The Project Gutenberg EBook of Ireland under the Tudors, Volume I (of II), by Richard Bagwell This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org Title: Ireland under the Tudors, Volume I (of II) With a Succinct Account of the Earlier History Author: Richard Bagwell Release Date: February 8, 2013 [EBook #42046] Language: English Character set encoding: ISO-8859-1 *** START OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK IRELAND UNDER THE TUDORS *** Produced by Brownfox and the Online Distributed Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net (This file was produced from images generously made available by The Internet Archive) IRELAND UNDER THE TUDORS VOL. I. PRINTED BY SPOTTISWOODE AND CO., NEW-STREET SQUARE LONDON IRELAND UNDER THE TUDORS WITH A SUCCINCT ACCOUNT OF THE EARLIER HISTORY BY RICHARD BAGWELL, M.A. IN TWO VOLUMES VOL. I. [Pg i] [Pg ii] [Pg iii] LONDON LONGMANS, GREEN, AND CO. 1885 All rights reserved PREFACE. ‘Irish policy,’ said Mr. Disraeli in the House of Commons, ‘is Irish history, and I have no faith in any statesman, who attempts to remedy the evils of Ireland, who is either ignorant of the past or who will not take lessons from it.’ This is most true, and history, if it is to be of any use, should be written for instruction, and not merely for the confirmation of existing prejudices. This is especially so in the present case, for, as Sir George Stanley told Cecil in 1565, ‘the practises of Ireland be great, and not understood to all men that seem to have knowledge thereof.’ The writer who enters the arena as an advocate may produce an interesting party pamphlet, but he will hardly make the world either wiser or better. The historian’s true office is that of the judge, whose duty it is to marshal all the material facts with just so much of comment as may enable his hearers to give them their due weight. The reading public is the jury. Starting with this conception of the task before me, I have not attempted to please any party or school. The history of Ireland is at the best a sad one; but its study, if it be really studied for the truth’s sake, can hardly fail to make men more tolerant. In Ireland, as in other countries, a purely Celtic population was unable to resist the impact of the Teutonic race. First came the pagan Northmen, with power to ruin, but without power to reconstruct. Then followed the Anglo- Normans, seeking for lands and lordships, but seeking them under the patronage of the Catholic Church. For a time it seemed as though the conquest would be complete; but the colony proved too weak for its work, and the mail-clad knights failed almost as completely as the Scandinavian corsairs. The main cause of this second failure was the neglect or jealousy of the kings. They feared the growth of an independent power within sight of the English shore, and they had neither means nor inclination to do the work of government themselves. Little gain and less glory were to be had in Ireland, and Scotch, Welsh, or Continental politics engrossed their attention in turn. They weakened the colony, partly of set purpose, and partly by drawing men and supplies from thence. In short, they were absentees; and, to use an expression which has gained currency in modern times, they were generally content to look upon Ireland as a mere drawfarm. The Wars of the Roses almost completed the ruin of the work which Henry II. had begun. For a moment it seemed as if the colony was about to assert its independence. But this could not have been done without an understanding with the native race, and it does not appear that any such understanding was possible. The upshot was that Yorkist and Lancastrian parties were formed in Ireland, that the colony was thus still further weakened, and that the English language and power seemed on the point of disappearing altogether. The throne of Henry VIII. was erected on the ruins of mediæval feudalism, and guarded by a nation which longed for rest, and which saw no hope but in a strong monarchy. The King saw that he had duties in Ireland. Utterly unscrupulous where his own passions were concerned, the idea of a patriot King was not altogether strange to him. Irish chiefs were encouraged to visit his court, and were allowed to bask in the sunshine of royal favour; and it is conceivable that the ‘Defender of the Faith,’ had he continued to defend it in the original sense, might have ended by attaching the native Irish to the Crown. By respecting for a time their tribal laws, by making one chief an earl and another a knight, by mediating in their quarrels, and by attending to their physical and spiritual wants, a Catholic Tudor might possibly have succeeded where Anglican and Plantagenet had failed. The revolution in religion changed everything, and out of it grew what many regard as the insoluble Irish question. Henry II. had found Ireland in the hands of a Celtic people, for the intermixture of Scandinavian blood was slight and partial. Henry VIII. found it inhabited by a mixed race. From the beginning there had been rivalry and ill-feeling between men of English blood born in Ireland, and those of English birth who were sent over as officials or who went over as adventurers. During the fifteenth century England did nothing to preserve the ties of kinship, and the Celtic reaction tended to swallow up the interlopers. The degenerate English proverbially became more Irish than the Irish themselves, but the distinction would scarcely have been so nearly obliterated had it not been for the change in religion. The nobles of the Pale, the burghers of the walled towns, and the lawyers in Dublin were equally disinclined to accept the new model. Neither Irish chieftains nor Anglo-Irish lords found much difficulty in acknowledging Henry’s supremacy both in Church and State; but further than that they would not go. The people did not go so far, and, in the words of the annalists, regarded the Reformation simply as a ‘heresy and new error.’ Religion itself was at an extremely low ebb, and only the friars preserved the memory of better days. Henry may have imagined that he could lead the people through the bishops and other dignitaries: if so, he was entirely mistaken. The friars defied his power, and the hearts of the poor were with them. In Ireland, at least, it was Rome that undertook the [Pg iv] [Pg v] [Pg vi] [Pg vii] [Pg viii] work of popular reformation. The Franciscans and Jesuits endured cold and hunger, bonds and death, while courtly prelates neglected their duties or were distinguished from lay magnates only by the more systematic nature of their oppressions. And thus, as the hatred of England daily deepened, the attachment of the Irish to Rome became daily closer. Every effort of Henry to conciliate them was frustrated by their spiritual guides, who urged with perfect truth that he was an adulterer, a tyrant, and a man of blood. Holding such cards as these, the friars could hardly lose the game, and they had little difficulty in proving to willing ears that the King’s ancestors received Ireland from the Pope, and that his apostasy had placed him in the position of a defaulting vassal. Henry’s vacillations and the early deaths of Edward and Mary for a time obscured the true nature of the contest, but it became apparent in Elizabeth’s time. She was an excommunicated Queen. From a Catholic point of view she was clearly illegitimate. Many English Catholics ignored all this and served her well and truly, but those who carried dogmas to their logical conclusions flocked to the enemy’s camp. Spain, Belgium, and Italy were filled with English refugees, who were willing enough that the Queen should be hurt in Ireland, since England was beyond their reach. But even here national antipathies were visible, and Irish suitors for Spanish help came constantly into collision with Englishmen bent upon the same errand. Desmond, Shane O’Neill, and Hugh O’Neill seem to have cared very little for religion themselves. The first was a tool of Rome; the two latter rather made the Church subservient to their own ambition. But in these cases, and in a hundred others of less importance, the religious feeling of the people was always steadily opposed to the English Crown. Elizabeth was by nature no persecutor, yet she persecuted. Her advisers always maintained, and her apologists may still maintain, that in hanging a Campion or torturing an O’Hurley she did not meddle with freedom of conscience, but only punished those who were plotting against her crown. The Catholics, on the other hand, could plead that they had done nothing worthy of death or of bonds, nor against lawful authority, and that they suffered for conscience’ sake. And the Continental nations, who were mainly Catholic, sided on the whole with the refugees. Ireland, it is true, was only a pawn in their game, and Philip II. was probably wrong in not making her much more. At Cork or Galway the Armada might have met with scarcely any resistance, and a successful descent would have taxed Elizabeth’s resources to the utmost. The poverty of the Crown is the key to many problems of the Elizabethan age. The Queen had to keep Scotland quiet, to hold Spain at bay, and to maintain tolerable relations with France. She saw what ought to be done in Ireland, but very often could not afford to do it. The tendency to temporise was perhaps constitutional, but it was certainly much increased by want of money. Her vacillating policy did much harm, but it was caused less by changes of opinion than by circumstances. When the pressure at other points slackened she could attend to her troublesome kingdom; when it increased she was often forced to postpone her Irish plans. Ireland has always suffered, and still suffers sorely, from want of firmness. In modern times party exigencies work mischief analogous to that formerly caused by the sovereign’s necessities. The dissolution of the monasteries was followed by no proper provision for education. In the total absence of universities and grammar-schools, certain monks and nuns had striven nobly to keep the lamp of knowledge burning, but they were ruthlessly driven from house and home. Elizabeth was alive to all this, but she could not give Ireland her undivided attention, and such remedies as were applied came too late. The oppressed friars kept possession of the popular ear, and the Jesuits found the crop ready for their sickle. Denied education at home, many sons of good families sought it abroad, and the natural leaders of the Irish acquired habits of thought very different from those of English gentlemen. Archbishop Fitzgibbon, one of the most important champions of Catholic Ireland, saw clearly that his country could not stand alone. He would have preferred the sovereignty of England, but she had become aggressively Protestant, and he turned to Spain, to France, to Rome, anywhere rather than to the land whence his own ancestors had sprung. The lineage of the United Irishmen and their numerous progeny may be easily traced back to Tudor times. A few words now to the critics whom every writer hopes to have. The spelling both of Irish names and English documents has throughout been modernised, from regard to the feelings of the public. Irish history is already sufficiently repulsive to that great unknown quantity the general reader, and it would be cruel to add to its horrors. Etymologists will always go for their materials to originals, and not to modern compositions. When, therefore, such names as Clandeboye or Roderic O’Connor are met with in the text, it is not to be supposed that I have never heard of Clann-Aedha-Buidhe or Ruaidhri O’Conchobair. Of the first 123 pages of this book, I need only say that original authorities have as much as possible been consulted. In the third and four following chapters, much use has been made of Mr. Gilbert’s ‘Viceroys,’ a debt which I desire to acknowledge once for all. In so succinct a review of more than three centuries, it has not been thought necessary to quote the authority for every fact. For the reign of Henry VIII. I have chiefly relied on the second and third volumes of the ‘State Papers,’ published in 1834. They are sometimes cited as ‘S. P.’ or ‘State Papers,’ and when only the date of a letter or report is given it must be understood that this collection is referred to. The great calendar of letters and papers begun by Dr. Brewer and continued by Mr. Gairdner contains some items not included in the older publication; it is referred to as Brewer. Other sources of information have not been neglected, and are indicated in the footnotes. The account of the reigns of Edward VI., Mary, and Elizabeth is chiefly drawn from the ‘State Papers, Ireland’—all documents preserved in the Public Record Office and calendared by Mr. Hans Claude Hamilton. How excellently the editor has done his work can only be appreciated by one who has entered into his labours as closely as I have done. [Pg ix] [Pg x] [Pg xi] Except where a document has already been printed, I have nearly always referred to the original MS. All documents cited by date or number without further description must be understood as being in this collection. The late Dr. Brewer’s calendar of the Carew MSS. at Lambeth often fills up gaps in the greater series; it is referred to as Carew. Many papers, both in Fetter Lane and at Lambeth, are copies; but their authenticity is not disputed. The Carew calendar is on so full a plan that it has not been thought necessary to consult the manuscripts; indeed, except for local purposes, it is not likely that they will be much consulted in the future. Other collections are referred to in their places, but it may be well to mention specially the journal of the Irish (Kilkenny) Archæological Society, whose editor, the Rev. James Graves, has done as much as any man to lay a broad foundation for Irish history. O’Donovan’s splendid edition of the ‘Four Masters’ has generally been consulted for the Irish version of every important fact. O’Clery and his fellow-compilers wrote under Charles I., and are not therefore strictly contemporary for the Tudor period. They appear to have faithfully transcribed original annals, but to this one important exception must be made. The old writers never hesitated to record facts disagreeable to the Church; the later compilers were under the influence of the counter-reformation which produced Jesuitism. Making some allowance for this, the ‘Four Masters’ must be considered fair men. Michael O’Clery spent much time at Louvain, but he wrote in Ireland, and had native assistants. Philip O’Sullivan, on the other hand, was a Spanish officer, and published his useful but untrustworthy ‘Compendium’ at Lisbon. The ‘Annals of Lough Cé’ are preferable in some ways to the ‘Four Masters,’ but they do not cover so much ground. All the native annalists are jejune to an exasperating degree. Genealogy seems to have been the really important thing with them, and they throw extremely little light on the condition of the people. We are forced therefore to rely on the accounts, often prejudiced and nearly always ill-informed, of English travellers and officials. The Anglo-Irish chronicles in ‘Holinshed’ were written by Richard Stanihurst, who dedicated his work to Sir Henry Sidney, for the reign of Henry VIII., and after that by John Hooker. Stanihurst, a native of Dublin, was not born till 1545. He has been thought an unpatriotic writer, and excited the violent antipathy of O’Donovan; but he appears to have been pretty well informed. The speeches which he puts into the mouths of his characters must be considered apocryphal, but as much may be said of like compositions in all ages. Hooker was an actor in many of the events he describes. He was a Protestant and an Englishman, prejudiced no doubt, but not untruthful, and his statements are often borne out by independent documents. Edmund Campion, the Jesuit, wrote in Ireland under Sidney’s protection; his very interesting work is less a history than a collection of notes. Other books, ancient and modern, are referred to in the footnotes. Among living scholars, I desire to thank Dr. W. K. Sullivan, of Cork, who had the great kindness to correct the first chapter, and to furnish some valuable notes. Hearty thanks are also due to the gentlemen at the Public Record Office, and especially to Mr. W. D. Selby and Mr. J. M. Thompson. In making the index a few errors were discovered in the text, and these have been noted as errata. Some mistakes may still remain uncorrected, but I am not without hope that they are neither many nor of much importance. Marlfield, Clonmel: August 13, 1885. CONTENTS OF THE FIRST VOLUME. CHAPTER I. INTRODUCTORY. PAGE Early notices of Ireland 1 The Celtic constitution 2 The tribal system 5 The Celtic land law 7 Common origin of Celtic and Teutonic institutions 11 The ancient Irish Church 12 [Pg xii] [Pg xiii] [Pg xiv] [Pg xv] Gradual introduction of Roman ecclesiastical polity 14 CHAPTER II. THE SCANDINAVIAN ELEMENT. First inroads of the Northmen 17 Turgesius 17 Danes and Norwegians 18 Danish power in Ireland 19 Its limits 21 Revival of the Celts 22 Brian Borumha 23 Battle of Clontarf 28 Conversion of the Danes 29 Superiority of their civilisation 30 Brian’s monarchy not permanent 31 Danish Christianity in Ireland 32 Conflict between Canterbury and Armagh 33 Papal supremacy fully established 34 CHAPTER III. THE REIGN OF HENRY II. Ireland given to England by the Popes 37 First interference of Henry II. 39 An Anglo-Norman party in Ireland 40 Strongbow 41 Anglo-Norman invasion 42 Henry II. in Ireland 47 Difficulties of the invaders 49 Henry was unable to carry out his own policy 52 An Irish kingdom contemplated 54 Viceroyalty of John 55 No conquest of Ireland under Henry II. 56 CHAPTER IV. FROM JOHN’S VISIT IN 1210 TO THE INVASION BY THE BRUCES IN 1315. John Lord of Ireland 58 King John in Ireland 59 Leinster divided after Strongbow’s death 61 The De Burgos in Connaught 61 The colony declines under Henry III. 62 Results of Edward I.’s policy 64 The Bruces invade Ireland 65 CHAPTER V. [Pg xvi] FROM THE INVASION OF THE BRUCES TO THE YEAR 1346. Why the Bruces failed 69 Decline of the colony 70 The colonists become Hibernis ipsis Hiberniores 71 Creation of the great earldoms 71 Irish corporate towns 73 Anglo-Norman families 75 Further decline of the colony under Edward III. 76 Dissensions among the colonists 77 CHAPTER VI. FROM THE YEAR 1346 TO THE ACCESSION OF HENRY VII. Lionel, Duke of Clarence 80 The statute of Kilkenny 81 Its effect in dividing the rival races 83 Richard II.’s first visit 85 His second visit 86 His complete failure 87 Henry IV. and V. neglect Ireland 87 Foreign wars fatal to Ireland 89 Richard of York made Lord-Lieutenant 90 A Yorkist party in Ireland 91 The colony reduced to the utmost 93 CHAPTER VII. THE IRISH PARLIAMENT. A close copy 94 Growth of representative institutions 95 The sphere of English law contracted under Edward III. 96 The Parliament of Kilkenny not representative of Ireland 97 The peerage 98 The clergy as an estate 99 The Viceroy 100 CHAPTER VIII. THE REIGN OF HENRY VII. The Fitzgeralds were Yorkists, the Butlers Lancastrians 102 Lambert Simnel crowned in Ireland 104 The Irish Yorkists cut to pieces at Stoke 105 Mission of Sir Richard Edgcombe 106 The Irish nobility in England 108 The Butlers and Geraldines 109 Perkin Warbeck 110 Sir Edward Poynings holds a Parliament at Drogheda 111 Poynings’ Acts 112 Second visit of Perkin Warbeck 113 [Pg xvii] Weakness of the Government 114 Third visit of Perkin Warbeck 115 Power of the Kildare family 115, 117-120 Battle of Knocktoe 120 Henry VII. wished to separate the two races 122 CHAPTER IX. FROM THE ACCESSION OF HENRY VIII. TO THE YEAR 1534. The Kildare family in power 124-128 The Ormonde family much reduced 125 Viceroyalty of Surrey 128-139 The Pale a very small district 129 Misery of the country 131 O’Donnell and O’Neill 132 Desmond and the MacCarthies 133 Policy of Henry VIII. 134 Unsteadiness of English policy 136 The Irish constantly at war 140 The Butlers and Geraldines were scarcely more peaceable 145 Wolsey’s policy 148 A Viceroy captured by the Irish 150 The rivalry between Ormonde and Kildare 149-152 Skeffington Viceroy 152 Overshadowed by Kildare 154 Results of the Kildare power 154-158 Fall of Kildare 161 CHAPTER X. THE GERALDINE REBELLION—SKEFFINGTON’S ADMINISTRATION, 1534-1535. The Geraldine rebellion 163 Loyalty of the Butlers 164 Geraldine siege of Dublin 166 Failure of the rebellion 169 Surrender of Kildare 177 The Desmonds and MacCarthies 180 Desmond intrigues with France 181 The Butlers and the Desmond Geraldines 182 Desmond intrigues with Charles V. 184 State of the South of Ireland 189 Modern spirit of the Tudor monarchy shown by promoting new men 194 CHAPTER XI. FROM THE YEAR 1536 TO THE YEAR 1540. Administration of Lord Leonard Grey 195-220 [Pg xviii] The royal supremacy established by law 196 The Act of Absentees 197 The O’Neills 198 Poverty of the Crown 199 Grey in the West of Ireland 200 Want of money 204 Grey and the O’Connors 206 Vague good intentions of Henry VIII. 210 The O’Neills and O’Donnells 212 Grey and the O’Connors 213 Seizure of the five Geraldines 215 Eclipse of the Kildare family 216 CHAPTER XII. END OF GREY’S ADMINISTRATION. Ormonde proposes to reform his country 221 Grey almost constantly engaged in war 222 His quarrel with the Butlers 223 The O’Carrolls 223 The O’Mores 224 Rash expedition of Grey 226 His dispute with the Butlers 229 The revenue 233 Cromwell’s Irish policy 234 The royal supremacy acquiesced in 236 A Catholic movement nevertheless makes itself felt 238 Grey routs the O’Neills 240 Fall and fate of Grey 243 CHAPTER XIII. 1540 AND 1541. Confusion after Grey’s recall 247 Sir Anthony St. Leger Lord Deputy 249-261 His policy 250 Case of the O’Tooles 251 The King will not allow a military brotherhood 254 Desmond abjures the Pope 255 Success of St. Leger with the Irish chiefs 256 Henry VIII. made King of Ireland by Act of Parliament 259 CHAPTER XIV. 1541 TO THE CLOSE OF THE REIGN OF HENRY VIII. St. Leger Lord Deputy 262-287 O’Donnell abjures the Pope 262 O’Neill abjures the Pope 264 Other chiefs follow suit 266 [Pg xix] The Munster nobles do likewise 267 O’Neill made Earl of Tyrone 268 O’Brien made Earl of Thomond 270 MacWilliam Burke made Earl of Clanricarde 271 The MacDonnells in Antrim 271 Financial dishonesty 274 An Irish contingent in Scotland 276 And in France 277 Dissensions between St. Leger and Ormonde 278 An English party in Scotland 279 The Lord of the Isles in Ireland 280 Abortive attempt to invade Scotland from Ireland 281 Intrigues of Irish officials—St. Leger and Ormonde 282 Ormonde is murdered in England 285 Permanent causes tending to weaken Irish Governments 286 CHAPTER XV. THE IRISH CHURCH UNDER HENRY VIII. Points at issue between King and Pope 288 See of Armagh 289 Dublin 290 Meath 290 Cashel 291 Tuam 292 Remoter sees 292 King and Pope in Leinster, Munster, and Connaught 293 Corrupt state of the Church 294 Miserable condition of four sees particularly described 295 General corruption of the clergy 296 Evils of Papal patronage 297 Many of the religious houses out of order 298 Excellent service rendered by others 299 Ecclesiastical legislation in 1536 300 The Crown could procure the passing of Acts, but the people remained unaffected by them 301 Archbishop Browne 302 His quarrel with Bishop Staples 303 Lord Leonard Grey gave general offence 303 Images, relics, and pilgrimages 304 The Munster bishops conformed 305 But this does not prove any real conversion 306 Origin of a double succession 306 Wauchop made Primate by the Pope 306 First appearance of the Jesuits 307 The friars oppose the royal supremacy 310 The Reformation hateful to the Irish 311 Henry attacks the monasteries 312 Account of the different orders 313 Cistercian abbeys 314 Hospitallers 315 Pensions to monks 317 The monks were not really driven out 317 Property of the religious houses 318 The mendicant orders 319 Their suppression scarcely decreased the number of friars 320 [Pg xx] The plunder of the monasteries shared by all classes 320 The educating monasteries not replaced 321 Early attempts at an Irish university 321 Archbishop Browne 322 Bishop Staples 323 CHAPTER XVI. FROM THE ACCESSION OF EDWARD VI. TO THE YEAR 1551. St. Leger still Deputy 325 Education of Irish nobles at Court 326 Sir Edward Bellingham Lord Deputy 327-345 His efforts to protect the Pale 328 Pirates on the Irish coast 329 Bellingham puts down the O’Mores 331 And the O’Connors 332 He bridles Connaught 333 A remarkable adventure 334 The Irish mint 335 Bellingham’s haughty bearing towards great men 337 He offends his own council 339 He tames Desmond 339 Ireland quiet 340 The Reformation—Browne and Staples 341 Bellingham and Dowdall 342 The royal supremacy 343 Death and character of Bellingham 344 Lord Justice Bryan 345 Lord Justice Brabazon 346 Foreign intrigues 347 St. Leger Lord Deputy 348-353 His conciliatory policy 349 The Reformation hangs fire 349 Causes of this 350 Want of money 351 The French discourage the Irish refugees 352 English settlers not always a civilising influence 353 CHAPTER XVII. FROM THE YEAR 1551 TO THE DEATH OF EDWARD VI. St. Leger Lord Deputy 354-359 Protestantism officially promulgated 354 Doctrinal conference 355 Browne and Dowdall 356 Tolerant views of St. Leger 357 Sir James Croft Lord Deputy 359-383 Colonisation projects 360 The Ulster Scots 361 The O’Neills 362 Shane O’Neill and his competitors 363 Another doctrinal conference 365 [Pg xxi] [Pg xxii] The primacy removed to Dublin 367 Church patronage 368 The coinage 370 Sufferings from a debased currency 371 Attempts at mining 372 French and Scotch intrigues 373 Connaught 374 Leinster 375 Ulster 376 Protestant bishops 379 Bale 381 Catholic reaction after Edward’s death 382 CHAPTER XVIII. THE REIGN OF MARY. St. Leger is again Lord Deputy 384-396 The succession 384 The Queen and the Pope 386 Bishop Bale at Kilkenny 386 The Primacy is restored to Armagh 391 Restoration of Kildare 392 The Pope and the kingdom of Ireland 393 Mary’s notions of prerogative 394 Recall of St. Leger—his accusers 396 Sussex (then Lord Fitzwalter) made Lord Deputy 396 Ulster 397 The King’s and Queen’s Counties 399 The monastic lands not restored 401 Catholicism re-established 401 Military operations of Sussex 402 O’Neills and O’Donnells 404 Sir Henry Sidney Lord Justice 405 General disaffection 406 Mary’s ideas on Irish policy 407 Sussex in Munster 408 And in Thomond and Connaught 410 Abortive expedition to the Hebrides 411 State of the Protestants under Mary 413 INDEX 415 Errata. Page140, for Bishop of Kildare read Bishop of Killaloe. " 305-6, for Michael Comyn read Nicholas Comyn. " 317, for Nicholas Walsh read Nicholas Fagan. MAPS. [Pg xxiii] Scope of the work. The Roman period. The Celtic polity. The Irish Monarchy or Pentarchy. Weakness of the Brehon law. IRELAND IN 1172 To face page 37 " ABOUT1300 " 69 " " 1500 " 124 IRELAND, ECCLESIASTICAL " 288 IRELAND UNDER THE TUDORS. CHAPTER I. INTRODUCTORY. The main object of this book is to describe in some detail, and as impartially as possible, the dealings of England with Ireland during the reigns of Henry VIII. and his three children. As an introduction to the study of that period, it seemed desirable to give some account of the course of government during those 340 years which had elapsed since the first Anglo-Norman set foot upon the Irish shore. And, seeing that Teutonic invaders had effected a lodgment about three centuries and a half before Henry II.’s accession, it was hardly possible to avoid saying something about the men who built the towns which enabled his subjects to keep a firm grip upon the island. Lastly, it seemed well at the very outset to touch lightly upon the peculiarities of that Celtic system with which the King of England found himself suddenly confronted. Agricola took military possession of south-western Scotland partly in the hope of being able to invade Ireland. He had heard that the climate and people did not differ much from those of Britain, and he knew that the harbours were much frequented by merchants. He believed that annexation would tend to consolidate the Roman power in Britain, Gaul, and Spain, and kept by him for some time a petty Irish king who had been expelled by his own tribe, and to whom he professed friendship on the chance of turning him to account. Agricola thought there would be no great difficulty in conquering the island, which he rightly conjectured to be smaller than Britain and larger than Sicily or Sardinia. ‘I have often,’ says Tacitus, ‘heard him say that Ireland could be conquered and occupied with a single legion and a few auxiliaries, and that the work in Britain would be easier if the Roman arms could be made visible on all sides, and liberty, as it were, removed out of sight.’ Agricola, like many great men after him, might have found the task harder than his barbarous guest had led him to suppose; and in any case fate had not ordained that Ireland should ever know the Roman Peace. It was reserved for another petty king, after the lapse of nearly 1,100 years, to introduce an organised foreign power into Ireland, and to attach the island to an empire whose possessions were destined to be far greater than those of Imperial Rome. Setting aside all ethnological speculations as foreign to the scope of this work, it may be sufficient to say that the inhabitants of Ireland at the dawn of authentic history were Celts, of the same grand division as the bulk of the Scots Highlanders, but differing considerably from the people of Wales. Their organisation in the twelfth century had not passed beyond the tribal stage.[1] There was a monarch of all Ireland, who had Meath—the Middle—as his official appanage, and who reigned originally at Tara. There were provincial kings of Ulster, Munster, Leinster, and Connaught. A primacy was given to the race of Niall, who lived presumably in the fourth and fifth centuries, and from whom the O’Neills, O’Donnells, and others trace their descent. The theory is thought to have been pretty closely adhered to until the desertion of Tara in the sixth century of our era. After that the over-king lived in his own territory; but his authority was often disputed, especially by Munster, the revolt of which province finally broke up the old order.[2] Wars were frequent, and Irish Brehons, who were rather legal experts than judges, exerted themselves to define rights and liabilities, and to establish a peaceful polity. Perhaps in laying down the law they sometimes rather stated their own conception of what it ought to be than described the actual state of things; much as Brahminical writers propounded a theory of caste which cannot be reconciled with historical truth. Neither the Church nor the Law had always original power sufficient to enforce steady obedience. The Law might be clear enough, but the central government was often too weak to secure respect for the opinion of experts. Portia might have argued like a very Daniel, but she could have done nothing without the Duke behind her. In the absence of such an overpowering authority, the decisions of the Brehons were little more than [Pg 1] [Pg 2] [Pg 3] [Pg 4] Ireland was outside the imperial system. The tribal system. The chief. Frequency of war. Celtic law of succession. Tudor view of the Celtic land law. Septs. arbitrations which might be, and probably often were, accepted as final, but on which neither party could be compelled to act.[3] In the treatise called the ‘Senchus Mór’ there is a passage which may be as old as the fourteenth century, in which it is allowed that the nature of Irish royalty varied considerably from time to time. ‘The King of Erin without opposition,’ says the writer or interpolator, ‘received stock from the King of the Romans; or it was by the successor of Patrick the stock is given to the King of Erin, that is, when the seaports of Dublin, and Waterford, and Limerick, and the seaports in general, are subject to him.’ There is here an attempt at once to bring Ireland within the pale of the Empire, and to show that the Irish Church was independent. It was natural that the Brehons should seek to introduce their country into the circle of nations, but we know as a matter of fact that the Empire never had anything to do with Ireland. The passage quoted may have been inspired by a wish to deny English supremacy by attorning, as it were, to the superior lord. It is a tribute to the greatness of the Empire more than anything else, and it was not thought of until the Brehon law schools had fallen from their high estate. It was by giving stock that an Irish chief showed his power and added to his wealth. There were lands attached to his office, but his capital consisted of kine, and he extracted a sort of rent by obliging his inferiors to give them pasture. The number of cattle which he ‘grazed without loss’ upon other people’s ground was the measure of his power and popularity. There were free tribesmen the amount of whose obligation to their chief was strictly laid down, though a greater quantity of stock might be voluntarily taken under certain restrictions. But there were also servile or semi-servile classes whose comparatively unprotected condition placed them more or less in the power of the chief to whose sept they were attached. An ambitious chief would always have opportunities of aggrandisement, and his wealth enabled him to support a mercenary force, and to grow strong at the expense of his own and other tribes. Broken men who had lost their own tribal position would always flock to an ambitious chief, and the disturbing influence of such retainers was often too strong for Brehons or priests. But the growth of power by means of mercenaries was not peculiar to Ireland, and was perhaps less frequent than is commonly supposed.[4] Whatever the advantages of a pure Celtic system, it did not secure general peace. There is no period of which Celtic Ireland may be more justly proud than that between the death of St. Columba in 597 and the death of St. Gall about 640. It was the age in which the Irish saint Columbanus bearded Thierri and Brunehaut, in which Ireland herself was a noted seat of learning, and in which the monasteries of Luxueil, of St. Gall, and of Bobbio were founded by Irishmen. Yet, under thirty years out of forty-four either battle or murder is recorded in the Chronicon Scotorum. In some years there were several battles and several murders. In 628 Leinster was devastated. Quarrels between near relations were frequent, and often ended in murder. When we consider that the deaths of important people only are recorded, we cannot pronounce the Ireland which sent forth Aidan, and Adamnan, and Columbanus to have been at all a peaceful country. Christianity was then established, and no Scandinavian irruption had yet hindered the development of purely native ideas. But Irish chroniclers, perhaps owing to their genealogical turn, give a disproportionate space to deaths; and it may be admitted that the number of homicides was not greater in Ireland than in some parts of Germany in feudal times.[5] Primogeniture, which is practically incompatible with the tribal stage of political organisation, was perhaps formally acknowledged at a very remote period, but was unknown as a rule of succession to Irish chiefries in the ages with which this book chiefly deals. In those comparatively modern times a vacancy was filled from the same family, but the person chosen was generally a brother or a cousin of the deceased. It seldom happened, perhaps, that an Irish chief, who was necessarily a warrior, attained threescore and ten years, and on an average a son would be less likely to make an able leader than one of an older generation. To avoid disputed successions, an heir-apparent, called the tanist, was chosen before a vacancy actually occurred, and sometimes probably against the wish of the reigning chief. Very often the sons refused to accept the tanist, and bloody quarrels followed. This system stank in the nostrils of the Tudor lawyers; but in the twelfth century the true principle of hereditary succession was not fully understood. It was, perhaps, a suspicion that his eldest son might not succeed him quietly that induced Henry II. to crown him in his lifetime. A later and much stronger analogy may be found in the history of the Empire. Charles V. procured the election of his brother Ferdinand as king of the Romans, and he was actually crowned. Many years later Charles wished to substitute his son Philip; but Ferdinand refused to yield, and he was sustained by the electors, who had no mind to see the Empire become an appendage of the Spanish monarchy. The influence of the Irish Brehons probably tended to prevent chiefries from becoming hereditary. In such cases as the earldom of Desmond we have a mixture of the two systems; the earls were chiefs as regarded the Irish; but their succession to the honour, and through it to the quasi-chiefry, was regulated by feudal rules. As the chief was elected by his tribe from among a limited number, so was the land distributed among the tribesmen within certain fixed limits. As it is with England’s treatment of Ireland that we have to do, it may be as well to let Sir John Davies himself say how the matter appeared to the Tudor lawyers:— ‘First be it known that the lands possessed by the mere Irish in this realm were divided into [Pg 5] [Pg 6] [Pg 7] [Pg 8] Lord and tanist. Tanistry and gavelkind. No estate of inheritance. Partitions of tribal land. Effect of frequent partitions. Position of daughters and of bastard sons. Four points peculiar to Irish gavelkind. Sir John Davies did not exhaust the subject. Composition for murder. Celtic usages part of the common Aryan stock. several territories or countries; and the inhabitants of each Irish country were divided into several septs or lineages.’ ‘Secondly, in every Irish territory there was a lord or chieftain, and a tanist who was his successor apparent. And of every Irish sept or lineage there was also a chief, who was called Canfinny, or head of a “cognatio.”’ ‘Thirdly, all possessions in these Irish territories (before the common law of England was established through all the realm as it now is) ran at all times[6] in course of tanistry, or in course of gavelkind. Every lordship or chiefry, with the portion of land that passed with it, went without partition to the tanist, who always came in by election, or by the strong hand, and never by descent.[7] But all the inferior tenancies were partible among the males in gavelkind.’[8] ‘Again, the estate which the lord had in the chiefry, or that the inferior tenants had in gavelkind, was no estate of inheritance, but a temporary or transitory possession. For just as the next heir of the lord or chieftain would not inherit the chiefry, but the eldest and worthiest of the sept (as was before shown in the case of tanistry), who was often removed and expelled by another who was more active or stronger than he: so lands in the nature of gavelkind were not partible among the next heirs male of him who died seised, but among all the males of his sept, in this manner:— ‘The Canfinny, or chief of a sept (who was commonly the most ancient of the sept) made all the partitions at his discretion. This Canfinny, after the death of each tenant holding a competent portion of land, assembled all the sept, placed all their possessions in hotchpotch, and made a new partition of the whole; in which partition he did not assign to the sons of the deceased the portion which their father held, but allotted the better or larger part to each one of the sept according to his antiquity.’[9] ‘These portions being thus allotted and assigned were possessed and enjoyed accordingly until the next partition, which, at the discretion or will of the Canfinny, might be made at the death of each inferior tenant. And thus by these frequent partitions and the removals or translations of the tenants of one portion or another, all the possessions were uncertain, and the uncertainty of possession was the very cause that no civil habitations were erected, and no enclosure or improvement of lands made, in the Irish countries where that custom of gavelkind was in use; especially in Ulster, which seemed everywhere a wilderness before this new plantation made there by the English undertakers. And this was the fruit of this Irish gavelkind.’ ‘Also by this Irish custom of gavelkind bastards took their shares with the legitimate, and wives, on the other hand, were quite excluded from dower, and daughters took nothing, even if their father died without issue male. So that this custom differed from Kentish gavelkind in four points.’[10] The four points were the certainty of estate in each share, the exclusion of bastards, the admission of a widow to one moiety, and the admission of females in default of issue male. For which reasons, says Sir John, the Kentish custom was always held good and lawful by the law of England. He admits, however, that the Irish custom had a counterpart in North Wales, which had been totally abolished by Henry VIII., along with other usages resembling those of Ireland. Edward I. had only ventured to exclude bastards, and to give widows their dowry.[11] Notwithstanding the above decision, it is probable that a description of tanistry and gavelkind does not exhaust the subject. The theoretical division among all the males of a sept is not at all likely to have been carried out, except in very early times. Human nature was against it. From the twelfth century the example of the Anglo-Normans, which cannot have been altogether without weight, was against it. The interest of the chief was everywhere against it, because it would deprive him of the means of rewarding his friends, and because he was always tempted to seize lands to his own use. The tendency to private property would be always asserting itself, but the exact historical truth can never be known. Before the close of the mediæval period, a great part of Ireland had been reconquered by the tribes from Anglo-Norman hands. Is it possible that the Irish land system can have been anywhere restored in its integrity? On the whole, it is at least probable that English statesmen in the sixteenth century made as many mistakes about tenures in Ireland as their representatives in the eighteenth and part of the nineteenth made about tenures in India. Good faith may be generally granted in both cases, but the blunders made were no less disastrous. It is at all events clear that primogeniture was no Celtic usage, that it is no part of the law of nature, and that the Tudor lawyers treated it as an end in itself, and almost as a necessary element in the eternal fitness of things. In the twelfth century Irish practice may have come much nearer to theory than in the sixteenth; at all events, Henry II.’s grants to individuals were absolutely opposed to Celtic notions of justice. The Irish admitted composition for murder. This blood-fine, called an eric, was an utter abomination to the English of the sixteenth century, who had quite forgotten the laws and customs of their own Teutonic ancestors. To men long used to a strong central government such a custom seemed impious. It was nevertheless part of the common heritage of the Aryan race, and had been in vogue among the peoples from whom the later English sprung. [Pg 9] [Pg 10] [Pg 11] The conflict of laws is the key to Anglo-Irish history. Origin of the Irish Church. Patrick and Columba. Exile of Columba. Saint Bridget. The Irish Church was originally monastic. The early Church was episcopal, but not territorially so. The Njal Saga illustrates its use among the Icelanders by many famous cases strictly in point. The feudal system and the canon law had caused the Teutonic nations to abandon a usage which they once had in common with the Irish. Celtic Ireland had never had a very strong central government, and such as it was it had sustained serious damage. Homicide was still considered a personal injury. The rule was not a life for a life, but adequate damages for the loss sustained. The idea of public justice, irrespective of private interests, was far in advance of the stage which had been reached by the Irish Celts. Irish history cannot be understood unless the fact is clearly grasped, that the development of the tribal system was violently interrupted by a feudal half-conquest. The Angevin and Plantagenet kings were strong enough to shake and discredit the native polity; but they had neither the power nor the inclination to feudalise a people which had never gone through the preliminary stages. When the Tudors brought a more steadfast purpose and better machinery to the task, they found how hard it was to evolve order out of the shattered remnants of two systems which had the same origin, but which had been so brought together as to make complete fusion impossible. From the first the subjects of England and the natives of Ireland had been on entirely different planes. Even for us it is extremely difficult to avoid confusion by applying modern terms to ancient things. The Tudor lawyers and statesmen could hardly even attempt to look at jarring systems from the outside. They saw that the common law was more advanced than that of the Brehons, but they could not see that they were really the same thing at different stages. In fact, plain Englishmen in the sixteenth century could not do what only the most enlightened Anglo-Indians can do in the nineteenth. They were more civilised than the Irish, but they were not educated enough to recognise the common ancestor. That there was a common ancestor, and that neither party could recognise him, is the key to Anglo-Irish history both before and after the Tudor times. The early history of the native Irish Church is shrouded in much obscurity. The best authorities are disposed to accept St. Patrick as the apostle of Ireland, the fifth century as the period of his labours, and Armagh as his chief seat. He was not a native of Ireland; so much seems certain. A more interesting, because a more clearly defined figure, is that of Columba or Columkille, who was born in Donegal in 521. The churches of Derry, Durrow, Kells, Swords, Raphoe, Tory Island, and Drumcliff, claim him as their founder; but it is as the apostle of North Britain that he is best known. He was religious from his youth, but a peculiarly serious tinge was given to his mind by a feeling of remorse for bloodshed which he had partly caused. He had surreptitiously transcribed a psalter belonging to another saint, who complained of this primitive infringement of copyright. A royal decision that ‘to every cow belongs her calf’ was given, and was followed by an appeal to arms. Exile was then imposed as a penance on Columba, whose act had been the original cause of offence. Such was long the received legend, but perhaps the exile was voluntary.[12] Whether his departure was a penance or the result of a vow, tradition says that he was bound never to see Ireland again, that he landed first on Oronsay, but found that Erin was visible from thence, and refused to rest until he had reached Iona. His supposed feelings are recorded in a very ancient poem:— ‘My vision o’er the brine I stretch From the ample oaken planks; Large is the tear of my soft grey eye When I look back upon Erin. Upon Erin my attention is fixed.’ Columba was the Paul of Celtic Christianity. By him and his disciples a great part of Scotland was evangelised, and it was to him that the British Church looked as a founder when the time came to decide between the relative pretensions of the Celtic and the Norman type of religion. St. Bridget or Bride, who died four years after Columba’s birth, is scarcely less celebrated. She was born near Dundalk, and her chief seat was at Kildare. She was the mother of Irish female monachism, and in popular estimation is not less famous than Patrick, and perhaps more so than Columba.[13] Irish Christianity was at first monastic. A saint obtained a grant of land from a chief. A church was built, and a settlement sprung up round it. The family, as it was called, consisted partly of monks and partly of dependents, and the abbot ruled over all as chief of a pseudo-tribe. Like a lay chiefry the abbacy was elective, and the abbots wielded considerable power. These ecclesiastical clans even made war with each other. Thus, it is recorded that in 763 the family of St. Ciaran of Clonmacnoise fought with the family of St. Columba of Durrow, and that 200 of the Columbides fell. The head of such a confraternity was called coarb, or successor of the founder, and Irish writers sometimes called the Pope ‘coarb of Peter.’ In course of time the coarb of Patrick crystallised into the Archbishop of Armagh, and the coarb of Columba into the Bishop of Derry. Other saints were revered as the founders of other sees. Very often at least the abbot was chosen from among the founder’s kin. Episcopal orders were acknowledged from the first, but it was long before the notion of a t...