the ships when they entered the North Atlantic. Numerous ships previously crippled in the earlier battles, began shipping water and either sunk or were driven aground along the Irish coast. The survivors coming ashore were stripped of their valuables by the Irish, but otherwise largely unharmed and occasionally assisted. One Gómez de Medina and his men went aground off Fair Isle in Scotland and though some 50 died of malnutrition, the survivors were helped to get to mainland Scotland, where negotiations commenced to repatriate them.

Books researched in the Society of Genealogists library, in London