Ireland under the Tudors (Vol. 1-3). Bagwell Richard

       Richard Bagwell

      Ireland under the Tudors (Vol. 1-3)

       With a Succinct Account of the Earlier History (Complete Edition)

      e-artnow, 2020

       Contact: [email protected]

      EAN: 4064066389970

Table of Contents

       Volume 1

       Volume 2

       Volume 3

      VOLUME 1

       Table of Contents

      Table of Contents

       PREFACE.

       CHAPTER I. INTRODUCTORY.

       CHAPTER II. THE SCANDINAVIAN ELEMENT.

       CHAPTER III. THE REIGN OF HENRY II.

       CHAPTER IV. FROM JOHN’S VISIT IN 1210 TILL THE INVASION BY THE BRUCES IN 1315.

       CHAPTER V. FROM THE INVASION OF THE BRUCES TO THE YEAR 1346.

       CHAPTER VI. FROM THE YEAR 1346 TO THE ACCESSION OF HENRY VII.

       CHAPTER VII. THE IRISH PARLIAMENT.

       CHAPTER VIII. THE REIGN OF HENRY VII.

       CHAPTER IX. FROM THE ACCESSION OF HENRY VIII. TO THE YEAR 1534.

       CHAPTER X. THE GERALDINE REBELLION—SKEFFINGTON’S ADMINISTRATION, 1534-1535.

       CHAPTER XI. FROM THE YEAR 1536 TO THE YEAR 1540.

       CHAPTER XII. END OF GREY’S ADMINISTRATION.

       CHAPTER XIII. 1540 and 1541.

       CHAPTER XIV. 1541 TO THE CLOSE OF THE REIGN OF HENRY VIII.

       CHAPTER XV. THE IRISH CHURCH UNDER HENRY VIII.

       CHAPTER XVI. FROM THE ACCESSION OF EDWARD VI. TO THE YEAR 1551.

       CHAPTER XVII. FROM THE YEAR 1551 TO THE DEATH OF EDWARD VI.

       CHAPTER XVIII. THE REIGN OF MARY.

      PREFACE.

       Table of Contents

      ‘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