IRISH CHIEFLY SUCCESSION:
‘AD HOC DERBHFINE’ GUIDELINES
Background
The succession to the chiefship of a name in Ireland has been a problem since the
destruction of the Gaelic order of things after the Battle of Kinsale (1601-02) and
certainly after the Cromwellian (1641-1652) and Williamite Wars (1689-91).
Throughout our history the government of society in Ireland was based previously on
our own Brehon Law, which was very precise in terms of the matter of who and why
and how society was ‘managed’. Each clan or sept or sub-sept of a ‘name’ had a
Chief-of-Name who was elected from an hereditary group within the name itself. The
actual election was carried out by the ‘Derbhfine’, who were all those of the chiefly
family descended from a common great-grandfather. Normally the election took
place during the chiefship of a person, and involved the selection of the ‘Tanist’ or the
person who would succeed the chief at his demise or his otherwise being
incapacitated.
The Gaelic system indeed was adopted by a number of Hiberno-Norse and NormanIrish families, who had in effect become ‘gaelicised’ and handled their own governing
via Brehon Law. It must be immediately stated that the Irish practices differed
profoundly from the English and Continental systems based on succession to titles by
primogeniture. That was a system whereby the eldest son succeeded his father and
was not at all one in which there was any election.
While not perfect, the Irish approach was based on the premise that the ‘best person’
electable should inherit from the then serving chief. And therefore the electee could
be a nephew, uncle, cousin, as well as any son and not necessarily the eldest. Yes,
there were disagreements and even battles between an electee and one or more of
those who were not selected, but who felt wronged. But by and large it was a very
well-functioning system and in keeping with the Irish customs and social mores as
well. For a Chief-of-Name of any clan was responsible for the whole clan and he
himself was not the ‘owner’ of the land but rather the trustee for the land of the
people within his chiefship. Thus avoided was any purely selfish motive of wanting
his inheritances of property and lands or whatever to go to his ‘immediate’ family of
his own son or sons. Whereas, again, under English law, the king or other noble was
assured under primogeniture that his eldest son would succeed him (even if not really
the most capable). And also of course, the English system was based on the king or
noble being the owner in fee simple of all the lands he controlled, with the people
receiving only what he allowed them to use for cash or other payments under a feudal
system. The overlord always retained the power to reject a succession or to simply
withhold recognitions as he saw fit.
One of the main contentions between the English and Irish from the entry into
Ireland in 1169-72 was the differences between the English law of inheritances and
tenure of lands and that of the Irish. The English came to be determined to impose
their system and to totally eliminate Brehon Law and its processes of organization of
society to include Irish chiefly inheritances.
We all know that indeed the English eventually succeeded, totally, based on their
victory at Kinsale (1602), the Flight of the Earls (1607) and the great part of the Irish
clan system was already gone due to Cromwellian organization and confiscations
(circa 1655).
The invader accomplished this infamy even though the bulk of
Norman-Irish sided with the Gaelic-Irish in the 1641 uprising leading to the entry of
Cromwell. Based on adherence to Gaelic values and Brehon Laws the invader lumped
all together, Gaelic-Irish or Norman-Irish as simply ‘Irish papists’. And all suffered
the same consequences of the harsh discriminatory laws imposed against all ‘mere
Irish’.
Tanistic succession was specifically ‘utterly and completely abolished’ by a variety of
laws stemming from the times of King Henry VIII and Queen Elizabeth I. The
penalties for using Irish practices such as tanistry and Brehon Law were severe, to
include death! Irish ‘chiefly successions’ and usages were absolutely proscribed and
those laws were thoroughly enforced after Kinsale.
Irish Chiefly Successions – The Current Situation
As said, chiefly succession under the Gaelic system basically ended in Ireland by 1655.
And with the ‘Flight of the Wild Geese’ after the Williamite War (1691) was only
carried on in exile, and that only within a limited number of families. Within Ireland
only a very very few chiefly families were able to pass the titles along, as everything
had to be done in total secret – which was extremely difficult given the control of the
English government.
When the Penal Laws against Catholics and dissenters began to be relaxed, starting
particularly in the mid-19th century, a few Chiefs-of-Name who managed to survive
secretly in Ireland did begin to use their chiefly designations. Chiefs such as O
Donoughue of the Glens, O Long, and O Conor Don. Then, when Ireland secured
some vestige of freedom as the Irish Free State in 1922 there began to again be some
interest shown in ‘the Gaelic Order’ and the historic chiefships. Of course the new
Ireland was and is republican, and adopted English Common Law as the basis of its
legal system – and did not revert to the historic Brehon Law. Those are complicated
subjects which it is not within the scope of this article to discuss, dealing as we are
with chiefly successions specifically.
By 1944 the government of Eamon DeValera recognized that some sort of
recognition should be given to those who claimed to hold ancient Irish Chief-ofName titles/designations. The responsibility for the control and administration of
the policy was passed to an official in the National Library and an office of Chief
Herald of Ireland came to be created. When Ireland appointed its first new Chief
Herald, it did not reintroduce Irish Tanistry. The Irish state granted ‘courtesy
recognition’ to Irish chiefs based on ENGLISH primogeniture from the last known
chief. From 1944 until 2003 that office indeed made the decision on which
chiefships were correctly held and which were not. But the office made a number of
errors, and actually should never have been involved in Irish chiefly successions in the
first place. This is given that the Irish State does not recognise titles, including those
of its own historic nobles, and in any case under Brehon Law it is only the Derbhfine
of the clan which has control over the approval of the Chief-of-Name! By 2003 the
government recognized the problems and contradictions and ordered the office of
Chief Herald to cease to involve itself in chiefly recognitions. Thus the policy of
‘courtesy recognition’ ended.
As of now, 2014, therefore, here is the situation in a nutshell: in 1989 there was an
initiative which led to the formation of Clans of Ireland, Ltd. This was certainly an
excellent step forward, in terms of helping to organize ‘clans’ of people with the same
surname. The organization continues to do good work, and there are about 70 or so
clans which are members. Clans of Ireland has membership criteria, helps with
meetings and general advice. That advice includes the recommendation that a ‘chief’
be elected from among those active in clan work. The great majority of clans do not
have an hereditary chief, and thus the election of a chief is strictly ‘honourary’ and, of
course, is outside of historic Brehon Law. Most elections are for a set period of a
year or two, when another election takes place for a new honourary chief.
In addition to Clans of Ireland, the Standing Council of Irish Chiefs and Chieftains
also came into existence (1991). This council is composed of the limited number of
Chiefs-of-Name who indeed have been able to prove descent from a former Chief-ofName who existed under the Gaelic order of things, pre 1691 – continuing secretly in
Ireland or in exile. There are now about 16-17 members, though a few are inactive
and do not attend meetings, etc., e.g. The Fox, The O Donnell. The council relied
on the office of Chief Herald to vet eligibility, and made admissions based on that
office’s approval of family descent. That has ceased since 2003 when the Chief
Herald was removed by government action from continuing the policy of ‘courtesy
recognitions’, as said. Since then the council has not made any admissions (though
there are several applications which have been submitted, a few a number of years
ago). It has made clear that it still wishes some sort of Irish government action as
regards the hereditary chiefships, if not restarting ‘courtesy recognitions’ then at least
registering descents.
Besides the few hereditaries on the council, there are
approximately 10 or so other claimants to hereditary titles who appear to indeed have
valid claims to a chiefship or chieftainship of a branch of the name.
A few
recognized Chiefs-of-Name, for their own reasons, did not choose to become
members of the council and have not applied for membership, e.g. O Neill Mor of
Spain, O Carroll of Oriel, the current and legitimate MacCarthy Mor.
A few of the clans within Clans of Ireland, a few only, are headed by the hereditary
Chief-of-Name who also belongs to the Standing Council of Irish Chiefs, e.g. O
Brien, MacDermott Prince of Coolavin.
In summary, only those chiefs on the Standing Council can be said to be in continuity
with the historic Brehon Law practices (though many of those succeeded under
primogeniture versus Derbhfine selection). That is, they maintain the historic ‘center
of gravity’ which is of the essence in terms of the perpetuation of a name/clan --election within a particular family via its Derbhfine and its descent from a formerlyreigning chief during the Gaelic order of things. It is only with an hereditary center
that a clan can truly be reflective of historic Irish practices.
The election of
‘honourary chiefs’ via Clans of Ireland is fine. No complaints if that is what a clan
wishes to do, but now there is an alternate approach to chiefship succession, which
can be fully in accord with Brehon Law. Brehon Law which does not have to stay
‘dead’, but it indeed can be reactualised and modified realistically for our own modern
day. And in the light of the tragedy of the thousands of Irish names which have lost
their centers of gravity due to the wars and persecutions. And to overcome the loss
of their hereditary chiefships. The Scots know this, and it is now time to speak of the
‘Ad Hoc Derbhfine’ approach used in Scotland to overcome what the Scots regard as
a great shame and an historic incorrectness: not having an hereditary chief.
The ‘Honourable Community’
In Scotland, as in Ireland prior to the demise of the Gaelic order by the end of the
17th century, a ‘clan’ (children, family), is known as an ‘Honourable Community’.
This is the Gaelic culture, and organization, historic from time-immemorial. The
invader of Scotland didn’t succeed in totally eliminating Brehon Law and tanistry, as
he did in Ireland. And made some compromises so that the clan system was allowed,
under Lord Lyon King of Arms, to be continued. English common law of course
was an umbrella over it but tanistry and the historic value system did survive. And
the clan indeed is recognized as a nobiliary body, and the chiefship as an incorporeal
hereditament. And as reflective of the historic Gaelic system.
Of course, with no overall Great Britain/U.K. encouragement, wars and massive
emigration, the Scots likewise as in Ireland ‘lost’ knowledge of descents from most of
their hereditary chiefs-of-name. But in slightly more liberal times, at the beginning of
the 19th century, there was a revival of interest in the Highland Gaelic Order and its Clans.
Some of this actually stemmed from Lowland Scots, and Sir Walter Scott was
influential via his writings. And it must be said that the revival was helped along by
Queen Victoria’s interest. In summary, the clan practices of ancient Gaelic Scotland
did not die and are ‘accepted’ within the U.K., as modified for modern times and as
maintained by Lord Lyon. He is an officer of the British crown and thus his
guidelines and practices have the force of law. It should be said before we get into
guidelines for Ireland that our situation is different: we have no ‘crown’ or fons
honourum for titles in republican Ireland; indeed titles are not granted in Ireland.
When an Ad Hoc Derbhfine election takes place in Scotland, it is a requirement of
law to have the election approved by Lord Lyon. For Ireland the Derbhfine is the
final approval, and no governmental approval or approval by a body such as the
Standing Council of Irish Chiefs is required, though there should be a ‘courtesy’
notification as will be explained below in Note 3.
Also included later will be a few references which go into detail concerning the
Scottish system, with great emphasis on how the Honourable Community can only
really exist as historic: that is with a hereditary center-of-gravity via an hereditary
chief.
Suggested Guidelines for an Irish ‘Ad Hoc Derbhfine’
Obviously, a member or group of members of a clan/name must have interest in the
whole idea of the Ad Hoc Derbhfine being a viable alternative for the selection of a
chief. Versus the near impossibility of finding any more persons proved conclusively
to descend from a chief or chieftain of name existing while the Gaelic order existed.
As said, there was just too much lost due to the wars, penal laws, deliberate
extirpation of our system of Brehon Law and tanistry. And the election of an
‘honourary’ chief, while very worthwhile in terms of clan revivals, is not grounded on
the historic Gaelic system.
The guidelines follow, to include certain steps which must be taken:
1. An organizing committee should be formed, to include a President and a
Secretary. This is easier to do of course for those clans which are already
members of Clans of Ireland or for those who are already otherwise organized,
have their own website, etc. There are indeed a number of clans which are so
organized but which are not members of Clans of Ireland, e.g. the Clan
MacCarthy Foundation, the Doyle Clan, etc.
2. There should be a minimum of nine members for the proposed Ad Hoc
Derbhfine
3. Wide publicity about the effort should be undertaken, via every possible
vehicle. That is, via the clan internet site, phone calls, mailings, whatever it
takes to get the news ‘out there’ among those of the Honourable Community.
In order to inform that an Ad Hoc Derbhfine is in process of happening
4. All known ‘armigers’ (those currently possessing a Coat of Arms) are ipso facto
to be members of the Ad Hoc Derbhfine. Therefore, the organizers must do a
thorough search worldwide to identify its armigers. This means contacting the
office of Chief Herald of Ireland, Norroy & Ulster King of Arms in the U.K.,
possible other heraldry offices in such as South Africa, etc. The objective
would be to ‘find’ the names of the armigers and then contact them with a view
to explaining the Ad Hoc Derbhfine idea and soliciting their support
5. Additionally, a list should be made of ‘principal people’ who because of keen
interest in clan affairs could be invited to sit on the Ad Hoc Derbhfine. In
short, the final composition of the Ad Hoc Derbhfine will include the armigers
and acknowledged ‘leaders’ of the name (principal people – who should be
encouraged to apply for a Coat of Arms by the organisers). Those eventually
sitting on the Ad Hoc Derbhfine may be male or female, though according to
Irish Brehon Law only a male may be elected as chief or chieftain of a name.
The Scots system based on Pictish history always allowed female successions
but that was never the case in Ireland (could the updating of Brehon Law allow
for female succession?: certainly could be considered though not as part of this
article.)
6. Once the organizers have determined that they have done all that can be done
in terms of locating the prospective members of the Ad Hoc Derbhfine, then
that fact should also be communicated to clan members as widely as possible.
It should be stated that the organizers must keep very detailed and precise
record of all tasks undertaken, of all the people contacted and their responses,
etc. This is to show that no rocks have been left unturned and that a true
strenuous effort has been completed.
7. A date for the Ad Hoc Derbhfine meeting and vote should be then set. The
meeting need not be in Ireland (as the Scots require that the meeting be in
Scotland). Indeed there need not be a face-to-face meeting, but it can take
place via emails.
8. The secretary of the organizing committee will solicit candidates from among
those appointed to the Ad Hoc Derbhfine as to who wishes to put his name
forward for election as chief/chieftain. Individuals may nominate a person
other than themselves, but only those ‘leaders’ of the clan appointed to the Ad
Hoc Derbhfine may be nominated. Obviously, there needs to be a period of
time, a few months at least, between the setting of the date of the meeting and
vote and the deadline for nominations. The secretary shall ensure that anyone
nominated by another is in accord with being nominated and will serve if
elected. Place of residence is not a consideration.
9. On the date of the election, each individual voting will send his vote to the
secretary.
Who will then do the count and announce the result to the
members of the Ad Hoc Derbhfine. And he will then propagate that result far
and wide within the clan.
The ‘electee’ will take the title ‘Ceann Cath’ (Commander) and not immediately that of
chief or chieftain of the name. A period of normally 10 to 20 years should elapse
before the Ceann Cath is proclaimed as hereditary Chief-of-Name or Chieftain-ofName of a branch of the clan. This is to allow time for any counters to the election;
that is for someone with a proved hereditary descent to come forward with a counterclaim. The minimum 10 years may be further reduced to a 5 year period by decision
of the Ad Hoc Derbhfine, if the person elected has been of a position of elected
honourary responsibility with the clan for a significant period of time.
Upon
succession to the chiefship, the new hereditary chief has the right to the undifferenced
original and historic Coat of Arms of the clan.
In closing, naturally any candidate for election should be versed in traditional Gaelic
practices. That is, he should understand the Gaelic order of things pre the end of
17th century. And most importantly, he should understand the differences between a
Gaelic/Irish chief and a noble of other European countries, where primogeniture
succession was the absolute norm. With that system, the immediate concern of a
king, or duke, or baron, or whoever, was focused on his own immediate family, his
own sons and daughters.
The others of his family, outside of the immediate
descendants, were not of his concern relative to inheritances. In the Gaelic system of
an ‘Honourable Community’, the chief was not the owner of anything! He was a
trustee, for ALL the family, all the clan, and could leave nothing to his own sons or
daughters other than what he may have possessed personally. He did not own the
land; it belonged to the whole community, and he was responsible to the whole
community, and not in any manner an absolute ruler. He was bound by the Brehon
Law.
His successor would be from a wider range than his own immediate
descendants, from the Derbhfine of all descended from a common great-grandfather.
Succession was by ‘tanistry’, with the Derbhfine choosing the ‘best man’ to succeed
and maintain the clan and the Gaelic traditions which governed Gaelic society. So
the election by Ad Hoc Derbhfine is the taking on of responsibility for the family, and
the title of Chief-of-Name is one of responsibility to all of the name, everywhere,
highest to lowest. And the projects the new chief undertakes should indeed be
similar to what chiefs did when Gaelic rule was actual: projects that benefit all per
historical Gaelic practices, to now include endowments for various purposes of help
to clan members.
Thank you for your interest in this article.
NOTES:
1. For a full exposition of the Scottish Gaelic-based system, there is nothing better
than the book by Frank Adam, introduction by the then Lord Lyon of
Scotland, THE CLANS, SEPTS & REGIMENTS OF THE SCOTTISH
HIGHLANDS. 8th edition, Stirling, Scotland, 1984, of the original 1908
publication. Additionally, you can see on the internet (typing in ‘Ad Hoc
Derbhfine’) various articles on the process. These include recent case histories
for the Ad Hoc Derbhfines of the Maccauley and Duncan clans, where new
chiefs were indeed elected to long-dormant chiefships.
2. For an Irish perspective, there is the recent article written by The O Cahan,
Chief-of-the-Name, on Irish chiefly successions, which may be accessed at the
MacCarthy Clan Foundation website at www.mccarthyclan.org. The article
speaks to the Ad Hoc Derbhfine process, very clearly. Title is ‘Irish Chiefly
Succession in the 21st Century’.
3. As said, the Irish Derbhfine is the ultimate approval authority over succession
within a particular name/clan. As a courtesy, and per ancient practice as well,
the succession should be communicated to the ultimate overlord of the
territory in which the clan historically existed.
Thus a newly elected
chief/chieftain should advise as follows, in our opinion - but again, not as any
‘approval’ but simply for registration and future communication: Clans within
Desmond – to MacCarthy Mor; within Thomond – to The O Brien; within
Leinster – to The MacMurrough-Kavanagh; within Connaught – to The O
Conor Don; within Ulster – to The O Neill Mor or The O Neill of Clanaboy.
As one exception, in that Louth was never under a MacMurrough or part of
Leinster under the Gaelic order, the notification for County Louth clans should
be to The O Carroll of Oriel, as that family were important major kings at the
time of the 1169-72 invasions and Louth was quickly overrun. Thus this
relates to the traditional four provincial kingdoms that existed at the time of the
demise of the Gaelic order – Munster, Leinster, Ulster, and Connaught with the
one exception for County Louth. And it should be noted that the Chiefs-ofName of these formerly-reigning royal families are all extant.
4. As an aside, when a Scottish person is proclaimed and certified by Lord Lyon
as chief of his clan, he is ‘full-fledged’. That is, he is then the same as those
who are chiefs by proved hereditary descent, and can take his place on the
Standing Council of Scottish Chiefs.
In Ireland as said there is no
‘governmental’ approval, but it is hoped that the Standing Council of Irish Chiefs
and Chieftains will see fit likewise to ‘admit’ a person proclaimed as hereditary
representative of his name. On that group, it is also hoped that the word
‘Irish’ in its title will come to mean ‘all’ Irish: for as of now it will only admit
Gaelic-Irish, and excludes Norman-Irish and Hiberno-Norse Irish, etc. This
we regard as incorrect.
There are even now several proved chiefs-ofname/captains-of-the-nation who are Norman-Irish chiefs, whose families
were gaelicised and which operated under Brehon Law and tanistry during the
Gaelic order of things. More Irish than the Irish as the saying goes. Thus
there is no reason why a Duke of Leinster (Fitzgerald), or a Viscount
Gormanston (Preston), or a Barry or Burke or deCourcy, or the Knight of
Kerry (another FitzGerald) should not be admitted. They are chiefs/chieftains
of the name per the Gaelic order of things. These families provided many of
the leaders of ‘The Wild Geese’, e.g. Dillon’s Regiment, to struggle on for
Ireland in exile. One must recall that there are upwards of 100 million of Irish
name in the ‘diaspora’ and 5 million Irish in Ireland.
This article was written and published by THE KINGDOM OF DESMOND
ASSOCIATION, with the support and cooperation of THE CLAN MACCARTHY
FOUNDATION (2014).
It reflects the positive attitude of the two groups
concerning the process known as ‘Ad Hoc Derbhfine’.