Today in Gaelic is
Near the territory of the O'Carey's lived the native Gaelic O'Tnuthghail Sept of North County Kildare who sometimes anglicized their name as Knowles as well as the more usual Newell.
The first Irish were neolithic users of flint and then bronze. About 350, the Gaelic Celts from southern France and Spain conquered Ireland. The Celtic traditions and culture have held on longer in Ireland than any other country, and the Vikings and Normans became absorbed into the Gaelic world. Bibliography
The difficulty with establishing an Irish pedigree is that the Central Repository of Ireland's Public Records was set on fire and burned in 1922. The main bulk of the State, Domestic and Ecclesiastical Records of the country were then destroyed.
The name Knowles in Ireland is often of immigrant origin having been brought into the country by settlers who arrived into the Province of Ulster, especially during the seventeenth century. The Cappoge Castle in the parish of Castleknock, County Dublin had been forfeited after the rebellion by Bartholomew Dillon, and the chief inhabitants on the lands after the Restoration were Captain Knowles and Henry Wood, whose house was assessed for two hearths. At the time of the Restoration (1660-1666) the inhabitants numbered four of English and 22 of Irish descent.
The current Irish Golden Pages
listings for Knowles by county:
1890 Distribution of Births for Knowles
There were 223 listings for Knowles surname
The Irish Times front page: Thursday, January 11, 2001
From Rachel Donnelly, in London
"Unarmed civilians and "Irish rebels" were shot during the 1916 Easter Rising on British orders not to take prisoners, according to War Office files released at the Public Record Office in London yesterday.
The files, which were closed under the 100-year rule but revealed now as part of Labour's policy of open government, provide details of soldiers shooting civilians, suspected of taking part in the Rising, without trial.
In a report written in June 1916 to the then Prime Minister, Herbert Asquith, the permanent secretary to the Home Department, Sir Edward Troup, observed that the source of "mischief" was the military order not to take prisoners. "This in itself may have been justifiable - but it should have been made clear that it did not mean that an unarmed rebel might be shot after he had been taken prisoner . . . still less could it mean that a person taken on mere suspicion could be shot without trial."
Sir Edward also referred to the shooting of James Moore outside a house in Little Brittain Street in Dublin. Moore was killed by a shot fired by a group of British soldiers in the street, but the soldiers' senior officer, "Serjeant Flood," went to the house after the shooting to express his regret. Sir Edward told Asquith that Moore was "probably a perfectly innocent person, and his being shot must be regarded as an accident. I have no doubt, however, that if the evidence were published there would be a demand that Flood should be tried for murder."
Legal advice given to the government in 1917, when Asquith had been replaced as Prime Minister by David Lloyd George, warned against publishing the proceedings of courtsmartial, many of which were held in camera in the days after the Rising when martial law had been declared. "There are one or two cases in which the evidence is extremely thin."
A legal official adds: "Nor do I think it would be wise if, for example, we were to publish the evidence in the case of Edmund Kent and we had to publish the fact that he summoned as one of his witnesses Thomas McDonagh, one of the leaders of the Easter Rising, and we had to state that Thomas McDonagh was not available as a witness as he was shot that morning."
Éamonn Ceannt was executed on May 8th, 1916."
British told not to take prisoners during Rising
From Rachel Donnelly, in London
"The shooting of unarmed civilians during the Easter Rising arose from British orders that soldiers should not take any prisoners, according to War Office files released at the Public Record Office in London yesterday.
A War Office document from June 1916, marked "very confidential", written by Sir Edward Troup, who was permanent secretary to the Home Department, for the British prime minister, Herbert Asquith, refers to several cases of civilians shot by British soldiers during the Easter Rising in Dublin.
The typed report is covered with handwritten corrections - sentences have been crossed out and rewritten - suggesting Sir Edward made a second draft of the report on the shootings, possibly after a request from Asquith, who was facing pressure from Irish politicians, such as John Dillon, to publish a detailed account of the Rising.
One case refers to the shootings of Peter Connolly, a member of the Redmondite Irish National Volunteers and the owner of a hardware shop; Thomas Hickey and his son, Christopher Hickey, aged 15, in North King Street on April 28th. They were "shot as rebels taken red-handed" and the British soldiers "had orders not to take prisoners, which they took to mean that they were to shoot anyone whom they believed to be an active rebel".
After this sentence several additions are made to the first draft of the report. The original script says: "Some of the persons were rightly shot, and that probably the others were not taking any active part, though the police evidence is clear that the whole of this street was a nest of Sinn Féiners." But additional notes provide more information so the sentence reads: "Some of the persons shot were probably fighting or sniping, but there can be little doubt that others were not taking any active part and, though the police evidence is clear that the whole of this street was a nest of Sinn Féiners, some were probably not even sympathisers."
And a handwritten note at the end of the document provides a revealing insight: "The source of the mischief was the military order to take no prisoners. This in itself may have been justifiable - but it should have been made clear that it did not mean that an unarmed rebel might be shot after he had been taken prisoner."
The next part of the sentence - "To kill an enemy who has surrendered without trial can't . . . " - has been crossed out and the sentence continues: "still less could it mean that a person taken on mere suspicion could be shot without trial." The second War Office file, registered on January 11th, 1917, details resistance to calls to publish transcripts of courtsmartial.
There were "161 Field General Courts-Martial" of civilians, with one referring to a non-commissioned officer and "22 General Courts-Martial" in connection with the Rising.
Asquith had given an undertaking to provide relatives of Irish "rebels" who had been shot with a copy of courts-martial proceedings, and when he was replaced as prime minister by David Lloyd George at the end of 1916 efforts were still being made to resist publishing details of the courts-martial.
Legal advisers to the government warned publication was unwise because several trials were held in camera and there was "no legal justification" for this under current legislation, "and in certain cases the evidence against Sinn Féiners who were killed was not too strong".
Copyright © 1995-2012 Clan Knowles™. All rights reserved. No text or images may be copied without written permission. RMK Research Questions or problems regarding this web site should be directed to Ronald Knowles or Séamus Ó Tnúthghail March 20, 2012