386 REPORT ON THE STATE OF IRELAND. [1515for the Englishmen pursued not so far. Then, as he showed, he had great joy of me, and led me into a town* and a strong house, among the woods, waters, and meres." The name of this chief was Brian Costeret. He gave Cristall his daughter in marriage, who bore him two children during his seven years' experience of this free life in solitary places. But the kindhearted Irishman was taken prisoner, as he was riding the horse which Cristall rode when he was captured. That horse was recognised in the English camp; and the adventure ended by Brian being released upon condition that he should give up the long-lost Cristall, with his family. "With great pain," says the narrator, "he made that bargain, for he loved me well, and my wife his daughter, and our children." Of the mode of existence in the Irishman's "strong house among the woods" we have no further glimpses. We only see the affectionate and hospitable nature of the man who saved and succoured his enemy-a nature which he shared with the majority of his countrymen. From the time of Strongbow there had been such constant interfusion of the races; and if neglect and oppression had not counteracted the natural influences of this disposition towards a cordial agreement between the natives and the settlers, we should not have to describe, as we now propose to do, the unhappy condition of Ireland at this period of the reign of Henry VIII. The materials for such description are now most abundant. Instead of taking the account which Spenser gives, in the reign of Elizabeth, as the starting-point in the history of evils which have endured to our own generation, and which have so materially influenced the course of public events in England, we have only to open the mass of State Papers which belong to half a century earlier, to exhibit a condition of society of which there was no parallel in the Europe that had emerged from barbarism. The English Pale, to which all early notices of Ireland refer, anciently comprised all the eastern coast from Dundalk bay to Waterford harbour, extending some fifty or sixty miles inland. The term "pale" is thus explained: "When Ireland was subdued by the English, divers of the conquerors planted themselves near to Dublin, and the confines thereto adjoining; and so, as it were, inclosing and impaling themselves within certain lists and territories, they feared away the Irish, insomuch as that country became mere English, and thereof it was termed the English pale." In 1515 the pale was so reduced in its extent, that a line drawn from Dundalk to Kells, from Kells to Maynooth, from Maynooth to Kilcullen, and then towards Dublin, under the Wicklow mountains, would comprise all the English pale from the sea.§ This was a small district to have the rule of a large country; and we shall see that, practically, a very narrow portion of the island could be considered as under the English governance. There were, at the beginning of the reign of Henry VIII. sixty regions, inhabited by those whom this reporter of the "state of Ireland" in 1515, calls the "king's Irish enemies." These regions, "some as big as a shire," were governed by chief captains, calling themselves kings, princes, dukes, or arch-dukes; Town, in England as well as Ireland, was the term for any collection of dwellings however mall-settlements around the " strong house " of the chief. Froissart, "Lord Berners' Translation," vol. ii. p. 620, ed. 1812. § The precise boundary is given in the "State of Ireland," 1515; "State Papers," vol. ii. p. 22. 1515.] REPORT ON THE STATE OF IRELAND. 387 In obeying no law but that of force; their very successions depending upon the strongest arm and the hardest sword. In each of these regions of Ulster, Leinster, Munster, and Connaught, we find the names of the chief captains, from "the great Oneylle, chief captaine of the nation, within the countrey of and region of Tyreown, to Omullmoy de Pherkeall, chief captaine of his nation," in Meath. Names that are still familiar to us call up remembrances of bitter animosities, rebellions, proscriptions-ranting demagogues and wily priests sowing the dragons' teeth, whilst the rich soil bore no corn, and the labourer starved where there was no security for the funds out of which labour is supported. But in old times, as in recent, the smaller beasts of prey were as voracious as the larger: "In every of the said regions there be divers petty captains, and every of them maketh war and peace for himself." A greater evil than that of the Irish great captains "living only by the sword," was that of "thirty great captains of English noble folk, that followeth the same Irish order, and keepeth the same rule, and every of them maketh war and peace for himself"-the Desmonds, Fitzgeralds, and Fitzmaurices, the Butlers, Dillons, and Delameres. In the few districts subject to the king's writs-those within the pale-the people were so oppressed by the courts of law, that they were glad to abandon their freeholds for ever. the marches, not subject to the king's law, they were as much oppressed by individual extortion. The reporter of 1515, looking at the inevitable consequences of such misrule, exclaims, "What common folk in all this world is so poor, so feeble, so evil-beseen in town and field, so bestial, so greatly oppressed and trod under foot, and fared so evil, with so great misery and with so wretched life, as the common folk of Ireland.' The oppression of the poor was universal. The noble folk, whether English or Irish, were oppressors. They seized upon horse meat and man's meat "of the king's poor subjects by compulsion, for nought, without any penny paying therefor," -which robbery was called "coyn and livery." The Deputy and his Council were extortioners. The church was wholly abandoned to lucre; none preaching or teaching but the mendicant friars. In every department of lay or spiritual rule, the private weal, and not the common weal, was alone regarded. This plain-speaking denouncer of evils that had been growing for two hundred years, writes, that the people despaired of a remedy for these complicated miseries, and said, "no medicine can be had now for the said infirmity, but such as have been had afore this time; and folks were as wise that time as they be now; and since they could never find remedy, how should remedy be found by us?"+ There are many official letters and memorials, of subsequent dates, which all agree in setting forth the turbulence of the people and the tyranny of the rulers. Whether English or Irish, there was scarcely one in authority who was not a plunderer or extortioner. Under Wolsey the government of Ireland had been principally committed to the earl of Kildare, who was ready enough to burn and destroy in the lands of rebellious chieftains, but was himself suspected of "seditious practices and subtle drifts." The earl of Surrey, who won his earldom at Flodden, was sent to Ireland as lord-lieutenant in 1520; whilst Kildare was in England. Surrey took a soldier's view * State Papers, vol. ii. p. 10. + Ibid., p. 17. 388 ARREST OF THE EARL OF KILDARE. [1534. of the position of the country, but one which indicated slight statesmanship; "After my poor opinion, this land shall never be brought to good order and due subjection, but only by conquest." But the warlike earl is not sanguine about his scheme; for Wales, he says, was not conquered by Edward I. in less than ten years; and as Ireland is five times as large as Wales, he doubted if it could be so soon won. But there was a greater difficulty in Surrey's mind. Even if conquered, the land must be re-peopled. "For if these country people of the Irish should inhabit, undoubtedly they would return to their old ill-rooted customs, whensoever they might see any time to take their advantage, accordingly as they have ever yet done, and daily do." Having delivered this advice-pointing out that money was wanting for men, victuals, artillery, and fortresses-the lord-lieutenant begs to serve his grace in any other place than in this troublesome land. Surrey goes home. Kildare comes back. The feuds between the two great rival chiefs, Kildare and Ormond, become more bitter than ever: and Kildare is again suspected of encouraging revolt. But Wolsey dares not remove him from his office of deputy, for he dreads that the earl's "kinsfolks, the O'Connors, and other such wild Irish lords, would, for revenge, over-run the whole English pale.” Kildare was the head of what was then deemed "the Irish party"—a party not so desirous of separation from England, as of using the English connection, not as the means for promoting the real improvement of the country, but for their individual aggrandisement. Kildare, at last, carried his schemes too far. In 1534 he appears to have been preparing to defy the English government; for he furnished his castles with arms and ammunition out of the royal stores; and it was said that "all the parchments and wax in England" would not bring him thither again. The earl, however, obeyed the royal summons, though slowly and unwillingly. He was committed to the Tower, upon his arrival in London. But his son, lord Thomas Fitzgerald, was permitted to return to Ireland as the vice-deputy appointed by his father. The consequences of this somewhat rash confidence were unexpected; but they were the natural results of a long period of misgovernment, through which "neither the English order, tongue, nor habit was used, nor the king's laws obeyed, above twenty miles in compass." + The earl of Kildare arrived at his last resting-place, the Tower of London, in February, 1534. He was subsequently attainted by act of parliament, for traitorously levying war in Ireland, for slaying the king's faithful subjects, and for carrying away munitions of war from the king's fortresses to his own castles. When the young Fitzgerald-who was known by the name of "the silken lord," from the splendid trappings of his horses-knew that his father was in imminent danger, and apprehending that the power of the race of Geraldines was coming to an end, he suddenly rose in open revolt. In June, 1534, Cromwell is apprised by Robert Cowley of the "rebelling of the earl of Kildare's son, and brethren, with their adherents." He states that they have committed "infinite murders, burnings, and robbings in the English pale, about the city of Dublin." One sentence in the letter of Cowley may have led to a belief that this rebellion was as much a religious as a political movement: "And, as I am very credibly informed, the said earl's son, * State Papers, vol. ii. p. 73. + Ibid., p. 162. 26 Hen. VIII. c. 25. 1534.] THOMAS FITZGERALD IN REBELLION. 389 brethren, kinsmen, and adherents do make their avaunt and boast, that they be of the pope's sect and band, and him will they serve against the king and all his part-takers; saying further that the king is accursed, and as many as take his part, and shall be openly accursed." * The opinion that the emperor, Charles V., was in communication with the earl of Desmond, and through him with the Geraldines, appears to have been a rumour in Waterford. In the disorganised condition of Ireland, the deputy, Skeffington, an Englishman-who was to succeed Kildare-not yet having arrived with any military force, the time was favourable for a bold attempt to supersede the English authority altogether. That Henry at that time was threatened with excommunication, was a stirring matter that might have been agitated amongst men prepared to throw off their allegiance; but that the rejection of the papal supremacy in England was the occasion of this revolt in Ireland, seems an overstrained inference from the facts as they appear in official records and other relations. Stanihurst, the chronicler of Irish affairs, makes no mention of the employment of such a motive for insurrection. The religious element might have been slightly mixed up with the social turbulence-as it ever has been since, whenever the wretchedness of the people is to be roused into fierce hatred; but in our view, this rebellion in Ireland is not "significant, chiefly because it was the first in which an outbreak against England assumed the features of a war of religion." Looking at this passage of Irish history, with a knowledge of the distracted condition of the country, the hatreds of the rival chiefs, the almost total absence of legitimate authority, the universal dominion of brute force, we regard the quarrel of Henry with the pope as a coincidence with this rebellion, but the very least of its causes. The opening scene of this Irish revolt, as described by the chronicler, has a deep human interest. On St. Barnabas' day, the 11th of June, lord Thomas Fitzgerald, at the head of seven score horsemen, in their shirts of mail, rode through the streets of Dublin, and passing through Dame's Gate, crossed the river to St. Mary's Abbey, where the Council were sitting. The lord Thomas took his seat as vice-deputy. Then the council-chamber was suddenly filled with his armed followers; and he rose, and thus spake: "Howsoever injuriously we be handled, and forced to defend ourselves in arms, when neither our service nor our good meaning towards our prince his crown availeth, yet say not hereafter, but in this open hostility which here, we profess and proclaim, we have showed ourselves no villains nor churls, but warriors and gentlemen. This sword of estate is yours, and not mine; I received it with an oath, and have used it to your benefit. I should stain mine honour if I turned the same to your annoyance. Now have I need of mine own sword, which I dare trust. As for the common sword, it flattereth me with a painted scabbard, but hath indeed a pestilent edge, already bathed in the Geraldines' blood, and now is newly whetted in hope of a further destruction. Therefore save yourselves from us, as from open enemies. I am none of Henry's deputy-I am his foe. I have more mind to conquer than to govern; to meet him in the field than to serve him in office. If all the hearts of England and Ireland, that have cause thereto, would join in Froude, vol. ii. p. 306. State Papers, vol. ii. p. 198. 390 MURDER OF ARCHBISHOP ALLEN. [1534. this quarrel (as I hope they will), then should he soon aby (as I trust he shall) for his cruelty and tyranny, for which the age to come may lawfully score him up among the ancient tyrants of most abominable and hateful memory." This speech-so resolved and daring, and yet so characteristic of the high feelings of a gentleman-carries with it a dramatic propriety, very different from the ordinary speeches which the chroniclers invent for their heroes.* It is to be lamented that, in their subsequent proceedings, the Geraldine and his supporters did not maintain their declaration that they were "no villains nor churls, but warriors and gentlemen." When they rushed forth from the council chamber, orders were given for their arrest; but the authorities of Dublin did not dare to execute the command, and some of the Council retired for safety to the castle. There was a contest between the citizens and the insurgents, in which the rebels were successful; and they were thus enabled to lay siege to the fortress. Amongst those who had taken refuge there was John Allen, the archbishop of Dublin; who, having been one of Wolsey's chaplains, was appointed by the cardinal to this dignity—an able statesman, systematically opposed to the Geraldines and their party. When the castle was besieged, Allen, knowing the hatred in which he was borne by the insurgents, escaped by night in a vessel in which he hoped to cross to England. By accident or treachery the boat was stranded near Clontarf; and after he had been a few hours on land, he was seized at a village called Artane, and there barbarously murdered, while lord Thomas stood by. The prior of Kilmainham, writing to the king, says, "The archbishop of Dublin, being in ship to depart towards England, Thomas, son to the earl of Kildare, caused him to be taken and brought before him, and there in his sight, by his commandment, was cruelly and shamefully murdered, and other divers of his chaplains and servants that were in his company."+ Robert Relye, who was present, stated upon his examination that he could not say whether it was by the command of lord Thomas, or not, that the murder of the archbishop was committed. He acknowledged that he was sent to Maynooth, one of Kildare's castles, with a casket which his master, lord Thomas, had taken from the prelate : and that his master "afterwards sent one Charles, his chaplain, to the bishop of Rome, to the intent, as he heard, of obtaining absolution for killing the bishop." Upon this most doubtful evidence it is assumed that the massacre of "a heretic archbishop" was a venial and acceptable act for which Rome would willingly grant forgiveness; and of this detestable murder we are told, "Such was the pious offering to God and holy Church on which the sun looked down as it rose that fair summer morning over Dublin bay."§ Again we repeat our conviction, founded upon a careful examination of the entire circumstances, that John Allen did not perish because he was a heretic archbishop," but because he had been one of the most efficient instruments in opposing the schemes of the Geraldines; that "holy Church," and its contest for supremacy with Henry of England, had furnished no incentive and no 66 *Mr. Froude quotes this speech from Campion's "History of Ireland," and from Leland's History. It is singular that he did not go to the earlier authority of Stanihurst; where the speech is given nearly as Mr. Froude gives it, with only one material variation. Stanihurst says of Henry, "then shall he soon aby, as I trust he shall, for his cruelty and tyranny." In Mr. Froude's version we have, "then should he be a by-word, for his heresy, lechery, and tyranny." + State Papers, vol. ii. p. 201. § Froude's History, vol. i. p. 283. State Papers, vol. ii. p. 201, note. |