The MacConroys in Iar Connacht

For a thousand years, the Delbna in Tir Dha Locha and their followers were ruled by the dynasty that became the MacConroys, who lived alongside and had apparently good relations with the Conmaicne Mara, whose chiefs became the O’Kealys, to their west.

To put that into perspective, that is more than four times the existence of the United States of America, as of 2013.  It is three centuries longer than the ancient kingdom of Strathclyde, the longest-lasting of the kingdoms of the “Old North” in Britain and most successful of the sub-Roman British kingdoms if you don’t count Scotland, which stands on the foundation of the “Pictish” Verturiones and Caledones who stoutly resisted Roman attempts to plant a permanent presence north of the Firths.

Other than their O’Kealy neighbors to the west, and possibly the O’Malleys of Tir Umhall to the northwest, the MacConroys ruled longer than any other Irish family on the island, including the O’Donnells of Tir Connaill, who were not independent until the 12th century, and the O’Neills of Tir Eoghan, who only gained the ascendancy after the downfall of their MacLochlain cousins in the same century.

The MacConroys (Mac Con Raoi, “Son of the Battle Hound”) in h-Iar Connacht  were the kings of the Delbhna Tir Dha Locha (Delbhna of the Land of the Two Lakes), Muintir Conraoi, and Baile Mheic Conraoi (Ballymaconry).  Their tuatha was also called Delbhna Feadha/Fiodh (Delbhna of the Woods) though these may date after their westward emigration to the far reaches of Connemara in western Iar Connacht.  The family was also called Clan Mheic Con Raoi and Muintir Conraoi, though references to them by these terms are rare.  

An older name for Tir Dha Locha itself was Gno.  Three of the most famous poets of ancient pagan Connacht—Dorban, Flaithcius, and Oengus an Filidh—were from Gno.

The domain lay between Loch Orbsen (Loch Corrib) and Loch Lurgan (Galway Bay) coextensive with the later barony of Moycullen, between the Delbhna Cuile Fabhair in Maigh Seola to the east in the later barony of Clare and the Conmaicne Mara to the west in the later barony of Ballynahinch and a sept of the Partraige an t-Sleibh in the later barony of Ross which was then known as Ui Oirbsen.  The territory covers 145.1 km², 35,851.1 acres, or 56.0 mi².  At the time of the Indenture of Composition in 1585, the barony of Moycullen was composed of fifty-two townlands (now 388).  By comparison, the barony of Ballynahinch then took in thirty-three townlands and the barony of Ross just nine.

Judging from the huge number of primitive churches, the largest of any of the ancient tribes of Iar Connacht, it must have also been quite populous and probably prosperous also.  Its ruler would have ranked as a ri buiden (“king of bands”), also known as ri tuath (“king of many tribes”) and ruiri (“overking”), thus equal in rank to their neighbors across Loch Orbsen, the O’Flahertys, though of lesser status since the Delbhna were fortuatha (a free but tribute-paying tribe) while the Ui Bruin Seola, of which the O’Flahertys were the lead sept, were saortuatha (a free tribe as a sept of the ruling tribe of the province).  

I refer to my ancestors here as the MacConroys “in h-Iar Connacht” rather than “of h-Iar Connacht” or “of Tir Dha Locha” for two reasons: first, while they always held territory in Iar Connacht, they were never rulers of the whole, and, second, while they ruled Tir Dha Locha unmolested for centuries, perhaps a millennium, they relocated in the 13th century to escape direct rule by the O’Flahertys.

Historically and in Irish law from ancient times, Ireland was divided between five kingdoms, or provinces, each with its own king:  Midhe (Meath), Connacht, Uliadh (Ulster), Laighin (Leinster), and Mumhan (Munster).  Over the five was the nominal High King at Tara in the heart of Meath, but his authority was mostly ceremonial.  Often, the High King was also king of one of the provinces, such as when the O’Briens and O’Connors held the office.  Below each provincial king were a number of overkings over several tuatha, the basic unit of life in Ireland, each of which had its own king (ri in Irish).

In earliest recorded history, the kingdom, or province (coiced, i.e. “fifth”) from the perspective of Ireland as a whole, of Connacht was known as Ol nEchmacht, after the then dominant group of dynastys, of which there were three:  the leading sept, the Gamanraige, ruling from the River Galway to the rivers Duff and Drowes from the famous citadel at Cruachan, the Fir Craibe to the south of them, and the Tuatha Taiden in roughly the later Ui Maine. 

It seems the western districts beyond the line of the River Galway, at least the southern part of that region, were left to their own devices, likely one reason a branch of the Delbhna chose to relocate to Tir Dha Locha in the first place after the breakup of the Delbhna overkingdom, which may have happened because of the rise of the Fir Ol nEchmacht. 

Before the rise of the Fir nEchmachta, the later Delbhna Tir Dha Locha had belonged to a single tribal domain that probably dominated most of central Ireland along with the seven other branches (such as the Delbhna Cuile Fabhair above)  into which they divided early in historical times.  The Delbhna together as a group were one of those termed “Fortuatha” in the early historic period, populations and dynasties that had once ruled their regions before the rise of the new tribes and remained free of direct rule of the conquerors.  The Partraige (which had three branches) and the Conmaicne (which had at least seven) were also Fortuatha, along with a little over a dozen other groups.

The Delbhna Tir Dha Locha’s autonomy did not change a great deal with the 5th century rise of the Connachta, descended from Conn Cetchathach (“of the Hundred Battles”), High King of Ireland in the 2nd century.  The Connachta divided into four branches, one of which became the Ui Neill of western Ulster and Meath with the remaining three, Ui Briuin, Ui Fiacrach, and Ui Ailello, giving their collective name to the province.

The ascension of the Connachta had the most effect on the Delbhna Tir Da Locha through the group of the Ui Briuin who conquered Moyseola and deposed their cousins of Delbhna Cuile Fabhair as rulers.  As before, however, those in Tir Da Locha maintained a more or less independent existence along with the Conmaicne Mara to the west and the Ui Orbsen branch of the Partraige an t-Sleibh to the north. 

In terms of geography, Iar (West) Connacht is confined to the region west of the River Galway; those territories to the east of the River Galway belong to Upper Connacht.  It includes the modern baronies of Galway, Moycullen, Ballynahinch, Ross, and Aran.  At the time the term first began being used, however, when the chiefs of Ui Briuin Seola first began being called Ri h-Iar Connacht, the term also took in the modern baronies of Kilmain (Conmaicne Cuile Toland), Clare (Moyseola, or Maigh Seola), Dunkellin (Clan Fearghaill).  Those three territories were lost to that family in 1238; Aran wasn’t added until 1582.

According to Seán O Dubhagain, chief ollamh of Ui Maine in the mid-fourteenth century, the dynasty that became the MacConroys ruled directly over a territory called Gnomore (Gno Mor) in the west of Tir Da Locha, while the family that became the O’Heynys (O'hAdhnaidh) ruled over the southeastern third known as Gnobeg (Gno Beag).  As O’Dugan wrote in his famous topographical poem:

Mac Conroi possesses in peace

Gno Mor of the numerous harbors

O’hAdhnaidh on Gno Beg the lasting

A nest not indigent or perishable

The reality was a bit different.  The division O’Dugan attributes to the Land of the Two Lakes was an anarchronism dating from no earlier than the second generation of occupation by the O’Flahertys of the land west of Loch Orbsen, when the eastern junior branch itself divided into two.

In the various annals, the MacConroys are always referred to as Ri (king) or Tighearna (Lord) of Tir Da Locha and were the dominant rulers of the territory as a whole.  Their title as chief of their name was Mac Mheic Con Raoi (“son of the son of the hound of the battlefield”).  His seat in Tir Dha Locha may have been called Druim Leith.  The sole notice that the 17th century “Four Masters” saw fit to take from their original sources to include in their unified annals referred to the death of “Mac Mheic Conraoi, tighearna Delbhna Tir Dha Locha” in 1142.

The southern family probably originated as erenaghs of the abbey of St. Enda at Ballynspiddal, to which were attached at least three daughter churches.  The name of the family was probably O’hEannaidh (or O’Heaney) rather than O’Adhnaidh (or O’Heyny).

Under ancient Irish law, the proper title of the Mac Mheic Conraoi in the 12th century was ri, or king, rather than tighearna, or lord, as the Four Masters put it.

The Delbhna Tir Dha Locha remained largely independent of outside interference long after their fellow Delbhna came under the rule of other groups.  Ruling a considerable amount of shoreline along Loch Lurgan as well as dominating Kilkieran Bay, the MacConroys were counted among the sea-kings (which means smugglers and pirates as often as fishermen or traders, if the truth be told) of Connacht, the others being the O’Malleys of Tir Umhall, the O’Dowds of Tuaisceart Connacht, and the O’Flahertys of Muintir Murchada in Magh Seola.

The O’Briens of Thomond in Munster were another major sea-faring dynasty in the vicinity, often dominating Loch Lurgan from the base of the MacTeige O’Briens in the Aran Islands to which Teige, son of Brien Borumha, had relocated about 1118.  Before he arrived, the islands belonged to the a sept called the Eoghanachta Ninussa, who had taken them from the Ui Fiachrach Aidne in the 8th century.  The Teige O’Briens were bitter rivals of the later antagonists of the MacConroys, the O’Flahertys, and may have been sometime partners with the former; more about that later.

Tir Da Locha was roughly coextensive with the modern barony of Moycullen, which takes  in the modern civil parishes of Kilcummin, Killanin, Moycullen, and Rahoon (note: these are different from the church parishes).  When first established, the barony of Moycullen included the parishes of Galway (the area outside the walls, formerly Clan Cosgraig) and the parish of Killinkelly, centered on the Carraroe Peninsula and taking in Gorumna and Lettermullen Islands.  The former now makes up the coextensive parish and barony of Galway along with the town, while the latter was merged into the parish of Killannin.

The later O’Flaherty territory of Gnomore took in the civil parishes of Kilcummin (67 on the map) and Killannin (61 on the map).  Gnobeg was made up of the later civil parishes of Rahoon (122 on the map) and Moycullen (107 on the map). 

The ancient church of Kilcummin lies in the civil parish of the same name, dedicated to the 7th century St. Cuimin.  Until Irish monasteries became Romanized in the 12th century, St. Cuimin’s monastery was the center of Christianity in Tir Dha Locha.  St. Cuimin was for centuries the main patron saint of the MacConroys and his feast day is 14 October. 

The other major patron saint of the Delbhna Tir Dha Locha was the 6th century St. Anhin, a contemporary companion of Patrick of Armagh, whose feast day is 18 January.  Others included St. Mocan, founder of the abbey at Barraderry, St. Colmcille, founder of the abbey at Cloghmore, and St. Coelan, founder of the monastery on Inishgarraunmore Island.

Other families in Delbhna Tir Dha Locha prior to the 13th century included the McAneaves (Mac an Naomh, “son of the Saint”, or Mac Giolla an Naomh, “son of the servant of the Saint”), who later anglicized their name as Forde, probably erenaghs of Cloghmore.

Next door to the west, the chiefs of the Conmaicne Mara were the O’Kealys, and their cadets were the MacConneelys, O’Devaneys, and O’Clohertys, with the O’Falons as their hereditary brehons.  To the north, in the country called Ui Oirbsen between Loch Oirbsen and Loch Measg, lived the Partraige an t-Sleibh, whose chiefs were the O’Kynes, next-door to their cousins the Partraige Locha, whose chiefs were the O’Dorcys, in whose territory lay the Abbey of Cong.

Until around 925, the annals refer to the O’Flahertys exclusively as kings of Ui Briuin Seola and do not consistently call them kings of Iar Connacht until the 11th century.

In 1049, Rory O’Connor moved his seat from the ancient capital of Cruachan to Tuam in Deisiceart Connacht, the territory of the O’Kellys of Ui Maine, in large part to keep the O’Flahertys in check.  It remained the capital of Connacht, and of all Ireland after the succession of his son, Turlough, until the English invasion.

In 1124, The O’Flaherty built Castle Galway at the mouth of the river into Loch Lurgan.  It was the one of the first three Norman-style castles built in Ireland and the first in Connacht.

Though they are mentioned by various other sources, mostly in lists of local kings, the sole mention of the MacConroys in the Annals of the Four Masters  is the following:  “Mac Conroi, lord of Delbhna Tir Dha Locha, killed, 1142.”

Connacht was the only one of the five provinces in Ireland that remained unconquered after the invasion by Henry II of England in 1171.  The Anglo-Normans and their allies attempted to take the province in 1177 but were handily repulsed.

The Crown ordered the authorities in Ireland to give the province to Richard de Burgo in 1225, and he moved into the area to take possession.  He met with stiff resistance.  After taking the Castle Galway in 1232, he made it his seat.

In 1238, following their defeat in a war against the forces of Hugh O’Connor and Richard de Burgo, ancestor of the Burkes, the O’Flahertys of Moy Seola and their allies the O’Hallorans of Clan Feargail and the MacAodhs (Hughes) of Clan Cosgraig were forced west of the River Galway, along with their followers the O’Duans, the O’Lees, the O’Donnells, and the O’Canavans. 

The Burkes founded the Earldom of Clanrickard in their newly won territory and Iar Connacht was reduced to Gnomore, Gnobeg, Connemara, and Ui Oirbsen.

The senior O’Flaherty, chief of the Sliocht Eoghan branch, made his home at Ballynahinch in Connemara, later building another at Bunowen along Galway Bay.  Junior branches of the family took the territories of Gnomore (Sliocht Murrough) and Gnobeg (Sliocht Gilleduff).  This, in truth, is probably the origin of the territories by these names.  Loch Lonan (later called Loch Ross and most recently Loch Buffy) north of the later castle and village of Moycullen (Maigh Cuilin) and the Aille River entering Loch Lurgan between the villages of Spiddal (An Spidéal) and Inverin (Indreabháin) are the principal features which divide Gnomore and Gnobeg.

Meanwhile, the O’Hallorans settled both Gnomore and Gnobeg.  The O’Lees initially settled along the western shore of Loch Corrib.  The O’Duans settled in the Renvyle Peninsula, followed by the O’Lees after the mid-13th century.

Displaced from the territory they had held for over a millennium, the MacConroys relocated to the far western reaches of Connemara, settling the country between Mannin and Barratrough (Streamstown) Bays, which came to known as Ballymaconry, with their seat on Ballyconry Peninsula.  Though much smaller than Tir Da Locha, this was still a huge territory, including the south shores of Barratrough Bay, the entirety of Ballyconry (Kingstown) Bay and Ardbear (Clifden) Bay, and at least the north shore of Mannin Bay, as well the peninsula of Errislanan.  

Their new home bordered Ballyconneely on the eponymous peninsula, home of the MacConneelys, eldest cadets of the O’Kealy kings of the Conmaicne Mara.

Some of the family established another settlement called Ballyconry in Thomond, now Co. Clare, in the territory called Boireann (now the barony of Burren), which was ruled by the O’Lochlainns formerly of the Corco Mruad (Ballyconry, Ballyvaughn, Burren, Clare). 

With a sea base at the west end of Connemara near the mouth of Loch Lurgan and another at its head in the territory of Thomond, the MacConroys were well-placed to carry on their dealings with the Teige O’Briens in Aran, if such dealings existed.

Their cadets, the O’Heaneys, meanwhile, settled a wide stretch of country on the remote Cleggan and Renvyle Peninsulas, the latter in the shadow of Tir Umhaill of the O’Malleys. 

Or, rather than after the O’Flaherty invasion, the two families may have decided to move after Walter de Burgo, the lord of all Connacht and Earl of Ulster, thoroughly ravaged the territories west of Loch Orbsen to punish the O’Flahertys and their followers for their attempts to regain their lost territories east of River Galway in 1256.  Afterwards, he built several castles along the western shore of Loch Corrib, which eventually fell to the O’Flahertys.

Meanwhile, the O’Kealys, the chiefs of Conmaicne Mara, relocated to Ui Oirbsen, but they were to find themselves imposed upon again after just a few decades.  The MacConneelys stayed in their home at Ballyconneely Peninsula, but soon found themselves neighbors of the O’Flahertys.

In 1283, a Cambro-Norman knight named Thomas de Joyce fled Wales after taking part in a rebellion against Edward I of England, and landing in Thomond, married the daughter of the O’Brien ruler there.  Sailing up the coast, he landed in Gnomore and was granted the land of Ui Orbsen by The O’Flaherty, which soon became known as Duiche Sheoighe, or Joyce Country. 

Though many of their followers used the family names of Joyce and Walsh, their chiefs used the Gaelic style MacThomas while their cadets were the MacTybods.  Joyce’s son Edmund MacMara, the first MacThomas, married Elizabeth O’Flaherty and gained what is now the parish of Ballynakill.

In the early 1300’s, the O’Flahertys granted a sizable band of the O’Tooles from Leinster fleeing their own fratricidal struggles the island of Omey nearby Ballymaconry.

Soon after this, the O’Heaneys relocated again, migrating east across the River Galway to just the other side of the river, settling in Claregalway.  They became very loyal followers of the Clanrickard Burkes, the most bitter enemies of their O’Flaherty antagonists.

Tired of being caught up in the internecine struggles of the Burkes of Clanrickard, the leading merchants of the town of Galway petitioned the Crown to become a free city in 1333, which it did, becoming the only city in Connacht during the Middle Ages.  It was ruled by an oligarchy of twelve Anglo- and Cambro-Norman familes and two native Irish families who assimilated.  Later known as the Tribes of Galway, they kept to themselves and mostly stayed inside their walls.

Warfare between the Joyces and O’Flahertys devastated much of the land and population of Iar Connacht throughout the entire 16th century.  It was in one of their battles, over what is now known as Hen’s Castle on an island in Loch Corrib, that Donal an Chogaidh O’Flaherty, husband of Grainne Ni Maille, was killed.  The O’Flahertys added to their own casualties by fighting amongst themselves, the eastern branches against the western branch and the branch in Gnomore against that in Gnobeg.

In the mid-to-late 1500’s, many MacConroys served in the crews of pirate ships and as land raiders in the fleet of Granuaille, Grainne Ni Mhaille or Grace O’Malley, alongside O’Flahertys, O'Malleys, Burkes, MacCormacks, MacNallys, MacDonnells, and MacSweeneys.

Tioboid na Caislean (“of the Castles”),  11th MacThomas (chief of the Joyces), built Castle Doon sometime after 1574 on Barratrough Bay directly across from Ballyconry Peninsula.  Up to this time, the MacConroys had been relatively unmolested in Ballymaconry, and may have remained so as there is no record of any hostilities between them and the Joyces at any time.

Co. Galway was established in 1576 in the aftermath of the Tudor conquest along with the other counties in Connacht.    Shortly after this, the Martins of Galway City purchased land from the O’Flahertys of Moycullen beside Lake Ross, becoming the first of the Tribes of Galway to move outside the city.

The O’Flahertys and their allies invaded the Aran Islands in 1582 and drove out the ruling chief, MacDonell MacTurlough O’Brien, and his family.  They were descended from Teige O’Brien, son of Brian Boru, and had ruled the territory since 1018.  The islands had long served as a bastion for such activities as smuggling, pirating, trading, and coastal raiding by its inhabitants, one of their favorite targets being their cousins in Thomond.

In 1585, the former Delbhna Tir Dha Locha territories of Gnomore and Gnobeg in possession of rival branches of the O’Flahertys were joined together along with Loch Corrib and the districts of Clan Cosgraige (the parish of Galway outside the walls) and Killinkelly (Carraroe Peninsula) as the barony of Moycullen, while that in which their more recent home lay, Connemara, became the barony of Ballynahinch.  Joyce Country became the barony of Ross.  The islands in Galway Bay—Inishmore, Inishmaan, and Inisheer—which were only recently added to Iar Connacht became the barony of Aran.

The document describing the change was called the Indenture of Composition, and was supposed to be an agreement between the leaders of Iar Connacht to give up their Irish titles and lands and receive back their lands from the Crown along with “proper” English titles.  It lists as parties to the transition several branches of O’Flahertys, those of Aghenenure Castle (Gnomore), of Moycullen Castle (Gnobeg), Connemara (the head of the western O’Flahertys at Ballynahinch Castle), of Bunowen Castle, and a few other leading members of the clan. 

Before listing a number of leading gentlemen of Iar Connacht important enough to make the role, Indenture lists, by surname only, five chiefs of their name:  MacThomas, O’Halloran, MacConroy (giving the name as “McEnry”), MacDonough, and MacConnor.  The last two of these were septs which split off from the O’Flahertys (there two more of those, MacDermot and MacHughes, different from those of Clan Cosraig, not listed), leaving just three men not related to that family considered important enough in Iar Connacht to be included as chief of their name, which demonstrates the stature which the Mac Mheic Mac Conraoi still maintained.

All of the Irish parties listed in the Indenture refused to conform, by the way, with the exception of Murrough O’Flaherty of Aghenenure, by this time in Fough Castle, who had collaborated with the Ascendancy authorities in the first place.  Murrough was, in fact, chief of all the O’Flahertys at that time only because Elizabeth had declared him so, and none of the other leading members of the clan recognized him as such.  After his death, the primacy in the family returned to the O’Flahertys of Moycullen Castle.

Around 1600, Dubhdara MacConroy, then chief of the name, built the Church of Kill (probably Church “of the Woods”, or “Cill Coill” in Irish) across Bauratrough Bay from Doon Castle.  He was later murdered by the O’Flaherty who lived there after its acquisition by his family.

A court inquisition in 1607 includes the following as leading chiefs of name in the barony of Ballynahinch:  O’Flaherty of Bunowen, MacConroy, MacConnor, MacDonough, O’Duan, O’Lee, and MacConneely.  Here again we have the MacConroys mentioned prominently.  The next two, MacConnor and MacDonough, are chiefs of branches that separated from the O’Flahertys, while the two after that, O’Duan and O’Lee, headed old followers of that family.  The MacConneelys were the eldest cadets of the O’Kealys of Conmaicne Mara.

The western O’Flahertys  purchased Castle Renvyle from the O’Hallorans, who had bought it from the MacTybod Joyces, in 1614, and may have acquired Castle Doon at the same time.

Because of their isolation, the peoples of Iar Connacht, including the MacConroys, managed to maintain their native Gaelic culture and language and the system of Brehon Laws longer than anywhere else on the island, even longer than western Ulster.  This was especially true in Connemara, ruled by the Sliocht Eoghan branch of the O’Flahertys.  Gaelic Ulster fell after the so-called Flight of the Earls in 1607 while Gaelic h-Iar Connacht lasted until 1625, when its inhabitants were finally brought to heel.  It remains the strongest part of the Gaeltacht of Ireland where Gaelic is the everyday language.

The Irish Confederate Wars of 1641-1653 changed the landscape of the Irish forever.  The O’Flahertys, Burkes, and Joyces were heavily involved on the Confederate side, and in a switch from their abstinence in Irish affairs, so were the Tribes of Galway.  All those who fought on the side of the Confederation and even those who had stood by were dispossessed.  The O’Flahertys were kings of Iar Connacht no more.  The only head of a branch with land left was the one in the barony of Aran of the island of Inishmore.

Art MacGeoghegan, a dispossessed lord from Co. Westmeath, was granted the former O’Flaherty possession of Castle Bunowen on Ballyconneely Peninsula and its lands.  The MacGeoghegans were a branch of the southern Ui Neill and later changed their name to O’Neill when they became Protestants later in the century after the Williamite Wars.

The Martins of Ross (the lake, not the barony) in Moycullen, though dispossessed of their holdings in Galway City after the Wars, were granted the rest of the O’Flaherty lands in the barony of Ballynahinch, including the castle of the same name, plus enough additional lands that they were then, with over 250,000 acres, the largest single landowners in the British Isles.  They made their seat at Ballynahinch Castle, former seat of the western O’Flahertys.  One of the Martins of Ballynahinch founded the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals in London in 1824.

At the close of the Wars, when Cromwell sent the Irish “to Hell or Connaught”, he ordered the entire population of Ulster minus the counties of Antrim and Down to be transported to Iar Connacht (he sent those from the rest of Ireland to other parts of the province).  Connacht went from being the most sparsely populated province of Ireland to its most densely populous.  In the neighborhood of Ballymaconry, the Brownes and the Darcys, formerly of the Tribes of Galway, were settled in Omey Island, joining and overwhelming its O’Toole residents.

Largely due to the overcrowding after the refugees from Cromwell’s vindictive wrath crammed into the province, Connacht, and especially h-Iar Connacht, suffered most from famine, death, and emigration during the 1840’s when the Great Hunger struck.

By the 19th century, almost all members of the family had Anglicized their name to King and Ballymaconry became known as Kingstown.  In the early 20th century, styles changed and the family used the Anglicization “Conroy”.

The name of the family lives on in the landscape as the townland of Kingstown Glebe, called Bail ‘ic Conroi in Irish (anglicized as Ballymaconry),  or simply Kingstown, in Omey civil parish, Ballynahinch barony, Co. Galway.  The townland is a mere 78 acres; a “glebe” is a portion of land set aside for the maintenance of a priest or a church, so that must be its origin.  The entire peninsula on which the townland of Kingstown Glebe sits is named the Ballyconry (Kingstown) Peninsula, between Ardbear (Clifden) Bay to the south and Bauratrough Bay to the north.

There is a holy well the locals call Tobar Muire on the south of Ballymaconry at the north edge of Curraun Loch.  In the townland to the west, Eyrefort, there is a Viking burial and is, or was, a clachan nearby.  Two townlands to the east is a promontory fort, probably dating back to the Iron Age.  In the townland of Bauratrough (Streamstown), the same townland that hosts the old church of Ath Dearg, there are two ringforts, likewise dating back to the Iron Age.

Kingstown Bay, which pierces the end of the peninsula in the west, forms the north border of the townland of Kingstown Glebe, while Curraun Loch, an “arm of the sea” or sea-loch connected to Ardbear Bay by a small inlet called Gub Ardmore, borders it on the south.  Kingstown Glebe lies between the townlands of Eyreforth on the west and Knockavilly on the east.  The small Kill (Coolacloy) Peninsula, itself part of Ballyconry Peninsula, forms the north border of the bay.

Inishturk and Turbot Island lie off the end of Ballyconry Peninsula, to the west and southwest respectively; the tiny Eeshel Island lies south and west of Inishturk.  The townland of Ardmore which encloses Curran Loch is actually a tidal island, an island at high tide, part of the peninsula at low tide.  The famous Omey Island, where the 6th century St. Fechin founded one of his many abbeys, lies a bit northwest of the Ballyconry Peninsula opposite the mouth of Streamstown Bay.

St. Fechin is the patron saint of Omey civil parish in which Kingstown Glebe lies.  Since the O’Flahertys adopted Cummin and Anhin as their patrons when they crossed River Galway in the 13th century, it’s likely the MacConroys did the same with St. Fechin.

There is also a point (of land) between the townlands of Kill and Knockavilly at the head of Kingstown Bay called Coolballymaconry.  Kingstown School lies just inside the townland of Kill on Ballyconry Peninsula coming from Knockavally on Sky Road, and Ballymaconry School once stood between the townlands of Kingstown Glebe and Knockavally.

The Irish word “baile”, which forms the first part of the name “Ballymacconry”, had different meanings throughout ancient and medieval Ireland, but in general referred to the land holding of a sept, some as big as 16 townlands (which, by the way, vary widely in size).  Considering that the Mac Mheic Con Raoi was considered important enough as late as 1585 that he was one of only three chiefs of his name not related to the O’Flahertys included in the Crown’s Indenture of Composition for Iar Connacht, it’s not surprising that the name Ballymaconry once applied to a far greater breadth of holdings than the tiny modern townland of Kingstown Glebe might suggest.

There are two townlands named Ballyconry in the barony of Burren in Co. Clare.  One is some distance inland in the parish of Carran and is probably named for the MacConry family native to the region.  The other Ballyconry, however, lies near the shore of Ballyvaughan Bay on Loch Lurgan in the coastal parish of Drumcreehy, on 789 acres of land, and was home to the refugees from Tir Da Locha in the 13th century.

Interestingly, there is a holy well in the townland of Knocknacarragh in Rahoon parish called Tobermaconry, or more properly Tobar Mac Conraoi.  It lies near the coastline about halfway between the village of Barna and Galway Town.  Clearly the name dates before the arrival of the O’Flahertys in the 13th century as well as after the adoption of patronymic surnames.

Beginning in 1700, the west of Ireland, especially Connemara, became the major center for smuggling between the Isles and the Continent, primarily because the residents had a centuries, maybe even millennia, long head start. 

Ballyconry Peninsula’s northern border of Barratrough (Streamstown) Bay, along with its neighboring bays, coves, harbors, inlets, and sea-lochs,  had a rather notorious reputation for smuggling and pirating, one of the most famous local practitioners being Capt. George O’Malley in the early 1800’s.  There is even an inn in the town of Clifden called Smugglers’ Lodge.

I have little doubt that the MacConroys, who were already counted as sea-kings of Connacht, engaged in such outlaw activity along with those more legitimate such as fishing and trading after being ejected from their former millennium-long home in Tir Da Locha, and probably even before that.

Whenever you do research and discover your ancestors were pirates and smugglers and other manners of outlaws and scoundrels, it’s a good day.  A damn good day indeed.

Sources:

Crichaireacht cinedach nduchasa Muintiri Murchada, a tract listing the territories and chiefs of Muintir Murchada before the expulsion of the O’Flahertys, c. 12th century

The Four Masters, The Annals of the Kingdom of Ireland, compiled 1632-1636

Roderic O’Flaherty,  A Chorographic Description of West or h-Iar Connaught, 1684

James Fraser, Guide Through Ireland, Descriptive of its Scenery, Towns, Seats, Antiquities, Etc., with Various Statistical Tables, also an Outline of its Mineral Structure, and a Brief View of its Botany, 1838

James Hardiman, “A Chorographical Description of West or H-IAR Connaught Written A. D. 1684, Edited, from a Ms. In the Library of Trinity College, Dublin, with Notes and Illustrations”, Journal of the Irish Archaeological Society, 1848

John O’Hart, Irish Pedigrees, or the Origin and Stem of the Irish Nation, 1892

J.P. Nolan, “Galway Castles and Owners in 1574”, complied by Lord Deputy Sydney, Journal of the Galway Historical and Archaeological Society, 1901

J. Fahey, “The Flight of the O’Flahertys, Lords of Moyseola, to Iar Connaught”, Journal of the Royal Society of the Antiquities of Ireland, 1902

E. W. Lynam, “The O’Flaherty Country”, in Studies, an Irish Quarterly Review, 1914

Lord Killanin, “Notes on Some of the Antiquities in the Barony of Moycullen, Co. Galway”, Journal of the Galway Archaeological and Historical Society, 1947

Lord Killanin, “Notes on Some of the Antiquities in the Barony of Ballynahinch, Co. Galway”, Journal of the Galway Archaeological and Historical Society, 1953

 “Placenames in the Civil Parish of Kilcummin”, Galway Library website

“Placenames in the Civil Parish of Killannin”, Galway Library website

 “Placenames in the Civil Parish of Moycullen”, Galway Library website

 “Placenames in the Civil Parish of Omey”, Galway Library website

 “Placenames in the Civil Parish of Rahoon”, Galway Library website

 “Ireland’s History in Maps”, website

Curran Loch, viewed from Lower Sky Road, Ballymaconry, Omey, Connemara

My response to former state senator David Fowler's "Bigotry And Intolerance Displayed In Tennessee"

Congratulations, Mr. Fowler, on contriving such a twisted and convoluted misdirection that it is worthy of the speech Shakespeare put into the mouth of Mark Anthony “praising” Brutus and “damning” Caesar.  It is truly impressive to see an American public figure in the 21^st century defend by use of the same the reasoning behind the Dred Scott decision (Dred Scott v. Sandford, 1857) and mimic the cries of antebellum slave-holding plantation aristocrats for their “rats” (sic, “rights”), not to mention the days when interracial marriages in a state where they were legal were prohibited from being recognized in others, such as Tennessee.

I want to thank you, Mr. Fowler, for reaffirming the need for Tennesseans to feel shame and embarrassment on the world stage displayed by the “Don’t Say Gay” bill in the legislature and the sectarian bigotry over the building of a mosque suffocating the city of Murfreesboro.  In case you haven’t been keeping up with current international events, I suggest that a relocation to the Russian Federation (which recently outlawed “gay propaganda”) might find you in a place more fit to your views.

Marriage was made for man (i.e., humans), Mr. Fowler, not man for marriage.

*****

David Fowler: Bigotry And Intolerance Displayed In Tennessee

http://www.chattanoogan.com/2013/8/18/257279/David-Fowler-Bigotry-And-Intolerance.aspx

Last week I commented on the fact that same-sex marriage advocates face a dilemma – will they actually tell people what they believe marriage is and why they believe it.  But Collegedale, Tennessee, just outside Chattanooga, voted last week to recognize same-sex marriages for certain purposes.  Having now made that bold move, the four city council members who voted for recognition have some explaining to do, and that puts them on the horns of a dilemma.

 Are they going to do the right thing or just admit to the bigotry and intolerance their vote exposed?

The City of Collegedale voted last week to adopt a definition of “domestic partners” that BlueCross BlueShield makes available to its policyholders, if they so choose.  That definition allows an unmarried employee of a business, or in this case, a city, to insure his or her “significant other” and the children for whom the partners are responsible.

The city could have said that any employee cohabitating with another person of the same or opposite sex whose relationship meets the definition of a “domestic partner” could have insurance that would cover the employee’s partner and their children.  All that would be required would be that the two be in a loving and committed relationship. But it did not do so.

Instead, the city chose to recognize only those “domestic partnerships” where a same-sex marriage had been performed in a state like New York or Maryland that makes such marriages valid.

Apart from the fact that the city council members who voted for the resolution violated their oath the state’s constitution¹,  which forbids recognition of same-sex marriages, understand what else they did in recognizing only certain loving and committed relationships.  And the best way to understand that is to put their action in the context of U.S. Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy’s recent opinion in the marriage cases.

In speaking of the fact that the federal government wrongfully recognized only certain “moral and sexual choices” – heterosexual ones, Justice Kennedy said:

The differentiation (between same-sex marriages and natural marriages) demeans the (same-sex) couple, whose moral and sexual choices the Constitution protects and whose relationship the State has sought to dignify.  And it humiliates tens of thousands of children now being raised by same-sex couples.  The law in question makes it even more difficult for the children to understand the integrity and closeness of their own family and its concord with other families in their community and in their daily lives.

Now what these four city council members really did becomes more plain.  In choosing to give benefits to same-sex couples that are in a committed, loving relationship and not to give those same benefits to heterosexual couples who may have been cohabitating for years, these council members:

1. Chose to “demean” unmarried heterosexual couples and their relationship, and
2. “Humiliate” the children of unmarried heterosexual couples and to make it “even more difficult for [their] children to understand the integrity and closeness of their own family.”

Moreover, they “demeaned” those in polygamous relationships of love and commitment by arbitrarily saying that only two people can be in a committed, loving relationship.  And they “humiliated” their children, too.

This is now the dilemma these council members face.  They need to either:

• extend benefits to all those who are in committed, loving relationships, regardless of number or sex, or
• admit publicly their own bias and discriminatory attitude toward all cohabitating relationships involving love and commitment that are not recognized by somebody as a marriage.
•  

You see, these council members want to grant moral equivalence to some relationships outside the bounds of natural, heterosexual marriage, but not others.  And the basis for that supposed equivalence — love and commitment — they are unwilling to apply to everyone fairly and equally. And in not doing so, these four advocates for same-sex marriage on Collegedale’s City Council have put on display for all to see their moral bigotry and intolerance toward all loving and committed relationships.

¹ The city’s resolution says that it is not unconstitutionally recognizing same-sex marriage because the resolution “is not meant to confer legal recognition or a right, privilege or responsibility on any particular relationship.”  To say that the resolution gives those who have a same-sex marriage license a legal right to family health insurance, but that the resolution “is not meant to confer legal recognition or a right, privilege or responsibility to any particular relationship” is one of the most illogical, nonsensical, and internally incoherent statements I have ever read in my life.

The ancient Delbhna of central Ireland

At one time a major power in the center of the island, the Delbhna were broken into several factions and scattered across central Ireland.  The Delbhna were one of the fortuatha descended from older populations dominant in Ireland in pre- and proto- historic times.  Many of these, like the Debhna, were themselves divided into a number of sub-groups, “kingdoms not ruled directly by members of the dominant dynasty of a province” (Francis John Byrne) and/or “people belonging to a different stock from that of the rulers of the territory” (T.F. O’Rahilly)

What makes the Delbhna  interesting to me is (1) the MacConroys of the Delbhna Tir Dha Locha are my ancestors and (2) the Delbhna are, according to one legend, descended from Delbaeth mac Ogma of the Tuatha De Danaan, the race of gods driven underground, literally, by the Milesians, the sons of Mil Espain.  Delbaeth mac Ogma is the same as Tuireann, the Irish god of thunder, and Ogma, his father, is/was god of eloquence, inspiration, language, magic, music, physical strength, poets, and writers.

Another legend claims that the Delbhna descended from Suman, son of Lugh Delbath, son of Cas, progenitor of the Dal gCais in Tuadh Mumhan, though this legend, most popular among the Delbhna of Midhe, came late and after the rise of the kings of Thomond to prominence.

Four groups of Delbhna inhabited parts of Connacht:

1. Delbhna Tir Dha Locha (of the Land of the Two Lakes), or Delbhna Feadha/Fiodh (of the Woods), were based in the area of Co. Galway between Loch Orbsen (Lough Corrib) and Loch Lurgan (Galway Bay) which is now the barony of Moycullen.  Their kings took the surname MacConraoi, or MacConroy, later Anglicized as McEnry, then as King.  As chiefs of the name they were styled Mac Mheic Con Raoi.

Their eldest cadets in the south probably originated as erenaghs of the abbey of St. Enda at Ballynspiddal, to which was attached at least three daughter churches.  The name of the family was probably O’hEannaidh (or O’Heaney).  Another family in Delbhna Tir Da Locha prior to the 13th century were the McAneaves (Mac Giolla an Naomh, “son of the servant of the Saint”), who later anglicized their name as Forde, probably erenaghs of Cloghmore, founded by St. Colmcille.

The two lochs to which the name of the territory refers are Loch nOirbsean (Loch Corrib) and Loch Lurgan (Galway Bay).  The territory occupied nearly all the land between the two lakes and the River Corrib.  It was roughly coextensive with the later barony of Moycullen, which took in the civil parishes of Kilcummin, Killanin, Moycullen, and Rahoon (67, 61, 107, and 122 on the map, respectively), the former civil parish of Kilkenny (now part of Killanin), plus the barony of Galway which was later annexed by the O’Flahertys.  This territory comprised 52 townlands at the time of the Indenture of Composition in 1585 (388 today).

After their defeat in a war against the forces of Hugh O’Connor and Richard de Burgo, ancestor of the Burkes, in 1236, the O’Flahertys of Moy Seola and their allies the O’Hallorans of Clan Feargail were forced west of the River Galway.  Both families built castles in both Gnomore and Gnobeg, though the O’Flahertys were lord of both.

Given these circumstances, it was probably at this time that the MacConroys relocated to the far western reaches of Connemara and made their  home at Ballymacconry near the later Joyce (and still later O’Flaherty) castle of Doon; the territory originally took in everything south of Barratrough (Streamstown) Bay south and west to include the lands about the head of Mannin Bay, bordering the land of the MacConneelys on Ballymacconnelly Peninsula.  They also settled on the northwest coast of Thomond, called Ballyconry.  The O’Heaneys migrated first to the Renvyle Peninsula in the far reaches of Connemara, then moved east across Loch Orbsen into the Claregalway area, where they became loyal vassals of the Burkes.

In his 14th century magnum opus, Seán O Dubhagain, chief ollamh of Ui Maine, wrote of their original territory being divides into Gno Mor and Gno Beag, but this is an anarchronism based on the division of the territory by two branches of the O’Flahertys (see “A Brief Account of the Kingdoms of the O'Flahertys” at http://notesfromtheninthcircle.blogspot.com/2013/12/a-brief-account-of-kingdoms-of.html)

(For more on the MacConroys, see “The MacConroys in Iar Connacht” at http://notesfromtheninthcircle.blogspot.com/2013/09/the-macconroys-in-iar-connacht.html)

2. Delbhna Cuile Fabhair once ruled Maigh Seóla (later the barony of Clare), the area east of Lough Corrib in County Galway, until conquered by the Ui Bruin Seola (the later Muintir Murchada who became the O’Flahertys) in the 8th century.  The chiefs remained in Magh Seola, took the surname O'Fathairtaigh or O’Faherty, and were recognized by their overlords as kings of Delbhna Cuile Fabhair as well as lords of Muintir Fathartaigh and Fiodh Luaraigh, which together made up 14 townlands in the later parish of Claregalway.  The name of their territory, Cuile Fabhair (anglicized as Coolfower) means “hill of the well”.  They were dispossessed in the 13th century by the Anglo-Norman knight John de Cogan, a retainer of Rochard de Burgo.  

They and/or their territory are sometimes confused with the O’Fathaigh (O’Faheys) of the district of Pobal Muintir Ui Faithaigh, who were in the kingdom of Ui Maine.  They had at least two septs, called O’Donnell and O’Hughes.

3. Delbhna Nuadat, or Delbhna Ui Maine, were lords of a large section that is now Athlone in Co. Roscommon, situated between the Suck and Shannon Rivers. From the early historic era (5th century CE) they were subject to the Ui Maine sept of Muintir Rodhuibh, later known as the MacGeraghtys.  Their chiefs, who later claimed to be descended from a branch of the O’Connors, took the surname O'Flannagain or O’Flanagan.

4. Delbhna Sith Neannta ruled over the small area now called the townland of Fairymount in the barony of Ballintober South in Co. Roscommon, subject to the Sil Murray.  Their chiefs took the name O'Laoghog or O’Logue.

The Book of Rights mentions a “Delbhna of Druim Leith” paying tribute directly to the king of Connacht at Cruachan  (and receiving stipend), but the context isn't clear which of the four groups it means (although it was likely not Delbhna Nuadat).

Four groups of Delbhna inhabited parts of Midhe and Leighin:

5. Delbhna bEthra probably formed a single kingdom with the Delbhna Nuadat until the latter were subjugated by the Ui Maine.  By the late 5th century they had fallen under the control of the southern Uí Néill.  Their chiefs took the surname MacCochluinn or MacCoughlan, ruling what is now the barony of Garrycastle in Co. Offaly

6. Delbhna Mor were located in what is now the barony of Delvin in Co. Westmeath.  In the 8th century their chief was considered the champion of all Ireland.  They were subject to the southern Ui Neill.  Their chiefs took the surname O'Finnallain or O’Fenelon.

7. Delbhna Bheag, or Delbhna Bec, were based in what is now the barony of Demifore in Co. Westmeath.  They were subject to the southern Ui Neill.  Their chiefs took the surname Ua Maoilchallan, or O’Mulholland.

8. Delbhna Teannmhagh, or Delbhna Iarthair Mhidhe, at one time controlled what is now the barony of Rathconrath, also called West Delvin,  in Co. Westmeath.  They were subject to the southern Ui Neill.  Their chiefs took the surname Ua Scolaidhe or O'Scully.

Chapulling in Turkey

If the word “chapulling” in the title makes you scratch your head, stay tuned.

Recent events in both Turkey and Egypt graphically demonstrate the truth of the dictum that “tyranny by a majority (or by a large plurality in either case at hand) is no better than tyranny by a few or tyranny by one.” 

Though many others have talked about “tyranny of the majority” in the past (John Adams first, followed by Alexis de Toqueville, John Stuart Mill, Friedrich Nietzsche, and Ayn Rand, among others), I may be the first to phrase the matter exactly thus.  Those great minds are, in order, American, French, English, German, and Russian, by the way, if you’re keeping track.

Of course, none of the afore-mentioned worthies had as predecessor the Vulcan philosopher Mr. Spock, who famously said in Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan, “The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few”.  The alternate younger version says the same thing in this summer’s Star Trek: Into Darkness.  Nor did those illuminati have the example of Ben Martin, who said in The Patriot, “Why should I trade one tyrant 3000 miles away for 3000 tyrants one mile away?”

Lest ye think that making a pop culture reference such as quoting a science fiction film, even the words of so iconic a character as the renowned Mr. Spock, trivializes the matter at hand, you should know that no less an institution than the Texas State Supreme Court quoted that very same line in its 2008 decision in Robinson v. Crown Cork & Seal.  It even noted that the source of the quote was from the planet Vulcan.

Another spin on Spock’s famous aphorism, by the way, is that “the needs of the many should outweigh the greed of the few”, which is the implicit cry of the 99% in the Occupy and indignados-indignés movements against the 1% and their infliction of austerity upon the poor and less affluent to pay for the mistakes of the wealthy.

The current situation in Turkey clearly shows what happens when an electoral majority, or rather near-majority (49.83% of the vote in the 2011 general elections) in this case, exercises its power and authority without thought or regard to the wishes of the minority (or minorities) or its effects upon them.  Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan and the Justice and Development Party (AKP) have justly received accolades and praise for the economic, general welfare, health, and human rights advances they have made since first coming to power in 2002. 

However, as so often happens with humans when flushed with success and praise, especially with those who believe they have God on their side as the members of the AKP (however covertly) do, they have begun to see themselves as infallible.  Thus, critics of any regime policy such as the destruction of Gezi Park become “haters of religion” or “terrorists”, and those who protest the authoritarian direction of the government’s overall standard operating procedure become “mohareb”, or “enemies of God”.

The foundation of the modern Republic of Turkey is the Basilea Rhomain, or Roman Empire, upon which the Turkish republic’s immediate predecessor, the Ottoman Sultanate, was based.  In fact, one of the titles of the Ottoman Sultan was “Caesar of Rome” and his capital was Constantinople, founded as Nova Roma in 330 CE, formerly the seat of the (Greek-speaking but still Roman) empire.

Though their realm became independent under Osman I upon the implosion of the Seljuq Sultanate of Rome in 1299, Ottoman rulers did not carry the title of Sultan until Murad I in 1383 after he conquered the Balkans.  After finally taking Constantinople in 1453, Mehmed II adopted the titles Padishah and Caesar of Rome.  But it wasn’t until 1517, after finishing the conquest of the Mamluk Sultanate in Egypt where the titular Abbasid successor of the Prophet resided that Selim I took on the title of Caliph of the Islamic world.

When Mustafa Kemal’s nationalists abolished the Sultanate in favor of a republic in 1922, they allowed the former Sultan to carry the titles Caesar of Rome and Caliph of Islam until 1924 when those were abolished.  Constantinople then became known as Istanbul and the capital moved to the more centrally-located Ankara in the middle of Anatolia.

The Republic of Turkey was founded upon the “Six Arrows” of Ataturk, as Kemal, the leader of the nationalists in the Turkish War of Independence against the occupying forces from the Allied powers (from France, United Kingdom, United States, Armenia, Greece, Italy, Georgia) and the Ottoman Sultante after the First World War, became known.  These Six Arrows are:

1.       Republicanism

2.      Populism (power in citizenship)

3.      Secularism (akin to the French concept of laïcité)

4.      Revolutionism (radical modernism)

5.      Nationalism (based on the social contract theory of Jean-Jacques Rousseau)

6.      Statism (regulation of the economy and action in it where needed by the state).

Regarding his principle of secularism, Kemal desired to completely separate government from religion, his goal being to stop religious leaders from interfering in government and to prevent government from interfering in religion.  He based a large part of his ideas on the French concept of laïcité, or rationalist anticlerical laicism, and wanted his government to stand at equal distance from every religion, neither supporting nor persecuting any one religion.

In practice, things have been a little more complex than that, even in the beginning.  For example, while the Sultanate’s office of Sheikh ul-Islam, which governed religious affairs and was second only to the Sultan, was abolished in 1924, in its place was erected the Presidency of Religious Affairs, commonly known as the Diyanet.  However, Secularism has remained one of the Six Arrows of Kemalism, and, therefore, of the official philosophy of the republic.

Preserving the republic’s secularism is one of the excuses given by military putschtists of the four coups d’etat the country’s armed forces have carried out in Turkey since the republic’s beginning in 1960, 1971, 1980, and 1997.  The last of those was directed against the prime minister from the Welfare Party, the country’s first Islamist party with any success, though not directly against the MP’s (members of Parliament) at the time.

Islamist predecessors of the Welfare Party included the National Order Party, founded 1970 and declared unconstitutional in 1971 and the National Salvation Party, founded in 1972 and dissolved by the military government that came to power in the coup of 1980.  The Welfare Party came into being when the military returned government to civilian hands in 1983 and was declared illegal by the Constitutional Court in 1998.  In its wake, the current president, Abdullah Gul, organized the Virtue Party (Erdogan was imprisoned at the time) composed of both fundamentalist and more liberal Islamists, but it too was declared unconstitutional in 2001.

Later in 2001, the more liberal Islamists around Erdogan and Gul organized the Justice and Development Party (AKP), rebranding themselves as socially conservatives who promoted liberal economics with no politico-religious goals.  While the first two points are accurate, experience has proven during the party’s eleven years in power that the third point is little more than a sham to get around the country’s secularism.

The eleven years since the AKP first came to power in 2002 as the first party in the republic’s history to win enough seats not to have to form a coalition in Parliament have seen a slow but ever-increasing attack by the supposedly non-theocratic AKP against the barriers between the secular nature of public institutions and the ultimate establishment of religion.

Most famously, the AKP passed a law in 2007 allowing female students, teachers, and administrators in universities both public and private to wear headscarves (as visitors have always been able to do).  The law was overturned in 2008 by the republic’s Constitutional Court. 

Since the outbreak of the Arab Spring in 2011, the AKP has actively supported, with money and advice, the “moderate Islamists” in countries across the region of the organizations fraternally connected to the Muslim Brotherhood of Egypt.  Writers of the English-language Turkish press refer to these as “Ikwanists” after the Arabic word for brotherhood.

A little over a year ago in late spring 2012, the AKP passed an education reform bill that not only increased the number of years of compulsory education for both boys and girls from eight to twelve, but also mandated the study of the Quran in schools.

Most recently, late this past May, the AKP passed a law prohibiting the advertisement of alcoholic beverages and limiting where and when they can be sold and consumed.  Other dominoes in the march of the AKP, particularly that clique around Erdogan, toward what many fear is, toward total Islamicization of their society includes a ban on outdoor seating at cafes and bars during Ramadan.  Wandering AKP supporters have taken up violently harassing people who do not observe Ramadan and couples kissing in public, early reminiscent of the hezbollahi gangs of the early days of Iran's Islamic Republic.

Turks have also witnessed the likewise ever-increasing tendency of MP’s from AKP to behave as if none of the opinions of others matter, much like American Republicans in Congress.  This tendency not to play well with others sometimes finds Erdogan and his acolytes shooting themselves in both feet. 

For example, at the beginning of June the AKP’s MP’s voted down an amendment to a bill in a knee-jerk reaction to its proposal by a rival party, the CHP or Republican People’s Party.  In fact, the provision was one from the AKP’s own program. 

Two days later, the majority of MP’s from the supposedly secular AKP walked out of their ongoing session to attend prayers on the first day of Ramadan, leaving a majority of opposition MP’s able to pass a bill prohibiting their interior department from approving projects.

These had also been worrying tendency of the AKP to imitate its militarist predecessors more and more.  Last year, for example, the Turkish parliament passed and President Gul signed into law a bill doubling detention time without charge for those suspected of espionage and/or acting against the interests of the state, constitution, national defense, or state secrets (in effect, a Turkish version of the NDAA passed by Congress and approved by President Obama).  The law was overturned by the Constitutional Court in the first week of this July, by the way.

In the background of all this have been the two largest investigations and prosecutions of alleged conspirators accused of plotting military coups d’etat in Turkish history. 

The first deals with an alleged shadowy secret organization within the military and allies in business and the press called Ergenekon which has supposedly existed since the 1990’s but only investigated beginning in 2007.  Among the more outlandish of the accusation has been that the Kurdish Communist Party (PKK) has been working secretly with Ergenekon to destabilize the country.  Arrests were made beginning in 2008 but the trial finished just this week (on 5 August), with verdicts being announced under heavy security and court proceedings barred to the press.  Three hundred were convicted, sixteen sentenced to life terms.

The second case regards an alleged coup plot supposedly called Balyoz, or Operation Sledgehammer, which prosecutors charge took place in 2003, though for some reason nothing was done about it until 2010.  The trial of these defendants took place in 2012, with some 330 convictions; the appeal case began being heard this July.

In both cases, the defendants were subjected to lengthy pretrial detention, sometimes without charge, and in both cases the trials were held in “special appointed courts” subsequently outlawed by the AKP members of parliament (perhaps in fear these could one day be used against them) after the two trails had begun.  Tainted evidence, unreliable witnesses, secret testimony, and non-democratic procedures have marked both cases throughout.

Supporters of the AKP contend the accused are all guilty and deserving of the strongest penalties available.  Oppositionists have universally condemned the proceedings, protested the innocence of the accused, and called the AKP vindictive.  More objective commentators in the middle suggest that charges might be true for a few, if any, but that the AKP government is also using both cases as excuses to rid itself of critics and opponents in government, business, and media as well as in the armed forces of the republic and intimidate the rest.

Within a few days of the announcement of its afore-mentioned widespread attack on the un-Islamic consumption of alcohol, the Erdogan government announced that it was replacing the private security forces on all university campuses, public as well as private, with state police forces.  It reminded me of the Basiji of the Islamic Republic of Iran having been first organized to help carry out its Cultural Revolution in its universities.

Only a few days afterward, the city of Istanbul announced it was going to destroy the last green space in what was once Constantine’s City to put up a replica to the undoubtedly Islamist Sultanate which Ataturk (“father of the Turks”) overthrew.

Prime Minister Erdogan has portrayed the Gezi Park protesters as “marauders” with no respect for religion.  He accused them of being “looters”, a term intended as a contemptuous insult which the protestors took for themselves as a badge of honor, giving it new meaning as “rebelling”, reminiscent of the way “going Iranian” came to mean “standing up for your rights” in the summer of 2009.  Its anglicized forms are “chapuller” and “chapulling” (thus my title for this piece; now you know).

After the brutal attack by police which cleared the occupation of Gezi Park and Taksim Square, protestors united with secularist religious observers to hold public iftars (fast-breaking meals) once the holy month of Ramadan (roughly equivalent to Lent) began.  Even these have been raided but continued despite that.  Now that Ramadan has ended (today is Eid al-Fitr), we’ll have to wait and see what form of protest Turkish chapullers adopt next.

In the aftermath of the protests, Erdogan called protestors rodents and praised the shopkeepers reaction to them (like beating some of them to death with baseball bats?).  Shortly after the final brutal suppression of the occupation of Taksim Square in the middle of June, Erdogan reiterated his intention to replace private security in the universities throughout the republic with state police forces, presumably more loyal to AKP and more inclined to go along with the Islamicizing intentions of Erdogan and his acolytes.  He stated that the recent experience of hooligans going around attacking people with baseball bats, machetes, and Molotov cocktails proved the need for this, failing to note that those were his own supporters.

One of the most popular signs born by the neo-Young Turks “chapulling” against the rise of a neo-Ottoman Sultanate this summer have carried messages such as “Keep Religion Out of Politics in Turkey and Everywhere”.  The chapullers see themselves not merely as citizens of the Republic of Turkey but as citizens of the whole world, as can be seen from the signs many held saying “We Are All Sao Paolo” even as Brasilians carried signs reading “We Are All Takhsim”.

The messages the chapullers of Turkey is that theocracy, in any amount, anywhere, is a threat to freedom everywhere.  They would also say that arbitrary populism is not the same thing as actual democracy, nor is the ability to cast a vote in elections for representative government.

Endnote: Though the (East) Roman Empire had been officially Greek-speaking for centuries before the Ottoman finished conquering it (since the accession of Heraclius in 610 CE), its government, its residents, its neighbors, its enemies, and its sometimes allies in the West all considered it Roman.  In much the same way that the Gaelic-speaking Kingdom of Scots originated as the kingdom of the formerly Brythonic-speaking Picts.  No one, east or west, called it anything but Roman while it existed.  “Byzantine Empire” was an appellation conjured by Bavarian historian Hieronymous Wolf for his 1557 work, Corpus Historiae Byzantinae; his home was then part of the Holy Roman Empire of the German Nation, which was, according to 18^th century French philosopher Voltaire, “neither holy, nor Roman, nor an empire”.  The Roman Empire (Imperium Romanum, Basilea Rhomain) existed from its establishment at the original city of Rome in 27 BCE to the fall of Constantinople (“New Rome”) in 1453, for a total of 1480 years.

Origins of Samerina (Samaria) and Yehud (Judah)

Around 1115 BCE, the formerly semi-nomadic Arameans established a kingdom based in the city of Damascus from which they dominated the northern Levant until 734 BCE, eventually reaching the Golan area, which gets its name from the later Roman sub-province of Gaulinitis, and the city of Dan.  Their political domination of the Levant and their control of trade in Southwest Asia was such that foreign empires (Assyrian, Babylonian, Iranian) adopted Aramaic as their lingua franca.

In about the year 883 BCE, Omri the Israelite became king of the Canaanite cities of central Palestine.  He built Samaria as his new capital around 878 BCE, along with rebuilding the cities of Gezer, Hazor, and Megiddo.  Annals and records of foreign powers refer to the country as Bit-Humria (Beth Omri), or Land of Omri, suggesting he was its first king.  The city of Samaria included a temple to both Yahweh and Asherah, designated Beth Yahweh (“House of Yahweh”) in inscriptions found at the site, and at least one more dedicated to Baal.

Damascus had become the local regional power, but it was soon challenged by a new player.

From 854-846 BCE, Shalmaneser III, ruler of Assyria, fought a war of conquest against the powers of the Levant, including Hadadezer of Damascus, Ahab the Israelite (son of Omri), Iruleni the Hamathite (from the modern Homs), Aha Gindibui the Arabian, Ba’asa of Ammon, Ahaabbu of  Sir-il-la-a-a, Matinubaal the Arvidite, and Adudnubaal the Shianian.  Hadadezer was clearly the dominant leader and the following commanded bodies of troops roughly equal in size but both half that of Damascus, the others much fewer.  And no power from the south is mentioned in the accounts.

Apparently satisfied with simply receiving tribute for which they probably returned nothing, the Assyrians then left the inhabitants of the Levant alone to fight among themselves.  In 843 BCE, Hazael, king of Damascus, erected a triumphal stele in the northern Galilee city of Dan (on the Golan border, the name Golan deriving from the Roman era Gaulinitis) commemorating his victory over the kings of Israel and of Beth-David (the latter a junior off-shoot of Beth Omri). 

Thirteen years later, in 830 BCE, Hazael destroyed the Philistine city of Gath, clearing a major impediment to settlement of the south by colonists from the burgeoning population of Beth Omri, or Samerina as it was also known, under the leadership of the rival Beth David.

Shortly after this, these Canaanites established a citadel at Tel Arad (10 km west of the modern city of Arad) adjacent to an Early Bronze Age city.  The new citadel included a temple named as a Beth Yahweh with stone monoliths to Yahuweh and Asherah.  It existed until destroyed in 587 BCE by the Chaldeans.

A southern outpost in northern Sinai at a place called Kuntillet Ajrud contained a shrine with pictures of deities and inscriptions to Yahweh, El, Baal, and Asherah.  Built about 800 BCE, it refers to “Yahweh of Samerina and Asherah” and “Yahweh of Teman and Asherah”.  Teman means ‘south’ in Hebrew, and clearly refers to the junior kingdom founded after the destruction of the Philistine metropolis at Gath.  The name Yehud does not appear in any historical record until after the final conquest by the Chaldeans of Babylonia when it becomes a directly ruled province with a Babylon-appointed governor.

The Assyrians under Tiglath-Pileser III conquered the Levant and asserted direct rule over Damascus, Phoenicia, Philistia, and Samerina in 740 BCE.  Apparently they saw no reason to bother with Samerina’s tiny impoverished neighbor to the south.

Not until about 736 BCE does settlement by the Canaanites presumably following Beth David reach the vicinity of Jerusalem, when a city is built at Tel Motza 5 km outside the later city of Jerusalem.  It includes a temple designated as a Beth Yahweh.

Around 722 BCE, the Arameans, Samaritans, and Philistines rose against their Assyrian oppressors.  Epic fail aptly describes the outcome for the rebels.  The Philistines were erased as a regional power as were the Arameans, while Samerina was  thoroughly subjugated, its capital Samaria destroyed and the population of the city deported to Nineveh.  Refugees from Samerina flooded into Teman, increasing its numbers.

In the mid-7^th century, Egypt threw out its Nubian rulers of the 25^th dynasty and set about establishing new guards against encroachment from both Nubia and Assyria. 

Around 650 BCE, Hebrew warriors established a military colony on the island of Elephantine complete with a temple designated as a Beth Yahweh right next to the temple to the Egyptian god Khnum.  At the temple, patrons worshipped Yahweh and his consort Anath alongside Khnum, as well as the gods Bethel, Harambethel, and Asambethel.  There are also Jewish military colonies established near the northeast border towns of Migdol and Tahpanhes-Daphnae, in Pathros, in Noph, and in the capital at Memphis.

Nebuchadnazzar II (aka Lucifer) of the Chaldean Empire conquered Teman, now referred to as Yehud, in 597 BCE, making it a tributary client state after successfully besieging the “city of Yehud” (unnamed), which was conquered but undestroyed.  Eleven years later, 586 BCE, the people of Yehud rebelled and he put down the revolt, destroyed the capital, deported its populace, and appended the former kingdom to Samerina as a sub-province.

In 539 BCE, Iran conquered the Chaldean Empire, and along with it Syria, Phoenicia, Samerina, Yehud, and Philistia.  Cyrus the Great kept Samerina and Yehud in the same arrangement (the latter a sub-province of the former) as part of the 6^th satrapy of Abar-Nahra.  Coinage in Yehud from the period has Yahweh on one side and Anath on the other.  In 525 BCE, Iran under Cambyses II conquered Egypt and added it to the satrapy of Abar-Nahra, though he later split it off as its own satrapy. 

The religion of Samerina and Yehud in the beginning of the period appears to have been henotheistic, moving into mononlatrism, and gradually becoming monotheistic under the influence of Zoroastrianism, then in its strictly monotheistic phase, which was imported by the conquerors.  The name of Zoroastrianism’s chief deity, Ahura Mazda, becomes Asara Mazas in Aramaic, or simply Mazas, which in Greek becomes Moses.  Hence, the “Law of Moses”.

Certainly by the mid-5^th century, when Samerina constructed a grand temple to Yahweh atop Mount Gerizim next to the city of Shechem, the people of both lands (Samerina and Yehud) were monotheistic.  This change in theology undoubtedly filtered down to the colonies in Egypt, where worshippers at the Beth Yahweh at Elephantine then refused to worship Khnum alongside their tribal god.  That temple was destroyed by Egyptian rioters incited by the priests of Khnum in 411 BCE.  In 407 BCE, the Hebrew colonists sent requests for permission to rebuild to Dalaiah and Shelemiah, the sons of Sanballat who were joint governors of Samerina and to Bagayavahu, Iranian governor of Yehud.  It was given and the temple rebuilt, only to fall out of use in the early 4^th century during the short period of Egyptian independence, 404-343 BCE.

Alexander the Great of Macedon conquered Syria, Palestine, Phoenicia, and Egypt in 332 BCE, establishing in Egypt a new capital, Alexandria.  The city of Alexandria had a large Hebrew section from its very beginning, two of the five districts of the city. 

Around this time, the senior male line to the priesthood in Yehud migrated to Samerina, where they were made high priests in the temple on Mount Gerizim.  The Judeans responded by going matrilineal on them, as historian Flavius Josephus reported later, in order to invalidate what had previously been patrilineal succession. 

Control of Palestina by the Ptolemaic Empire was firmly secured after the Battle of Ipsus in 301 BCE.  Greek cities and military colonies were established throughout Palestina.  Onias I ben Jaddua founded the Oniad dynasty of the Jerusalem high priesthood the same year.  In 219 BCE, Samerina passed to the Seleucid Empire after its governor, Theodotus of Aetolia, switched his allegiance.  Yehud followed suit in 198 BCE.

Gnaeus Pompeius Magnus conquered Greater Syria for the Republic of Rome in 63 BCE.  Syria proper became an imperial province while the Hasmonean despots ruling from Jerusalem continued as autonomous clients of Rome until they were deposed in 37 BCE by Herod the Great, who was a reasonably good ruler as for as the people were concerned, even if he had a rather murderous attitude toward his in-laws. 

Upon Herod’s death in 4 BCE, his realm was divided into four parts, but only after a bloody uprising in Galilaea and Iudaea (which included Samaraea and Idumaea) that year which saw two thousand of its leaders crucified following the victory of the Roman legions.  Upon the deposition of Herod’s son Archaelus in 6 CE, Iudaea came under direct Roman rule as an imperial province; Galilaea, it should be noted was already a Roman province though under another son of Herod nicknamed Antipas (his actual name was Antipater).