Daily prayer in Ordinary Time 2025: 97, Thursday 14 August 2025

‘You wicked slave! I forgave you all that debt because you pleaded with me. Should you not have had mercy on your fellow-slave, as I had mercy on you?’ (Matthew 18: 32-33) … a stained-glass window in Saint Michael’s Church, Limerick (Photograph: Patrick Comerford)

Patrick Comerford

We are continuing in Ordinary Time in the Church Calendar and this week began with the Eighth Sunday after Trinity (Trinity VIII). The calendar of the Church of England in Common Worship today remembers the life and witness of Maximilian Kolbe (1894-1941), Carmelite friar and martyr in Auschwitz.

I am back in Stony Stratford this morning after my short-mid-week visit to Dublin. Before today begins, I am taking some quiet time this morning to give thanks, for reflection, prayer and for reading in these ways:

1, today’s Gospel reading;

2, a reflection on the Gospel reading;

3, a prayer from the USPG prayer diary;

4, the Collects and Post-Communion prayer of the day.

‘Have patience with me, and I will pay you everything’ (Matthew 18: 26) … old, worthless banknotes heaped up outside an antiques shop in Rethymnon (Photograph: Patrick Comerford)

Matthew 18: 21 to 19: 1 (NRSVA):

21 Then Peter came and said to him, ‘Lord, if another member of the church sins against me, how often should I forgive? As many as seven times?’ 22 Jesus said to him, ‘Not seven times, but, I tell you, seventy-seven times.

23 ‘For this reason the kingdom of heaven may be compared to a king who wished to settle accounts with his slaves. 24 When he began the reckoning, one who owed him ten thousand talents was brought to him; 25 and, as he could not pay, his lord ordered him to be sold, together with his wife and children and all his possessions, and payment to be made. 26 So the slave fell on his knees before him, saying, “Have patience with me, and I will pay you everything.” 27 And out of pity for him, the lord of that slave released him and forgave him the debt. 28 But that same slave, as he went out, came upon one of his fellow-slaves who owed him a hundred denarii; and seizing him by the throat, he said, “Pay what you owe.” 29 Then his fellow-slave fell down and pleaded with him, “Have patience with me, and I will pay you.” 30 But he refused; then he went and threw him into prison until he should pay the debt. 31 When his fellow-slaves saw what had happened, they were greatly distressed, and they went and reported to their lord all that had taken place. 32 Then his lord summoned him and said to him, “You wicked slave! I forgave you all that debt because you pleaded with me. 33 Should you not have had mercy on your fellow-slave, as I had mercy on you?” 34 And in anger his lord handed him over to be tortured until he should pay his entire debt. 35 So my heavenly Father will also do to every one of you, if you do not forgive your brother or sister from your heart.’

1 When Jesus had finished saying these things, he left Galilee and went to the region of Judea beyond the Jordan.

‘Have patience with me, and I will pay you everything’ (Matthew 18: 29) … a collection of denarii among old Greek coins in an exhibition in Callan, Co Kilkenny (Photograph: Patrick Comerford)

Today’s Reflection:

The Gospel reading at the Eucharist this morning (Matthew 18: 21 to 19: 1) looks critically at the limits we place on forgiveness and the over-abundant generosity and universal scope of God’s forgiveness.

What are the limits to my capacity to understand and forgive others?

Are there limits to God’s willingness to forgive?

Forgiveness is so central to Christian faith and life, that it is emphasised throughout Saint Matthew’s Gospel.

In this reading, Saint Peter asks how many times he should forgive, and is told ‘not seven times but, I tell you, seventy-seven times,’ or, as some sources put it, seventy times seven.

In Biblical thinking, the number seven always indicates holiness, as in the seventh day, the seventh month, the seventh year or ‘year of release,’ and the Jubilee year that follows seven cycles of seven years.

As the former Chief Rabbi, the late Lord (Jonathan) Sacks, has said, seven is the symbol of the holy, that God exists beyond time and space.

But what about the number 70 when Christ says ‘seven times seventy’ or ‘seventy-seven times’?

Talmudic scholars approach the Torah as if it has ‘seventy faces’ (Numbers Rabbah 13: 15-16). The number 70 has sacred significance in Biblical Hebrew: 70 is the number of people who first went down to Egypt, the elders chosen by Moses, the years of King David, the Babylonian exile, the sages of the Sanhedrin, the translators of the Septuagint, the span of human life, the words of Kiddush, the nations of the world …

The French philosopher Bernard-Henri Lévy points out in The Genius of Judaism that the number 70 is ‘no ordinary number.’ He calls it the ‘secret universal.’ It represents the fullness of humanity, the ‘other universal that escorts human beings on the path of their history and to the centre of their substance.’ It is ‘the number of infinity extended.’

So, Christ tells us in this Gospel reading that divine forgiveness is to be extended ‘seventy-seven times’ or ‘seventy times seven’ – in other words, God’s forgiveness in its abundance is holy in its giving and infinite in its reach.

In the second part of this reading, Christ explains what he is saying in a parable that is unique to Saint Matthew’s Gospel and that involves three distinct episodes:

1, A king decides to settle his accounts with his slaves or servants: the word δοῦλος (doulos) means either, so those who first heard this parable could imagine an end-of-year audit with court officials, financiers or tax collectors. One of these officials owes 10,000 talents, the equivalent to £3,358,735,524 (€3,877,551,979) today. No ordinary slave could accumulate such a debt. Of course, he is unable to clear a debt of such magnitude.

The king might have been reminded that Jewish law prohibits demanding payment from a debtor who is unable to pay (mitzvah 234; Exodus 22: 24). A lender may not embarrass a borrower by harassing him, and is forbidden to seize the debtor’s land or to sell him or his family into slavery.

When the servant seeks forgiveness, the king goes beyond the narrow constraints of rabbinical law, shows overflowing generosity, and agrees to clear off the loan.

2, Now, however, this senior official demands the repayment of a loan of three month’s wages, 100 denarii – about £6,473 (€7,473) today – from a lower-level servant. Imagine the senior official as the line manager for the official who asks for forgiveness. Once again, there is commandment not to take a pledge from a debtor by force (mitzvah 239; Deuteronomy 24: 10). The man already forgiven now refuses to forgive when it is his turn, even his obligation, and he compounds this with his use of force.

3, When the king hears about this, he retracts his original forgiveness.

After telling this parable, Christ identifies the king as God, the first servant as any Christian, and the second as anyone else.

Christ makes the point that God’s forgiveness in its abundance is holy in its giving and infinite in its reach. He calls us to forgive in a way that is so difficult that I am still wrestling with it.

Many of us grew up with language that chided us, so that when we did something wrong and said sorry, we were told, ‘Sorry is not enough’ or ‘Sorry doesn’t fix anything.’ Such phrases allow a hurt person to withhold forgiveness, to find comfort in their own hurt, to control us in a way that allows us to know mercilessly how much we are in need of mercy.

But we also live in a culture of half-hearted apologies that are difficult to forgive. Politicians and business leaders say they accept responsibility by resigning – so they never have to answer for their actions. Half-hearted apologies – ‘I am sorry if I have offended you’ – mean that those who are hurt feel they need to apologise for their response, their reaction, for being hurt.

There are times that I have no right to forgive, when it is not my place to forgive. I cannot forgive the perpetrators of the Holocaust, because, no matter how many times I have visited places that are an intimate part of the Holocaust story, I am not one of the victims.

I cannot forgive slaveholders or mass murderers in wars and killing fields, because I am not one of their victims. On the other hand, perhaps, because I am not a victim, I might find it is not so difficult.

The true difficulties arise in my own personal life: members of my own family, lost friends, near neighbours, former colleagues I think hurt me in the past. I walk around with perceived slights, insults and hurts, like some crutch that helps the wounded, broken me to walk through this broken and hurting world.

But then I am reminded, time and again, that God’s forgiveness in its abundance is holy in its giving and infinite in its reach.

‘And out of pity for him, the lord of that slave released him and forgave him the debt’ (Matthew 18: 27) … a stained-glass window in Saint Michael’s Church, Limerick (Photograph: Patrick Comerford)

Today’s Prayers (Thursday 14 August 2025):

The theme this week (10 to 16 August) in Pray with the World Church, the prayer diary of the Anglican mission agency USPG (United Society Partners in the Gospel), is ‘Serving God in the Gulf’ (pp 26-27). This theme was introduced yesterday with reflections from Joyaline Rajamani, Administrator at the Church of the Epiphany, Doha, Anglican Church in Qatar.

The USPG Prayer Diary today (Thursday 14 August 2025) invites us to pray:

Gracious God, we thank you for Joyaline. Grant her wisdom, patience, and courage to reflect Christ’s love in all she does. Bless her as a faithful steward of your calling.

The Collect of the Day:

Almighty Lord and everlasting God,
we beseech you to direct, sanctify and govern
both our hearts and bodies
in the ways of your laws
and the works of your commandments;
that through your most mighty protection, both here and ever,
we may be preserved in body and soul;
through our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ,
who is alive and reigns with you,
in the unity of the Holy Spirit,
one God, now and for ever.

The Post-Communion Prayer:

Strengthen for service, Lord,
the hands that have taken holy things;
may the ears which have heard your word
be deaf to clamour and dispute;
may the tongues which have sung your praise be free from deceit;
may the eyes which have seen the tokens of your love
shine with the light of hope;
and may the bodies which have been fed with your body
be refreshed with the fullness of your life;
glory to you for ever.

Additional Collect:

Lord God,
your Son left the riches of heaven
and became poor for our sake:
when we prosper save us from pride,
when we are needy save us from despair,
that we may trust in you alone;
through Jesus Christ our Lord.

Collect on the Eve of the Blessed Virgin Mary:

Almighty God,
who looked upon the lowliness of the Blessed Virgin Mary
and chose her to be the mother of your only Son:
grant that we who are redeemed by his blood
may share with her in the glory of your eternal kingdom;
through Jesus Christ your Son our Lord,
who is alive and reigns with you,
in the unity of the Holy Spirit,
one God, now and for ever.

Yesterday’s reflectons
Continued Tomorrow

Forgiveness and love in the face of death and mass murder … a fading rose on the fence at Birkenau (Photograph: Patrick Comerford)

Scripture quotations are from the New Revised Standard Version Bible: Anglicised Edition copyright © 1989, 1995, National Council of the Churches of Christ in the United States of America. Used by permission. All rights reserved worldwide. http://nrsvbibles.org

Kilbline Castle, near Bennetsbridge, built in the 16th century by the Comerford family

Kilbline Castle, near Bennettsbridge, Co Kilkenny … built by the Comerford family ca 1539, but confiscated in the 1560s (Photograph © The Irish Antiquarian, 2020)

Patrick Comerford

On a recent question on the Facebook group Comerford Genealogy, after I posted an up-to-date photograph, one member asked: ‘Weren't there initially 4 owned by the Comerford family? Ballybur, Inchohologan, Danganmore, and Kilbline’.

I thought it would be interesting to start a new, occasional series on the castles and ancestral homes of the Comerford family, beginning with the story of Kilbline Castle, Co Kilkenny, although, when this is migrated to the Comerford Genealogy site, it shall eventually become No 4 in the series.

Kilbline Castle is a fortified 16th century tower house in Co Kilkenny. It is set on the Kilbline Estate in the parish of Tullaherin, in the Barony of Gowran, about a mile south-east of Bennettsbridge.

The historian of the Diocese of Ossory, Canon William Carrigan, suggested the name of Kilbline came from Saint Blaan, an early seventh century Irish saint and the first bishop of the See of Dunblane in Scotland.

Kilbline Castle is a typical example of the tower houses that are distinctive features of the Irish landscape. It is estimated that about 3,000 tower houses were built in Ireland between 1400 and 1650. Kilbline Castle is sometimes dated to the 14th or 15th centuries, while other sources say the castle was built in 1539 and was originally owned by the Comerford family.

If the castle was first built by the Comerford family in 1539, then the most likely original proprietor was James Quemerford or Comerford (ca 1493 – post 1560) of Ballymack, Co Kilkenny, a younger brother of Richard ‘Roe’ Comerford, ancestor of the Comerford family of Ballybur.

James Comerford was Attorney for the Earl of Ormond in counties Kilkenny, Wexford, Carlow and Tipperary, from 1531. He was presented with his brother Richard ‘Roe’ Quemerford of Ballybur and the rest of the gentry of Co Kilkenny in 1537 for ‘charging of coyne and livery’.

He was in possession of Ballymartown in 1543, and held Ballymack, immediately south of Ballybur, and halfway between Kilkenny and Callan. On 26 March 1549, he was pardoned along with his brothers, Richard Comerford of Ballybur, and Patrick Quemerford and Nicholas Quemerford, who were living at Ballymack.

James Comerford was the Queen’s Attorney for Waterford in 1558, and the Sheriff of Co Kilkenny in 1549, 1555-1559, and was killed in office. Elizabeth I’s letter to Perrot in January 1585 implies he had been attainted for rebellion, but this may be a mistake for his elder son, Thomas Quemerford (ca 1523-ca 1583).

Thomas Comerford inherited both Ballymack and Kilbline Castle from his father James Comerford ca 1560. In 1566, he had a commission with his cousin, Richard ‘Oge’ Comerford of Ballybur Castle, and others to make war on Piers Grace. However, Thomas Comerford was attainted soon after, and he lost Ballymack briefly to Patrick Sherlock of Waterford, who also acquired Mothel Abbey, near Carrick-on-Suir, and also lost the townland of Kilbline.

Thomas Comerford, who was to become known as a ‘perpetual rebel and traitor,’ was pardoned on 1 March 1569. However, that summer he joined the first Desmond rebellion led by James FitzMaurice FitzGerald. The rebellion lasted for two years, and Thomas Comerford was attainted again in 1571. All his lands were granted to John Prescott in 1575, but in 1580 they were granted to Francis Lovell, and this was confirmed in 1583.

Thomas Comerford married Margaret Cowley, but they had children and his claims and interests passed to his brother, Henry Quemerford or Comerford (ca 1525-1590) of Ballymack. Henry’s family managed to hold on to Ballymack for another century, but never recovered Kilbline Castle.

Henry Comerford’s descendants included: the Revd Thomas Comerford (ca 1596/1598-1635) of Ballymack, his grandson, who was Vicar of Attanagh and Vicar of The Rower, Co Kilkenny; Thomas Comerford (died ca 1627/1629), who is commemorated in Saint Mary’s Church, Callan, with a monument that includes the coat-of-arms of the Comberford family of Comberford, Staffordshire; Edward ‘Ned’ Comerford (ca 1600-(ca1660), MP for Callan; Major-General John Comerford (ca 1665-1725) of Madrid and Badajoz; Enrique Comerfort, Conde de Bryas; and Doña Josefa Eugenia Maria Francisca de Sales (‘Josefina’) de Comerford (1794-1865) of Barcelona and Seville, a femme fatale in the Spanish revolutionary politics of the 19th century.

Kilbline Castle was never recovered by the Comerford family after it was confiscated in the 1560s (Photograph © The Irish Antiquarian, 2020)

As for Kilbline Castle, it was never recovered by the Comerford family, and the subsequent owners were members of the Shortall family who also owned Rathardmore Castle, Co Kilkenny. A large limestone chimneypiece on the first floor carries the date 1580 so it is possible this is when the building was completed, after it had been lost by the Comerford family.

Thomas Shortall of Rathardmore died in 1628 and soon after his son and heir Peter Shortall moved to Kilbline Castle and lived there. His estates, extending to 1,500 acres, were forfeited by the Cromwellians in 1653 and his sons ordered to be sent to Connaught. After the restoration of Charles II in 1660, it is said, one of the sons of Peter Shortall seems to have returned to Kilbline.

William Candler, from Newcastle, Northumberland, was as a colonel in Cromwell’s army in Ireland in 1649-1653. He received grants of land in counties Wexford, Offaly (King’s County) and Kilkenny. His principal grants of land in Co Kilkenny included 620 acres in Dunamaggin Parish, 70 acres in Kilbeacon Parish, near Mullinavat, and Kilbline Castle. He and his wife, the widowed Anne Villiers, were the parents of two sons, and their youngest son, John Candler, lived at Kilbline.

William Candler’s second son, Thomas Candler, was an officer in the Williamite Wars in 1690-1691 and later lived at Callan Castle. He was the father of four sons, the youngest of whom Daniel who left Ireland with his wife Hannah ca 1735. They first moved to North Carolina before moving to Bedford, Virginia. Daniel died in 1765 and is buried in the Quaker cemetery at South River Meeting, near his home; Hanna lived to the age of 105, outliving her husband by 40 years – she died in 1800 and is buried with her husband. Their great, great, great-grandson was Asa Griggs Candler, who in 1888 bought the formula for Coca Cola.

Meanwhile, back in Ireland, William Candler’s two eldest sons were ordained in the Church of Ireland: the eldest, the Ven Henry Candler, became Archdeacon of Ossory; the second son, the Revd Dr William Candler, was Rector of Eirke, lived in Castlecomer and died in 1753. The third son, Thomas Candler, lived in Kilbline Castle until he died in 1740.

Kilbline Castle was owned by the Shortall, Cadler, Ryan and Lannon families (Photograph © The Irish Antiquarian, 2020)

Kilbline Castle continued to be occupied with a Ryan family living in the castle until 1840, before it passed by marriage into the Lannon family, who lived there until 1979. The castle remains in private ownership.

In many ways, Kilbline Castle is a typical Irish tower house. It is five storeys high, with round bartizans or wall-mounted turrets at each corner of the east front and a slender chimney-stack between them.

A chimney-piece in the tower is dated 1580 and there is an oak-panelled room on the south-east corner of the ground floor. However, the most significant feature of Kilbline Castle architecturally is a wonderful panelled room on the south-east corner of the ground floor, with oak that may date from the late 17th or early 18th century. All the wall panelling is intact and in remarkably good condition, although the ceiling is now covered in tongue-and-groove boards. The old chimneypiece is marred only by a shelf added at a later date.

The surrounding bawn wall survives in part, with early brick walls with blank arches. But some sections were demolished as late as the 20th century when modern farm sheds were being erected.

Kilbline Castle continued to be lived in up to a few decades ago. At some point, a two storey three-bay house was added at the west end of the tower house and a further single storey structure adjoining it.

The present owners do not live in the castle and it has been empty for some time, but they are aware of its importance. Although they have are no plans to restore the castle, the interior is said to be relatively intact and in remarkably good condition.

Kilbline Castle is a protected or listed structure with Kilkenny County Council. However, it is not open to or accessible to the public.

Kilbline Castle is about a mile south-east of Bennetsbridge, Co Kilkenny (Photograph © Irish Tower Houses, 2022)

Castles and Houses in this series:

1, Ballybur Castle, Cuffesgrange, Co Kilkenny

2, Ballymack, Co Kilkenny

3, Danganmore Castle, Co Kilkenny

4, Kilbline Castle, Co Kilkenny

5, Castleinch or Inchyolaghan, Co Kilkenny

6, Coolgreany House, near Castlewarren, Co Kilkenny

Kilbline Castle, near Bennettsbridge, Co Kilkenny, is a protected or listed structure but is not open to the public (Photograph: Paddy O’Shea, Irish Castles / Wikipedia CCL)

This illustrated essay was posted on Comerford Way (27 May 2025), and in the occasional series ‘Comerford castles and ancestral homes’ on Comerford Family History (backdated to 18 June 2009)

Nicholas Comberford’s maps of the ‘Bay of Mexico’ defy Trump’s delusions about the ‘Gulf of America’

Manuscript map of North America, ca late 1630s, pen and ink and watercolour on parchment (Yale Center for British Art, Paul Mellon Fund) … Nicholas Comberford was using the name ‘Bay of Mexico’ almost 400 years ago

Patrick Comerford

The Trump regime’s petty insistence on labelling the Gulf of Mexico as the ‘Gulf of America’ is both mendacious and egregious, imposing a name that has been concocted to mollify a petulant man who continues to pursue imperious gestures and to sign egregious edicts for no other reason than to compensate for his inner insecurities and his low self-esteem.

Executive Order 14172 on 20 January tried to the change the name of the Gulf of Mexico to the Gulf of America in US federal government usage, despite the fact that it has been known as the Gulf of Mexico since the 1550s, a name derived from Mexica, the Nahuatl word for the Aztecs.

Associated Press journalists have been banned indefinitely from the Oval Office and Air Force One because AP decided to continue using Gulf of Mexico. The White House accused AP of ‘commitment to misinformation’ and ‘irresponsible and dishonest reporting’, and Trump says AP continues to be barred ‘until such time as they agree that it’s the Gulf of America.’

Historians, geographers and cartographers, as well as journalists, have produced maps that are centuries-old using names such as the Gulf of Mexico, the Great Bay of Mexico, or simply the Bay of Mexico. No historical map names the place the Gulf of America. Why? Simply because there was no USA back then.

The names Gulf of Mexico and Bay of Mexico appear on maps long before Jamestown, before Plymouth Rock, and over 200 years before the Declaration of Independence, and more than 250 years before the Louisiana Purchase, which was the first time the US controlled any land even bordering the Gulf.

The name Mexico refers to the people later referred to as Aztecs, when what is now Mexico was part of Colonial Spain. The name ‘Golfo de Mexico’ first appears in 1550 on a map now in the Bodleian Library in Oxford, and in an historical account in 1552.

Europeans have used the name the Gulf of Mexico, and the corresponding terms in Spanish and French, Golfo Mexicano and Golphe du Mexique, with consistency from the mid-17th century, although Spanish geographers continued for a time to also use the name of Golfo de Nueva España.

In recent days, I have come across two versions of the earliest English-language maps to refer to the Bay of Mexico or Gulf of Mexico. They have been dated to the 1630s or, more likely, the 1640s or the 1650s, and the cartographic historian and antiquarian Philip D Burden has recently identified Nicholas Comberford (ca 1600-1673) of Stepney, the 17th century Kilkenny-born map maker as the creator of these maps.

One version of the map with the name ‘Bay of Mexico’ is a manuscript map of North America in pen and ink and watercolour on parchment. It is in the Yale Center for British Art, thanks to the Paul Mellon Fund, and it has been dated to the late 1630s.

Another version, recently sold by Clive A Burden Ltd of Chalfont St Giles, Buckinghamshire, has been labelled ‘Map of the Bay of Mexico &c’, has been dated to London ca 1650, and has been identified as the work of Nicholas Comberford.

This second map measures 220 x 430 mm on a sheet measuring 250 x 465 mm, and is in ink with green and yellow watercolour wash on parchment. It is in good condition and has an ink notation, ‘This vellam and paper I brought with me out of England as I remember about 18 yeares past the vellam decay’d through the moisture of the place’.

It was sold recently as stock number 9601 by Clive A Burden Ltd rare map dealers. The business was founded by the late Clive A Burden in 1966 and is one of the longest established dealers in antique maps, atlases, books and rare decorative prints, with a particular focus are the British Isles and North America.

Nicholas Comberford’s works have been catalogued in the British Library and are found in the National Maritime Museum, Greenwich, the New York Public Library, the Sterling Memorial Library at Yale University, and some other museums and libraries. He is a widely-acclaimed, leading and important member of the London group of chart-makers, who used similar colours, patterns and techniques, worked on vellum, and lived close to the dockyards at Stepney and Wapping on the Thames. They have come to be called the Thames School.

He was born in Kilkenny ca> 1600, and, according to his own account, his father was Nicholas Comerford, the ‘King’s Gaoler’ at Kilkenny, and his grandfather was Garret Comerford (ca 1550-1604) of Inchiolohan or Castleinch, the Queen’s Attorney-at-Laws for Connaught, MP for Callan, Second Baron of the Exchequer and Chief Justice of Munster.

Nicholas was a life-long member of the Drapers’ Company in London and his maps charted the world from the East Indies and India to Brazil and the coast of North America. He may well have been the first person to create English-language maps that show Borneo, including the area that is now Sarawak and the place where Kuching would later develop.

However, unlike the other members of the Thames School, Nicholas Comberford was not an Englishman, but a Kilkenny-born Irishman, who, as well as being overlooked until recently by cartographers and art historians alike, has been overlooked too in his native county.

The Town Hall in Callan, Co Callan, once held the Civic Mace presented by Edward Comerford … Edward Comerford and Lord Maltravers were MPs for Call in in 1634-1635 (Photograph: Patrick Comerford)

Philip D Burden joined his father in the business in 1979. He wrote and published in 1996 and 2007 a definitive two volume work, The Mapping of North America. It was the first work to list all known printed maps relating to North America up to the year 1700.

Burden argues convincingly that this remarkable English manuscript map of North America was probably prepared ca 1650, in conjunction with a proposal to establish a colony in North Carolina (‘Carolana’). The fact that the manuscript was drawn on costly vellum, as opposed to paper, strongly suggests it was prepared as an official document for a key figure involved in the proposed settlement.

He says the idiosyncratic detail of the map strongly suggests a connection with John Farrah, mapmaker, and former Deputy Treasurer of the Virginia Company, who was very active in ‘Carolana’ affairs at this time.

The English colony of ‘Carolana’ originated in a grant by Charles I in 1629 to Sir Robert Heath, Solicitor General of England (1621), Attorney General (1625) and a member of the council of the Virginia Company.

Charles I named the new territory ‘Carolana’ after himself. Heath had no success in attracting settlers and in 1638, he assigned his rights to Henry Frederick Howard (1608-1652), Lord Maltravers and from 1640 Earl of Arundel, and MP for Callan, Co Kilkenny, Edward Comerford in the Irish Parliament in 1634-1635; Edward Comerford was MP for Callan again in 1639-1649

Lord Maltravers had many interests in the American colonies. He was a member of the New England Company and sought royal support for the English West India Company in 1637. Interest in North Carolina expanded after the trial and execution of Charles I in 1649.

A promotional tract was published in May in a London newspaper, The Moderate Intelligencer, entitled ‘A Description of ‘Carolana’ by a ‘Well-Willer’. A similar tract, William Bullock’s Virginia Impartially Examined, was published a few weeks earlier and was dedicated to Lord Maltravers and Lord Baltimore.

Lord Maltravers, was MP for Callan with Edward Comerford, and planned to colonise Norh Carolina

By far the most important of the ‘Carolana’ promotional tracts came in 1650 as Edward Williams’s Virgo Triumphans, or Virginia richly and truly valued; more especially the South part thereof: viz. The fertile Carolana … (London: John Stevenson, 1650).

Williams’s publication was associated with John Farrar of Geding, Huntingdonshire, formerly Deputy Treasurer for the Virginia Company. He was the author of a number of maps of Virginia at this time, when ‘Carolana’ was often regarded as South Virginia.

Farrar’s map in 1651 uses the name ‘Carolana’ to the region between the Roanoke and the Chowan Rivers. His map is most famous for its inclusion of a great ‘The Sea of China and the Indies’ immediately beyond the Appalachian Mountains. This detail would have been of great interest to Lord Maltravers, who held nominal title to all the land included in the original grant, which extended far beyond those mountains. Farrar’s map claims any successful colony in ‘Carolana’ would have access to ports on this western sea, and with trade with ‘China and the Indies’.

The English manuscript map includes a much vaster area than Farrar’s map – virtually all of North America. However, on the Englishman manuscript, the great trans-Appalachian sea is called ‘The South Sea’, not ‘The Sea of China and the Indies’.

Both the Farrar map and the English manuscript map include the Nansemond River, in Southside Virginia. The Nansemond is one of only four placenames given for Virginia on the English manuscript, along with Chesapeake, Jamestown and ‘Accomack. Burden says all the evidence points to the English manuscript as having been prepared in conjunction with the 1649 proposal to establish a permanent colony in ‘Carolana’.

The fact that there is no sign of the English colonies of New York and New Jersey (founded 1664, and the entire region between the Hudson from the Delaware is labelled the New Netherland helps Burden to be even more precise in dating the map. Fort Orange (founded in 1624), the Hudson River and Helgate are named. Long Island is shown divided by a channel and is similar in form to Sir Robert Dudley’s map of New England (1647), while Delaware (‘De la Warr’) Bay and River are given their present name, first introduced on Lord Baltimore’s map (1635).

He points out too that name ‘Carolana’ was used consistently in England for the region south of Virginia until 1663, when a new grant from Charles II used the spelling Carolina.

In conclusion, Burden suggests the map is no earlier than 1634, the date of the founding of Maryland, and no later than 1664, when the English conquest turned New Netherland into New York.

Burden also believes that the map’s calligraphy was the work of ‘two distinct hands’. He a ‘major chart maker’ would have been a logical choice for such a seemingly important map, and says: ‘A study of the Thames school reveals that it is not uncommon for charts to be unsigned or undated … Chartmakers tended to have geographical areas of expertise and a study of the time frame and region would tend to point to Nicholas Comberford. He was the only map maker identifiable during this time frame who produced charts of North America. There are similarities of lettering also, particularly noticeable with the ‘R’ and ‘A’.’

Nicholas Comberford, however, was known for being decorative, so this would not have been a major production of his, and seems to suggest the map may date ca 1649 to 1651.

‘The South Part of Virginia’ (Nicholas Comberford, 1657)

The connection that Lord Maltravers shared with the Comerford family and with Callan may partly explain the commissions Nicholas Comberford received for maps associated with Carolina, and subsequently he completed two further maps showing Carolina.

His map of the ‘The South Part of Virginia’ was produced in 1657. It is a single sheet of vellum, measuring 38 x 50 cm is mounted on two hinged boards, each 39 x 25 cm.

This chart is in the Heathcote collection. Another copy with slight differences but of the same date is in the New York Public Library.

‘The south part of Virginia now the north part of Carolina’ (Nicholas Comberford, 1657)

Another map of ‘The south part of Virginia now the north part of Carolina’ was made by Nicholas Comberford in 1657. This map in the New York Public Library, is similar to his map, ‘The south part of Virginia’ (1657) and is in the National Maritime Museum in Greenwich, but the signature reads: ‘Nicholas C[o]mberford fe[c]itt anno 1657.’

These two maps record for the first time many names that are still in use. Some of them, such as ‘Battis Ponte’ on Pamlico River, were probably given by Captain Nathaniel Battis, an early explorer, landowner and settler.

In the title of the New York map, the words ‘now the north part of Carolina’ were added in a later hand some time after the grant of Carolina in 1663.

Nicholas Comberford is a key figure in 17th century art in England, but he is also an important figure in explaining how we came to understand the way the world was explored, mapped, charted and named by Europeans and by English-speaking travellers and adventurers in the mid-17th century.

Only the foolhardy ignore the facts of history, and only the deluded ignore the reality of geography. As I continue to learn more about how his work was so influential as a mapmaker, cartographer and geographer, I can only muse if the name ‘Bay of Mexico’ was good enough for Nicholas Comberford and the Comerford family almost 400, thn thee name ‘Gulf of Mexico’ should be good enough today for an upstart like Donald Trump, his acolytes and sychophants in the Oval Office and his MAGA minions.

Nicholas Comberford, ‘Map of the Bay of Mexico &c’, London, ca 1650, 220 x 430 mm on a sheet 250 x 465 mm, ink with green and yellow watercolour wash on parchment

Joseph Comerford and the Comberford monument in the Comberford Chapel, Tamworth, erected in 1725

The Comberford family monument erected in Saint Editha’s Church in 1725 (Photograph: Patrick Comerford)

Patrick Comerford

The Comberford Memorial Tercentenary:
a talk on the Comberford family
and rededication of the 1725 plaque

Tamworth and District Civic Society,

Tuesday 1 April 2025,

7 p.m.: Saint George’s Chapel, Saint Editha’s Church, Tamworth,

with rededication in the Comberford Chapel

Introduction:

This year marks the 300th anniversary of the erection of a mural in 1725 of the curious tablet on the wall of the Comberford Chapel or North Transept, also known historically as Saint Catherine’s Chapel. It is one of two Comberford family monuments in the chapel, the other being a much worn and damaged effigy.

The monument is on the wall beneath the window depicting Christ the Teacher, erected almost a century and a half later in 1871 recalling two 19th century vicars of Tamworth, Canon Francis Blick (1754-1842) and his son-in-law, the Revd Robert Watkins Lloyd (1783-1860), and their wives.

I spoke here six years ago (2019) on ‘The Comberfords of Comberford and the Moat House, Tamworth’ (9 May 2019). This evening, to mark this 300th anniversary, I want to:

1, look at that particular monument;

2, look at some of the questions the text on it raises;

3, answer some of the questions it has created over the years for local and family historians;

4, identify who erected this monument 300 years ago; and

5, place it within the context of its setting in this church, both before it was erected and in the context of what was happening in Saint Editha’s Church at the time.

The desecrated and defaced Comberford effigy in the Comberford Chapel in Tamworth (Photograph: Patrick Comerford)

1, Looking at the monument:

The marble tablet erected in 1725 in the Comberford Chapel laments the demise of the main male line of the Comberford family that ended with Robert Comberford’s death, saying that line died out in 1671, although, in fact, he died in 1669. Indeed, his widow Catherine, had continued living at Comberford with her daughter, and she died only eight years before the plaque was erected.

The marble mural bears a Latin inscription that declares:

Hic situm est Monumentum diuturnitare vero
temporis et bellis plusquam civilibus dirutum
familiae non ita pridem florentis. Gentis
amplae et honostae Cumberfordiorum
Qui de hoc Municipio cum in alliistum.
In hoc Templo aedificando optime meruerunt.
Domini Cumberfordiae melaruere annis septigentis.
In Roberto autem novissimo stirpis Angliacae
Staffordiensis viro Gentis extinctum pleratur.
Qui obiit A.D. 1671 et hic cum consorte
Domina Catharina Bates filiisque duabus
Maria et Anna suis Haeredibus Tumulo
conditur Nomen adhuc viger in stirpe
Hibernica, quae Regem Jacobum Secundum
in Galliam secuta est; atque ibi Angluniae
In Provincia de Champagne Dominio
insignitur 1725.

Translated, this inscription reads:

‘This place is truly a fitting monument to a family brought low by wars rather than civic affairs, and that no longer flourishes here. The generous and honest family of Cumberfords richly deserve the gratitude of this town in many things, including in the building of this church. The Lords of Cumberford, who survived for seven hundred years, died out with the death of Robert, last scion of the Staffordshire branch in England, when he died in AD 1671, and was buried here with his wife Lady Catherine Bates and their two daughters and heiresses, Mary and Anne. Henceforth, the name lives on in the Irish branch of the family, which followed James II into exile in France, and there they became the Lords of Anglunia in the Province of Champagne. Erected in 1725.’

In addition, two local historians, Stebbing Shaw (1762-1802) and Charles Ferrers Palmer (1819-1900), and one 19th century family historian, James Comerford, noted that above this plaque there was a representation of the Comberford coat-of-arms (gules, a talbot passant argent) impaling those of Bates of Sutton (sable, a fess between three hands erect argent), with the Comberford crest of a ducal coronet and peacock’s head. This detail has since disappeared, but only in the past century and half or less.

‘Christ the Teacher’ … a stained glass window in the Comberford Chapel in Saint Editha’s Church, commemorates the Revd Francis Blick, Vicar of Tamworth (Photograph: Patrick Comerford)

2, Some questions raised in the text:

In his pamphlet, The Moat House and the Comberford Family, privately published about 60 years ago (ca 1965-1967), DP Adams, then Senior History Master at the Queen Elizabeth’s Grammar School, Tamworth, says: ‘Two things about this memorial are strange. When and by whom was it erected since it refers to James II’s exile which occurred from 1690 onwards, and where was Anglunia?’

In fact, he’s asking three, not two questions: when was it erected? Who erected it? And where is Anglunia? And he hints at a fourth question: how was a monument with such obvious Jacobite sympathies erected in a parish church in England within a decade of a Jacobite invasion in a concerted campaign to dethrone the House of Hanover?

The plaque is surprisingly open in its Jacobite sentiments, only a decade after the Vicar of Tamworth was convicted for his Jacobite loyalties.

One of Adams’s questions is already answered in the text, which says clearly the monument was erected in 1725. In addition, by clearing up the identity of ‘Anglunia’ the identity of the monument’s patron is revealed.

But they are at least two typographical errors on this monument, and someone more learned in classical Latin than I am may probably identify more:

(i) The date 1671 should read 1669, when Robert Comerford died;

(ii) Anglunia refers to Anglure in the Champagne area in France.

Patrick Comerford with the monument erected in the Comberford Chapel in 1725 by the Comerford family of Ireland

3, Questions created for local and family historians

As I shall point, the tablet was probably commissioned by an Irish officer and merchant, Joseph Comerford of Clonmel and Dublin, who had recently bought the chateau of Anglure in Marne, France, along with the title of Marquis d’Anglure.

He was keen to establish links between the Comerford family in Ireland and the Comberford family in Tamworth, but makes some clear and perhaps deliberate mistakes, if not representations of the stories of both families.

Let me identify some of those deliberate errors when it comes to the Comberford family of Comberford Hall and the Moat House.

Firstly, The tablet says the Comberford family had been living in Staffordshire for no more than six rather than seven centuries.

Then, as I have said, Robert Comberford (1594-1669) died in 1669, and not in 1671 as the monument claims. Robert furnished Elias Ashmole with many of the details of the Comberford family in Lichfield in 1663, although leaving some curious gaps. His wife Catherine was at least 30 years younger than him, and he died in 1669 at the age of 77, he was buried in the Comberford Chapel and his widow and two daughters continued to live at Comberford Hall until she died in 1718.

Indeed, the family had been impoverished during the Civil War, losing the Moat House on Lichfield Street in Tamworth. The family had recovered Comberford Hall, but it had been heavily mortgaged, and Catherine probably remained there as a tenant of the Skeffingtons of Fisherwick, Robert Comberford’s cousins and neighbours. Her will, written in Latin, was made on 18 January 1716, and probate was granted on 7 November 1718.

Her will shows Catherine still held some property in Wigginton, Hopwas and Tamworth, which she divided between her granddaughters, Catherine Brooke and Mary Grosvenor, wife of Sherrington Grosvenor of Tamworth. Both daughters are more likely to have been buried with their husbands than with their parents here in Tamworth.

Catherine died seven years before this monument was put in place, so there were people around in 1725 who would have remembered the family had continued living in this area long after James II’s exile. The Comberford name continued in the Brooke family through Robert’s grandson, Comberford Brooke.

It is true the name died out, but not the family line. Robert Comberford’s descendants continued through female lines in prominent Midlands families, including the Brooke, Giffard, Grosvenor, Mostyn, Parry, Slaughter and Smitheman families, and their descendants.

Indeed, if Robert Comberford was the last of the line and died in 1669 or 1671, during the reign of Charles II, a branch of the family could not have then followed James II to Ireland and then into exile into France.

Château d’Anglure … it gave Joseph Comerford an estate and a title

4, Who erected this monument in 1725?

Joseph Comerford, Marquis d’Anglure, is one of the most enigmatic members of the family. His origins and place in the family tree have been obscured by his own obfuscation:

• The family tree he registered in Dublin was a self-serving and vainglorious exercise, aimed at asserting a nobility that would underpin the French aristocratic title he acquired when he bought a chateau and petit domain in Champagne.

• The plaques he erected in the Comerford chapel in Saint Mary’s Parish Church, Callan, Co Kilkenny, and the Comberford Chapel in Saint Editha’s Parish Church in Tamworth, were proud but vain efforts to link the Comerford family in Co Kilkenny with the Comberford family in the Lichfield and Tamworth area of Staffordshire.

Although he claimed on those monuments that his family had been brought low by the ravages of civil wars in Ireland and in England, he appears to have remained in Ireland for some years after the defeat of the Jacobite cause in the 1690s without any obvious social, political or financial disadvantage. And, while he eagerly craved acceptance in French aristocratic circles, the title he acquired has never continued in use in the Comerford family.

Joseph Comerford’s pedigree, registered with the Ulster Office of Arms, the principal heraldic and genealogical office in Ireland, makes extravagantly fanciful and romantic claims for his origins and ancestry. Yet, paradoxically, it is difficult to disentangle truth from fiction, or to be quite certain about Joseph Comerford’s family origins.

However, we can presume that Joseph Comerford knew and was honest about the names of his parents and grandparents. It would appear, therefore, that his grandfather was Peter Comerford, who married Honor Everard, and that his father was Edward Comerford, a merchant, of Clonmel, Co Tipperary. He married Barbara Browne, and died in November or December 1679, while Barbara died in 1719.

Edward and Barbara Comerford were the parents of three or four sons and two daughters, including Joseph Comerford, the subject of our discussions this evening; Bonaventure Comerford, a Jacobite captain in France who died in 1709 and is buried in Douai; Luke Comerford, also a Jacobite captain; and Michael Comerford, who died in Dublin 1724, and who in his will uses the Comberford coat-of-arms.

Joseph Comerford was a freeman of Waterford (1686) and was a captain in the Jacobite army of James II in Ireland.

However, despite the terms of the Treaty of Limerick after the Jacobite defeat, Joseph Comerford was still living in Ireland in 1692, when he bought the ‘Ikerrin Crown,’ an encased gold cap or crown discovered 10 ft underground by turf-cutters in Co Tipperary, and which he saved from being melted down.

The ‘Comerford Crown’ or ‘Ikerrin Crown’ … bought by Joseph Comerford in 1692 and later kept in his château in Anglure

Soon after, Joseph moved to France, and as Joseph de Comerford of Clonmel, he received letters of naturalisation in France in January 1711. In exile in France, he was made a Chevalier of St Louis, bought the Anglure estate on the banks of the River Aule in Champagne, including Château d’Anglure, and claimed the title of Marquis d’Anglure.

However, he returned to Ireland at the beginning of the 18th century, when he was living in Cork, and in Dublin in April 1724, he registered a fanciful family pedigree at the Ulster Office of Arms in Dublin Castle.

At this time, or soon after, he probably also erected the monument in Saint Mary’s Church, Callan, Co Kilkenny, to Thomas Comerford, who may have been his great-grandfather and who died in 1627 or in 1629. That monument also uses florid Latin and the coat-of-arms of the Comberford family of Comberford rather than that of the Comerfords of Co Kilkenny.

Joseph Comerford returned to France after registering his pretentious pedigree and erecting plaques in Callan and Tamworth that may have been intended to support and substantiate his genealogical claims.

On 28 November 1725, as Joseph de Comerford, he gave the Anglure estate, including ‘the grounds and seigniories of Mesnil and Granges,’ 3 km west of Anglure, to his nephew, Louis Luc de Comerford.

When he died in 1729, Joseph Comerford’s will was proved in Paris. Another will was dated 19 May 1729 and went to probate in Dublin that year. He was buried in the chapel at Château d’Anglure not under the title of Marquis d’Anglure but as Baron d’Anglure et Dangermore.

Although he had an only daughter, Jane Barbara, there was no male heir to inherit his claims and titles. Instead, he had designated his brother Captain Luc (Luke) Comerford as his heir. In default of male heirs, Joseph Comerford settled his estates in Champagne on the heirs male of his brother, Captain Luke Comerford, and in default of such heirs male on his kinsman, Major-General John Comerford, and his male issue.

Captain Louis-Luc Comerford of Sézanne, north of Anglure, became Seigneur d’Anglure as heir to his uncle Joseph. He was financially ruined, sold the Anglure title and estate in 1752, and retired to Sézanne, north of Anglure, where he lived in extreme poverty.

Louis-Luc Comerford’s next brother, Captain Pierre-Edouard Comerford, used the title of Baron Dangermore, but he made no pretensions to the Anglure titles. This branch of the Comerford family died out in 1813 with the death of Captain Joseph-Alexandre-Antoine Comerford (1757-1813). Since then, the French titles have never been assumed or claimed by any member of the family. As for the crown rescued by Joseph Comerford, its fate remains a mystery, though it has inspired various works of art in Ireland.

The Moat House on Lichfield Street, Tamworth … Joseph Comerford’s motives may have included preserving family rights and interests in the Comberford Chapel from later proprietors of the Moat House (Photograph: Patrick Comerford)

5, The monument and its contexts

The destiny of Joseph Comerford’s crown, title, chateau, and his many pretentious claims are interesting chapters in the story of the decline of a family, and help to explain why he erected the monument in the Comberford chapel.

When Joseph Comberford bought his chateau in Anglure, it came with a title – but with the caveat that the owner had to be what passed in France as noble birth. And that explains the very confusing family tree he registered in Dublin in 1724. Erecting this monument in Tamworth, without using his own name, bolstered that claim – we could accuse him of creating ‘facts on the ground.’

But there were other, more understandable reasons – perhaps more honourable reasons – for his wanting to erect this monument. The Comberford family lost the Moat House on Lichfield Street during the English civil war in the mid-17th century. I have inherited some papers and correspondence that show how successive owners of the house went to great lengths to find out whether the house brought with it rights of burial in the Comberford Chapel: in other words, was the right of burial inherited in the Comberford family, or was it associated with the Moat House.

Of course, the Comberford Chapel predates the family’s ownership of the Moat House. So, we may probably accept, Joseph Comerford, in some way, was probably trying to keep the Comberford Chapel ‘in the family’ – albeit through a very distant and questionable genealogical link – rather than alienate those rights to the owners of the day at the Moat House.

His action was bold, for, as Adams points out, the plaque is surprisingly open in its Jacobite sentiments, only a decade after a local vicar was executed for his Jacobite loyalties. The Revd William Paul (1678–1716) had been a teacher in Tamworth before becoming Vicar of Orton, six or seven miles east of Tamworth, in 1709. He became a nonjuror, joined the Jacobite rebels in 1715, was arrested and convicted of treasons, and was hanged, drawn and quartered at Tyburn on 13 July 1716.

It remained a political and social risk to openly espouse Jacobite sympathies in Tamworth in 1725. But of course, who with the name Comberford or Comerford, would not want to keep, whatever the implied risks, whatever links it was possible to maintain with the Moat House, Comberford Hall and the Comberford Chapel in Tamworth?

Some of the 19th centuries papers relating to the Comberford family and the Moat House (Photograph: Patrick Comerford)

Niall Comerford: a young rugby player at the Olympic Games in Paris this week

Niall Comerford … scored a clinching try against Japan in Paris this week (Photograph: RTÉ)

Patrick Comerford

Last night's opening ceremony for the 2024 Olympics in Paris was beautiful and spectacular choreography, and an imaginative presentation of the Olympic values and principles. Niall Comerford is a young rugby player who played a key role in Ireland’s quest for an Olympic medal in Paris earlier this week as part of the Irish men’s Rugby Sevens. He is currently playing for United Rugby Championship and European Rugby Champions Cup side Leinster, and his preferred position is wing.

The 24-year-old is part of Ireland’s Rugby Sevens Olympic squad, who had their opening games against South Africa and Japan. On Wednesday night – before the games proper began officially – he scored himself a try in the Irish win over Japan, helping secure a quarter-final spot for Ireland.

Niall Comerford’s athletic pedigree is no surprise: his father Philip Comerford is from Co Kilkenny, where he is remembered for his achievements on the hurling field with John Locke’s of Callan. Philip Comerford lives in Kildare and he has been in Paris this week watching his son playing in the biggest sporting event in the world.

Ireland secured place in the quarter-finals of the men’s rugby sevens with wins over South Africa and Japan earlier this week. They were back in action on Thursday (25 July) against top seed New Zealand, when Ireland lost 19-15. Then, later in the day, Ireland faced Fiji in the quarter final, when Fiji came from behind to beat Ireland 19-15 at the Stade de France.

So there were no medal matches for Ireland today; instead Ireland was fighting it out for the minor placings. They have finished higher than the tenth place at Tokyo three years ago but the regrets of what could have been in the fight against Fiji and the battle with New Zealand will linger.

Niall Comerford, who is from Shankill, Co Dublin, was born on 6 April 2000. His first love of sport was in hurling, Gaelic football, and soccer, and one of his first memories is of holding a hurling stick. He played hurling and football with Kilmacud Crokes in his youth, and during his time with Kilmacud Crokes he first met and was coached by Fergal Keys.

He was first introduced to rugby when he entered Blackrock College in 2012. He found it an easy transition, and a good option since Blackrock has no tradition in Gaelic football. He went on to win a Junior Cup at Blackrock in 2016. Over the years, he tried various positions on the team from flanker in first year to winger on the senior cup team.

Leaving Blackrock College in 2019, Niall choose to study Commerce at University College Dublin (UCD), where he received a rugby scholarship, which allowed him to continue playing rugby alongside his studies.

He realised that rugby was more than a hobby and was something he wanted to do long-term. The UCD Ad Astra scholarship provided the student-player with an academic mentor and allowed Niall to split his final year academic load across two years.

During his time at UCD, he joined the Leinster Academy, the next step on his journey with school mates Joe McCarthy and Sean O’Brien and also current 7s squad member Andrew Smith all entering the academy together.

Niall was called to play for the Irish U20s for the first time in the Six Nations 2020, against France. He was thrilled to play for his country, but then Covid hit; it played havoc with everything and in the end the game was cancelled.

With the impact of Covid on all sports during 2020, training had to take place at home. He set up a home gym to stay fit while the Leinster Academy team communicated over Zoom. The Leinster winger made his debut for the Irish Sevens in Vancouver in 2021.

Through the UCD Rugby Club, Niall was put into contact with Ernst & Young (EY), who offered an internship programme for graduates seeking a career in taxation. He joined EY and was able to work on a hybrid basis, balancing rugby and work. However, last December, when the commitment to the rugby 7s training schedule increased, Niall was faced with a decision to playing full-time or not.

In the end, his employers at EY were understanding and effectively allowed him time out to focus on the game with a leave of absence. He has taken a career break to concentrate on the Paris games.

Sevens rugby, often simply called ‘7s’, is a fast-paced variant of rugby in which teams are made up of seven players, playing seven-minute halves, instead of the traditional 15 players playing 40-minute halves in rugby union. There are seven players on the pitch, but 13 squad members travel to each tournament.

It is a quick, high scoring game, and the emphasis is on speed and agility. Players face the same pitch size as the 15s but with fewer players to cover the area.

Niall Comerford is currently playing under head coach James Topping and also credits the support team with the performance of his team. Training is intensive, with the team training four days a week in the high-performance centre in Abbotstown.

The 2024 Olympics opened in Paris last night

Ignacio Comonfort, President of Mexico, descended from the Comerfords of Callan

President Ignacio Comonfort (1812-1863), President of Mexico in 1855-1858 … he was a grandson of Joseph Comerford, born in Callan, Co Kilkenny

Patrick Comerford

President Ignacio Comonfort (1812-1863) was the President of Mexico briefly in 1855-1858. He is seen as a revolutionary and a liberal who sought to introduce major constitutional and political reforms in Mexico, and he challenged the influence and power of the Roman Catholic Church in Mexican life.

However, his search for a political compromise with conservative elements led to his downfall and exile. After his return to Mexico, he was killed in a skirmish in 1863. He was a patriotic and dedicated man, who has given his name to the city where he was buried. But he has also been described as ‘one of the more tragic and unhappy figures of Mexican history.’

His name is intriguing, for it certainly does not sound Spanish, and many Comerford family members have long speculated that his name derived from Comerford. However, this long continued to be mere speculation – perhaps a genealogist’s conjecture or even a ‘good hunch’.

But I remained persistent in my pursuit, and I was keen to either prove or disprove once and for all that this key figure in the history of post-colonial Mexico was a member of the Comerford.

Now, in recent weeks, trawls through Mexican genealogical sites and records and biographies, mainly in Spanish, have confirmed this speculation and prove that Ignacio Comonfort was, in fact, the grandson of Joseph Comerford, who was born in Callan, Co Kilkenny, in the early decades of the 18th century.

Callan, Co Kilkenny … Ignacio Comonfort was descended from the Comerfords of Callan (Photograph: Patrick Comerford, 2011)

President Ignacio Comonfort was born José Ignacio Gregorio Comonfort de los Ríos on 12 March 1812 in Amozoc, Puebla de los Ángeles, now Puebla de Zaragoza, then the second largest city in the Spanish Colony of New Spain or colonial Mexico.

His father, Mariano José Anselmo de la Santísima Trinidad Comonfort Carricarte, was born in Puebla in 1771. His grandfather, Joseph Comerford, was born in Callan, Co Kilkenny, and emigrated to Mexico, where the surname first became Comoforte but later morphed into Comonfort in an attempt at Hispanicisation. (In a similar way, he name O’Brien later on, became the Spanish Obregón.)

The name Comonfort continued for another few generations through the former President’s grandchildren.

Ignacio Comonfort’s parents were Lieutenant-Colonel Mariano José Anselmo de la Santísima Trinidad Comonfort Carricarte and Maria Guadalupe de los Rios. The name José recalled the future president’s Comerford grandfather, Joseph Comerford. But the name José had been given earlier to another, older child who died in infancy, and as he grew up he was known as Ignacio.

At the age of 14, he began studying at the Carolino College, a Jesuit-run school in Puebla, and went on study law in Puebla. However, his father’s death impoverished the family; he abandoned his law career and enlisted in the army.

Meanwhile, after the collapse of Spanish colonial rule and the Mexican War of Independence, Mexico was eventually proclaimed a federal republic on 4 October 1824, as the United Mexican States (Estados Unidos Mexicanos) with a new constitution.

Ignacio Comonfort was 20 in 1832 when he took part in the liberal revolt that overthrew President Anastasio Bustamante and he fought action at San Agustin del Palmar and Puebla. During the subsequent siege of Mexico City, he was already a captain of the cavalry and fought at Tacubaya, Casas Blancas, Zumpango, San Lorenzo and Posadas.

When Bustamante was overthrown and the Zavaleta Accords put an end to the revolution, Comonfort became the military commander of Izúcar de Matamoros. He was elected to the presidency of the third ayuntamiento in the capital and became prefect of western State of Mexico.

Shortly after the United States annexed Texas in 1845, the two nations sent troops to their shared border. The US declared war on Mexico in 1846 and invaded Mexico in 1847. Comonfort took part in the defence of Mexico City and the Battle of Churubusco on 20 August 1847. He became assistant to the commander-in-chief, and after the US army took the capital he was a member of the congress that met at Querétaro. He was elected a senator the following year (1848).

Comonfort’s liberal sympathies, military expertise and presence in the south gave him a key role in the Ayutla Revolution, unifying liberal opposition to Antonio López de Santa Anna and his conservative government in 1854. During the revolution, Comonfort was sent on an important mission abroad to gain war materiel. When he was in charge of the fortress of Acapulco, he resisted a siege by Santa Anna.

Santa Anna resigned in August 1855, but Comonfort refused to recognise his successor Martin Carrera. He entered Guadalajara on 22 August 1855 and demanded the recognition of Juan Álvarez, a veteran insurgent and prominent liberal, as the leader of the revolution.

Ignacio Comonfort became the interim President of the United Mexican States in December 1855, and remained in office until January 1858

Álvarez became President and named Comonfort as Minister of War in his new cabinet. When Álvarez stepped down after only a few months, Comonfort became the interim President of the United Mexican States in December 1855, and remained in office until January 1858.

During those two years, Comonfort began an ambitious liberal project to give the state a secular character and to encourage economic development. He was the leader of the moderate Liberal group, and his government introduced reforms in education, commerce and administration, along with the Juárez Law, aimed at separating church and state and ending ecclesiastical courts.

A new constitutional was introduced in February 1857 with new guarantees that included freedom of the press, freedom of expression and freedom of association or assembly. The constitution was opposed by conservatives, who rejected its provisions controlling the economic power and privileged status of the Catholic Church. The Lerdo law stripped the Church of its property and forced the breakup of communal land holdings of indigenous communities, enabling them to resist integration economically and culturally.

The controversy escalated when the government demanded all civil servants took an oath to uphold the new constitution. Catholic public servants were faced with a choice between keeping their jobs or being excommunicated.

In fact, Comonfort considered the anticlerical provisions too radical, and he also objected to the deliberate weakening of the power of the executive branch of government by empowering the legislative branch. He had been dealing with revolts since the beginning of his administration and the new constitution left the president powerless to act.

Hoping to find a compromise with the conservatives and other opponents of the constitution, Comonfort joined the Plan of Tacubaya proclaimed by General Félix María Zuloaga, nullifying the constitution in December 1857.

Comonfort ignored the new constitutional order that he himself had sworn to months before, Congress was dissolved and he remained as president. But he was abandoned by his liberal allies. He backed out of the plan, resigned as President in January 1858, and was succeeded by the president of the Supreme Court, Benito Juárez.

Comonfort left Mexico City on 22 January and headed for the liberal-controlled state of Vera Cruz. On 7 February, he and his family left for Europe on the steamer Tennessee, going into exile as the bloody Reform War broke out.

He was living in Texas in 1861 when he made a risky and dangerous crossing of the Rio Grande and returned to Mexico. He lived with his daughters in Monterey and at first the government ordered his arrest but then accepted his services when the French invaded Mexico.

France invaded Mexico in 1862 on the pretext of collecting debts the Juárez government had defaulted on. In reality, the French plan was to install a ruler under French control, putting Archduke Ferdinand Maximilian of Austria on the throne as Emperor Maximilian I of Mexico, with support from the Catholic Church, conservative elements in the upper class, and some indigenous communities.

Comonfort was defeated by the French at the Battle of San Lorenzo on 8 May 1863. He retreated to Mexico City and then followed the national government when it retreated from the capital on 31 May 1863. He returned to government office and was made Minister of War.

He was heading from San Luis Potosí to Guanajuato on 13 November 1863, when he was killed in a surprise attack between Chamacuero and Celaya at the Soria Mill, by a party under the command of Chief Gonzales Aguirre. His body was taken to San Miguel de Allende.

Ignacio Comonfort was killed on 13 November 1863 in a surprise attack near Chamacuero

Despite repeated Imperial losses to the Republican Army and ever-decreasing support from Napoleon III, Maximilian would chose to remain in Mexico rather than return to Europe. He was captured and executed on 19 June 1867, along with two Mexican supporters. After the republic was restored in 1867, Comonfort’s ashes were taken to the cemetery of San Fernando.

Most historical comment on Comonfort focuses on his role in the initial stages of the Mexican Reform, when he was a hero of the Revolution of Ayutla, became provisional president and made possible the Constitution of 1857. But he has been severely criticised for his support of the coup d’état that overthrew this constitution and set the stage for the disastrous War of the Reform. Nevertheless, he remains a key figure in the development of liberal politics and democracy in Mexico.

The town where he is buried was renamed Comonfort in his honour. Comonfort covers an area of 485.90 sq km and has a population of 67,642. In pre-Columbian times, the area that is now Comonfort was known as Chamacuero, a word of Purépecha origin that means ‘to fall down’ or ‘place of ruins.’ Since 2018, Comonfort has been a ‘Pueblo Mágico’ or tourist town of ‘cultural richness, historical relevance, cuisine, art crafts, and great hospitality.’

The grave of Ignacio Comonfort in Comonfort, previously known as Chamacuero

The genealogy of Ignacio Comonfort:

Peter Comerford from Callan, Co Kilkenny, may have been born ca 1710/1720. He married Elena Rosete (?Rothe) and they were the parents of:

Joseph Comerford was born in Callan, Co Kilkenny, perhaps ca 1740/1750. He moved from Ireland to Puebla in Mexico in the mid-18th century where he became known as José Comonfort and is described as comerciante or a businessman. He married María Gertrudis Josefa Onecífora Carricarte Ortega (1754- ), on 7 January 1770, in Puebla (witness: Ignacio José Javier Carricarte Ortega, her brother). She was a daughter of (Captain) Pedro Carricarte Juanchín and María de los Dolores Ortega-Caballero Angón.

They were the parents of eight children, five sons and three daughters:

1, Pedro José Ignacio Comonfort Carricarte (1771- ), named after his grandfather in Callan, died in infancy.
2, José Miguel Ignacio Comonfort Carricarte (1776- ).
3, Pedro de Jesús Ignacio Comonfort Carricarte (1781- ).
4, Mariano José Anselmo Comonfort Carricarte (1782- ), married María Guadalupe Ríos; see below.
5, María Josefa Atanasia Comonfort Carricarte (1785), born 1785, married 1 May 1808 in Puebla, José Ignacio Cuellar Rincón.
6, Manuel José Ignacio Comonfort Carricarte (1786- ).
7, María Antonia Ildefonsa Comonfort Carricarte (1790- ).
8, María Ignacia Juana Comonfort Carricarte (1791- ).

Their fourth son:

Mariano José Anselmo de la Santísima Trinidad Comonfort Carricarte (1782- ) was born 22 April 1782 in Puebla de Zaragoza, México and was baptised that day. He was a subteniente (sub-lieutenant) in the Batallón de Izúcar in 1812, and later a lieutenant-colonel in the Mexican army.

He married María Guadalupe Ríos (1785- ), and they were the parents of two sons and two daughters:

1, José Luis Gonzaga Comonfort Ríos (1809- ), died in infancy.
2, (President) José Ignacio Gregorio Comonfort de los Ríos (1812-1863), of whom next.
3, Juana Comonfort Ríos (1815-1899), born 1815 in Matamoros, Tamaulipas; married 11 June 1837 in Puebla, Miguel María Arrioja Freyre (1807-1867); and died 20 March 1899 in Coyoacán, México. They were the parents of six children, three sons and three daughters, who continued to hold the Comonfort (Comerford) name in the generation that followed:

1a, María de Jesús Josefa Arrioja Comonfort (1838- ).
2a, Ignacio de Jesús Toribio Arrioja Comonfort (1840- ).
3a, María Joaquina Paula Arrioja Comonfort (1843- ).
4a, Guadalupe Felipa de Jesús Arrioja Comonfort (1845).
5a, Miguel Basilio Francisco de Paula del Corazón de Jesús Arrioja Comonfort (1849- ).
6a, Emilio Antonio Arrioja Comonfort (1852- ).

4, Crescencia Comonfort Ríos.

The second but eldest surviving child was:

José Ignacio Gregorio Comonfort de los Ríos (1812-1863) was born 12 March 1812 in Puebla de Zaragoza, Puebla, México, and was baptised that day in Puebla. He died aged 51 on 13 November 1863.

He was the father of two daughters. Through his relationship with María Baamonde, he was the father of:

1, Clara Comonfort Baamonde (1837-1892), she married on 7 April 1865 in México City, Victoriano Octaviano Francisco Alcerreca Villanueva (1838- ), son of General Agustín Alcerreca Leyva (1802-1862). They were the parents of three sons who continued to hold the Comonfort (Comerford) name in the generation that followed:

1a, Ignacio Alcerreca Comonfort (1869- ).
2a, Ricardo Alcerreca Comonfort (1872- ).
3a, Enrique Alcerreca Comonfort, married Guadalupe Priego Ciprés.

Through his relationship with Carmen Lara, he was the father of:

2, Adela Comonfort Lara (1843-1911), born in México City in 1843, died 8 January 1911 in Monterrey, Nuevo León, México, aged 68. She married on 14 September 1865, in México City, Francisco Oliver Soler (1836-1894), son of José Oliver and Bárbara Soler. They were the parents of one son who continued to hold the Comonfort (Comerford) name into the next generation:

1a, José Ignacio Juan Oliver Comonfort (1866-1902), born 9 July 1866, in Monterrey, Nuevo León, México, baptised 22 July 1866; he married Dolores Garza Ayala in Monterrey on 17 April 1901; and he died 3 February 1902 in Monterrey.

The monument to Thomas Comerford in the ruined South Aisle of Saint Mary’s Church, Callan, with the coat-of-arms of the Comberford family … but which branch of the family did Peter and Joseph Comerford belong to? (Photograph: Patrick Comerford)

The role of the Comerford or Comonfort family in the Mexican army and politics needs to be understand within the context of the Irish diaspora in Mexico. Although smaller compared to other diasporas, its contribution has had a lasting impact on many aspects of Mexican life.

William Lamport (1611-1659), who was born in Wexford, was the real-life 17th century adventurer whose escapades and lifestyle inspired the stories of ‘El Zorro.’

Hugh O’Conor (1732-1779) from Dublin, moved to Nueva España in the18th century. He was governor of the region of Texas and commander of the northern frontier. He was also the founder of the town now known as Tucson, Arizona.

Juan José Rafael Teodomiro de O’Donojú y O’Ryan (1762-1821) was the Viceroy of New Spain (Mexico) from 21 July 1821 to 28 September 1821 during the Mexican War of Independence. He had once been an interpreter to the Duke of Wellington and was the last Viceroy of New Spain.

James Power(1788-1852), from Ballygarrett, Co Wexford, founded a new Irish settlement under Mexican jurisdiction in Texas. Other Irish figures involved in this colonisation included James Hewetson from Thomastown, Co Kilkenny, John McMullen and James McGloin.

During the war between the US and Mexico in the 184os, the Irish division in the Mexican army, Los San Patricios, led by John Riley, took part in all the major battles and was cited for bravery by General López de Santa Anna. During the war, 85 of the Irish battalion were captured and sentenced to tortures and deaths in what is considered even today as the ‘largest hanging affair in North America.’

The historian Conleth Manning identifies the Comerfords after the Butlers as the most important family in 17th century Callan, and names Edward Comerford (ca 1600-ca 1660) of Westcourt, Callan, MP for Callan, ‘as the most prominent member of the family in the town.’ Edward Comerford was the estate manager and one of the closest confidantes of both Walter Butler, 11th Earl of Ormond, and his grandson, James Butler, 12th Earl of Ormond and first Duke of Ormond. He was Sovereign or Mayor of Callan in 1632, was twice elected MP for Callan.

However, my research has yet to show which family Ignacio Comonfort’s early 18th ancestors in Callan, his grandfather Joseph Comerford and his great-grandfather Peter Comerford, were member of. The family name has been present in that part of south Kilkenny for generations and centuries, and each of the principal branches of the Comerford family, including those of Ballymack and Castleinch, have had strong connections with Callan.

There is more work to do on the Irish background of President Ignacio Comonfort and his genealogy.

The tomb of Judge Gerald Comerford in Saint Mary’s Church, Callan, Co Kilkenny, displays symbols of the passion (Photograph: Patrick Comerford)