President Clinton's Arms

57 views
Skip to first unread message

EJD

unread,
Oct 7, 1999, 3:00:00 AM10/7/99
to
Does anyone know the details of President Clinton's arms? He is
mentioned, in passing, in an article
in Tuesdays "Irish Times" as having a grant.
- Edward


Francois R. Velde

unread,
Oct 7, 1999, 3:00:00 AM10/7/99
to
In medio rec.heraldry aperuit "Sean J Murphy" <seanj...@tinet.ie> os suum:
>Interesting to see
>how MacCarthy's support base continues to crumble, the latest high profile
>courtiers to defect being Peter Berresford Ellis and Patrick O'Shea.

<gasp of disbelief>

Patrick M. O'Shea? The Royal Eoaghanacht web-spin-doctor himself?

<click, click>

By Golly, look at
http://www2.smumn.edu/munster/mccm.html
This gives new meaning to the word "loyalty"...

<shudder>

Does this mean that the mass of scholarship collected on the web site of the
"Royal Eoghanacht House" is about to be taken down? What a loss for mankind in
general and Ireland in particular. What a loss for all those counts, barons and
knights!

<click, click>

And over here...
http://www.luminet.net/~tiraha/letters/

Dated Oct. 7, 1999, the lord of Tiraha's apostasy.

--
François Velde
ve...@nospam.org (replace by "heraldica")
Heraldry Site: http://www.heraldica.org/

Sean J Murphy

unread,
Oct 8, 1999, 3:00:00 AM10/8/99
to
A grant of arms to President Clinton was issued on 15 June 1995 by Chief
Herald Donal Begley. This appears to have been a low key grant, perhaps
because of the then controversy over the spurious Roslea pedigree of
Clinton's maternal Cassidy ancestors. I would imagine that further
particulars of the arms granted to the President would be available from the
Irish Genealogical Office (2 Kildare Street, Dublin 2).

The Clinton grant was in fact the last made by Begley before his unexpected
early retirement in 1995. Begley of course was also the Chief Herald who
recognised Terence MacCarthy as MacCarthy Mór in 1991-92. Interesting to see


how MacCarthy's support base continues to crumble, the latest high profile

courtiers to defect being Peter Berresford Ellis and Patrick O'Shea. What we
are witnessing of course is merely a realignment of forces and not a true
dawning of reason, as 'ordenshunger' remains as strong as ever and is
already finding new outlets. The recent accelerated issue of grants of arms
by the Irish Genealogical Office is a case in point. I would have thought
that the Chief Herald should in fact have suspended such activities pending
identification of the extent to which spurious arms, false pedigrees and
bogus titles have been infilitrated into the records of the Office over the
past 20 years.

Sean Murphy
Centre for Irish Genealogical and Local Studies
http://homepage.eircom.net/~seanjmurphy/chiefs/

*********************************************************

EJD <"ejd2(remove)"@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
news:37FCD42C...@worldnet.att.net...

Michael F McCartney

unread,
Oct 8, 1999, 3:00:00 AM10/8/99
to
Come on, Fancois, let's not shoot the wounded! Your assignment
for tonight: reread the parable of the prodigal son...

--
Michael Fannin McCartney
Fremont, California
(Please do not use "m...@sns.com" any more - that account is dead)

se...@maclochlainn.freeserve.co.uk

unread,
Oct 8, 1999, 3:00:00 AM10/8/99
to
It takes balls to admit you were wrong.

A great shame those letters have disappeared though, some were
hilarious. The semi-hysterical letter from T MacCarthy to the GO, for
instance, insisting that he absolutely refuses to submit to
primogeniture (he was stamping his feet at the time no doubt). Also the
letter from Clan MacCarthy North America inc, addressing the GO as if
it were a performing dog.

But who can forget the doctor (a vet I hope) quoted in a local
newspaper, who believed that if T MacCarthy was not MacCarthy Mor then
the solution was simple, T MacCarthy's brother was!

Sean


Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Before you buy.

Patrick M. O'Shea

unread,
Oct 8, 1999, 3:00:00 AM10/8/99
to
In article <7tjcem$br5$1...@scotty.tinet.ie>,

"Sean J Murphy" <seanj...@tinet.ie> wrote:

> The Clinton grant was in fact the last made by Begley before his unexpected
> early retirement in 1995. Begley of course was also the Chief Herald who
> recognised Terence MacCarthy as MacCarthy Mór in 1991-92. Interesting to see
> how MacCarthy's support base continues to crumble, the latest high profile
> courtiers to defect being Peter Berresford Ellis and Patrick O'Shea. What we
> are witnessing of course is merely a realignment of forces and not a true
> dawning of reason, as 'ordenshunger' remains as strong as ever and is
> already finding new outlets. The recent accelerated issue of grants of arms
> by the Irish Genealogical Office is a case in point. I would have thought
> that the Chief Herald should in fact have suspended such activities pending
> identification of the extent to which spurious arms, false pedigrees and
> bogus titles have been infilitrated into the records of the Office over the
> past 20 years.

Dear Mr. Murphy,

Although long silent in this forum, it seems that I cannot avoid having
my name invoked and ridiculed. Therefore, I should wish to make a few
personal statements which are relevant to the MacCarthy Mór matter. When
people of honor have been misled, and make mistakes as a result, they
admit as much. Sadly, some feel compelled to attack and ridicule a man
who has made such an admission. I freely state that I, along with many
others, was duped by Terence McCarthy. Those who have met him know that
he is an educated and charismatic individual, and his ability to mix
historical fact with invention was highly polished. His message was
quite appealing to many, probably because it sought to advance an
alternative to the perceived 'cultural inferiority complex' from which
modern Ireland seems to often suffer.

By painting with the broadest possible brush members of the Niadh Nask
and officials of the Genealogical Office as agents of 'ordenshunger,' you
tip your own hand with respect to republican bias. Just as it is wrong
for Terence McCarthy to have interpolated and invented aspects of the
Niadh Nask, it is equally wrong for you to ignore that Ireland's Gaelic
past is incompatible with the modern mythology of "Gaelic democracy."

The Niadh Nask is described in many sources which predate the activities
(and, in fact, the birth) of Terence McCarthy. Its precise nature and
history must be studied carefully, and the constructs of Terence McCarthy
must be stripped away to reveal historical facts which can be documented
and substantianted. It is clear that military elites existed under Irish
kings, and that the Niadh Nask is mentioned by Keating and others, often
in conjunction with the concept of High Kingship. It is also true that
many honorable people are members of the Niadh Nask, and that the group
has tremendous potential to do good work in support of the legitimate
Irish Chiefs and true scholarship. Obviously, this will be a time of
careful study and consideration of an honorable way forward. Initial
support for this course has been made unofficially by various Chiefs and
other persons, but the future of the NN will clearly be a future without
Terence McCarthy, and without pretensions to be anything other than a
confraternity of persons interested in supporting the remnants of the
Gaelic order, such as they exist today.

We would hope that Irish citizens and persons of Irish descent would be
supportive of our goals, and understanding of the difficulty of the
process which we must now undertake to "rehabilitate" the Niadh Nask, and
to bring it in line with accepted practice, historical fact, and
hopefully under appropriate patronage of Irish Chiefs. There is no
"quick fix," but given the potential of the Niadh Nask, there has been
almost unanimous agreement that its continuation should be supported so
long as the conditions of re-definition and clearly stated mission can be
satisfactorily met. If they cannot, I know of not a single person who
would remain in the organization.

Finally, it may well be true that the present MacCarthy Mór scandal will
bring about the eventual dissolution of the Genealogical Office in its
present form. Perhaps this will be a positive development for both the
remnants of Gaelic Ireland, embodied by the legitimate Chiefs of the
Name, as well as for the Republic. However, I dare say that any such
development will have precious little to do with your 'research' or your
strident rhetoric.

The officers of the Niadh Nask, so I understand (I am not one), will be
making an official statement regarding the Terence McCarthy matter later
today. Although certain individuals will be dancing with glee on the
figurative grave of Terence McCarthy, we hope that the same people will
accept the assertion that the Niadh Nask may yet survive and be of
significant benefit to the Irish Chiefs in the future.

Sincerely,

Patrick M. O'Shea
--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
www2.smumn.edu/facpages/~poshea

Francois R. Velde

unread,
Oct 8, 1999, 3:00:00 AM10/8/99
to
In medio rec.heraldry aperuit Michael F McCartney <10265...@compuserve.com> os suum:

> Come on, Fancois, let's not shoot the wounded! Your assignment
> for tonight: reread the parable of the prodigal son...

Yes; gloating, however tempting, is unseemly. I do feel that, since Deja News'
archives are replete with the posts of the lord of Tiraha, his change of mind
ought to be duly recorded here. That's done, 'nuff said.

(For those who miss the old version of PMOS' page on the MM, it's still accessible
(for a limited time), in a cached version, at
http://www.google.com/search?q=cache:34695508&dq=cache:www2.smumn.edu/munster/mccm.html
Those pictures will be collectors' items soon!)

There is some irony in the fact that the logo "this site support Terence Francis
MacCarthy" on other Terentines' sites (e.g., Len Keane, self-styled Col. Shortt
of the thugs-in-kilt a.k.a. Galloglas) now link directly to O'Shea's recantation.

--
François R. Velde


ve...@nospam.org (replace by "heraldica")

Heraldica Web Site: http://www.heraldica.org/

seanj...@my-deja.com

unread,
Oct 8, 1999, 3:00:00 AM10/8/99
to
Good to see that Patrick O'Shea has again found
his tongue. However, despite renouncing Terence
MacCarthy, he wishes to maintain his constructs,
particularly the Niadh Nask, confirming my point
about realignment of forces as opposed to true
contrition. My own abiding memory of Dr O'Shea's
role in all this is his reply to my protest
against the 'G2 Branch' Galloglas surveillance
threat against myself and others, which was
linked to his Eoghanacht Dynasty site: 'Having
read the statement, I see nothing indicating
intended harassment'. Will there be a counterpart
to the 'G2 Branch' under the New Order?

Sean Murphy
Centre for Irish Genealogical and Local Studies
http://homepage.eircom.net/~seanjmurphy/chiefs/

James Dempster

unread,
Oct 8, 1999, 3:00:00 AM10/8/99
to
On Fri, 08 Oct 1999 15:50:06 GMT, Patrick M. O'Shea <pos...@smumn.edu>
wrote:


>Dear Mr. Murphy,
>
>Although long silent in this forum, it seems that I cannot avoid having
>my name invoked and ridiculed.

<snip of a long statement>

I must admit that I found Sean Murphy's reply to a question about Bill
Clinton to be totally off the topic of the thread and unwarranted.
What the questioner got out of it, I have no idea - unless he was a
medium term frequenter of this group it cannot have made any sense.

Whilst every cock may crow on his own dunghill - we don't have to like
the sight, smell or sound.

There are plenty of persuasive people in this world who take advantage
of others. For those who have been "taken in" it can be a difficult
process to admit - privately and publically - that they have been
wrong. It is so often so much easier emotionally to go on defending a
position which they know in their hearts to be wrong than to admit
that they were wrong.

Patrick O'Shea has rather bravely come to that decision and done so in
public as well as in private. I for one think that he should not be
held up to ridicule.

I can only hope that out of all this comes a more realistic attitude
to Irish Genealogy - a middle way between the overly romantic view
that excused the excesses of the extreme Macarthy Mor camp and the
genealogy as point-scoring which seems to be practiced by the other
side.

James

James Dempster (jdem...@easynet.co.uk)

You know you've had a good night
when you wake up
and someone's outlining you in chalk.

Guy Stair Sainty

unread,
Oct 8, 1999, 3:00:00 AM10/8/99
to
In article <7tl3ra$ot0$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, Patrick says...

We have differed in the past, in particular over this question,
but I must unhesitatingly express my admiration for your good
faith and obviously good intentions. I am sure that being taken
in by a confidence trickster is always a horrible experience,
especially when one has invested time and money in an enterprise.
To admit that one has made an error is difficult, and I admire
Mr O'Shea for having the courage to have stated his positionso
clearly.

I hope that soon he will give similar consideration to the claims
of the so-called "Order of Saint Stanislas".

I wish that those who have been taken in by false Saint John/Malta
Orders would take action when they discover the truth. If the
purveyors of false tiles and Orders are sued for their deception it will
certainly deter others in the future. Such suits have been successful
in the US federal courts.

Guy Stair Sainty

>Dear Mr. Murphy,
>
>Although long silent in this forum, it seems that I cannot avoid having

>Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
>Before you buy.

Guy Stair Sainty
Stair...@msn.com
www.ChivalricOrders.org


Mike Dwyer

unread,
Oct 8, 1999, 3:00:00 AM10/8/99
to
In article <7tlo3l$15...@drn.newsguy.com>,

Guy Stair Sainty <Guy_m...@newsguy.com> wrote:
> In article <7tl3ra$ot0$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, Patrick says...
>
> We have differed in the past, in particular over this question,
> but I must unhesitatingly express my admiration for your good
> faith and obviously good intentions. I am sure that being taken
> in by a confidence trickster is always a horrible experience,
> especially when one has invested time and money in an enterprise.
> To admit that one has made an error is difficult, and I admire
> Mr O'Shea for having the courage to have stated his positionso
> clearly.
>

For what little it's worth, I'd also like to say that I also realize
that Terrence MacCarthy was not who he said he was and he has tricked a
great many people. I apologize for any aggravation I may have caused
anyone, especially Mr. Sainty and Mr. Crackroft-Brennan, in our
previous discussion on this matter.
--
J. Michael Dwyer
VIRTUS SOLA NOBILITAS

EJD

unread,
Oct 8, 1999, 3:00:00 AM10/8/99
to

Mike Dwyer wrote:

> For what little it's worth, I'd also like to say that I also realize
> that Terrence MacCarthy was not who he said he was and he has tricked a
> great many people. I apologize for any aggravation I may have caused
> anyone, especially Mr. Sainty and Mr. Crackroft-Brennan, in our
> previous discussion on this matter.
> --
> J. Michael Dwyer
> VIRTUS SOLA NOBILITAS
>

Michael,
I would ask you the same question I posed to P. O'Shea: what
was it in the end that finally convinced you that Terence MacCarthy was a
fraud - an accumulation of evidence, or.... ?
- Edward

EJD

unread,
Oct 8, 1999, 3:00:00 AM10/8/99
to

Patrick,
This must be a somewhat difficult time for you, given your earlier
committment to Mr MacCarthy. However, it would be of some interest to many of us
to know what it was in the end that finally convinced you that Terence MacCarthy
was a fraud - was it an accumulation of evidence, or.... ?
- Edward


Patrick M. O'Shea

unread,
Oct 9, 1999, 3:00:00 AM10/9/99
to
In article <7tlhkc$2s1$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,

seanj...@my-deja.com wrote:
> Good to see that Patrick O'Shea has again found
> his tongue. However, despite renouncing Terence
> MacCarthy, he wishes to maintain his constructs,
> particularly the Niadh Nask, confirming my point
> about realignment of forces as opposed to true
> contrition. My own abiding memory of Dr O'Shea's
> role in all this is his reply to my protest
> against the 'G2 Branch' Galloglas surveillance
> threat against myself and others, which was
> linked to his Eoghanacht Dynasty site: 'Having
> read the statement, I see nothing indicating
> intended harassment'. Will there be a counterpart
> to the 'G2 Branch' under the New Order?

Mr. Murphy,

As this is likely to become tedious to the general readers, I shall make
this my last public reply to your remarks. Should you wish to address
additional comments to me, you may do so privately, but of course this
will deprive you of your place in the center ring.

It is unclear why you perceive some immense and sinister conspiracy
involving the Genealogical Office, the Niadh Nask, and, it would seem,
all heralds, persons holding any titles of nobility, and chivalric
orders. If you find such things as distasteful as your comments imply,
it might be far more agreeable for you to simply avoid reading
rec.heraldry and similar newsgroups.

There is no "realignment of forces" intended. Quite simply, the officers
of the Niadh Nask have stated to the entire membership (as of today) that
the pedigree advanced by Terence McCarthy is not credible. The
organization is examining the statements and research T.McC. has made
concerning the history of the NN, and we are finding that an increasing
number of these are not based on solid scholarship. While the NN has
existed in the past (as referenced by Keating and other writers), it will
be some time before the mythology can be untangled from true historical
references, and the exact historical nature of the NN can be adequately
described. I readily admit that there is much to be done on this front.

With that said, the Niadh Nask, as a group of people with a genuine
interest in the old Gaelic nobility, has great potential to support the
activities of the legitimate Chiefs of the Name. There is a great deal
of research which might be supported by means of grants to credible and
credentialed scholars. It is my hope that the Niadh Nask may be
harnessed to this end, once the process of stripping away mythology has
taken place - a process which will, no doubt, be painful for some.

There will be no "New Order." The Niadh Nask will either reform and
become an organization which supports the Gaelic nobility in a meaningful
way, or it will cease to exist. Its precise nature, and any form of
patronage from the various legitimate Chiefs, are matters which are yet
to be determined. Having known many members of the NN for years, I am
willing to trust in their honor, and have resolved to make what efforts I
can to make the NN a positive means of support for the institution of
Gaelic Irish Chiefship in general, and as a forum for discussion of
Ireland's Gaelic past.

If you find the notion of a highly stratified, inegalitarian, and
aristocratic Gaelic Ireland repugnant, I am sorry. The reality of this
history cannot be changed, although it seems to be quite readily ignored
in some circles. Be that as it may, there are those who have a genuine
interest in discovering more about that past, and in preserving what
fragmentary remnants yet survive. The Niadh Nask is an existing
organization which counts among its members a great many people with such
interests.

For most members of the Niadh Nask, the common interest in Gaelic Ireland
has been the important tie binding us. While it may be enjoyable to
dress up and wear insignia of whatever sort, a few ounces of metal on
one's chest is not sufficient inducement for the people I know to abandon
all reason. Your suggestion that the Niadh Nask consists essentially of
wide-eyed Americans salivating at the prospect of shiny trinkets is not
only puerile and offensive, but also entirely inaccurate.

Yet, your simplistic assertions notwithstanding, many members of the
Niadh Nask were drawn in by a vision of Gaelic Ireland that did not cower
in the face of the Norman 'invasion,' and which celebrated the Gaelic
resistance against English rule for nearly 600 years. The vision of a
sophisticated and truly regal sense of Irish kingship remains appealing,
and serious study of the Gaelic Irish kingdoms continues to bring to
light the extent of the development of court life, cultural exchange, and
the export of monastics to the Continent in the context of 12th and 13th-
century Ireland. The picture emerging is far different from the concept
of an entire society of peasant farmers existing in a form of Gaelic
'proto-communism.'

It is, by the way, silly of you to raise the issue of the 'G2 Branch'
statement, made by another person on a web site not under my control,
which site had been linked to the Royal Eoghanacht site long before the
statement had been drafted. Although it is not necessarily a statement I
would have advised, when the statement was written, I was 1000 miles away
from home, visiting relatives on Cape Cod, and was in a cabin with no
telephone, much less a computer. Even so, I stand by my previous view
that I did not see anything overtly threatening in the statement as it
then existed. Perhaps you are so thin-skinned as to shrink from even a
bland assertion that you were to be 'investigated.' If such statements
constitute threats in your mind, you have my sympathy, as it must be
impossible for you to conduct your life in the modern world.

Lastly, it is particularly disagreeable that you should gain notariety as
a 'professional genealogist' from the present sad situation. That you
are willing to advance your own reputation in such a way is
incomprehensible, but perhaps provides some explanation for your
exclusion from the Genealogical Office's list of contract genealogists.
Your implicit assertion that the material you have presented came as a
result of your own original research and insights has already been
countered privately. Perhaps it is time for you to embrace the adage,
'vir sapit qui pauca loquitur.'


Sincerely,

Patrick O'Shea
--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
www2.smumn.edu/facpages/~poshea


Patrick M. O'Shea

unread,
Oct 9, 1999, 3:00:00 AM10/9/99
to
In article <7tlo3l$15...@drn.newsguy.com>,
Guy Stair Sainty <Guy_m...@newsguy.com> wrote:
> In article <7tl3ra$ot0$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, Patrick says...
>
> We have differed in the past, in particular over this question,
> but I must unhesitatingly express my admiration for your good
> faith and obviously good intentions. I am sure that being taken
> in by a confidence trickster is always a horrible experience,
> especially when one has invested time and money in an enterprise.
> To admit that one has made an error is difficult, and I admire
> Mr O'Shea for having the courage to have stated his positionso
> clearly.
>
> I hope that soon he will give similar consideration to the claims
> of the so-called "Order of Saint Stanislas".

Thank you for the encouraging words, Guy. We have, indeed, butted heads
over the Terence McCarthy issue more than once, and although I have let
Gaelic fervor get the better of me in some of those exchanges, I had
always been proceeding from an understanding of Terence's pedigree as
solidly proven. In light of the recent and impending revelations, any
person with an ounce of integrity must abandon untenable positions and
apologize for any harm done, however unintended. You do have my public
and sincere apology in this regard (as does Francois Velde and the
several others I have verbally lashed from time to time on this issue).

With respect to the Order of St. Stanislas, I have not been an active
member of that organization since I formally resigned and returned all
insignia in 1996 or 1997 (I'd have to check my correspondence to be
exact). I resolved at that time that there were sufficient questions
about the history of the order, and about its Grand Master, that as a
person not acquainted with the Polish nobility it was better for me
personally to sever ties with the organization rather than to embark upon
a course of research to satisfy my concerns which I felt ill-prepared to
follow. To be honest, I still do not know enough about the organization
to make any meaningful public comment on its legitimacy, nor do I intend
to re-visit the issue personally. In the final analysis, the Order of
Saint Stanislas is basically irrelevant to my own heritage and interests.

My concern has been, and continues to be, the support of the old Gaelic
Irish nobility. I am hopeful that a reformed and re-defined Niadh Nask
will be a key element in that support. I also continue to research the
genealogy of the chiefly lines of the O'Sheas, and have identified at
least two potential candidates who may yet seek to be recognized in the
chiefship (once the Terence McCarthy matter has receded from the public
consciousness). As an O'Shea working for the recognition and general
acceptance of an O'Shea Chief of the Name, I cannot be connected with
anything suspect or unsubstantianted, and had the officers of the NN not
made the painful but necessary decisions outlined today, I would have had
no choice but to withdraw from the organization. I am very proud to be
able to stand with the officers of the NN at this difficult time, as I
consider them to be honorable men, and I believe that their decision
speaks clearly for their integrity.

There is still much work to be done in promoting the historical concept
of highly developed and sophisticated Gaelic kingdoms. Although credible
research reveals an ever-clearer picture of the Gaelic kingdoms as having
power and influence similar to their Continental counterparts in the 12th
century, and a resurgence of Gaelic power in the 14th and 15th centuries,
the prevailing understanding of ancient Ireland still suffers from
centuries of anti-Irish propaganda. For this very reason, the idealized
version of Gaelic history presented by Terence McCarthy was extremely
seductive, as it charged headlong at the notion of Gaelic Ireland as
"quaint" or even "barbaric." The truth, alas, is somewhere between these
extremes, and I believe that the Niadh Nask will emerge from the present
crisis as an organization devoted to finding and preserving that truth.

Best regards,

Patrick

KauttWH

unread,
Oct 9, 1999, 3:00:00 AM10/9/99
to
>Subject: Re: Terence McCarthy & my silence
>From: Guy Stair Sainty Guy_m...@newsguy.com
>Date: Fri, 08 October 1999 05:35 PM EDT
>Message-id: <7tlo3l$15...@drn.newsguy.com>

>
>In article <7tl3ra$ot0$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, Patrick says...
>
>We have differed in the past, in particular over this question,
>but I must unhesitatingly express my admiration for your good
>faith and obviously good intentions. I am sure that being taken
>in by a confidence trickster is always a horrible experience,
>especially when one has invested time and money in an enterprise.
>To admit that one has made an error is difficult, and I admire
>Mr O'Shea for having the courage to have stated his positionso
>clearly.
>
>I hope that soon he will give similar consideration to the claims
>of the so-called "Order of Saint Stanislas".
>
>I wish that those who have been taken in by false Saint John/Malta
>Orders would take action when they discover the truth. If the
>purveyors of false tiles and Orders are sued for their deception it will
>certainly deter others in the future. Such suits have been successful
>in the US federal courts.

Ladies and Gents,

I have been quietly following these commentaries with some interest--I don't
think I've ever made my association with the NN a secret.

To answer continuous questions about why people were fooled by Terrence
McCarthy, I will put forward my own case. I am not ignorant of Irish history
nor do I consider myself a fool, but in this matter I trusted the opinions of
those who are more learned than I in matters of genealogy and nobility.

At the same time, I read of the papers concerning Terrence McCarthy's pedigree
(from the former Chief Herald and the Marques de la Floresta). In fact, the
certification of arms by the Marques de la Floresta is quite remarkable to me
as it said (I read the original Spanish to make sure it wasn't mistranslated)
that he had the right to create nobles and they were to be recognized as such
in Spain. It was these proofs that I accepted--for again, I do not have the
background in genealogy that I would like, nor do I spend my research time in
the National Library Archives room (the floor above the Chief Herald's areas
btw) looking into documents related to the McM.

It was not until someone independent of the Chief Herald, who was wrongfully
vilified by many of the McCarthy supporters, Berresford Ellis--who's reputation
in Irish history is second-to-none--looked at the same evidence and came to the
same conclusion that I could believe that six heralds and several governments,
not to mention legit nobles from throughout Europe, were simply wrong.

As for the people I've met in the NN, I can say that when I first read the
emails we transmit amongst ourselves about the truth of the evidence, I didn't
feel sorry for me, but only concern for the NN. These are truly the most
honorable people I've ever met! I've spent seven years as an officer in the
USAF and I just finished a tour as a history professor at the USAF Academy
(where they live and breathe honor for real [yes I've SEEN cadets turn
themselves in for honor violations!!]). But I can only assure you that the
companions of the NN, while some blow some serious hot air once in a while, are
honest, honorable, sincere, trustworthy people. My fear was that a group like
the NN would fall apart and such people would have that much more difficulty
associating.

What will the NN do in the future? Simple, I still remember what Patrick C B
said in an email when many NN were attacking his unkind words about Terrence
McCarthy many months ago when this broke--he said (forgive me Patrick, but I
must paraphrase): that I support the MacCarthy Mór, not Terrence McCarthy since
he is not the McM. I was struck by that at the time and I've remembered it
until now because it's the righ view to take. The NN will support the
MacCarthy Mór, whoever that will be and anyone of us who doesn't, should
resign.

Finally, I agree that it takes real guts to say you were wrong, especially
considering the heated discussions in ATR and rec.heraldry. Patrick O'Shea and
the others who most adamant in defense don't deserve pitty or
congratulations--they are simply doing what honorable men like them do when
they've made an honest mistake. As for me, mea culpa, mea culpa..... and I
stand willing to help make a NN that will do what Patrick O'Shea is talking
about (trust me I pay for my own trips to Ireland) there's precious little
money for research in history, let alone Irish history!!!

Bill Kautt

Michael F McCartney

unread,
Oct 9, 1999, 3:00:00 AM10/9/99
to
..we now interrupt the latest installment of "All My NN's" for an
on-topic word from the subject line of this thread: now that we
know who signed the grant etc., does anyone know the blazon? (if
the term has become unfamiliar - nay, atrophied - thru non-use,
that's the funny-french description of those strange squiggles on
shields...)

Michael F McCartney

unread,
Oct 9, 1999, 3:00:00 AM10/9/99
to
Everyone has a dream, or (sadly) perhaps had one which has died;
some will admit it to themselves, some in public, while others
won't or can't. Some deams die slowly and in private, some (like
the topic of this thread) die a painful and public death. Whether
the survivors retreat into cynicism, blosson into sadder but wiser
seekers, or fall prey yet again to the next beguiling voice, of
course varies from person to person.

As the SCA'ers would say, "in service to the Dream" - hopefully a
worthwhile one!

The ushers will now collect the offering...

Mike Dwyer

unread,
Oct 9, 1999, 3:00:00 AM10/9/99
to
In article <37FE9137...@worldnet.att.net>,
EJD <"ejd2(remove)"@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>
>

> Michael,
> I would ask you the same question I posed to P. O'Shea: what

> was it in the end that finally convinced you that Terence MacCarthy
>was a fraud - an accumulation of evidence, or.... ?
> - Edward
>
>

Edward,
First, let me say, I am no expert on Irish history. In agreement with
the comments made by Patrick O'Shea, I must say the men I have had
dealings with in the NN are wonderful people who are men of honor and
integrity. I do not have all the facts, therefore I can't tell you
everything. All I know is the officers of the NN have said that
Terrence MacCarthy's claim to the title of MacCarthy Mor is no longer
tenable and that they no longer recognize him as such and that more
information will be forthcoming. As a matter of faith in these men,
I've accepted their ruling. Since I believe these men are of the
highest caliber, I believe they could only have changed their minds
about Terrence MacCarthy after being presented with very convincing
evidence. I have not yet seen the evidence myself, but I'm willing,
for the moment, to accept their interpretation of it.


--
J. Michael Dwyer
VIRTUS SOLA NOBILITAS

se...@maclochlainn.freeserve.co.uk

unread,
Oct 9, 1999, 3:00:00 AM10/9/99
to
In article <7tl3ra$ot0$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,

Patrick M. O'Shea <pos...@smumn.edu> wrote:

I dare say that any such
> development will have precious little to do with your 'research' or
your
> strident rhetoric.

Whose research is it?

Sean

Patrick Cracroft-Brennan

unread,
Oct 9, 1999, 3:00:00 AM10/9/99
to
In article <7tjcem$br5$1...@scotty.tinet.ie>, Sean J Murphy
<seanj...@tinet.ie> writes

>A grant of arms to President Clinton was issued on 15 June 1995 by Chief
>Herald Donal Begley. This appears to have been a low key grant, perhaps
>because of the then controversy over the spurious Roslea pedigree of
>Clinton's maternal Cassidy ancestors. I would imagine that further
>particulars of the arms granted to the President would be available from the
>Irish Genealogical Office (2 Kildare Street, Dublin 2).
>
>The Clinton grant was in fact the last made by Begley before his unexpected
>early retirement in 1995. Begley of course was also the Chief Herald who
>recognised Terence MacCarthy as MacCarthy Mór in 1991-92. Interesting to see
>how MacCarthy's support base continues to crumble, the latest high profile
>courtiers to defect being Peter Berresford Ellis and Patrick O'Shea.

I'd missed this......where/when did this come to light?


> What we
>are witnessing of course is merely a realignment of forces and not a true
>dawning of reason, as 'ordenshunger' remains as strong as ever and is
>already finding new outlets. The recent accelerated issue of grants of arms
>by the Irish Genealogical Office is a case in point. I would have thought
>that the Chief Herald should in fact have suspended such activities pending
>identification of the extent to which spurious arms, false pedigrees and
>bogus titles have been infilitrated into the records of the Office over the
>past 20 years.
>

>Sean Murphy
>Centre for Irish Genealogical and Local Studies
>http://homepage.eircom.net/~seanjmurphy/chiefs/
>

>*********************************************************
>
>EJD <"ejd2(remove)"@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message
>news:37FCD42C...@worldnet.att.net...
>> Does anyone know the details of President Clinton's arms? He is
>> mentioned, in passing, in an article
>> in Tuesdays "Irish Times" as having a grant.
>> - Edward
>>
>
>


Patrick Cracroft-Brennan HonFHS FSA(Scot)
Managing Director - Heraldic Media Limited
Publishers of "Cracroft's Peerage"
Tel: 0181-871 4659
Fax: 0870 0522631
E-mail: herald...@kwtelecom.com
Web site: http://www.kwtelecom.com/hmedia/

Patrick Cracroft-Brennan

unread,
Oct 9, 1999, 3:00:00 AM10/9/99
to
In article <19991009012935...@ng-fj1.aol.com>, KauttWH
<kau...@aol.com> writes

Thanks for a "from the heart" posting, Bill.....a really can understand
where you're coming from. some of this is news to me as I was not aware
that Patrick O'Shea had moved away from Terence McCarthy...for some
inexplicable reason I appear to have been taken off the NN e-mail
circulation list...perhaps I should insist on being put back on!

So what is going to happen to the NN.....anybody heard anything?

Patrick Cracroft-Brennan

unread,
Oct 9, 1999, 3:00:00 AM10/9/99
to
In article <7tnf6d$bh3$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, Mike Dwyer <liongules@my-
deja.com> writes

>In article <37FE9137...@worldnet.att.net>,
> EJD <"ejd2(remove)"@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>>
>>
>
>> Michael,
>> I would ask you the same question I posed to P. O'Shea: what
>> was it in the end that finally convinced you that Terence MacCarthy
>>was a fraud - an accumulation of evidence, or.... ?
>> - Edward
>>
>>
>
>Edward,
>First, let me say, I am no expert on Irish history. In agreement with
>the comments made by Patrick O'Shea, I must say the men I have had
>dealings with in the NN are wonderful people who are men of honor and
>integrity.

I wish I could agree with you. I remember when I first met Roger
Sherman - a man I have the greatest personal respect for - and wondering
how anyone like him could possibly be taken in by the legitimacy of the
Irish title he was sporting. Everything that he told me about the MM
screamed at me that this was an out and out fraud...but what on earth do
you say to a man who has just parted with several thousand dollars for
his shiny new title?


> I do not have all the facts, therefore I can't tell you
>everything. All I know is the officers of the NN have said that
>Terrence MacCarthy's claim to the title of MacCarthy Mor is no longer
>tenable and that they no longer recognize him as such and that more
>information will be forthcoming. As a matter of faith in these men,
>I've accepted their ruling. Since I believe these men are of the
>highest caliber, I believe they could only have changed their minds
>about Terrence MacCarthy after being presented with very convincing
>evidence. I have not yet seen the evidence myself, but I'm willing,
>for the moment, to accept their interpretation of it.

Hmm.....I find this mindset slightly worrying. Why accept what others
say? Surely you can do some research and eventually come up with your
own decision on the rights and wrongs of TM's case. You originally
accepted TM as MM by blindly accepting what others said...now you're
compounding your mistake my accepting without question when they say he
is not the MM. C'mon man.....think for yourself. This isn't the army
were you have to accept what your superior officers see...it's civvy
street, where you think for yourself.


>--
>J. Michael Dwyer
>VIRTUS SOLA NOBILITAS
>
>

>Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
>Before you buy.

Mike Dwyer

unread,
Oct 9, 1999, 3:00:00 AM10/9/99
to
In article <tgYiGIAO42$3E...@londwill.demon.co.uk>,

Patrick Cracroft-Brennan <herald...@www.kwtelecom.com> wrote:
> In article <7tnf6d$bh3$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, Mike Dwyer <liongules@my-
> deja.com> writes
> >
> I wish I could agree with you. I remember when I first met Roger
> Sherman - a man I have the greatest personal respect for - and
wondering
> how anyone like him could possibly be taken in by the legitimacy of
the
> Irish title he was sporting. Everything that he told me about the MM
> screamed at me that this was an out and out fraud...but what on earth
do
> you say to a man who has just parted with several thousand dollars for
> his shiny new title?

Unfortunately, not everyone is as perceptive as you.
Nothing "screamed" at me about anything in the whole TM affair.

>
> Hmm.....I find this mindset slightly worrying. Why accept what others
> say? Surely you can do some research and eventually come up with your
> own decision on the rights and wrongs of TM's case. You originally
> accepted TM as MM by blindly accepting what others said...now you're
> compounding your mistake my accepting without question when they say
>he is not the MM. C'mon man.....think for yourself. This isn't the
>army were you have to accept what your superior officers see...it's
>civvy street, where you think for yourself.
>

I'm afraid I don't go about questioning everything I see and hear in
life. Like the majority of people, when I read something or am told
something, I tend to accept it as fact unless it flies in the face of
something else that I aready know. I'm sorry if it worries you, but
I've never claimed to be perfect. If you, or Guy Stair Sainty, or
Francois Velde, tell me something concerning a heraldic matter, because
I have come to respect your expertise in the field of heraldry, I
accept it, I don't go and do research.....I just accept it. Perhaps
that's not right, but it's just the way I am.

--
J. Michael Dwyer, FRSAI, FSA (Scot)
VIRTUS SOLA NOBILITAS

Patrick M. O'Shea

unread,
Oct 9, 1999, 3:00:00 AM10/9/99
to
In article <37FE90AD...@worldnet.att.net>,

EJD <"ejd2(remove)"@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>
>
> Patrick,
> This must be a somewhat difficult time for you, given your earlier
> committment to Mr MacCarthy. However, it would be of some interest to many of us
> to know what it was in the end that finally convinced you that Terence MacCarthy
> was a fraud - was it an accumulation of evidence, or.... ?
> - Edward

Dear Edward and All,

There are limitations to what can be said at present, due to the not-yet-
released status of the documents held by the Genealogical Office. It is
my understanding that the first Freedom of Information Act requests will
be processed within the week, and at that time the contents of the
documentation may be freely discussed.

My own statements are made on the basis of information passed to me by a
friend and scholar who has examined in detail the documentation of the
pedigree. Let me make it clear that this person is similarly constrained
by the legal protocols mentioned above, but in consideration of my
personal request, he consented inform me and other members of the Niadh
Nask of his findings, in general terms. It should be noted that this
scholar has known Terence McCarthy for some time, and had been supportive
of him in the past. Thus, the Niadh Nask officers were sufficiently
reassured that he would not be a part of any attempt to discredit without
cause Terence McCarthy or damage his claim to the chiefship.

Again, I cannot speak as an officer of the NN, but it is my understanding
that based on the characterizations of the documents made by the above-
mentioned scholar, the officers felt that now was the time to make a
clear statement about the insufficiency of Terence McCarthy's pedigree.
I support that interpretation, and where my opinion has been sought, I
have stated as much.

Unfortunately, until all of the documentation concerning the Terence
McCarthy matter is in public hands, I cannot make additional comments
with specificity. I hope you will be patient as the matter unfolds.
Shortly, the specific details will be known, and as certain members of
the Niadh Nask have ascertained, continuation of the organization's
support of Terence McCarthy will be shown to be untenable. In light of
this, the decision made by the NN officers is the only possible decision
which acknowledges the truth.

Regards,

Patrick O'Shea

--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
www2.smumn.edu/facpages/~poshea


Patrick Cracroft-Brennan

unread,
Oct 9, 1999, 3:00:00 AM10/9/99
to
In article <7tl3ra$ot0$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, Patrick M. O'Shea
<pos...@smumn.edu> writes
>In article <7tjcem$br5$1...@scotty.tinet.ie>,

> "Sean J Murphy" <seanj...@tinet.ie> wrote:
>
>> The Clinton grant was in fact the last made by Begley before his unexpected
>> early retirement in 1995. Begley of course was also the Chief Herald who
>> recognised Terence MacCarthy as MacCarthy Mór in 1991-92. Interesting to see
>> how MacCarthy's support base continues to crumble, the latest high profile
>> courtiers to defect being Peter Berresford Ellis and Patrick O'Shea. What we

>> are witnessing of course is merely a realignment of forces and not a true
>> dawning of reason, as 'ordenshunger' remains as strong as ever and is
>> already finding new outlets. The recent accelerated issue of grants of arms
>> by the Irish Genealogical Office is a case in point. I would have thought
>> that the Chief Herald should in fact have suspended such activities pending
>> identification of the extent to which spurious arms, false pedigrees and
>> bogus titles have been infilitrated into the records of the Office over the
>> past 20 years.
>
>Name, as well as for the Republic. However, I dare say that any such

>development will have precious little to do with your 'research' or your
>strident rhetoric.
>
>The officers of the Niadh Nask, so I understand (I am not one), will be
>making an official statement regarding the Terence McCarthy matter later
>today. Although certain individuals will be dancing with glee on the
>figurative grave of Terence McCarthy, we hope that the same people will
>accept the assertion that the Niadh Nask may yet survive and be of
>significant benefit to the Irish Chiefs in the future.
>
>Sincerely,
>
>Patrick M. O'Shea
>--

Well done, Patrick.....it cannot have been easy to write this and I
applaud you for your honesty and integrity.

I don't think that anyone will be "dancing on the figurative grave of
Terence MacCarthy". The whole affair is terribly sad. It proves just
how important it is to not always take claimants to titles at face value
but to look carefully at what lies behind the glittering facade.

I totally agree with your ideas for the future of the NN...shorn of all
the false nobiliary trappings (is anyone going to take legal action for
the recovery of the fees they've paid Terence MacCarthy for non-existent
titles?) it certainly could have great use in channelling interest in
Irish culture and traditions (but please get rid of the Gallowgalss
Guard.....they really are a joke!) and I would be happy to be more open
about my own membership of the NN if this was the case.

Regards

Patrick

PS Do any of us really belong to the NN now? If TM was a fraud, then
surely any awards by him are totally null and void?

PPS Is there any reason why I appear to have been removed from the NN e-
mail circulation list? Surely not because I objected to the support for
Leka soi disant King of the Albanians...or Roger touting his cut price
cigars?

Patrick Cracroft-Brennan

unread,
Oct 9, 1999, 3:00:00 AM10/9/99
to
In article <7tm03i$dm7$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, Mike Dwyer <liongules@my-
deja.com> writes

>In article <7tlo3l$15...@drn.newsguy.com>,
> Guy Stair Sainty <Guy_m...@newsguy.com> wrote:
>> In article <7tl3ra$ot0$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, Patrick says...
>>
>> We have differed in the past, in particular over this question,
>> but I must unhesitatingly express my admiration for your good
>> faith and obviously good intentions. I am sure that being taken
>> in by a confidence trickster is always a horrible experience,
>> especially when one has invested time and money in an enterprise.
>> To admit that one has made an error is difficult, and I admire
>> Mr O'Shea for having the courage to have stated his positionso
>> clearly.
>>
>
>For what little it's worth, I'd also like to say that I also realize
>that Terrence MacCarthy was not who he said he was and he has tricked a
>great many people. I apologize for any aggravation I may have caused
>anyone, especially Mr. Sainty and Mr. Crackroft-Brennan, in our
>previous discussion on this matter.

Mr Dwyer...please...no apologies necessary. These things happen, it's
life. I can assure you that in the future there'll be many well-meaning
people like yourself who will be taken for a ride by glib-sounding
confidence tricksters. The only regret I've got is that people didn't
listen to experts like Guy Stair Sainty before sending off their cheques
(sorry, checks!).

We learn from our mistakes and perhaps this will encourage more people
to seriously look at the claims of such people as Julius Solonocki and
Lloyd Worley.

Patrick Cracroft-Brennan

unread,
Oct 9, 1999, 3:00:00 AM10/9/99
to
In article <7tm3li$g0c$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, Patrick M. O'Shea
<pos...@smumn.edu> writes

But the problem here, Patrick, is that you, me and anyone else who got a
diploma from TM got a dud. IF the NN still exists (and there does
appear to be some real doubt whever it has survived to modern times or
is just a re-invention of TM) then any appointments made to it by TM are
null and void and any future appointments to it await on the pleasure of
the real MM, whoever he may be.

What we have at the moment if the present "members" of the NN continue
to assert such membership is a bunch of Americans who have in effect
self-appointed themselves to an organisation they choose to call the NN.
They will lack all credibility (my previous post notwithstanding) if
they pursue the path you suggest.

Having thought about it a bit further, surely the correct and honourable
thing for everyone who has received anything from TM to do is to just to
throw away the whole lot.....NN, titles, uniforms, the lot!.....and
await the decision of the GO as to who is the rightful Head of the
MacCarthys (aka the MacCarthy Mor). It will then be up to that person to
decide (a) whether he wants the NN to exist or not, if so (b) whether he
wants to make any appointments, if so (c) what appointments he wants to
make, etc.

Once TM has been exposed as a fraud, for anyone to claim to be an
ongoing "officer of the NN" is ludicrous. How can he have been
appointed as an officer if the person making the appointment had no
right to make that appointment.

I'm sorry to be so harsh....but there are times when you've got to face
facts.

KauttWH

unread,
Oct 9, 1999, 3:00:00 AM10/9/99
to
>Subject: Re: Terence McCarthy & my silence
>From: Patrick Cracroft-Brennan

>But the problem here, Patrick, is that you, me and anyone else who got a
>diploma from TM got a dud. IF the NN still exists (and there does
>appear to be some real doubt whever it has survived to modern times or
>is just a re-invention of TM) then any appointments made to it by TM are
>null and void and any future appointments to it await on the pleasure of
>the real MM, whoever he may be.
>
>What we have at the moment if the present "members" of the NN continue
>to assert such membership is a bunch of Americans who have in effect
>self-appointed themselves to an organisation they choose to call the NN.
>They will lack all credibility (my previous post notwithstanding) if
>they pursue the path you suggest.
>
>Having thought about it a bit further, surely the correct and honourable
>thing for everyone who has received anything from TM to do is to just to
>throw away the whole lot.....NN, titles, uniforms, the lot!.....and
>await the decision of the GO as to who is the rightful Head of the
>MacCarthys (aka the MacCarthy Mor). It will then be up to that person to
>decide (a) whether he wants the NN to exist or not, if so (b) whether he
>wants to make any appointments, if so (c) what appointments he wants to
>make, etc.
>
>Once TM has been exposed as a fraud, for anyone to claim to be an
>ongoing "officer of the NN" is ludicrous. How can he have been
>appointed as an officer if the person making the appointment had no
>right to make that appointment.

But he did, he was recognized by competant authority, see my last post.

Kautt

KauttWH

unread,
Oct 9, 1999, 3:00:00 AM10/9/99
to
>PS Do any of us really belong to the NN now? If TM was a fraud, then
>surely any awards by him are totally null and void?

Patrick (Cracroft Brenan),

Since you've brought this up publicly, then I shall give my thoughts here. My
take is that if an American president were elected, but was Constitutionally
unqualified to sit (too young or of foreign birth) and this were discovered
after he'd been in office, then while he would be removed from office, his
appointments would still stand. The bills he signed into law would not become
null, nor the commissions he signed as they were executed in good faith.

I believe this is a close parallel. While the end result of Terence McCarthy's
case is that he is not qualified to be the MacCarthy Mór, he was still
recognized as such by competent authority. As long as he was acting as part of
his Office, then his appointments stand--my brevet was signed MacCarthy ór, not
Tadg or Terrence. Therefore, I would argue that the membership is valid.

Kautt

EJD

unread,
Oct 9, 1999, 3:00:00 AM10/9/99
to

Patrick Cracroft-Brennan wrote:

>
>
> So why should it me any different with TM and the NN? Could it possibly
> be that certain persons have a vested interest in continuing the NN in
> one way or another, whatever the legalities of the matter. They've sent
> the Gallowglass Guard to march in the St Patrick Day Parade (aka the IRA
> Flag Day) in New York. They've even got their photo on the web kissing
> the ring of the Cardinal!!

Patrick, I rather fear you are loosing the run of yourself (again...). Am I to take
it that the Cardinal is an IRA man, and that Ireland's national day is nothing but a
flag day? Only for the fact that you have somewhat of a track record for making
"unfortunate" remarks, I would be very annoyed...
- EJD


Barry Gabriel

unread,
Oct 9, 1999, 3:00:00 AM10/9/99
to

Patrick Cracroft-Brennan wrote:

> [snip]


>
> Mr Dwyer...please...no apologies necessary. These things happen, it's
> life. I can assure you that in the future there'll be many well-meaning
> people like yourself who will be taken for a ride by glib-sounding
> confidence tricksters. The only regret I've got is that people didn't
> listen to experts like Guy Stair Sainty before sending off their cheques
> (sorry, checks!).
>
> We learn from our mistakes and perhaps this will encourage more people
> to seriously look at the claims of such people as Julius Solonocki and
> Lloyd Worley.

And lets not forget the Duke of Albany.

BG


Barry Gabriel

unread,
Oct 9, 1999, 3:00:00 AM10/9/99
to
Ld. W. Baldwin,MD-S wrote:

> Patrick Cracroft-Brennan wrote:
> [snip]
>
> As far as I am
> > aware no-one makes anything up, comes along one day and says "Hey guys!
> > Look, here's a third metal. I know you've never heard of it but beleive
> > me, it really exists.".
>
> Um, sorta like when the CHA said "look, here's a third metal" (copper)
> and I believe them, it exists, because the CHA said so!! They invented
> pink too, just for good measure!! (remember?)

Thanks for reminding people. In Canada there is now copper, which if truth be
known in the paintings I have seen looks remarkably like gold. Rose is the
name of the other color. It isn't really pink per se, it is more a magenta
like color...a dark pink I suppose.

BG


Barry Gabriel

unread,
Oct 9, 1999, 3:00:00 AM10/9/99
to
Patrick Cracroft-Brennan wrote:

> [snip]


> >Patrick, I rather fear you are loosing the run of yourself (again...). Am I to
> >take
> >it that the Cardinal is an IRA man, and that Ireland's national day is nothing
> >but a
> >flag day? Only for the fact that you have somewhat of a track record for making
> >"unfortunate" remarks, I would be very annoyed...
> > - EJD
> >
>

> So the buckets out collecting funds for Noraid at the St Patricks Day
> Parade were just a figment of our imaginations?

What's Noraid?

BG


Patrick M. O'Shea

unread,
Oct 10, 1999, 3:00:00 AM10/10/99
to
In article <7tnpbf$i80$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,
se...@maclochlainn.freeserve.co.uk wrote:

> Whose research is it?

In private correspondence, Mr. Murphy has pointed out to me that it is
improper to make any allegations concerning his research and the
integrity of any reports issuing from it without firsthand knowledge of
his methods and procedure. I concede that he is correct on this point,
and as some of my earlier comments were based on hearsay, it is fitting
that I hereby retract any statements concerning the integrity of Mr.
Murphy's research, and apologize for them.

I continue to have my own opinions about Mr. Murphy's motivations in
this matter, but shall keep these private from this point forward. I
have pointed out to Mr. Murphy that my responses were made in the face
of his own insinuations about my character and motivations, but in
retrospect, I regret giving into the temptation of making a public
response.

Patrick Cracroft-Brennan

unread,
Oct 10, 1999, 3:00:00 AM10/10/99
to
In article <19991009190307...@ng-ck1.aol.com>, KauttWH
<kau...@aol.com> writes

>>Subject: Re: Terence McCarthy & my silence
>>From: Patrick Cracroft-Brennan
>
>>But the problem here, Patrick, is that you, me and anyone else who got a
>>diploma from TM got a dud. IF the NN still exists (and there does
>>appear to be some real doubt whever it has survived to modern times or
>>is just a re-invention of TM) then any appointments made to it by TM are
>>null and void and any future appointments to it await on the pleasure of
>>the real MM, whoever he may be.
>>
>>What we have at the moment if the present "members" of the NN continue
>>to assert such membership is a bunch of Americans who have in effect
>>self-appointed themselves to an organisation they choose to call the NN.
>>They will lack all credibility (my previous post notwithstanding) if
>>they pursue the path you suggest.
>>
>>Having thought about it a bit further, surely the correct and honourable
>>thing for everyone who has received anything from TM to do is to just to
>>throw away the whole lot.....NN, titles, uniforms, the lot!.....and
>>await the decision of the GO as to who is the rightful Head of the
>>MacCarthys (aka the MacCarthy Mor). It will then be up to that person to
>>decide (a) whether he wants the NN to exist or not, if so (b) whether he
>>wants to make any appointments, if so (c) what appointments he wants to
>>make, etc.
>>
>>Once TM has been exposed as a fraud, for anyone to claim to be an
>>ongoing "officer of the NN" is ludicrous. How can he have been
>>appointed as an officer if the person making the appointment had no
>>right to make that appointment.
>
>But he did, he was recognized by competant authority, see my last post.
>
But the said "competant authority", ie the GO, had based recognition of
TM as MM on a false premise, ie that he really was who he said he was.

He was not who he said he was, therefore the recognition is null and
void and therefore any appointments, awards, etc, by TM are similarly
null and void.

It really is a root and branch situation!!

Patrick Cracroft-Brennan

unread,
Oct 10, 1999, 3:00:00 AM10/10/99
to
In article <7to1fl$nlc$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, Mike Dwyer <liongules@my-
deja.com> writes

>In article <tgYiGIAO42$3E...@londwill.demon.co.uk>,
> Patrick Cracroft-Brennan <herald...@www.kwtelecom.com> wrote:
>> In article <7tnf6d$bh3$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, Mike Dwyer <liongules@my-
>> deja.com> writes
>> >

OK....if one of us tells you something about heraldry, then hopefully
its not inconsistent with what you already know about heraldry so you
you're on a pretty safe bet to go along with what we say. Heraldry is a
science, full of rules and laws and factual things. As far as I am


aware no-one makes anything up, comes along one day and says "Hey guys!
Look, here's a third metal. I know you've never heard of it but beleive
me, it really exists.".

But the claims of TM are something different indeed.

Lets look at just one of these.....

His claim to be "Prince of Desmond" (and by this not just an empty
style, like, sau "Prince of Thomomnd" used by the head of the O'Brien
family, but claims that just fall a tad short of cliaming semi-regal
status)......

Tell me...excluding holders of foreign titles, how many other Brits (in
the widest sense) do you find tramping round England claimning to be,
say, Prince of Swaledale...or round Scotland claiming to be, say, Prince
of Fife? The answer in: NONE. In the UK and Ireland we just don't
have princely titles outside the Royal Family. In England you'd need to
go back to the Heptarchy of pre-Conquest times, in Scotland to the 11th
century and in Wales to about the 14th century before you got to any
princely titles outside the Royal Family. In Ireland things were
slightly different, but any native titles ceased by the end of the 16th
century.

So, you come across this Irish guy claiming to be a Prince, disposing of
titles and handing out his house "order"...even forming a personal
bodyguard. Now doesn't this strike you as a tad odd? Even a
rudimentary knowledge of British history should tell you that this is
totally at odds with reality.

And "reality" is really what we're talking about. If you know anything
about Orders of Chivalry, you know that it is an absolute minefield,
with fraudsters trying to sell you this Order or that Order. You know
that you ought to check things out....look things up in a standard
reference work...put it past with people who know about these things.
But what happens? A nice neck cross or title is dangled in front of
you, and "Poof!", out the window goes any sense of reality. How else
can you explain how people could possibly beleive that an Irish "prince"
could make them "Lord of This" or "Lord of That", how else can you
explain how people could possibly beleive that the heir to the
Hohenstauffens could suddenly reappear after centuries? But they do.
It's sad, but they really do.

Let's not get too upset over this...what has happened has
happened....let's look to the future, slightly wiser if slightly poorer
in our pockets!

Patrick Cracroft-Brennan

unread,
Oct 10, 1999, 3:00:00 AM10/10/99
to

Please, Patrick, let's drop all this cloak and dagger nonsence once and
for all. What on earth do you mean by "legal constraints"? All the
records held by the Chief Herald are records of the National Library and
as such public documents, available to all.

Sean Murphy published his findings on here months ago. What more
evidence do you need?

Patrick Cracroft-Brennan

unread,
Oct 10, 1999, 3:00:00 AM10/10/99
to
In article <19991009185926...@ng-ck1.aol.com>, KauttWH
<kau...@aol.com> writes

>>PS Do any of us really belong to the NN now? If TM was a fraud, then
>>surely any awards by him are totally null and void?
>
>Patrick (Cracroft Brenan),
>
>Since you've brought this up publicly, then I shall give my thoughts here. My
>take is that if an American president were elected, but was Constitutionally
>unqualified to sit (too young or of foreign birth) and this were discovered
>after he'd been in office, then while he would be removed from office, his
>appointments would still stand. The bills he signed into law would not become
>null, nor the commissions he signed as they were executed in good faith.
>
>I believe this is a close parallel.

I can see no parallel.

> While the end result of Terence McCarthy's
>case is that he is not qualified to be the MacCarthy Mór, he was still
>recognized as such by competent authority. As long as he was acting as part of
>his Office, then his appointments stand--my brevet was signed MacCarthy ór, not
>Tadg or Terrence. Therefore, I would argue that the membership is valid.
>

I beg to differ. The Genealogical Office was duped into giving
recognition based on falsified information given to them by TM. TM then
proceeded to trade on this recognition, knowing full well that the
information he had given to the GO for the purposes of seeking
recognition was falsified. There was no "good faith" in this sordid
matter in shape or form.

There is maxim in Common Law that a criminal should not be allowed to
benefit from his crime. The recognition is void because it is based on
falsifid information. From this is follows that the appointments by TM
are also void. It also follows that he should be made to refund any
monies he received for the sale of titles, etc.

Your brevet was not signed by THE MacCarthy Mor...they were signed by a
man who knowingly had made a false claim to the style of MM and had
knowingly duped others into giving him recognition as such to further
his fraudulent ends.

Let me give you a silly analogy. I come along, claiming to be "Ming,
Emperor of the Known Universe". I manage to persuade the College of
Arms that I am the said Emperor by showing them a false birth
certificate I ran up on my PC yesterday and they issue a nicely painted
bit of vellum saying that they have recorded this in the archives of the
College. Based on this, for the moment you beleive me. I create you
"Duke of Mars" and make you a Knight Grand Cross of the Effulgent Order
of the Crab Nebula. You're as pleased as Punch with this and skoot
round the place showing your gee-gaws to all and sundry and intimidating
head waiters with your newly acquired title.

Suddenly someone twigs that the birth certificate was a fraud, that I'm
not Ming, Emperor of the Known Universe, but plain old Patrick Cracroft-
Brennan. The offending record is expunged from the archives of the
College and I am told in no uncertain terms never to darken their
threshold again.

Now, given this scenario, would you say your title of "Duke of Mars" was
still valid, 'cause at the time of creation I was shown in the archives
of Her Majesty's College of Arms as being Ming, Emperor of the Known
Universe? Of course not, you'd say the whole thing was a load of old
rubbish, that you'd been well and truly done...and you'd send round the
boys to extract from me the little sum of £10,000 I'd charged you as
"passage fees" when I "conferred" the Order of the Crab Nebula on you.

So why should it me any different with TM and the NN? Could it possibly
be that certain persons have a vested interest in continuing the NN in
one way or another, whatever the legalities of the matter. They've sent
the Gallowglass Guard to march in the St Patrick Day Parade (aka the IRA
Flag Day) in New York. They've even got their photo on the web kissing

the ring of the Cardinal!! How can they possibly lose face now by
saying it's a load of old tosh and admitting they were stupid enough to
throw away $5,000 on a worthless title? What will the wife say (she
gets turned on by seeing me in my kilt!)? What will the kids say (they
love the dressing up!)? What will my colleagues say (I made such a fuss
about getting my office business cards printed with the title I got from
the MM, I'd look a total wally if I got them to take it off now!)? I am
sure you could think of many similar scenarios for yourself!

Sorry to be so cynical, but I've learnt from experience that a pinch of
salt if not a whole bushel load ain't a bad thing when talking about
Orders and titles.

Michael F McCartney

unread,
Oct 10, 1999, 3:00:00 AM10/10/99
to
Sean Murphy (I think) voiced the opinion that, with all the recent
flap re: etc etc, perhaps the Chief Herald should suspend granting
new arms etc 'till the smoke clears, or words to that effect.

I would agree that this might not be the ideal time &
circumstances to confirm any new Irish Chieftains; but I don't see
any particular bearing on the granting of NEW arms, which by
definition aren't based on any of the legal theories or pedigree
problems that have hit the fan - a new grantee by definition isn't
the heir of anybody, nor (other than perhaps an Irish-American
tracing back to his immigrant ancestor) is one's ancestry of more
than passing (& non-controlling) interest.

seanj...@my-deja.com

unread,
Oct 10, 1999, 3:00:00 AM10/10/99
to
In article <7toob5$6ci$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,


It is a particularly grave matter for one scholar to make an
unwarranted accusation of plagiarism against another, and I accept Dr
O'Shea's apology, even if the concluding reservation robs it of some
graciousness. While I carried out my own research and carefully cited
sources, I have discovered that there were in fact several parallel
investigations going on into the MacCarthy Mór Hoax. As I was the only
professional genealogist to issue a report above my name, I have
naturally been a particular target of resentment and malicious attack.
Contributors to this discussion group who first raised questions two
years ago about Terence MacCarthy's operations will know the feeling.
It is those who have been circulating material anonymously, leaking
documents selectively and spreading slander who should have their
characters and motivations called in question.

Sean Murphy
Centre for Irish Genealogical and Local Studies
http://homepage.eircom.net/~seanjmurphy/chiefs/

se...@maclochlainn.freeserve.co.uk

unread,
Oct 10, 1999, 3:00:00 AM10/10/99
to
In article <19991009185926...@ng-ck1.aol.com>,

kau...@aol.com (KauttWH) wrote:
> >PS Do any of us really belong to the NN now? If TM was a fraud, then
> >surely any awards by him are totally null and void?
>
> Patrick (Cracroft Brenan),
>
> Since you've brought this up publicly, then I shall give my thoughts
here. My
> take is that if an American president were elected, but was
Constitutionally
> unqualified to sit (too young or of foreign birth) and this were
discovered
> after he'd been in office, then while he would be removed from
office, his
> appointments would still stand. The bills he signed into law would
not become
> null, nor the commissions he signed as they were executed in good
faith.
>
> I believe this is a close parallel. While the end result of Terence

McCarthy's
> case is that he is not qualified to be the MacCarthy Mór, he was still
> recognized as such by competent authority. As long as he was acting
as part of
> his Office, then his appointments stand--my brevet was signed
MacCarthy ór, not
> Tadg or Terrence. Therefore, I would argue that the membership is
valid.

The GO recognition of T MacCarthy as MacCarthy Mor is "null and void"
(Statement of GO August 1999). It is as if GO recognition were never
given. The decision of the GO was based upon sound genealogical
grounds. These same grounds would exclude T MacCarthy from succession
under the operation of a MacCarthy derbfine. T MacCarthy has no
legitimacy in the eyes of either the GO or the MacCarthy clan.

If the Niadh Nask does have a continued existence under MacCarthy Mor,
then it curently exists in its pre-T MacCarthy state. If Gaelic
lordships can be sold by MacCarthy Mor, then all the lordships sold by
T MacCarthy remain with MacCarthy Mor, whoever that might be.

A new MacCarthy Mor may ratify the actions of T MacCarthy, then again
there is no reason why he should.

This doesn't preclude those members of T MacCarthy's Niadh Nask from
staying together to pursue laudable aims in the field of history,
including an investigation into the history of the true Niadh Nask.

Sean

Ld. W. Baldwin,MD-S

unread,
Oct 10, 1999, 3:00:00 AM10/10/99
to
Patrick Cracroft-Brennan wrote:

> OK....if one of us tells you something about heraldry, then hopefully
> its not inconsistent with what you already know about heraldry so you
> you're on a pretty safe bet to go along with what we say. Heraldry is a
> science, full of rules and laws and factual things.

All of which change from place to place and time period to period. All
of which are greatly subject to interpretation and opinion. All of which
are full of exceptions. Pretty simple, huh? No room for confusion or
controversy there.....

As far as I am
> aware no-one makes anything up, comes along one day and says "Hey guys!
> Look, here's a third metal. I know you've never heard of it but beleive
> me, it really exists.".

Um, sorta like when the CHA said "look, here's a third metal" (copper)


and I believe them, it exists, because the CHA said so!! They invented
pink too, just for good measure!! (remember?)

> But the claims of TM are something different indeed.


>
> Lets look at just one of these.....
>
> His claim to be "Prince of Desmond" (and by this not just an empty
> style, like, sau "Prince of Thomomnd" used by the head of the O'Brien
> family, but claims that just fall a tad short of cliaming semi-regal
> status)......
>
> Tell me...excluding holders of foreign titles, how many other Brits (in
> the widest sense) do you find tramping round England claimning to be,
> say, Prince of Swaledale...or round Scotland claiming to be, say, Prince
> of Fife? The answer in: NONE. In the UK and Ireland we just don't
> have princely titles outside the Royal Family. In England you'd need to
> go back to the Heptarchy of pre-Conquest times, in Scotland to the 11th
> century and in Wales to about the 14th century before you got to any
> princely titles outside the Royal Family. In Ireland things were
> slightly different, but any native titles ceased by the end of the 16th
> century.
>
> So, you come across this Irish guy claiming to be a Prince, disposing of
> titles and handing out his house "order"...even forming a personal
> bodyguard.

The personal bodyguard was a bit much, but the rest wasn't *too*
ridiculous, since it was intended to be on the continental model, and
blatantly repudiated anything remotely British.

>Now doesn't this strike you as a tad odd? Even a
> rudimentary knowledge of British history should tell you that this is
> totally at odds with reality.
>
> And "reality" is really what we're talking about. If you know anything
> about Orders of Chivalry, you know that it is an absolute minefield,
> with fraudsters trying to sell you this Order or that Order. You know
> that you ought to check things out....look things up in a standard
> reference work...put it past with people who know about these things.
> But what happens? A nice neck cross or title is dangled in front of
> you, and "Poof!", out the window goes any sense of reality. How else
> can you explain how people could possibly beleive that an Irish "prince"
> could make them "Lord of This" or "Lord of That", how else can you
> explain how people could possibly beleive that the heir to the
> Hohenstauffens could suddenly reappear after centuries? But they do.
> It's sad, but they really do.
>
> Let's not get too upset over this...what has happened has
> happened....let's look to the future, slightly wiser if slightly poorer
> in our pockets!

This is the other crux of the problem. The people who could've sent red
flags on the whole thing had been crying wolf too long, on the wrong
issues, that they were ignored.
PCB was always spouting british this, and british that, when MM kept
saying it was an Irish thing. Thus the Irish-centric dismissed his
arguments, *including the relevant ones.* Had the arguments focused more
on fraud and false hype, the message would have been clearer. To be
fair, I believe GSS (or FV?) did begin focusing more on the man's claims
as opposed to his "nobiliary theories" towards the end. This, along with
the GO's announcement, was the first domino to go...

Ld. W. Baldwin,MD-S

unread,
Oct 10, 1999, 3:00:00 AM10/10/99
to
se...@maclochlainn.freeserve.co.uk wrote:

> The GO recognition of T MacCarthy as MacCarthy Mor is "null and void"
> (Statement of GO August 1999). It is as if GO recognition were never
> given. The decision of the GO was based upon sound genealogical
> grounds. These same grounds would exclude T MacCarthy from succession
> under the operation of a MacCarthy derbfine. T MacCarthy has no
> legitimacy in the eyes of either the GO or the MacCarthy clan.
>
> If the Niadh Nask does have a continued existence under MacCarthy Mor,
> then it curently exists in its pre-T MacCarthy state. If Gaelic
> lordships can be sold by MacCarthy Mor, then all the lordships sold by
> T MacCarthy remain with MacCarthy Mor, whoever that might be.
>
> A new MacCarthy Mor may ratify the actions of T MacCarthy, then again
> there is no reason why he should.
>
> This doesn't preclude those members of T MacCarthy's Niadh Nask from
> staying together to pursue laudable aims in the field of history,
> including an investigation into the history of the true Niadh Nask.

Perhaps calling themselves TAFKANN. The Association Formerly Known As
Niadh Nask...

Patrick Cracroft-Brennan

unread,
Oct 10, 1999, 3:00:00 AM10/10/99
to
In article <37FFF3B6...@worldnet.att.net>, EJD <"ejd2(remove)"@worl
dnet.att.net> writes

>
>
>Patrick Cracroft-Brennan wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> So why should it me any different with TM and the NN? Could it possibly
>> be that certain persons have a vested interest in continuing the NN in
>> one way or another, whatever the legalities of the matter. They've sent
>> the Gallowglass Guard to march in the St Patrick Day Parade (aka the IRA
>> Flag Day) in New York. They've even got their photo on the web kissing
>> the ring of the Cardinal!!
>
>Patrick, I rather fear you are loosing the run of yourself (again...). Am I to
>take
>it that the Cardinal is an IRA man, and that Ireland's national day is nothing
>but a
>flag day? Only for the fact that you have somewhat of a track record for making
>"unfortunate" remarks, I would be very annoyed...
> - EJD
>

So the buckets out collecting funds for Noraid at the St Patricks Day
Parade were just a figment of our imaginations?

Patrick Cracroft-Brennan HonFHS FSA(Scot)

Patrick Cracroft-Brennan

unread,
Oct 10, 1999, 3:00:00 AM10/10/99
to
In article <7tq7p8$3t1$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, se...@maclochlainn.freeserve.co
.uk writes

>
>The GO recognition of T MacCarthy as MacCarthy Mor is "null and void"
>(Statement of GO August 1999). It is as if GO recognition were never
>given.

This is exactly what I have said in my postings.

> The decision of the GO was based upon sound genealogical
>grounds. These same grounds would exclude T MacCarthy from succession
>under the operation of a MacCarthy derbfine. T MacCarthy has no
>legitimacy in the eyes of either the GO or the MacCarthy clan.

Not only "has no" but, more importantly for those who have bought titles
off him and received membership of the NN, "has had no
legitimacy...ever".

>
>If the Niadh Nask does have a continued existence under MacCarthy Mor,
>then it curently exists in its pre-T MacCarthy state. If Gaelic
>lordships can be sold by MacCarthy Mor, then all the lordships sold by
>T MacCarthy remain with MacCarthy Mor, whoever that might be.

This would strongly lead to me suggesting that all those who have
acquired titles (now totally worthless) that they consider a class
action against TM to recover monies they have paid to him.....

>
>A new MacCarthy Mor may ratify the actions of T MacCarthy, then again
>there is no reason why he should.
>
>This doesn't preclude those members of T MacCarthy's Niadh Nask from
>staying together to pursue laudable aims in the field of history,
>including an investigation into the history of the true Niadh Nask.

But it would be wrong if they (or should I say us?), the members of "T
MacCarthy's Niadh Nask", continued to use the term "Niadh Nask" because
whatever it is we are members of, it certainly is not the "Niadh Nask".

Patrick M. O'Shea

unread,
Oct 10, 1999, 3:00:00 AM10/10/99
to
In article <7tpstq$th0$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>,
seanj...@my-deja.com wrote:

> It is a particularly grave matter for one scholar to make an
> unwarranted accusation of plagiarism against another, and I accept Dr
> O'Shea's apology, even if the concluding reservation robs it of some
> graciousness. While I carried out my own research and carefully cited
> sources, I have discovered that there were in fact several parallel
> investigations going on into the MacCarthy Mór Hoax. As I was the only
> professional genealogist to issue a report above my name, I have
> naturally been a particular target of resentment and malicious attack.
> Contributors to this discussion group who first raised questions two
> years ago about Terence MacCarthy's operations will know the feeling.
> It is those who have been circulating material anonymously, leaking
> documents selectively and spreading slander who should have their
> characters and motivations called in question.

On this last statement, Mr. Murphy and I are in complete agreement. The
behavior of certain persons in official positions connected with these
matters has been reprehensible. It seems clear that Mr. Murphy has been
the victim of some of these attacks, and although I cannot condone any
misrepresentations of fact made by Terence McCarthy, it does seem that he
was the target of some of the selective leaks and slander cited above.

I have been told that efforts are underway to 'clean up' the Genealogical
Office, but it will be some time before the Office enjoys any widespread
credibility. Indeed, the very behavior of GO officials lent considerable
weight to Terence McCarthy's argument that he was simply the victim of a
political 'smear campaign.' Under the circumstances, the GO essentially
guaranteed that supporters of Terence McCarthy would dismiss out of hand
their assertions (including the withdrawal of recognition).

This does not make a claim to a chiefship based on flimsy or contrived
evidence in any way acceptable, but it does offer some explanation of why
Terence's supporters, particularly in America (i.e., isolated from
certain sources of information) were willing to accept Terence's word
over that of the GO. In effect, by attempting to engineer the 'downfall'
of Terence McCarthy, persons affiliated with the GO actually galvanized
his support in North America, and perpetuated the problem.

-Patrick O'Shea
--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
www2.smumn.edu/facpages/~poshea


se...@maclochlainn.freeserve.co.uk

unread,
Oct 10, 1999, 3:00:00 AM10/10/99
to
In article <37FF9411...@uccb.ns.ca>,
Barry Gabriel <bgab...@uccb.ns.ca> wrote:

> What's Noraid?
>
> BG

A misguided US group which raises funds for the evil Irish Republican
movement so that the communist/fascist/criminal (delete according to
whim) godfathers of the IRA can deprive children and pregnant women of
their loved ones.

Of course, while Irish-Americans know nothing about Ireland, the
British public are well informed on the subject and their country is
admirably even handed in its dealings, bearing the White Mans Burden
without a grumble.

And God is an Englishman.

Sean

CAPT Sel. Glen Cook

unread,
Oct 10, 1999, 3:00:00 AM10/10/99
to
>What will the wife say (she
>gets turned on by seeing me in my kilt!)?

How did you know?
Glen Cook
Coo...@aol.com


Patrick M. O'Shea

unread,
Oct 10, 1999, 3:00:00 AM10/10/99
to
In article <Lu4LFEAOd4$3E...@londwill.demon.co.uk>,
Patrick Cracroft-Brennan <herald...@www.kwtelecom.com> wrote:

>
> PS Do any of us really belong to the NN now? If TM was a fraud, then
> surely any awards by him are totally null and void?

This, of course, depends upon what one now defines the NN to be. It is
impossible to make an absolute answer, but I am of the opinion that all
Niadh Nask, who have committed themselves to support the MacCarthy
CHIEFSHIP (and no one man), remain committed to that support. I also
believe that this mission may be extended to include the the other heirs
of provincial kingdoms, and indeed perhaps all legitimate chiefs.

Quite simply, we remain Niadh Nask. Now we must answer the fundamental
question: "What is a Niadh Nask?" I have some basic ideas (which frankly
have not changed, regardless of the MacCarthy Mor affair), but a full
answer to this question will only emerge in the coming weeks and months.


>
> PPS Is there any reason why I appear to have been removed from the NN e-
> mail circulation list? Surely not because I objected to the support for
> Leka soi disant King of the Albanians...or Roger touting his cut price
> cigars?

Your Leka comments notwithstanding (and you certainly are entitled to
your opinion on that matter), I cannot imagine why you were not included
on the e-mail distribution list. As David Wooten sent this out, I'll
check with him to be sure that you are included in any future
distribution lists.

-Patrick O'Shea


--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
www2.smumn.edu/facpages/~poshea


Barry Gabriel

unread,
Oct 10, 1999, 3:00:00 AM10/10/99
to
Ld. W. Baldwin,MD-S wrote:
    Barry Gabriel wrote:
    [snip]
    > Thanks for reminding people.  In Canada there is now copper, which if truth be
    > known in the paintings I have seen looks remarkably like gold.  Rose is the
    > name of the other color.  It isn't really pink per se, it is more a magenta
    > like color...a dark pink I suppose.

    I remembered rose but had forgotten that it wasn't exactly pink. Has
    anyone ever found out the hatching scheme?

    Nothing official yet, though I remember an attempt at copper which looked something like this (.(.(.(.(.
    with the dot being in the middle.

    BG

Barry Gabriel

unread,
Oct 10, 1999, 3:00:00 AM10/10/99
to
Michael F McCartney wrote:

> I guess I wouldn't mind copper in my arms if it looked like gold,
> as BG says - at least not nearly as much as I would mind it, if
> the gold in my purse looked awfully like copper!

Well put. As I mentioned before, copper looks somewhat like gold in the
examples I have in my possession. I believe originally copper was used
for certain Aboriginal Nations of the west coast of Canada to whom
copper holds some significance. It has since branched out to the
dominant population in their arms, but is still fairly rare.

>
>
> Seriously, IMO copper & pink were bad ideas, just because they are
> relatively indistinct. Good armory is clear, distinctive armory -
> well at least that should be one of the criteria.

For two examples of rose, one good and one bad, visit here
http://www.geocities.com/BourbonStreet/Square/3238/Page3.html

I do not yet have any examples of copper on site...soon one hopes.

>
>
> On the other hand, a bit of experimentation isn't a bad thing, eh?
> Like any mutation, most will self-destruct in reasonably short
> order, & only the viable will survive. The history of heraldry
> has IM a strong Darwinian element...

Time will tell.

BG


Barry Gabriel

unread,
Oct 10, 1999, 3:00:00 AM10/10/99
to

Adrian M Whatley wrote:

> To what extent are copper & rose being used? i.e. in what percentage of grants?

Not very many. Most people petitioning for arms prefer the standard tinctures and
metals.
For an example of rose, visit here
http://www.geocities.com/BourbonStreet/Square/3238/Page3.html

BG


Barry Gabriel

unread,
Oct 10, 1999, 3:00:00 AM10/10/99
to
Derek Howard wrote:

> [snip]
>
> I am suprised no one has used platinum or something so shiny it merely
> reflects!

Too much like silver, but there are incidents where Argent is blazoned in jewel
terms.

>
>
> I am looking at a copy of a grant from Sir Isaac Hear, Garter, following
> the grant to Thomas Lister Esq of the title Baron Ribblesdale of
> Gisburne Park in the West Riding of the County of York, of supporters -
> "On the Dexter side a Stag regardant Sable attired and unguled Or,
> gorged with a collar of SS and charged on the body with an Eagle
> displayed Gold, On the Sinister A War Horse of a brown Colour
> caparisoned proper supporting A Guidon of the York Light Dragoons Or
> charged with the Letters Y L Das the same are in the Margin hereof more
> plainly depicted..."

This is logical as the horse's color being brown would be correctly indicated as
"brown Proper" This avoids confusion over merely Proper as horses come in many
colors.

> [snip]
>
> I can understand why a horse could be brown if proper but in light of
> the thread about whether a Canadian maple leaf proper should be green or
> red it is interesting that "brown" is not only used in describing the
> supporter but also for the terminology of the shield. I have not come
> across many uses of brown.

It is fortunately rare and discouraged, but the arms of one of the African nations
(Kenya? Gambia?) uses brown (and quite effectively as well).

BG


Patrick M. O'Shea

unread,
Oct 11, 1999, 3:00:00 AM10/11/99
to
In article <4+DHxKAjt4$3E...@londwill.demon.co.uk>,
Patrick Cracroft-Brennan <herald...@www.kwtelecom.com> wrote:

>
> But the problem here, Patrick, is that you, me and anyone else who got a
> diploma from TM got a dud. IF the NN still exists (and there does
> appear to be some real doubt whever it has survived to modern times or
> is just a re-invention of TM) then any appointments made to it by TM are
> null and void and any future appointments to it await on the pleasure of
> the real MM, whoever he may be.

I would agree if the NN were, in fact, a dynastic order specifically of
the house of MacCarthy Mor. When one examines the actual references, the
indication is that this is not so (contrary to TM's assertions). If the
NN were connected to the high kingship, or even to the larger Eoghanacht
dynasty, there are other legitimate Chiefs which are empowered to support
the continuation of the group.

>
> What we have at the moment if the present "members" of the NN continue
> to assert such membership is a bunch of Americans who have in effect
> self-appointed themselves to an organisation they choose to call the NN.
> They will lack all credibility (my previous post notwithstanding) if
> they pursue the path you suggest.
>
> Having thought about it a bit further, surely the correct and honourable
> thing for everyone who has received anything from TM to do is to just to
> throw away the whole lot.....NN, titles, uniforms, the lot!.....and
> await the decision of the GO as to who is the rightful Head of the
> MacCarthys (aka the MacCarthy Mor). It will then be up to that person to
> decide (a) whether he wants the NN to exist or not, if so (b) whether he
> wants to make any appointments, if so (c) what appointments he wants to
> make, etc.

For reasons that should now appear obvious, the GO's credibility in such
matters is now paper thin. I would much rather see the ratification of
any new MacCarthy Mor (or any chief) by the Standing Council of Irish
Chiefs. The GO should not enter into it, nor, I expect, will they wish
to do so.

>
> Once TM has been exposed as a fraud, for anyone to claim to be an
> ongoing "officer of the NN" is ludicrous. How can he have been
> appointed as an officer if the person making the appointment had no
> right to make that appointment.
>

> I'm sorry to be so harsh....but there are times when you've got to face
> facts.

No apology necessary. This is a harsh time. Still, I believe that the
NN will continue, and the matter of appropriate patronage will be
addressed in due course.

-PMOS

Ld. W. Baldwin,MD-S

unread,
Oct 11, 1999, 3:00:00 AM10/11/99
to
Barry Gabriel wrote:
>
> Ld. W. Baldwin,MD-S wrote:
>
> > Patrick Cracroft-Brennan wrote:
> > [snip]
> >
> > As far as I am
> > > aware no-one makes anything up, comes along one day and says "Hey guys!
> > > Look, here's a third metal. I know you've never heard of it but beleive
> > > me, it really exists.".
> >
> > Um, sorta like when the CHA said "look, here's a third metal" (copper)
> > and I believe them, it exists, because the CHA said so!! They invented
> > pink too, just for good measure!! (remember?)
>

Anton Sherwood

unread,
Oct 11, 1999, 3:00:00 AM10/11/99