UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

Elizabethan justifications for violence in Ireland Tronrud, Thorold John 1977

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Notice for Google Chrome users:
If you are having trouble viewing or searching the PDF with Google Chrome, please download it here instead.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-UBC_1977_A8 T76.pdf [ 5.14MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0094089.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0094089-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0094089-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0094089-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0094089-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0094089-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0094089-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0094089-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0094089.ris

Full Text

ELIZABETHAN JUSTIFICATIONS FOR VIOLENCE IN IRELAND by THOROLD JOHN TRONRUD B.A., U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia, 1976 A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS i n THE DEPARTMENT OF HISTORY We accept t h i s t h e s i s as conforming to'the r e q u i r e d standard THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA May, 1977 Thorold John Tronrud, 1977 In presenting this thesis in partial fulfilment of the requirements for an advanced degree at the University of British Columbia, I agree that the Library shall make it freely available for reference and study. I further agree that permission for extensive copying of this thesis for scholarly purposes may be granted by the Head of my Department or by his representatives. It is understood that copying or publication of this thesis for financial gain shall not be allowed without my written permission. Department of H i s t o r y  The University of British Columbia 2075 Wesbrook Place Vancouver, Canada V6T 1W5 Date 30, 1977 i i ABSTRACT Vio l e n c e was a c e n t r a l feature of A n g l o - I r i s h r e l a t i o n s i n the l a t t e r h a l f of the s i x t e e n t h century. Besides the devastation brought about by organized warfare there were many i n c i d e n t s of vi o l e n c e of an e x t r a o r d i n a r y n a t u r e — v i o l e n c e employed i n times of truce.as w e l l as war, ex e r c i s e d against, non-combatants of a l l ages, and o f t e n c a r r i e d out w i t h extreme c r u e l t y . Such d e s t r u c t i o n evoked extensive response from many E n g l i s h gentry s e r v i n g as o f f i c i a l s and a d m i n i s t r a t o r s i n I r e l a n d . Their p r i v a t e and o f f i c i a l accounts of the I r i s h people and the I r i s h problem serve as the b a s i s of my study. This t h e s i s w i l l be an a n a l y s i s of how these E l i z a b e t h a n gentry attempted to j u s t i f y t h e i r v i o l e n c e , to l e g i t i m a t e i t i n the face of e x t e r n a l o p p o s i t i o n , and to r a t i o n a l i z e i t w i t h i n t h e i r own minds. I w i l l attempt to discover why Elizabethans found i t necessary to j u s t i f y t h e i r a c t i o n s i n the i n t r i c a t e manner i n which they d i d , and what t h i s may t e l l us about the i n t e l l e c t u a l development of the E n g l i s h gentry throughout the s i x t e e n t h century. An examination of the a t t i t u d e s and p o l i c i e s of s i x t e e n t h -century Englishmen towards I r e l a n d r e v e a l s t h a t a great change took place over a r e l a t i v e l y short p e r i o d of time. Accounts and p o l i c i e s d a t i n g from the r e i g n of Henry V I I I were both l e n i e n t and sympathetic towards the I r i s h whereas those from the r e i g n of E l i z a b e t h were, by and l a r g e , b r u t a l . This change was to occur mainly during the p e r i o d of the P r o t e c t o r a t e i n England at a time when m i l i t a r y f o r c e and r e l i g i o u s p e r s e c u t i o n became the p r i -mary t o o l s by which I r e l a n d could be brought to ' c i v i l i t y ' . The i i i works dating from the r e i g n of E l i z a b e t h were, i n large p a r t , a response to.the e x t r a o r d i n a r y v i o l e n c e which began at the mid-century and to the p s y c h o l o g i c a l tensions t h a t such d e s t r u c t i o n created. For t h i s reason, I have r e l i e d , to a l i m i t e d extent, upon modern p s y c h o l o g i c a l t h e o r i e s to help e x p l a i n some aspects of the Eli z a b e t h a n j u s t i f i c a t i o n s . F i n a l l y , I am s t a t i n g , as p r o p o s i t i o n s , two conclusions. F i r s t , I propose that i n the l a t t e r h a l f of the s i x t e e n t h century the E n g l i s h and the I r i s h thought out and formulated ideas on two d i s -t i n c t i n t e l l e c t u a l planes and, as a consequence, were unable to f u l l y comprehend the motives and a s p i r a t i o n s of each other. T h i s , I suggest, negated the p o s s i b i l i t y of a l a s t i n g peace i n the s i x -teenth century and s e r i o u s l y hampered f u t u r e attempts at r e c o n c i l -i a t i o n . Secondly, I submit t h a t i n t h e i r attempts to analyse and describe I r e l a n d and to j u s t i f y the v i o l e n c e perpetrated i n tha t land, Englishmen were forced to re-examine t h e i r own s o c i e t y and to re-evaluate t h e i r r o l e w i t h i n i t . I t i s p o s s i b l e , there-f o r e , t h a t t h e i r experience i n I r e l a n d was one of the numerous f a c t o r s which helped many Englishmen break w i t h the i n t e l l e c t u a l bonds of the past and to t h i n k i n new and d i s t i n c t i v e ways. i v TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter I CHANGING ATTITUDES AND POLICIES TOWARDS IRELAND 1 I I ELIZABETHAN DESCRIPTIONS, ATTITUDES, AND JUSTIFICATIONS FOR VIOLENCE IN IRELAND 2 8 Fear and Viol e n c e 28 A u t h o r i z a t i o n f o r Viol e n c e 31 Moderation and Reaction 36 I I I FORMS OF JUSTIFICATION ........... 40 Moderate J u s t i f i c a t i o n s . . . ; 42 Immoderate J u s t i f i c a t i o n s : The Process of Dehumanization .. 47 a) Stereotyping ; ....... 47 b) D e c h r i s t i a n i z a t i o n 50 c) Dehumanization ; 53 Results of Dehumanization Process: V i o l e n c e .. 5 4 Moral and C u l t u r a l S u p e r i o r i t y ................ 55 The ' C i v i l i z i n g * M i s s i o n 59 IV THE INTELLECTUAL DEVELOPMENT OF THE ENGLISH GENTRY . 64 CONCLUSION i . . . 76 NOTES 77 BIBLIOGRAPHY 9 4 CHAPTER I CHANGING ATTITUDES AND POLICIES TOWARDS IRELAND One of the most s t r i k i n g features of A n g l o - I r i s h r e l a t i o n s i n the time of E l i z a b e t h I i s t h e i r extremely v i o l e n t nature. On. 26 October 1598, an obviously e b u l l i e n t W i l l i a m Saxey, the E n g l i s h Chief J u s t i c e of Munster, wrote a re p o r t to S i r Robert C e c i l i n which I r i s h r e b e l s were accused of having e f f e c t e d many execrable murders and c r u e l t i e s upon the E n g l i s h . . . i n f a n t s taken from the nurse's b r e a s t s , and the b r a i n s dashed against the w a l l s ; the heart plucked out of the body of the husband i n view of the w i f e , who was forced to y i e l d the use of her apron to wipe o f f the blood from the murderers' f i n g e r s . . . d i v e r s sent to Youghal amongst the E n g l i s h , some w i t h t h e i r t h r o a t s cut, but not k i l l e d , some w i t h t h e i r tongues cut out of t h e i r heads, others w i t h t h e i r noses cut o f f ; by view whereof the E n g l i s h might the more b i t t e r l y lament the misery of t h e i r countrymen.. . 1 Accounts such as t h i s permeate both the o f f i c i a l and the u n o f f i c i a l records of the l a t e s i x t e e n t h century, and by the end of Tyrone's r e b e l l i o n i n 1603 are almost commonplace. For example, the State Papers f o r 1570 r e v e a l S i r John P e r r o t t , then P r e s i d e n t of Munster, endeavouring to c l e a r the roads of I r i s h bards, f r i a r s , t r a v e l l i n g gamblers, craftsmen, and wandering kern by d e a l i n g w i t h them accord-i n g t o m a r t i a l law; some 800 of them were l e f t hanging on the gibbets 2 of Munster. And Thomas Churchyard, who accompanied S i r Humphrey G i l b e r t on h i s 1569 mission of p a c i f i c a t i o n , wrote approvingly of G i l b e r t ' s methods: the heddes of a l l those...which were k i l l e d i n the daie, should be cutte of from t h e i r bodies and brought to the place where he incamped at n i g h t , and should there bee l a i e d on the ground by eche side of the waie ledyng i n t o -2-h i s owne tente so t h a t none could come i n t o h i s tente f o r any cause but commonly he muste -passe through a lane of heddes which he used ad. terrorem, the dedde fe e l y n g nothyng the more paines thereby, and yet d i d i t b r i n g greate t e r r o u r to the people when t h e i sawe the heddes of t h e i r dedde f a t h e r s , b r o t h e r s , c h i l d r e n , k i n s f o l k e and f r e i n d e s , l y e on the grounde b e f o r e . t h e i r faces, as t h e i came to speake w i t h the s a i d c o l l o n e l l . 3 C l e a r l y such a c t i o n s must be d i s t i n g u i s h e d from those perpetrated during the ordinary course of war; t h e i r very inhuman-i t y n e c e s s i t a t e s t h a t we do so. Throughout the s i x t e e n t h century the common s t a t e of r e l a t i o n s between England and I r e l a n d was t h a t of war, punctuated by periods of exhaustion. As the century pro-gressed, t h a t c o n f l i c t was to take on c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s which c l e a r l y set i t apart from the wars of the past. By the mid-century, v i o -lence employed by both E n g l i s h and I r i s h was no longer merely a c o n d i t i o n of formal warfare but continued through periods of truce and was e x e r c i s e d against those not d i r e c t l y i n v o l v e d i n the bear-i n g of arms--against women and c h i l d r e n , the aged and the c r i p p l e d . Hence an a n a l y s i s of the l a t e sixteenth-century v i o l e n c e i n I r e l a n d does not. simply mean a d i s c u s s i o n of war, but r a t h e r a much broader examination of the c o l l e c t i v e m e n t a l i t i e s t h a t allowed such a c t i o n s to take p l a c e . As a r e s u l t of e x t e r n a l p o l i t i c a l and r e l i g i o u s circumstances, these m e n t a l i t i e s were i n a constant process of change. For the I r i s h the s t r u g g l e changed, by mid-century, from one of i n d i v i d u a l p o l i t i c a l skirmishes i n t o a c o l l e c t i v e "war* agai n s t the E n g l i s h w i t h r e l i g i o n as i t s u n i f y i n g and m o b i l i z i n g f o r c e . For the Eng-l i s h a mere p o l i t i c a l campaign against r e b e l l i o u s I r i s h l o r d s , grew, by the time of E l i z a b e t h I , i n t o a wholesale c o l o n i a l c o n f l i c t . Both nations were to r e a c t to these fundamental changes i n h i g h l y -3-d i s t i n c t i v e ways--ways which r e f l e c t e d the p e c u l i a r p s y c h o l o g i c a l development of each country. Therefore, an a n a l y s i s of the p o l i c i e s and a t t i t u d e s of the E n g l i s h to the I r i s h problem, and of how these a t t i t u d e s changed over time, w i l l give some i n s i g h t i n t o the development of a p a r t i c u l a r mental e v o l u t i o n — i n t o the process by which new ideas and concepts a r i s e . Such an examination w i l l a l s o form the b a s i s of a much broader d i s c u s s i o n of the h i s t o r y of ideas. The massacre of non-combatants of a l l ages places the l a t e s i x t e e n t h - c e n t u r y A n g l o - I r i s h s t r u g g l e i n t o a category which, i n terms of European h i s t o r y , i s u s u a l l y reserved f o r that of r e l i g i o u s c o n f l i c t . Such v i o l e n c e d e f i n i t e l y formed an i n t e g r a l p a r t of 4 the s i x t e e n t h - c e n t u r y French r e l i g i o u s r i o t s , but i t was c e r t a i n -l y not i n evidence on the same s c a l e i n the o r i g i n a l Norman con-5 quest of I r e l a n d or i n any of the r e b e l l i o n s i n Tudor England. In the A n g l o - I r i s h s i t u a t i o n , such v i o l e n c e seems to have been a l a t e s i x t e e n t h - c e n t u r y i n n o v a t i o n . In the same, way as i n r e l i g i o u s r i o t s , the v i o l e n c e perpetrated i n I r e l a n d , by both E n g l i s h and I r i s h a l i k e , was unquestionably f r e e from the burden of g u i l t . How e l s e could S i r Walter Ralegh, upon the death of G i l b e r t , b o l d l y s i n g l e out S i r Humphrey's c r u e l t y as an accomplishment worthy of d i v i n e a t t e n t i o n : . Would God the s e r v i c e of S i r Humphrey G i l b e r t might be r i g h t l y looked unto, who w i t h the 3rd p a r t of the g a r r i s o n now i n I r e l a n d ended a r e b e l l i o n not much i n f e r i o r to t h i s i n 2 months! Or would God h i s own behavior were such i n peace as i t d i d not make h i s good s e r v i c e s f o r g o t t e n and hold him i n the preferment he i s worthy of!6 -4-The p h y s i c a l nature of the v i o l e n c e e x e r c i s e d i n I r e l a n d cannot be c l e a r l y d i s t i n g u i s h e d from the forms of d e s t r u c t i o n t h a t char-a c t e r i z e d r e l i g i o u s c o n f l i c t s , but the w r i t t e n arguments used to r a t i o n a l i z e those acts d i f f e r c o n s iderably. R e l i g i o u s v i o l e n c e i n the s i x t e e n t h century was so intense because, as Davis claims> i t was i n t i m a t e l y connected "with the fundamental values and s e l f - d e f i n i t i o n " of the community, and i t was explained i n terms of goals, r o l e s , and "patterns of behavior" 7 allowed by the p a r t i c u l a r c u l t u r e from which i t o r i g i n a t e d . The mere f a c t t h a t no two r e l i g i o n s could c o - e x i s t i n the same c u l t u r e without one imposing upon the r e l i g i o u s p u r i t y of the other i n d i -cates t h a t the fundamental values of t h a t c u l t u r e stemmed from and were determined by an a l l - p e r v a s i v e r e l i g i o u s m e n t a l i t y , and t h a t , t h e r e f o r e , inter-group v i o l e n c e could only be l e g i t i m a t e l y g j u s t i f i e d by recourse to p a r t i c u l a r r e l i g i o u s norms. Hence, f o r C a t h o l i c s as much as f o r P r o t e s t a n t s , the mere presence of an opposing r e l i g i o n posed a grave t h r e a t to the very e x i s t e n c e of the community/ and, i n p a r t i c u l a r , to i t s r e l a t i o n s h i p w i t h i t s god. In t h i s way, the d e s t r u c t i o n of one's foes was r a t i o n a l i z e d almost wholly on the b a s i s " o f r e l i g i o n — a n y other form of r a t i o n a l i z a t i o n , i f i t e x i s t e d , would not be f u l l y s u f f i c i e n t . For the I r i s h , whose r e l i g i o n pervaded t h e i r c u l t u r e to an extent perhaps even greater than f o r the French, a p u r e l y r e l i g i o u s j u s t i f i c a t i o n f o r e x t r a o r d i n a r y v i o l e n c e seemed to be more than s u f f i c i e n t , but f o r the E n g l i s h i t apparently was not. Beginning i n the 1550's, the E n g l i s h , f o r a v a r i e t y of reasons, found i t -5-necessary to b u i l d an extremely- elaborate system of j u s t i f i c a t i o n , or more c o r r e c t l y , systems of overlapping and mutually r e i n f o r c i n g j u s t i f i c a t i o n s . For most Englishmen, the purely r e l i g i o u s argu-m e n t — t h a t we.are P r o t e s t a n t and they are C a t h o l i c — w a s no longer f u l l y s u f f i c i e n t and had to be supplemented by the s e c u l a r . They f e l t a need to extend t h e i r arguments i n t o all-encompassing forms which sought to l e g i t i m a t e not only the v i o l e n t aspects of t h e i r p o l i c y , but a l s o t h e i r very presence as a conquering fo r c e i n I r e -land. Thus, f o r Englishmen, the A n g l o - I r i s h s t r u g g l e was not based purely on r e l i g i o u s grounds. The p h y s i c a l nature of E n g l i s h v i o l e n c e was indeed very s i m i l a r to that of r e l i g i o u s c o n f l i c t but the means by which they r a t i o n a l i z e d that v i o l e n c e were very d i f f e r e n t . Herein l i e two fundamental questions: 1) why and i n what way d i d forms of j u s t i f i c a t i o n o f f e r e d by E l i z a b e t h a n E n g l i s h -men vary from those used by the I r i s h and indeed, from those used by Englishmen i n the f i r s t h a l f of the century; and 2) i n what way does the development of these p r e v i o u s l y unnecessary forms of j u s t i f i c a t i o n r e f l e c t the growth of a p e c u l i a r E n g l i s h m e n t a l i t y ? Perhaps.due to the small number of Englishmen l i v i n g or working i n I r e l a n d i n c a p a c i t i e s other than t h a t of a d m i n i s t r a t i o n , the primary sources f o r the p e r i o d p r i o r to 1550 come mainly from the o f f i c i a l s t a t e records. The authors were i n v a r i a b l y Englishmen or O l d - E n g l i s h (those occupying land or t i t l e s i n I r e l a n d d a t i ng back as f a r as the Norman conquest) who occupied some o f f i c i a l p o s i t i o n i n the s m a l l bureaucracy which o s t e n s i b l y administered the whole of I r e l a n d (but which i n r e a l i t y c o n t r o l l e d only the P a l e ) . -6-Their tasks -were to "keep the peace, c o l l e c t the taxes, c o n s o l i -date the a d m i n i s t r a t i o n of a people whose one idea was to avoid being administered a t a l l " , to ensure the a l l e g i a n c e of the over-powerful G a e l i c and Old-E n g l i s h l o r d s , and to deny to any p o t e n t i a l 9 enemy the use of I r e l a n d as a base of operation against England. Appointed by the Crown and r e s p o n s i b l e to the E n g l i s h government these men could be counted on to r e f l e c t the o f f i c i a l p o s i t i o n on I r e l a n d . By•the l a t e 1530"s the immanent t h r e a t of c o n t i n e n t a l i n v a -s i o n , a consequence of Henry V I I I ' s break w i t h Rome, meant that I r e l a n d became more s t r a t e g i c a l l y important to England. I t s grow-in g s i g n i f i c a n c e was r e f l e c t e d i n a gradual change i n the type of a d m i n i s t r a t i o n t h a t r u l e d i n the Pale.. Beginning w i t h Surrey i n 1521, but e s p e c i a l l y w i t h St. Leger i n the 1530's there was a r a p i d expansion of the E n g l i s h government i n I r e l a n d . As new p o s i t i o n s became a v a i l a b l e and as London began to take a more d i r e c t hand i n the a d m i n i s t r a t i o n of the I r i s h , a great number of English-born officials—modern:-mihded men^w.ith-new conceptions, and new i d e a s -flooded the i s l a n d . These men came from every segment of E n g l i s h s o c i e t y , from the a r i s t o c r a c y — m e n such as Lord Grey, Sussex, and E s s e x — t o the common labourers, the s o l d i e r s and c o l o n i s t s who d i r e c t l y confronted the I r i s h . However, the bulk of primary mater-i a l upon which h i s t o r i a n s have r e l i e d f o r the second h a l f of the s i x t e e n t h century i s deri v e d from a s i n g l e s o c i a l l e v e l — t h e gentry. The gentry who came to I r e l a n d acted e i t h e r i n the s e r v i c e of t h e i r l o r d s or i n the s e r v i c e of t h e i r k i n g as m i l i t a r y o f f i c e r s or -7-as a d m i n i s t r a t o r s . T h e i r p r i v a t e and o f f i c i a l a c c o u n t s — t h e i r explanations and s o l u t i o n s of the I r i s h problem—form the b a s i s of my a n a l y s i s . T h e i r works are e s p e c i a l l y apt f o r a general d i s c u s s i o n of the growth and development of the E n g l i s h m e n t a l i t y through the s i x t e e n t h century because, as ,a group, they were more or l e s s r e -p r e s e n t a t i v e of the mainstream of E n g l i s h i n t e l l e c t u a l thought. Some, such as S i r Thomas Smith and S i r John Davies, both w i t h deep involvement i n I r e l a n d , can be s a i d to have r e f l e c t e d the vanguard of Renaissance thought, w h i l e other noted i n t e l l e c t u a l s , l i k e John Hooker, S i r John Harington,, and S i r F r a n c i s Bacon, found I r e l a n d worthy of t h e i r a t t e n t i o n . A great many—Edmund Spenser and S i r John Davies being the most n o t a b l e — p l a y e d a c t i v e and even dominant r o l e s i n the l i t e r a r y world of Tudor and S t u a r t England, and o t h e r s , such as S i r James P e r r o t t and Ludowick B r y s k e t t , were noted f o r t h e i r numerous p h i l o s o p h i c a l works. "^ The l i s t goes on and on: many were educated at e i t h e r Cambridge or Oxford, served against the Spaniards i n the Netherlands, or were Marian e x i l e s w i t h deep r e l i g i o u s convictions."'""'" Many of the noted E l i z a b e t h a n e x p l o r e r s and c o l o n i z e r s such as S i r F r a n c i s Drake, M a r t i n F r o b i s h e r , S i r Walter Ralegh, S i r Richard G r e n v i l l e , and S i r Humphrey G i l b e r t had some involvement i n the development of E n g l i s h c o l o n i a l p o l i c y i n 12 s i x t e e n t h - c e n t u r y I r e l a n d . In the f i n a l a n a l y s i s , i t can be s a i d t h a t those w r i t i n g on I r e l a n d i n the second h a l f of the s i x t e e n t h century were by and l a r g e r e p r e s e n t a t i v e of the a t t i t u d e s of an i n t e l l i g e n t E l i z a b e t h a n gentry. The commonly he l d a t t i t u d e of the E n g l i s h gentry toward the -8-I r i s h during t h i s p e r i o d was t h a t they were not only b a r b a r i c and savage, but v i r t u a l l y non-human. For the Engl i s h , . f o r c e was the only means whereby the I r i s h could be brought to any semblance of c i v i l i t y . I t must be s t r e s s e d , however, th a t Englishmen were by no means unanimous i n t h e i r opinions of the I r i s h problem. There were d i s s e n t e r s i n both halves of the s i x t e e n t h century, though, w i t h a.few exceptions, any d e v i a t i o n from the commonly accepted view was u s u a l l y ignored or otherwise greeted as "hopelessly un-13 r e a l i s t i c " by those w i t h any great experience i n I r e l a n d . Ex-cept f o r a b r i e f p e r i o d around the mid-century, when the a t t i t u d e s of both E n g l i s h and I r i s h f l u c t u a t e d w i l d l y amidst the p o l i t i c a l and r e l i g i o u s t u r m o i l of the t i m e s — a p e r i o d i n which new ideas and concepts met and clashed w i t h the o l d — f u n d a m e n t a l d i f f e r e n c e s of op i n i o n among the E n g l i s h were rare indeed. Any divergence of op i n i o n was more l i k e l y to be a matter of degree than a challenge to the accepted orthodoxy. In t h e i r condemnation of the I r i s h , some w r i t e r s were simply u n w i l l i n g to go as f a r as others. This was e s p e c i a l l y so i n the l a t t e r h a l f of the s i x t e e n t h century. I f one i s to b e l i e v e the arguments put forward i n the E n g l i s h accounts of I r e l a n d , f i r s t from the r e i g n of Henry V I I I and then from that of E l i z a b e t h , the I r i s h people apparently grew from being poor wretched s o u l s , indeed E n g l i s h s u b j e c t s , labouring under the tyranny of t h e i r l o r d s and i n desperate need of the c i v i l i z i n g i n -fluence of a strong but v i r t u o u s nation, ( i e . England), i n t o mur-deri n g , e n t i r e l y u n c i v i l i z e d b a rbarians, v i r t u a l l y incapable of being c i v i l i z e d — o r . t o use Barnabe Rich's choice phrase, a people -9-" t r a i n e d up i n Treason, i n R e b e l l i o n , i n T h e f t . . . i n I d o l a t r y , and 14 nuzzeled from t h e i r Cradles i n the very puddle of Popery". I t i s doub t f u l t h a t I r i s h l i f e became any more b a r b a r i c i n the l a t t e r h a l f of the s i x t e e n t h century, though i t probably d i d become more v i s i b l e ; yet the a t t i t u d e s of the E n g l i s h hardened and became more and more savage. I am i n c l i n e d to b e l i e v e t h a t , i n h i s t o r i c a l terms, t h i s almost complete r e v e r s a l of a t t i t u d e occurred over a r e l a t i v e l y short p e r i o d of t i m e — p r o b a b l y w e l l w i t h i n twenty y e a r s — and r e f l e c t e d a fundamental s h i f t i n the very nature of E n g l i s h thought. I t i s d i f f i c u l t to say whether Englishmen i n the e a r l y years of the r e i g n of Henry V I I I had any d i s t i n c t n otion of the I r i s h people. Only r a r e l y do the I r i s h ever make an appearance i n the E n g l i s h correspondence t h a t survives,.and even then they are almost i n v a r i a b l y subordinated to purely p o l i t i c a l concerns. Even a f t e r 400 years of E n g l i s h presence i n I r e l a n d , i t i s probably safe to say that u n t i l the l a t t e r h a l f of the s i x t e e n t h century very few people i n England had any conception of a p e c u l i a r I r i s h way of l i f e . The extreme a t t e n t i o n given i n the l a t e r p e r i o d to minute d e t a i l s — t h e i r food and d r i n k , t h e i r houses, t h e i r apparel, and even t h e i r sexual h a b i t s and marriage c u s t o m s — i n d i c a t e s t h a t the I r i s h were something new to the E n g l i s h mind, something to be s t u d i e d , r i d i -c u led, and laughed at l i k e the n a t i v e s of A f r i c a and North America. However, one f i n d s no evidence t h a t , as re p r e s e n t a t i v e s of a c u l -t u r e , they were more than objects of c u r i o s i t y u n t i l W i l l i a m Camden r e s u r r e c t e d the medieval compiler Cambrensis i n the e a r l y 1570's. -10-I f the I r i s h people were by and l a r g e absent from the E n g l i s h mental p i c t u r e of I r e l a n d i n the e a r l y s i x t e e n t h century, the l o r d s , both G a e l i c and O l d - E n g l i s h , were c e r t a i n l y not. Henry V I I I ' s e n t i r e p o l i c y p r i o r to 1518 was one of r e l i a n c e upon the Ol d - E n g l i s h l o r d s . Henry accepted the t i t l e "Lord of I r e l a n d " u n t i l he pro-claimed h i m s e l f k i n g i n 1541, but he was more than w i l l i n g to a l l o w h i s v a s s a l s i n I r e l a n d to handle the day-to-day a f f a i r s of adminis-t r a t i o n . T h e i r a l l e g i a n c e was a l l he asked. In doing t h i s he was merely f o l l o w i n g a w e l l - e s t a b l i s h e d p a t t e r n o r i g i n a t e d i n the time of Henry I I . Not u n t i l the Reformation d i d he f i n d any need to take d i r e c t c o n t r o l of the f a t e of I r e l a n d . However, Henry was not e n t i r e l y i n a c t i v e i n I r i s h a f f a i r s . As a r e s u l t of " f r e s h rumors of . . . i n t r i g u e s on the continent" by the O l d - E n g l i s h E a r l of Desmond i n 1518, Henry and Wolsey began to take n o t i c e of I r e l a n d 15 and a hand i n the course of I r i s h a f f a i r s . For a b r i e f p e r i o d , u n t i l money co n s i d e r a t i o n s f o r c e d the abandonment of Henry's more ambitious p o l i c i e s , t h e i r aim was t o b r i n g the whole of I r e l a n d under the a u t h o r i t y of the Crown and to u n i f y and ' a n g l i c i z e ' the 16 church "under Wolsey's l e g a t i n e a u t h o r i t y " . This amounted to a reconquest of I r e l a n d . Henry's v i s i o n of reconquest was very d i f f e r e n t from t h a t which would develop by the r e i g n of E l i z a b e t h . At t h i s e a r l y stage Henry apparently had no conception of conquering a 'people'. Indeed, the concept of making war on a 'people' was perhaps a l i e n to a l l of western Europe at t h i s time.' Kings made war and l o r d s made war;, the people merely served as subjects and v a s s a l s . Henry was w i l l -i n g t o f i g h t f o r h i s r i g h t to I r e l a n d but h i s f i g h t was not w i t h - l i -the ' I r i s h 1 . In t y p i c a l medieval f a s h i o n , he saw h i s s t r u g g l e as one of a l l e g i a n c e , vassalage, service,.honour, and shame. For him, personal t i e s between himself and the l o r d s i n I r e l a n d — t i e s subject to the r e s t r a i n t s of 'good l o r d s h i p ' and i n v o l v i n g the 17 " p r o v i s i o n of 'favours' and maintenance i n r e t u r n f o r s e r v i c e " determined the nature of h i s conquest. His f i g h t was of an i n d i -v i d u a l nature, against r e b e l l i o u s l o r d s r a t h e r than r e b e l l i o u s 'people'. The concept of the I r i s h as a term encompassing the whole of I r e l a n d — t i t l e d and u n t i t l e d , G a e l i c and Old E n g l i s h a l i k e — as a d i s t i n c t r a c i a l u n i t , was as yet a l i e n to the E n g l i s h 18 mind. Only i n the seventeenth century, a f t e r an extensive pro-cess of d e c h r i s t i a n i z a t i o n and dehumanization, do Englishmen be-19 gxn to r e a c t to the I r i s h 'en masse'. In t h i s respect, Henry and the l o r d s of I r e l a n d were i n t o t a l agreement. Both saw the s t r u g g l e as one of p o l i t i c s and power. Without r e l i g i o u s d i f f e r e n c e s to d i v i d e them, the E n g l i s h and the I r i s h ( i n c l u d i n g the Old English) had a much c l e a r e r understanding of the motives and the a s p i r a t i o n s of each other. Though the I r i s h evidence i s s t i l l very weak, i t i s -probably safe to say that the I r i s h and Old E n g l i s h l o r d s used the E n g l i s h Crown to f u r t h e r t h e i r own p o l i t i c a l purposes, e i t h e r by g a i n i n g the post of Lord Deputy and thereby extending t h e i r power and c o n t r o l over a greater area, or by using E n g l i s h f o r c e as a p r o t e c t i o n against p o t e n t i a l r i v a l s . Those I r i s h c h i e f s who opposed the advance of E n g l i s h power d i d so because they r e j e c t e d any form of vassalage. They "wanted to be 21 l e f t alone to r u l e i n t h e i r own way". The E n g l i s h used t h e i r -12-power to gain t h a t which Henry termed "our proper i n h e r i t a n c e " — i n essence, the p o l i t i c a l c o n t r o l of I r e l a n d . Therefore, p r i o r to the Reformation, both E n g l i s h and I r i s h saw t h e i r s t r u g g l e as one of a l l e g i a n c e , vassalage, and p o l i t i c a l power. Only f o l l o w i n g the r e l i g i o u s change and i t s e f f e c t s upon the E n g l i s h m e n t a l i t y , was each n a t i o n to carve a separate path o b l i v i o u s of the aims of 22 the other. Henry, of course, would have p r e f e r r e d not t o f i g h t a t a l l , f o r mere a l l e g i a n c e was a l l he asked. His p o l i c y , by which the lo r d s i n I r e l a n d would surrender t h e i r lands to the Crown so tha t he> i n r e t u r n , would regrant those lands i n the form of an E n g l i s h t i t l e , was a c l e a r i n d i c a t i o n of h i s i n a b i l i t y to f u l l y conquer 2 3 the country. I f - " p o l i t i q u e d n f t e s and amiable persuasions" would s u f f i c e , v i o l e n c e would not be necessary. Henry wrote: We would you should not over much press them i n any vigorous s o r t , but only to persuade them d i s c r e e t l y , upon c o n s i d e r a t i o n that the lands they have, be our proper i n h e r i t a n c e . . . a n d what honour, q u i e t , b e n e f i t , and commodity, they s h a l l have by such an end to be made w i t h us, and what danger may come to them i f they embrace not t h i s our s p e c i a l grace showed unto them, to induce them gently to condescend to t h a t , which s h a l l be reasonably d e s i r e d of them. 2 4 This not only r e v e a l s h i s i n a b i l i t y to b r i n g about a m i l i t a r y con-quest of I r e l a n d , but i t a l s o i n d i c a t e s h i s unw i l l i n g n e s s to do so. The documents of the p e r i o d , which r e v e a l a s u r p r i s i n g l y l e n i e n t p o l i c y accompanied by an extremely moderate view of the I r i s h , r e i n f o r c e such an argument. A comparison w i t h E l i z a b e t h a n statements produces a s t r i k i n g c o n t r a s t . S i r Richard Bingham wrote i n 1589: -13-Th i s d a l l i a n c e w i t h these r e b e l s makes them most i n s o l e n t , and without the sword be now and then severely used, i t i s impossible to govern the I r i s h people.^5 Ale n , Master of the R o l l s i n the time of Henry V I I I , declared of those same I r i s h : I wolde have trewythe used to them, that they moughte perceyve, t h a t we desyryd more the weale and quyete, than ther c a t a l l or goodes; f o r by peace they s h a l l e growe welthye, and then they cannot endure warre. I would have them, i f I mought, be put oute of practyse of warre.2 6 S i r Thomas Cusake, w r i t i n g to the P r i v y C o u n c i l i n 1541, merely echoed the words of Alen when he claimed that i f one simply i n -creases t h e i r substance by urging husbandry they w i l l be l o t h e to warre, f e r i n g to have ther c u n t r e i s d e s t f o i e d , and to lose ther substance; f o r the grete oc- -casion of t h e r warre i s p o v e r t i e , f o r when they have nothing to loose, they forse not what warre to make.2 7 Such moderate views were common i n the e a r l i e r h a l f of the century. Seldom does one f i n d o u t r i g h t condemnation of the I r i s h people or of t h e i r way of l i f e , and when one does i t i s i n v a r i a b l y placed i n the context of a sober e x h o r t a t i o n f o r j u s t i c e . For example, a 1533 r e p o r t to Cromwell read: As to the surmise of the brutenes of peple, and the i n c i v i l i t i e of them, no doubte i f ther were j u s t i c e used amongst them, they wold be founde as c i v i l e , wise, p o l i t i k e , and as a c t i v e , as any other nation.2 8 • By c o n t r a s t , Rokeley, Chief J u s t i c e of Connacht, summed up the E l i z a b e t h a n view when he wrote to C e c i l i n 1570: So b e a s t l y are t h i s people, that i t i s not l e n i t y t h a t w i l l win them...it must be f i r e and sword, the rod of God's vengeance...(it must be) v a l i a n t and courageous captains and hardy s o l d i e r s t h a t must make a way f o r law and j u s t i c e , or e l s e f a r e w e l l to Ireland.29 -14-I f condemnation was a c e n t r a l and v i r t u a l l y unanimous feature of E l i z a b e t h a n accounts of I r e l a n d , the opposite was true of the e a r l i e r p e r i o d . Reports d a t i n g from the r e i g n of Henry V I I I were much more accommodating i n nature and o f t e n saw f i t to sympathize w i t h the I r i s h . One of the e a r l i e s t accounts of the H e n r i c i a n p e r i o d , a 1515 work e n t i t l e d "State of I r e l a n d , and Plan f o r i t s Reformation", had u n q u a l i f i e d admiration f o r the perseverance of the I r i s h people i n the face of a l l manner of oppression. The u n i d e n t i f i e d o f f i c i a l who wrote t h i s r e p o r t , to emphasize the p l i g h t of the I r i s h , com-pared t h e i r sorrow to the wealth and happiness of the E n g l i s h : What comen f o l k e i n a l l t h i s worlde maye compare w i t h the comyns, of Ingland, i n ryches, i n .fredom, and r e p a y r e i t h h i s c o f e r s w i t h golde, s y l v e r , and precyous stones,.save the comyns?...What comyn f o l k e i n a l l t h i s worlde i s so power, so f e b l e , so ivy11 besyn i n town and fylde> so b e s t y a l l , so great-l y oppressid and trodde under f o t e , and fared so e v y l l , w i t h so great myserye, and w i t h so wrecheid l y f f , as the comen f o l k e of Ireland?...The Kinges' armye i n Ingland i s the comyns; the Kinges army i n I r e l a n d i s a l l suche that oppresse the comyns...30 P r i o r to the mid-century such commiseration was the r u l e r a t h e r than the exception. Fynes Moryson, s e v e n t y - f i v e years l a t e r , would l a y the blame f o r I r e l a n d 1 s ' p o o r s t a t e on the " n a t u r a l malice" of r e b e l s 31 who take pleasure i n "destroying the labours of other men". I r e l a n d , according to him, "would y i e l d abundance of a l l t h i n g s " — f i s h , metals, corn, wood--"if t h i s p u b l i c good were not hindered by the i n h a b i t a n t s barbarousness, making them apt to s e d i t i o n s , and so u n w i l l i n g to e n r i c h t h e i r P r i n c e and Country; and'by t h e i r s l o t h f u l n e s s , which i s so s i n g u l a r as they hold i t baseness to -15-labour". But the author of the e a r l y r e p o r t knew e x a c t l y where to place the blame. The causes of I r i s h s u f f e r i n g , according to him, l a y not w i t h the " n a t u r a l s l o t h " of the I r i s h people and not w i t h t h e i r i n c i v i l i t y and barbarism, but the blame l a y squarely w i t h the k i n g bycause he bereyth the cure and the charge t e m p e r a l l , under Godd, of a l l the landes, ..and i n t h i s 200 yers he hath byn recheles t h e r o f , and dyd not lbke t h e r t o , ne cast ther yee theron; and i n defaute t h e r o f , the landdes i s , as y t i s . 3 3 The blame was even more h e a v i l y placed upon the king's deputy i n I r e l a n d who takes advantage of h i s o f f i c e to f u r t h e r h i s own f i n a n c i a l p o s i t i o n , and i n the process sets a bad example f o r "the noble f o l k of the land": The Kynges Deputye, by e x t o r t i o n , , chargeith the Kynges poor subgettes and comyn f o l k e , i n horsse mete and mannes mete, by estymation, to the value of 2 00fc evey daye i n the yere, one day countyd wyth an other which comeyth to the some of 3 6,0 00fe y e r e l y e . 3 ^ And f i n a l l y , the blame was l a i d at the doorstep of the Church, not the "poor f r i a r beggars" but r a t h e r the archbishops, bishops, and abbots f o r f o r s a k i n g the land. Who s u p p o r t e i t h the Churche of Cryst i n I r e l a n d , s a i v e the poore comyns? By whom the Churche i s most ^5 supporteid r i g h t w e l l , be them most grace s h a l l e growe. Such a document undoubtedly r e f l e c t s an extreme p o s i t i o n and i t s b e l l i c o s e nature probably e x p l a i n s why the author remains u n i d e n t i -f i e d . However, i t f o r c e f u l l y p o r t r a y s the nature of E n g l i s h o p i n -i o n towards t h e I r i s h i n the f i r s t f i f t y years of the century. The I r i s h were a nation^ to be p i t i e d . They were o b j e c t s of sym-pathy, a people i n need of reformation; and who e l s e was b e t t e r f i t to b r i n g them o u t o f t h e i r misery, to educate and e n l i g h t e n -16-them to the v i r t u e s of c i v i l i t y , than were the E n g l i s h . I f the r e a l i z a t i o n of the economic and p o l i t i c a l goals of England were a p a r t of t h i s process, so much the b e t t e r . For many Englishmen, there-f o r e , much of I r e l a n d ' s misery was a d i r e c t r e s u l t of E n g l i s h negligence, and the poor I r i s h were, i n essence, v i c t i m s of i n j u s -t i c e . This stands i n s t r i k i n g c o n t r a s t to the views adopted by the E l i z a b e t h a n s . Editrund Spenser, f o r example, would concede no Eng-l i s h f a u l t i n the o r i g i n s of I r i s h misery and i n c i v i l t y . One may t h i n k , he claimed, t h a t w i t h the good example of the E n g l i s h s e t -t i e r s being s e t before them, and t h e i r d a i l y conversing w i t h them, would have brought them by d i s l i k e of t h e i r own savage l i f e to the l i k i n g and embracing of b e t t e r c i v i l i t y . But i t i s f a r otherwise...(and) f o r two causes; f i r s t because they have been brought up l i c e n t u o u s l y and to l i v e as each one l i s t e t h . . . so t h a t now t o be brought i n t o any b e t t e r order they account i t to be r e s t r a i n e d of t h e i r l i b e r t y and ex-treme wretchedness; secondly because they n a t u r a l l y ^ hate the E n g l i s h , so t h e i r fashions'they a l s o hate. He goes on to lament that the E n g l i s h i n the past d i d not "crush" the I r i s h and f o r c e them to conform wh i l e they were s t i l l weak, f o r now t h a t they were strong, subduing them was made a l l the 3 7 more d i f f i c u l t . And i n 1612, S i r John Davies c a l l e d f o r the t o t a l and r a p i d s u b j e c t i o n of the I r i s h as the only p o s s i b l e s o l u -t i o n to the c o n f l i c t between the two nations. For him, the past lack of E n g l i s h success i n I r e l a n d r e s t e d i n the " f a i n t prosecu-t i o n of the war and next i n the looseness of the c i v i l government". His analogy of the E n g l i s h as c u l t i v a t o r s and the I r i s h as the land makes h i s view p e r f e c t l y c l e a r : -17-For the husbandman must f i r s t break the land before i t can be made capable' of good seed; and when i t i s thorough-l y broken and manured i f he do not f o r t h w i t h c a s t good seed i n t o i t , i t w i l l grow w i l d again and bear' nothing but weeds.38 For l a t e s i x t e e n t h and'early'seventeenth-century Englishmen, I r e -land had to be f i r s t subdued and "broken by war" before c i v i l government could be established,and before the land could be " w e l l 39 p l a n t e d and governed". Views such as those of Davies and Spenser are r e p r e s e n t a t i v e of an a t t i t u d e v i r t u a b l y non-existent i n the e a r l i e r p e r i o d . In Henry's time the argument t h a t the I r i s h were " n a t u r a l l y " savage, t h a t some inherent mental weakness made them incapable of c i v i l i z e d a c t s , was not used. There i s no evidence to suggest th a t the I r i s h were seen as being n a t u r a l l y i n f e r i o r to the E n g l i s h u n t i l w e l l a f t e r the death of Henry V I I I . P r i o r t o the mid-century, v e r b a l p r a i s e f o r Irishmen was amply supported by p o l i c y . In t h i s sense, H e n r i c i a n commentators were much l e s s ambiguous' than t h e i r E l i z a b e t h a n counterparts;.. A w r i t e r i n 1541 wrote that The Irishmen have pregnant s u b t i l e w i t i s , eloquent, and marvelous n a t u r a l i n comynaunceC?)(but) they must be i n -s t r u c t i d t h a t the King entendeth not to e x i l e , banyshe o r destrue theym, but wold bee content t h a t every of theym shuld enjoy h i s possessions, t a k i n g the same of the King...and to become h i s t r u e subgietes obedient to h i s lawes, f o r s a k i n g t h e i r I r i s h lawes, h a b i t t e s and custumes, s e t t i n g t h e i r c h i l d r e n to lerne English.^0 The Henricians apparently saw no need f o r d r a s t i c measures. Where-as the E l i z a b e t h a n s could, i n the same breath, recount the v i r t u e s of the I r i s h and then c a l l f o r t h e i r u l t i m a t e d e s t r u c t i o n , o f f i -c i a l s i n the e a r l i e r p e r i o d appear to have been much more c o n s i s t e n t and perhaps somewhat more s i n c e r e i n t h e i r p r a i s e . In 1612 S i r John Davies wrote, "For t h a t I c a l l a p e r f e c t con-quest of a country which doth reduce a l l people thereof to the 41 c o n d i t i o n of s u b j e c t s " . In the time of Henry V I I I there:was no need to 'reduce' the I r i s h t o the c o n d i t i o n of s u b j e c t s , f o r they were deemed subjects from the s t a r t . Henry wrote to the E a r l of Surrey i n 1520: ' How be i t , our mynde i s not that ye s h a l l impresse i n thaym any o p i n i o n by f e a r f u l l wordes, t h a t We intende t o e x p e l l e theym from t h e i r landes and dominions, l a u f u l l y possessed, but to conserve theym i n t h e i r awne, and to use t h e i r advice and a s s i s t e n c e , as of f a i t h f u l l s u b g i e t t e s , to recover our r i g h t f u l l inheritaunce.42 I t stood to reason that Irishmen, as E n g l i s h s u b j e c t s , possessed c e r t a i n r i g h t s — r i g h t s t h a t were denied them once they were declared b a r b a r i a n i n the l a t t e r h a l f of the s i x t e e n t h century. Most s i g -n i f i c a n t was the r i g h t to p r o t e c t i o n under the Common Law. In 1520 the E a r l of Surrey was faced w i t h a small group of r e b e l s o l d i e r s who had "threatened" to s t e a l a boat and r a i d the coast of England. Since he deemed i t necessary to seek s p e c i a l per-mission to punish those i n d i v i d u a l s , i t i s c l e a r t h a t , f o r Surrey, those r e b e l s l i v e d under the p r o t e c t i o n of E n g l i s h law. He wrote to Wolsey: co n s i d e r i n g th£y have doon noon a c t , but oonly promysid to doo, the comon lawe wold not s u f f e r theym to dye t h e r f o r . And d i v e r s of theym have seen my patent, wherin i s none a u c t o r i t i e to put theym to deth, but oonly a f t e r the course of comon lawe. I movid Your Grace, t h a t I might have had as large a u c t o r i t i e . . . to punysh thoos t h a t bee i n wagis."43 The E l i z a b e t h a n s , by c o n t r a s t , f e l t t h a t innate barbarism excluded the I r i s h from any l e g a l r e c o g n i t i o n . One doubts that S i r John -19-P e r r o t t found i t necessary to seek permission when he set about to 44 c l e a r the roads of Munster by using m a r t i a l law. And Edmund Spenser wrote i n h i s View of the Present State of I r e l a n d t h a t the I r i s h were i n c l i n e d to any v i c e and had no conscience or sense of e v i l - d o i n g . Therefore, he deemed i t useless to attempt to r e s t r a i n them ,by f e a r of punishment, f o r i t was impossible to remove a f a u l t so general w i t h merely t e r r o r of laws. He f e l t t h a t "laws ought to be fashioned unto the manners and c o n d i t i o n of the people to whom they are meant and not to be imposed upon them according to the simple r u l e of r i g h t " . He concluded, t h e r e f o r e , that " i t i s i n v a i n to speak of p l a n t i n g of laws and p l o t t i n g of p o l i c i e s 45 t i l they be a l t o g e t h e r subdued". In essence, the I r i s h were den-i e d the r i g h t to E n g l i s h law u n t i l they became the w i l l i n g s laves of E n g l i s h w i l l . Henry V I I I , l i k e many'of the E l i z a b e t h a n s , based h i s concept of c i v i l i t y upon law. For him, " p o l i t i c governance and good j u s -t i c e " were impossible "unless the u n b r i d l e d s e n s u a l i t i e s of i n s o -l e n t f o l k s be brought under the r u l e of laws. For realms without j u s t i c e be but t y r a n n i e s and r o b b e r i e s , more consonnant to b e a s t l y 46 a p p i t i t e s than to the laudable l i f e of reasonable c r e a t u r e s " . However, where Henry and h i s contemporaries d i f f e r e d from the E l i z a b e t h a n s , was i n the means by which the I r i s h could be brought under the proper r u l e of law. Henry V I I I b e l i e v e d t h a t the true conquest of I r e l a n d could only be accomplished "by sober waies, p o l i t i k e d r i f t e s , and amiable persuasions, founded i n lawe and reason, r a t h e r than by -20-ri g o r o u s d e a l i n g s , comminacions, or and other inforcement by strenght 47 or v i o l e n c e " . Herein l i e s the fundamental d i f f e r e n c e between the a t t i t u d e s of Englishmen before and a f t e r the death of Henry V I I I . The Elizabethans saw v i o l e n c e as e s s e n t i a l to the attainment of t h e i r ends and unavoidable i n the l i g h t of circumstances. Even-t u a l l y v i o l e n c e even became an end i n i t s e l f , something worthy 4 8 of note (as G i l b e r t ' s o b i t u a r y i l l u s t r a t e s ) and indeed a v i r t u e . Those of the e a r l i e r p e r i o d , perhaps because of economic consider-a t i o n s , saw v i o l e n c e as a course to be avoided at a l l c o s t s , to be used only as a l a s t r e s o r t and even then only to a degree a b s o l u t e l y . necessary to achieve t h e i r immediate goals. The idea t h a t the wholesale d e s t r u c t i o n of the I r i s h people was r e q u i r e d as a means of a t t a i n i n g t h e i r p o l i t i c a l goals would not have occurred to them. Henry, i n w r i t i n g to Surrey, s t r e s s e d that v i o l e n c e , though per-haps j u s t i f i a b l e i n l i g h t of h i s proper c l a i m to land and leader-ship i n I r e l a n d , was to be avoided, f o r "by streng t h the weaker i s subdued and oppressed, which i s contrary to a l l laws, both of God and of man". He urged Surrey t o Cause theym (the I r i s h ) to knowe the waies of j u s t i c e , wherby they shalbe the r a t h e r moved not oonely to i n c l i n e thereunto, but also to leve suche u n l a u f u l l and s e n s u a l l demeanours, as they have h i t h e r t o used.49 But by no means was he to use f o r c e . I f E n g l i s h laws be too s t r i c t or harsh, he advises Surrey to discuss w i t h the I r i s h , ways and means whereby the laws might be changed to s u i t t h e i r needs: By which meanys ye s c h a l l f i n a l l y induce thaym, of n e c e s s i t i e , to conforme thayr ordre of lyvyng to the observance of summe reasonable law, and not to lyve at w y l l , as they have u s i d heretofore.50 -21-Henry V I I I and St. Leger, h i s deputy i n I r e l a n d , had agreed not only t h a t that land should be governed as economically as p o s s i b l e , but a l s o that i t s "gradual and peaceful absorbtion should 51 be the business of a generation or longer". However, w i t h the death of Henry, a r a p i d change was to take p l a c e . P o l i t i c a l c i r -cumstances i n England were to s i g n a l an i n c r e a s i n g l y h o s t i l e m i l i -t a r y p o l i c y i n I r e l a n d . Both Somerset and Northumberland, faced w i t h numerous problems in^England and Scotland, and h i g h l y i n s e -cure i n t h e i r p o s i t i o n s of power, seemed not to have the patience to c a r r y on the prolonged p o l i c y of gradual r e l i g i o u s conversion and c u l t u r a l a s s i m i l a t i o n that had been the hallmark of the f o r -mer regime. Somerset, f o r example, was above a l l a p r a c t i c a l man who r e a l i z e d the persuading power of a p p l i e d f o r c e . His act i o n s i n Scotland and i n I r e l a n d , where g a r r i s o n i n g formed the key element 52 i n h i s r u l i n g p o l i c y , c l e a r l y r e f l e c t e d t h i s . • However, he was als o an extremely stubborn man and i t was t h i s t h a t gave h i s government i t s d i s t i n c t i v e character. He was p e r s i s t e n t i n h i s attempts to make unworkable things work and t h i s a p p l i e s e s p e c i a l l y 53 w e l l to h i s r e l i g i o u s and m i l i t a r y p o l i c i e s i n I r e l a n d . For such a government there was l i t t l e room f o r c o n c i l i a t i o n . A l e t t e r from Edward VI to Lord Deputy S i r James C r o f t i n August 1551 revealed the true a t t i t u d e of the Edwardian government: "...we w i l l win them not by t h e i r w i l l s but by our power...then 54 they s h a l l obey because they cannot choose" , and Viceroy Grey r e a f f i r m e d t h i s i n 15 81 when he reported to the queen that " f e a r , -22-and not dandling must b r i n g them to the b a s i s of obedience". The new m i l i t a r y p o l i c y began i n the l a t e 1540s w i t h a l e n -gthy s e r i e s of charges brought against St. Leger by h i s f e l l o w o f f i c i a l s , Bellingham and Brabazon. The primary accusation was t h a t St. Leger was too l e n i e n t and "more favourable to Irishmen than to the king's s u b j e c t s " . 5 6 Brabazon, then Lord J u s t i c e , favoured the c r e a t i o n of g a r r i s o n s and the reformation of L e i n s t e r so t h a t 5 7 "as few of the i n h a b i t a n t s of the area be r e t a i n e d as p o s s i b l e " . A strong m i l i t a r y p o l i c y was nothing r e a l l y new i n I r e l a n d . In the i n t e r e s t s of r o y a l power, ..the E a r l of Surrey had set about to force the I r i s h l o r d s i n t o submission t h i r t y years before. But the Edwardian p o l i c y , because of the Reformation, was coloured by a f a c t o r f a r more important than t h a t of r o y a l p r e s t i g e — t h a t f a c t o r was r e l i g i o n . Henry V I I I had sought t o b r i n g about the Reformation i n I r e -land i n much the same way that he had i n England: through the use of statutes,by acts of parliament, and by suppressing the monas-5 8 t e r i e s . I t appears, though, t h a t he encountered trou b l e r i g h t from the s t a r t , f o r i n 1536 we f i n d him threatening members of the I r i s h parliament i n order to pass l e g i s l a t i o n d e c l a r i n g him 59 head of the Church. However, w i t h the death of Henry, P r o t e s t a n t -ism was f r e e d of the deadweight th a t had h e l d i t back f o r w e l l over a decade, and i t was pushed forward w i t h an enthusiasm t o t a l l y u n c h a r a c t e r i s t i c of the previous generation. For a short time p o l i t i c a l expediency gave way to r e l i g i o u s z e a l and the "expansion of E n g l i s h power went hand i n hand w i t h the progress of r e l i g i o u s r e f o r m " . u u By and l a r g e i n d i f f e r e n t to the p o t e n t i a l l y e x p l o s i v e nature of the I r i s h s i t u a t i o n , the government i n England launched upon a r e l e n t l e s s p o l i c y of r e l i g i o u s p a c i f i c a t i o n — a p o l i c y which was bound to have seriou s repercussions i n C a t h o l i c I r e l a n d . The government i n London presumed that the law of England "should of n e c e s s i t y be the law of I r e l a n d (and) the E n g l i s h parliament was c a l l e d upon to enact the new r e l i g i o u s measures and to extend them 61 of i t s own a u t h o r i t y t o I r e l a n d " . In t h i s process, the l o r d s of I r e l a n d , the I r i s h parliament, and even the I r i s h Church were t o t a l l y ignored. During the deputyship of S i r James C r o f t (1551-53) we see the beginnings of such a p o l i c y i n the appointments of John Bale and 6 2 Hugh Goodacre as bishops i n I r e l a n d , i n the i n c r e a s i n g l y s t r i c t enforcement of a n t i - C a t h o l i c i n j u n c t i o n s , and i n the establishment of commissions entrusted to " a b o l i s h I d o l a t r y , p a p i s t r y , the mass 6 3 sacrement, and the l i k e " . Under Northumberland s e c u l a r c o n t r o l of the r e l i g i o u s h i e r a r c h y was t i g h t e n e d . The new communion s e r v i c e of 1548 replaced the mass. S u r v i v i n g images were removed, and parliament, which autho r i z e d the new s e r v i c e book, the Book of Common Prayer... e s t a b l i s h e d an authorized form of worship w i t h p e n a l t i e s f o r non-observance.64 S i r James C r o f t , p r i m a r i l y a m i l i t a r y man, was s t i l l very much a r e p r e s e n t a t i v e of the e a r l i e r model of a d m i n i s t r a t i o n and attempted to e f f e c t some degree of compromise i n t o the r e l i g i o u s controversy. Moderation and c o n c i l i a t i o n , however, were not what the government i n London had ordered and C r o f t was f o r c e d t o work so as not to place any obstacles i n the way of Archbishop Browne. U l t i m a t e l y , the r e l i g i o u s reformation of I r e l a n d during the p e r i o d of the Pro--24-t e c t o r a t e was l e f t i n the hands of r a d i c a l P r o t e s t a n t s . The consequences of such a p o l i c y were broad indeed, f o r the r e l i g i o u s p a c i f i c a t i o n of a na t i o n as s t r o n g l y C a t h o l i c as I r e l a n d , when combined w i t h the fe a r of c o n t i n e n t a l i n t e r v e n t i o n , n e c e s s i -t a t e d a m i l i t a r y p o l i c y of a nature unprecedented i n the h i s t o r y of A n g l o - I r i s h r e l a t i o n s . When an i n c r e a s i n g l y h o s t i l e m i l i t a r y p o l i c y was combined w i t h an unpopular r e l i g i o u s reformation, the nature of v i o l e n c e i n I r e l a n d underwent a dramatic change. Even C r o f t , hardened by m i l i t a r y s e r v i c e overseas, came to abhor the type of d e s t r u c t i o n employed agai n s t the I r i s h : these unexpert captains and s o l d i e r s t h a t hath s l a i n and destroyed as w e l l the unarmed as the armed, even to the plowman t h a t never bare weapon, extending c r u e l t y upon both sexes and upon a l l ages, from the babe i n the cra d l e to the d e c r e p i t age, i n s o r t not to be named and by C h r i s t i a n people not to be looked upon.66 In another example, Lord Grey de Wilton's massacre of Spaniards, I t a l i a n s , and I r i s h a t Smerwick i n 1580, an a c t i o n which Spenser f e l t o b l i g e d to defend, had undisguised r e l i g i o u s overtones. Lord Grey was a man of strong r e l i g i o u s c o n v i c t i o n s . He "was convinced t h a t only the e r a d i c a t i o n of C a t h o l i c i s m i n I r e l a n d would put an 6 7 end to the troubles i t brought i n t o e x i s t e n c e " , and he favoured s t e r n measures accompanied by a rigorous enforcement of r e l i g i o u s p e r s e c u t i o n . His massacre of 600 men, women, and c h i l -dren was reported 1 by Irishmen i n remarkably graphic d e t a i l . Of three convicted of what were described as r e l i g i o u s crimes, one I r i s h source wrote: t h e i r legs and arms were at a forge, broken i n three p l a c e s , and they were l e f t to l i e i n agony f o r a whole n i g h t , to be hanged, drawn and quartered on the f o l l o w i n g morning.6 8 -25-For the f i r s t time i n i t s h i s t o r y , England had embarked upon a p o l i c y of p a c i f i c a t i o n which had as i t s primary aim the ' c i v i l i z i n g ' and r e l i g i o u s conversion of Irishmen through purely m i l i t a r y means. C r o f t ' s promotion to Lord Deputy, almost s u r e l y a r e s u l t of h i s m i l i t a r y e x p e r t i s e , "suggests t h a t Northumberland had decided th a t the c o n c i l i a t o r y e f f o r t s of St. Leger were unsuccessful and that a m i l i t a r y government l e d by C r o f t , might succeed where the 69 g e n t l e r methods of St. Leger (and Henry V I I I ) had f a i l e d " . The m i l i t a r y policies'"of-Northumberland and Somerset d i f f e r e d from those of e a r l i e r times by the f a c t t h a t the i n e v i t a b l e v i o l e n c e involved,.was no longer seen as a necessary accompaniment to more humanitarian means of p a c i f i c a t i o n , but became the primary t o o l by which.Ireland could be 'reduced' to c i v i l i t y . By the end of Edward's r e i g n the government i n England had come to r e a l i z e t h a t the long drawn out p o l i c y of gradual change th a t had been the h a l l -mark of Henry's and St. Leger's p o l i c y , was indeed the best p o l i c y . However,, to r e t u r n to t h a t p o l i c y "was not so easy as the departure, and many of the problems of I r i s h h i s t o r y can be traced to t h i s source (for) i n almost every department the government of Edward brought d e c i s i v e changes which were to have l a s t i n g i n f l u e n c e s 70 i n I r i s h h i s t o r y " . In the f i n a l a n a l y s i s perhaps St. Leger was r i g h t when he s a i d of the innovations i n r e l i g i o n introduced by Edward VI: i f the Lords of the c o u n c i l had l e t t e n a l l things i n the order the King's f a t h e r l e f t them and meddled not to a l t e r r e l i g i o n n e i t h e r had the r e b e l l i o n i n England, nor a l l these h u r l e y - b u r l e y s happened.71 During the r e i g n of Edward V I , we have seen that p o l i t i c a l -26-and r e l i g i o u s circumstances r e q u i r e d a p o l i c y of extreme v i o l e n c e . I t was a v i o l e n c e which was to feed on i t s e l f and e v e n t u a l l y c u l -minate i n a decade-long war at the end of the century. The argu-ment advanced i n the succeeding pages w i l l be an a n a l y s i s of how the E l i z a b e t h a n gentry attempted to j u s t i f y that v i o l e n c e , to l e g i t i m a t e i t i n the face of e x t e r n a l o p p o s i t i o n , and to r a t i o n a l -i z e i t w i t h i n t h e i r own minds. I w i l l attempt to d i s c o v e r why Elizabethans found i t e s s e n t i a l to j u s t i f y t h e i r a c t i o n s i n the i n t r i c a t e manner i n which they d i d , and what t h i s may t e l l us about the i n t e l l e c t u a l s t a t u s of the E n g l i s h gentry through the s i x t e e n t h century. In t h e i r r o l e as 'anthropologists'—men faced w i t h the task of a s s i m i l a t i n g and d e s c r i b i n g a c u l t u r e so a l i e n to t h a t of t h e i r own—the E n g l i s h gentry were forced to make e x p l i c i t ideas and concepts which u n t i l then had only remained unconscious. Without any great experience i n d e a l i n g w i t h c u l t u r e s a l i e n to t h a t of Europe, they were compelled to describe I r e l a n d i n terms of Eng-l i s h s o c i e t y . Therefore, i n t h e i r attempts to analyse I r i s h s o c i e t y , Englishmen were fo r c e d to re-examine t h e i r own. A d e s c r i p t i o n of I r e l a n d was to become a g l o r i f i c a t i o n of England and two opposing absolutes— :savagery and c i v i l i t y — c a m e to pervade t h e i r thought. I t would be presumptuous to c l a i m that t h e i r I r i s h experience allowed the E n g l i s h gentry to break from the i n t e l l e c t u a l bonds of the past and to create a new conception of ' o r d e r 1 , a new d e f i n i -t i o n of l i b e r t y , and a new b a s i s f o r statehood, f o r such new con-cepts were a r i s i n g throughout western Europe at t h i s time under -27-the guise of humanism and the renaissance of c l a s s i c a l thought. However, the I r i s h problem, i n that i t forced Englishmen to r e -formulate, re - e v a l u a t e , and b r i n g i n t o the open fundamental questions about the very nature of t h e i r s o c i e t y , the r o l e of t h e i r govern-ment, and the essence of t h e i r r e l i g i o n , allows the h i s t o r i a n some glimpse i n t o the process by which new ideas were formed. There-f o r e , t h e i r w r i t i n g s serve as a m i r r o r to r e f l e c t not only the a t t i t u d e s of a p a r t i c u l a r c l a s s of Englishmen, but al s o the i n -t e l l e c t u a l framework which allowed those a t t i t u d e s to achieve t h e i r overwhelming s i g n i f i c a n c e . CHAPTER I I ELIZABETHAN DESCRIPTIONS, ATTITUDES, AND JUSTIFICATIONS FOR VIOLENCE IN IRELAND Fear and Vi o l e n c e N e i l Smelser w r i t e s t h a t , "one of the most profound aspects of e v i l i s tha t he who does t h e - e v i l i s t y p i c a l l y convinced that 72 e v i l i s about to be done to him". I t was f e a r of t h i s nature that compelled Englishmen to attempt the p a c i f i c a t i o n of I r e l a n d . We have seen that i t was rumors of i n t r i g u e s by the E a r l of Desmond w i t h powers p o t e n t i a l l y h o s t i l e to England that sparked Henry i n t o 73 t a k i n g d i r e c t a c t i o n i n I r e l a n d , and such a l l i a n c e s w i t h f o r e i g n P r i n c e s were to become i n c r e a s i n g l y common as the century progressed. In 1551 Cormac O'Connor was i n France p l o t t i n g the i n v a s i o n of I r e l a n d by the combined forces of Scotland and France, and a healthy I r i s h correspondence was c a r r i e d on w i t h both Spain and Rome during the course of nea r l y a l l the r e v o l t s i n the l a t t e r h a l f 74 of the s i x t e e n t h century. Almost every h o s t i l e power at some p o i n t i n t h i s p e r i o d had attempted to use I r e l a n d as a base of operations f o r m i l i t a r y a c t i o n against England. I r e l a n d , along w i t h Scotland, was a weak l i n k i n England's l i n e of defence and "no E n g l i s h government could f e e l secure w h i l e the long western 75 seaboard was open to i n v a s i o n from across St. George's Channel". The c r i t i c a l p o i n t f o r E n g l i s h f e a r of i n v a s i o n through I r e -land came w i t h the Reformation. Permanent r e l i g i o u s enemies on the continent meant that England could look forward to the p o s s i b i l i t y of prolonged wars i n s p i r e d by r e l i g i o n , w i t h C a t h o l i c -29-I r e l a n d as a constant t h r e a t . England, t h e r e f o r e , could not forsake I r e l a n d , and was forced to take an a c t i v e r o l e i n her a d m i n i s t r a t i o n . Englishmen were c o n t i n u a l l y reminded of t h i s t h r e a t by I r i s h r e b e l s who always waged war i n the name of the Pope and the Roman C a t h o l i c f a i t h . Tyrone, f o r example, made 7 6 l i b e r t y of conscience h i s primary demand i n a l l h i s n e g o t i a t i o n s and Desmond demanded of the mayor and co r p o r a t i o n of Cork during h i s r e b e l l i o n i n 1569 t h a t they a b o o l i s s h oute of tha t c i t t l e t hat o l d heresy newely r a i s e d and invented, and namely Barnaby Daaly and ^ a l l theim t h a t be Hugnettes, boothe men and woomen. However, aside from the purely m i l i t a r y and s t r a t e g i c aspects of E n g l i s h p o l i c y , . t h e r e undoubtedly e x i s t e d f o r both nations a tremendous fea r of the unknown. Those o f f i c i a l s coming to I r e l a n d , and indeed Englishmen i n general, were by and l a r g e inexperienced i n d e a l i n g w i t h c u l t u r e s thought to be a l i e n to the European mode of l i f e , and consequently they r e a l i z e d more than t h e i r share of ethnocentrism. Once Englishmen had extended t h e i r range of contact beyond that of the P a l e , they were confronted w i t h a c u l t u r e which they a l l e g e d lacked the e s s e n t i a l i n g r e d i e n t s of c i v i l i z a t i o n and which demanded explan a t i o n . The I r i s h were a nomadic people who c u l t i v a t e d no land, whose c a p i t a l c o n s i s t e d of c a t t l e , and 7 8 whose appearance d e f i e d E n g l i s h standards of decency. S i r John Davies found i t strange t h a t i n "a land abounding w i t h a l l things necessary f o r the c i v i l l i f e of man", they b u i l d no houses of b r i c k or stone, they p l a n t no gardens or orchards, they don't "enclose or improve t h e i r lands, congregate i n v i l l a g e s and towns, -30-or make p r o v i s i o n s f o r p o s t e r i t y " . In f a c t , once the E n g l i s h gentry f a i l e d to f i n d (or to forc e by decree) s i m i l a r i t i e s between the two c u l t u r e s , they themselves f e l t threatened, and re s o r t e d to an i n c r e a s i n g l y negative mode of d e s c r i p t i o n , emphasizing cleavage, 80 s e p a r a t i o n , and segregation. For the E n g l i s h gentry, coming from the comfortable surroundings of t h e i r homes i n England, a l l t h i s 81 was " b e a s t l i n e s s , nauseating, contemptible, and i n e x p l i c a b l e " . What they f a i l e d to understand, they n e c e s s a r i l y d i s l i k e d , d i s -t r u s t e d , and i n e v i t a b l y s t r u c k out at. Fear of t h i s type can, and d i d , i n the case of I r e l a n d , lead to the p e r p e t r a t i o n of considerable v i o l e n c e . Violence i n the r e i g n of E l i z a b e t h was of a form unseen i n the time of Henry V I I I . The r e b e l l i o n of S i l k e n Thomas and those of the 0*Brian's and the Kavanagh's i n the 15 30's were v i o l e n t p r i m a r i l y on the b a t t l e f i e l d and mainly against those men ta k i n g an a c t i v e p a r t i n the course of r e b e l l i o n . However, as r e l i g i o u s d i v i s i o n s grew, and as more and more Englishmen came i n t o contact w i t h a people they had been l e d to b e l i e v e were both b a r b a r i c and t r a i t o r o u s , the nature of v i o l e n c e changed d r a m a t i c a l l y . Examples such as tha t reported by W i l l i a m 8 2 Saxey i n 1598 or that described so v i v i d l y by Churchyard above , where women and c h i l d r e n s u f f e r e d a f a t e as bad, i f not worse, than the s o l d i e r s of war, and where s t a r v a t i o n and massacre were accept-ab l e , and even encouraged forms of p a c i f i c a t i o n , became the n a t u r a l course of a f f a i r s by the end of the century. In 1599, P a t r i c k 83 Crosby^ a r e l i a b l e spy i n I r e l a n d , was able to w r i t e to S i r Roger Wilbraham -31-t h a t I r e l a n d was l o s t and savings towns and c a s t e l s a l l at the r e b e l s w i l l : t h a t no means but famyn to constraine them to l o y a l t i : and that must be by t a -k i n g t h e i r c a t t a i l and h i n d e r i n g the seeds and harvest and"burning t h e i r corne.84 His p l o t was to send s e v e r a l l o y a l I r i s h l o r d s a g a i n s t the Munster reb e l s "so both'sides would be wasted i n warre: L e i n s t e r Mouster 8 5 and Connaght wold be ruyned by famyn. and so made q u i e t " . In another example, Fynes Moryson r e v e l l e d i n g i v i n g h i s 1603 des-c r i p t i o n of s t a r v i n g Irishmen who " t h r u s t long needles i n t o the horses of our E n g l i s h troops" so t h a t upon the death of the animals they would be "ready to t e a r out one another's t h r o a t f o r a share of them", and he seemed to take pleasure i n r e l a t i n g how no spectacle was. more frequent i n the d i t c h e s of towns... than to see multitudes of these poor people dead, w i t h t h e i r mouths a l l colored green by e a t i n g n e t t l e s , docks, and a l l things they could rend up above ground.8 6 Indeed, the nature of v i o l e n c e had changed. However, even w i t h the existence of considerable f e a r , ex-t r a o r d i n a r y v i o l e n c e of the type seen i n l a t e s i xteenth-century I r e l a n d r e q u i r e d some other form of j u s t i f i c a t i o n . E l i z a b e t h a n Englishmen made use of a great number of exceedingly complex argu-ments which, i n the f i n a l a n a l y s i s , j u s t i f i e d not only t h e i r v i o -l e n t acts but a l s o t h e i r e n t i r e p o l i c y i n I r e l a n d . A u t h o r i z a t i o n f o r V i o l e n c e A c r i t i c a l step i n the u l t i m a t e r a t i o n a l i z a t i o n of personal acts of extreme c r u e l t y i s the establishment of some form of auth-o r i z a t i o n . In I r e l a n d we f i n d two forms of a u t h o r i z a t i o n : 1) d i --32-r e c t and 2) i m p l i c i t . In the I r i s h s i t u a t i o n , d i r e c t a u t h o r i z a -t i o n i s r a r e l y found coming from those agencies or i n s t i t u t i o n s which had the power to put such v i o l e n c e i n t o e f f e c t . Both the E n g l i s h Church and government seemed u n w i l l i n g to accept the f u l l r e s p o n s i b i l i t y t h a t accompanied d i r e c t s a n c t i o n i n g of v i o l e n t or d e s t r u c t i v e a c t s . U n l i k e i n France, where one f i n d s C a t h o l i c p r i e s t s and Huguenot preachers exhorting t h e i r r e s p e c t i v e congre-gations to f u r t h e r acts of v i o l e n c e and i n the process absolving them 8 7 of a l l moral r e s p o n s i b i l i t y , one f i n d s very few examples of d i r e c t manipulation of crowds i n I r e l a n d . The considerable l a c k of documentary evidence f o r the I r i s h s i de of the s t r u g g l e may weaken such an argument and i t could very w e l l be that I r i s h p r i e s t s d i d exhort t h e i r f o l l o w e r s to acts of extreme v i o l e n c e . Regardless, the I r i s h unused to and r e b e l l i o u s a g a i n s t any form of p h y s i c a l r e s t r a i n t , needed no admonition to destroy Englishmen, and the E n g l i s h found s u f f i c i e n t a u t h o r i z a t i o n through other means. However, i n reading the contemporary p r i v a t e E n g l i s h accounts, as opposed to the o f f i c i a l State Papers, one f i n d s numerous examples of d i r e c t e x h o r t a t i o n to v i o l e n c e , accounts which urge near e x t i r -p a t i o n as the only means whereby I r e l a n d can be brought to proper c i v i l i t y . Fynes Moryson asserted t h a t those who best understood the I r i s h nature found nothing so necessarie f o r keeping them i n obedience as s e v e r i t i e , nor so dangerous f o r the increase gg of murthers and outrages as indulgence towards them. And Lord Deputy F i t z w i l l i a m wrote i n 1572: t h i s people...hath been l o n g l y m i s l e d i n b e a s t l y l i b e r t y and s e n s u a l l immunity so as they cannot abide to hear of c o r r e c t i o n , . no, not f o r the h o r r i b l e l e s t -33-s i n s they can commit. T i l l the sword have thoroughly and u n i v e r s a l l y tamed (and not meekened them) i n v a i n i s law brought against them: nay dangerously i s . the b r i d l e thereof shaked towards them... t h i s makes them a l l tooth and n a i l . . . t o spurn, k i c k and p r a c t i c e a g a i n s t it.°^ Such reports both authorized and m o b i l i z e d e v i l by p r o v i d i n g the means whereby Irishmen could be declared b a r b a r i c , subhuman, and thoroughly undeserving of any mercy. In t h i s way, they helped to s e t the stage f o r a g u i l t - f r e e massacre. Much more important, and much more common i n the I r i s h s i t u a -t i o n , was i m p l i c i t a u t h o r i z a t i o n f o r e v i l . " A u t h o r i z a t i o n o f t e n i n v o l v e s a posture t h a t does not openly and p o s i t i v e l y s a n c t i o n . ... 90 d e s t r u c t i v e n e s s " but yet does not p r o h i b i t i t . We do not f i n d the E n g l i s h government ex p r e s s l y a u t h o r i z i n g G i l b e r t or Essex to embark upon p o l i c i e s of extermination i n I r e l a n d . Indeed, i n 1580, E l i z a b e t h f e l t compelled to s t r e s s t h a t i t was not her i n t e n t i o n 91 "to e x t i r p a t e the i n h a b i t a n t s of I r e l a n d " . .. However, i f we f i n d no examples of d i r e c t government a u t h o r i z a t i o n , n e i t h e r do we f i n d the establishment of s t r i c t p o l i c y g u i d l i n e s , and once i n -f l i c t e d , the e v i l i n v a r i a b l y draws p r a i s e from a u t h o r i t i e s i n Lon-don. F o l l o w i n g G i l b e r t ' s s u c c e s s f u l p o l i c y of v i o l e n t p a c i f i c a t i o n , S i r Henry Sidney, Lord Deputy at the time, r e f l e c t e d o f f i c i a l o p i n i o n when he wrote: For the Colonel I cannot say enough...(the land was brought to some semblance of c i v i l i t y by h i s actions) and y e t t h i s i s not the most or the best t h a t he hath done; f o r the e s t i m a t i o n that he hath won to the name of Englishmen there, before almost not known, exceedeth a l l the r e s t . . i T h e name of an Englishman i s more t e r r i b l e now to them than the s i g h t of a hundred was before. For a l l t h i s I.had nothing to present him w i t h but the honour of Knighthood.92 -34-So G i l b e r t was knighted f o r h i s v i o l e n c e . . . the E a r l of Essex f a r e d l i t t l e worse. F o l l o w i n g h i s unauthorized massacre of 2 00 I r i s h men and women i n 1574, the queen wrote t h a t when the occasion doth present you do rat h e r a l l u r e and b r i n g i n tha t rude and barbarous n a t i o n to c i -v i l i t y ... by wisdom and d i s c r e e t handling... and yet when n e c e s s i t y r e q u i r e t h you are ready a l s o t o oppose y o u r s e l f and your forces' to them whom reason . and duty cannot b r i d l e . 9 3 The government, i n essence, authorized e v i l without o f f i c i a l l y s a n c t i o n i n g i t and allowed the m o b i l i z a t i o n to develop "through 94 independent s o c i a l mechanisms". With t h i s form of a u t h o r i z a t i o n we see the emergence of a new phenomenon which may have g r e a t l y enhanced the capacity of the E n g l i s h people to e x e r c i s e e x t r a o r d i n a r y v i o l e n c e . This was the growth of what may be l o o s e l y termed the nat i o n s t a t e : The European n a t i o n a l i s m of the s i x t e e n t h century amounted to a c o n s o l i d a t i o n and c e n t r a l i z a t i o n of c e r t a i n geographical areas i n t o a s i n g l e and d i s t i n c t p o l i t i c a l u n i t s or n a t i o n s t a t e s . . . I r e l a n d was the v i c t i m of the operation of t h i s process i n England. I t i s q u i t e p o s s i b l e t h a t the need to j u s t i f y v i o l e n c e i n I r e l a n d was one of the many f a c t o r s which caused the E n g l i s h gentry to r e -j e c t g r a d u a l l y the medieval p a t e r n a l i s t i c t i e s - - t h e 'lineage s o c i e t y 1 , the sense of ' b l o o d ' — o f l o r d to v a s s a l , of l a n d l o r d to tenant, i n favour of a more diverse a l l e g i a n c e to i n s t i t u t i o n s ' and ideas: to the s t a t e of England. The act of e x t e n s i v e l y comparing E n g l i s h and I r i s h c u l t u r e s , as many Elizabethans were doing, could only have r e i n f o r c e d t h i s trend. As a means of escaping d i r e c t r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r d i s t u r b i n g a c t s , modern man i d e n t i f i e s > w i t h a l a r g e r c u l t u r a l and r a c i a l u n i t which, i n most cases, i s the ' s t a t e ' . -35-What i s seen i s "the merger of i n d i v i d u a l r e s p o n s i b i l i t y w i t h 96 (that of) the o r g a n i z a t i o n and i t s f a t e " . I n d i v i d u a l s , t h e r e f o r e , come to see themselves as agents or instruments of a l a r g e r 'cause 1 to which r e s p o n s i b i l i t y f o r v i o l e n t acts can be delegated, and, i n t h i s way, they absolve themselves of any blame. I t i s p o s s i b l e t h a t a s i m i l a r process was at work i n s i x t e e n t h - c e n t u r y I r e l a n d . For the I r i s h , t h e i r 'cause' was the church; f o r the i n t e l l e c t u a l l y enlightened E n g l i s h gentry, i t was the ' s t a t e ' . The i n c r e a s i n g moral and c u l t u r a l n a t i o n a l i s m r e f l e c t e d i n the E n g l i s h w r i t i n g s 97 of the p e r i o d lend support to such an argument. S i r Thomas Smith, f o r example, saw England as s u p e r i o r to a l l other nations i n c l u d i n g the ancient Romans, and Spenser wrote t h a t : the E n g l i s h were at f i r s t as s t o u t and w a r l i k e a people as were the I r i s h and yet you see are now brought to t h a t c i v i l i t y , that no n a t i o n i n the world e x c e l l e t h them i n a l l goodly conversation.98 The E n g l i s h commentators, t h e r e f o r e , p a r t i a l l y out of a need to j u s t i f y v i o l e n c e and p a r t i a l l y as a consequence of the trend t o -wards c o n s o l i d a t i o n o c c u r r i n g throughout western Europe at t h i s time, began to a s s o c i a t e more and more w i t h the E n g l i s h s t a t e as" an a b s t r a c t u n i t . However, i n the E n g l i s h mind, I r e l a n d was s t i l l very much a p a r t of that u n i t . " I t hardly entered i n t o the mental equipment of the Elizabethans to consider I r e l a n d as a separate 99 p o l i t i c a l e n t i t y , f o r t h a t c l a i m had s c a r c e l y yet been made". Hence, the c o n s o l i d a t i o n of England i n t o a n a t i o n s t a t e automati-c a l l y meant the i n c l u s i o n of I r e l a n d as a p a r t of that u n i t , and by f o r c e , so 'necessity' seemed to d i c t a t e . -36-Moderation and Reaction That the E n g l i s h w r i t e r s of the l a t t e r h a l f of the s i x t e e n t h century f e l t a need to j u s t i f y t h e i r acts i s i n i t s e l f important. I t reveals t h a t they were unsure of the e f f i c a c y of not only t h e i r immediate p o l i c i e s but al s o t h e i r e n t i r e p o s i t i o n i n I r e l a n d . Their arguments r e v e a l that they were u n c e r t a i n of the v a l i d i t y of 'con-quest' as a j u s t i f i c a t i o n , of the use of e x t r a o r d i n a r y v i o l e n c e as a means of p a c i f i c a t i o n , and even of the a c t u a l barbarousness of the I r i s h . 1 0 0 By the mere f a c t that these w r i t e r s f e l t t h a t they had to j u s t i f y the v i o l e n c e perpetrated i n I r e l a n d , they acknowledged the e x i s t e n c e of o p p o s i t i o n . Without some opposing view, j u s t i f i -c a t i o n would not have been necessary, f o r even i f v i o l e n c e i s j u s t i f i e d by reference to a u t h o r i z i n g agencies or simply by way of revenge, t h a t need f o r ex c u l p a t i o n i n v a r i a b l y occurs " i n the con-t e x t of other competing values and standards t h a t define (that d e s t r u c t i o n ) as i l l e g i t i m a t e and, indeed, e v i l " . 1 0 1 Such opposi-t i o n came i n the guise of moderate opinions which urged l e n i t y and temperance r a t h e r than f o r c e . Such moderation came from men who were r e a c t i n g to excessive v i o l e n c e w i t h a l t e r n a t e p r o p o s a l s — p r o -posals which seemed to threaten those o f f i c i a l s who advocated harsh measures. Therefore, moderate opinions stand as evidence of inner tensions w i t h i n a 'community' of values. As l a t e as 15 75, Lord Burghley was proposing that a "bridge be b u i l t between the two l e g a l systems" and consequently between the two s o c i e t i e s . He wrote: The best i s to seek: the reformation of I r e l a n d as w e l l by f o r c e as by order of j u s t i c e , t h a t the E n g l i s h -37-may obey laws and the I r i s h r y be kept from r e b e l l i o n . And so by success of time the Irish.-be brought to be governed e i t h e r by the law of England or by some c o n s t i t u t i o n s to be compounded p a r t l y of t h e i r own customs and Brehon laws, t h a t are agreeable to reason, and p a r t l y of E n g l i s h laws.l°2 This sounds very much l i k e Henry V I I I ' s p o l i c y of some f i f t y years e a r l i e r , -but the simple d i f f e r e n c e s are that Burghley's was never implemented, and that i t i s wholly unrepresentative of the common o p i n i o n of h i s time. There were other voices of- moderation, though they i n v a r i a b l y came from those w i t h l i t t l e or no d i r e c t experience i n I r e l a n d . S i r Thomas Sidney, _for example, spent very l i t t l e time i n I r e l a n d before condemning the methods used by the E n g l i s h s o l d i e r y , and S i r Thomas C e c i l had never been to I r e l a n d when he wrote i n 15 80 that he "had put h i s f i n g e r on the r e a l o b s t a c l e to any permanent accomodation between England and the I r i s h : l a c k of t r u s t by the 103 l a t t e r i n E n g l i s h s i n c e r i t y " . For him, the I r i s h problem could best be solved by t a k i n g away the f e a r of conquest of l a t e deeply seated i n the hearts of the w i l d I r i s h (and) to wink at c e r t a i n p r i v a t e d i s o r d e r s which do not prop e r l y offend the v Crown, and have by custom long been used i n t h a t realm.104 Although most of those w i t h any prolonged contact w i t h the I r i s h seemed to r e a c t i n a r e p r e s s i v e way, there were a l s o those w i t h great experience i n I r e l a n d who leaned towards moderation. Mount-joy "s p o l i c y , f o r example, showed signs of t o l e r a t i o n q u i t e unchar-a c t e r i s t i c of h i s time. He proposed th a t "the c a r r y i n g of an even course between the E n g l i s h and the I r i s h whether i t be i n competi-t i o n or i n controversy as i t were one n a t i o n . T . i s one of the best -38-105 medicines of t h a t estate".- But i t was a l s o he who, i n 1601, 106 deemed i t necessary "to overcome them...by famine",. and who proposed to the P r i v y C o u n c i l t h a t I r i s h s o l d i e r s be sent to the Indies where they might h o p e f u l l y die o f f . On the whole, moderate views were greeted as wholly u n r e a l i s -t i c by o f f i c i a l s w i t h any experience i n I r e l a n d . The counter-argu-ments used were e i t h e r t h a t such p r a c t i c e s had already been . t r i e d and were to no a v a i l , or t h a t the I r i s h were simply too barbarous to heed E n g l i s h good i n t e n t i o n s . For example, Lord Grey de W i l t o n wrote i n 1581 t h a t "the I r i s h were to addicted to treachery and breach of f i d e l i t y as, longer than they f i n d the yoke i n t h e i r 10 8 neck, they respect n e i t h e r pledge, a f f i n i t y , or duty". And a f r u s t r a t e d S i r John P e r r o t t , faced w i t h i n c r e a s i n g l y h o s t i l e I r i s h f o r c e s , " c a l l e d f o r an end to c o n c i l i a t o r y methods f o r d e a l -10 9 i n g w i t h r e b e l l i o n " . There i s l i t t l e doubt as to what he f e l t should take the place of conciliation.''"''"^ Barnabe R i c h defended harsh measures by c l a i m i n g t h a t the I r i s h p r e f e r r e d to " l i v e l i k e beastes, .voide of law and a l l good order", and they they were "more u n c i v i l l , more uncleanly, more barbarous and more b r u t i s h i n t h e i r customs and demeanures, than i n any other p a r t of the world that i s known".''''''"'" And f i n a l l y there were those who simply f e l t t h a t f o r c e and v i o l e n c e were the best means f o r achieving the r e d u c t i o n of I r e l a n d . Sidney, f o r example, was more concerned "with the use of f o r c e to sweep away a l l o b s t a c l e s than w i t h j u s t i c e or w i t h s t r i c t 112 proceedure according to law"; Moryson claimed that "England ought to use power where reason a v a i l e t h not, nothing i s soe proper -39-to r u l e by f o r c e whom force hath subjected"; and f i n a l l y G i l b e r t wrote: "Being f o r my p a r t c o n s t a n t l y of the o p i n i o n t h a t no conquered n a t i o n w i l l ever y i e l d w i l l i n g l y t h e i r obedience f o r love but r a t h e r f o r f e a r " . 1 1 4 Therefore, the r a t i o n a l i z a t i o n of the v i o l e n c e perpetrated i n I r e l a n d was i n many ways a response to the existence of moderation. However, .Elizabethan o f f i c i a l s were not only r e a c t i n g to w r i t t e n l e n i t y , f o r t h a t formed an extremely small and i n s i g n i f i c a n t por-t i o n of the t o t a l l i t e r a t u r e on I r e l a n d , but, more imp o r t a n t l y , they were r e a c t i n g to c e r t a i n tensions created w i t h i n t h e i r own minds. Their a c t i o n s transgressed t h e i r e t h i c a l c o d e — a code which decreed t h a t they had exceeded the normal l i m i t s of m o r a l i t y . The E l i z a b e t h a n commentators, i n essence, were s u f f e r i n g from the pangs of conscience, and the r a t i o n a l i z a t i o n of t h e i r v i o l e n c e was the means by which they attempted "to smooth over and otherwise come to terms w i t h that t e n s i o n " . 1 1 ^ CHAPTER I I I FORMS OF JUSTIFICATION Perhaps the e a s i e s t r a t i o n a l i z a t i o n f o r v i o l e n c e t n a t the E n g l i s h used was t h a t of revenge. Churchyard, f o r example, w h i l e r e c o g n i z i n g the p o s s i b i l i t y t h a t G i l b e r t ' s a c t i o n s might be sub-j e c t to ost r a c i s m , p a r t i a l l y j u s t i f i e d h i s p o l i c y of extermina-t i o n thus: i n excuse whereof i t i s to be answered th a t he d i d but then begin t h a t order w i t h them which t h e y ^ g had i n e f f e c t e v e r t o f o r e used towards the E n g l i s h . Revenge, however, merely j u s t i f i e d a c t ions which would under other circumstances, be considered as e v i l . Therefore, the E n g l i s h found i t expedient to go a step f u r t h e r . " J u s t i f i c a t i o n i s r a t i o n a l i z a t i o n " . . . " b u t l e g i t i m a t i o n i s pe r f e c t e d j u s t i f i c a t i o n and 117 thus a f a r more e f f e c t i v e mask, a stronger mode of defence". Indeed, i t i s so strong t h a t i t o f t e n becomes o f f e n s i v e r a t h e r than defensive. The E n g l i s h , i t seems, were n o t s a t i s f i e d w i t h merely j u s t i f y i n g e v i l deeds. They sought to make t h e i r e x t r a o r d i n a r y v i o l e n c e i n t o a v i r t u e . For them, to l e g i t i m a t e an ac t was to see -. 118 i t s goodness. To make the i n d i s c r i m i n a t e k i l l i n g of I r i s h men, women, and c h i l d r e n i n t o an a c t of d i v i n e goodness, would have allowed the E n g l i s h to answer any o b j e c t i o n s , moral or otherwise, which might have been r a i s e d against t h e m — o b j e c t i o n s r a i s e d by members of t h e i r own community and, perhaps more imp o r t a n t l y , o b j e c t i o n s r a i s e d w i t h i n t h e i r own conscience. However, to turn v i c e i n t o a v i r t u e -41-n e c e s s i t a t e d a much more complex i n t e l l e c t u a l a r s e n a l than i n the past, and the E n g l i s h , i t appears, were more than up t o the task. We f i n d two forms of argument. F i r s t there were those who f e l t t h a t the r e d u c t i o n of I r e l a n d by v i o l e n t means was a necessary e v i l - - a n unfortunate course of action--but unavoidable under the circumstances. They—Davies, B r y s k e t t , Mountjoy, and Smith being the most prominent•—sought' to j u s t i f y t h e i r presence and t h e i r p o l i c i e s i n I r e l a n d by appealing to l e g a l , p h i l o s o p h i c a l , and n a t i o n a l i s t i c or p a t r i o t i c arguments. For them, the d e s t r u c t i o n of an Irishman was a s m a l l p r i c e to pay f o r the g l o r i o u s ' ends t h a t would u l t i m a t e l y be achieved. In the second case,- we f i n d an extremely complex argument from those who e a r n e s t l y b e l i e v e d that the E n g l i s h brought no e v i l to I r e l a n d and who r e v e l l e d i n the thought of extreme c r u e l t y as I r e l a n d ' s j u s t punishment. Their l e g i t i m a t i o n i n v o l v e d an elabor-ate argument f o r the degradation, d e c h r i s t i a n i z a t i o n , and u l t i m a t e dehumanization of a l l the I r i s h . The major proponents of t h i s form of argument would be Moryson, R i c h , G i l b e r t , Essex, Sidney, S i r John P e r r o t t , and perhaps even Spenser. These men might be c a l l e d b l o o d t h i r s t y , and indeed they were. But they were b l o o d t h i r s t y w i t h the k i n d of detachment that a f f i r m s that those being k i l l e d were not seen as human beings. G i l b e r t , f o r example, wrote to England i n a very m a t t e r - o f - f a c t manner d e s c r i b i n g h i s procedures f o r the r e d u c t i o n of I r e l a n d as i f they were r e a l l y not worth mentioning. He refused to speak or make peace w i t h any rebels except on h i s terms and put: -42-a l l those from time to time to the sword t h a t d i d belong, fed, accompany or maintain any outlaws or-t r a i t o r s . And a f t e r my f i r s t summoning of any >castle or f o r t , i t they would not p r e s e n t l y y i e l d i t , I would not. afterward take i t of t h e i r g i f t but win i t per f o r c e , how many l i v e s soever i t c o s t , p u t t i n g man, woman, and c h i l d of them to the sword.119 He could j u s t as e a s i l y have been d e s c r i b i n g the weather. These two types of argument overlapped i n numerous ways as each author grasped whichever argument s u i t e d h i s purposes. No s t r i c t d i v i s i o n e x i s t e d . S i r John Davies, f o r example, could be j u s t as adament i n h i s d e s i r e to 'force' the I r i s h i n t o submission 120 as was Fynes Moryson, i f i t served t o f u r t h e r h i s l e g a l argument. Some authors seemed to place more emphasis on one type of argument than on the other, w h i l e others drew e q u a l l y from both. I do not mean to create d i v i s i o n s where they don't e x i s t , but the various j u s t i f i c a t i o n s used by v i r t u a l l y a l l the w r i t e r s a t one p o i n t or other are much more e a s i l y s t u d i e d i f a d i s t i n c t i o n i s made be-tween those arguments which s t r e s s dehumanization and those which do not. Moderate J u s t i f i c a t i o n s S i r John Davies and S i r Thomas Smith are perhaps the best rep-r e s e n t a t i v e s of the more moderate school of thought w i t h respect to the I r i s h q uestion. They, l i k e t h e i r more b r u t a l c o l l e a g u e s , en-v i s i o n e d an I r e l a n d which was modelled a f t e r and t o t a l l y s ubservient 121 to E n g l i s h s o c i e t y , and consequently t h e i r methods were no l e s s v i o l e n t . As Davies s t a t e d , "a barbarous country must f i r s t be 122 broken by a war before i t w i l l be capable of good government". -43-and Smith was- i n t o t a l agreement when he greeted I r i s h r e b e l l i o n as "the best token t h a t can be that God w i l l prosper t h i s doing when he cas t e t h h i s feare i n them before whom he wold have reduced 12 3 i n t o good order". The means whereby I r e l a n d was 'reduced' to that c i v i l i t y d i d not seem to concern them, f o r one f i n d s no c r i t i c i s m s i n t h e i r works of the b r u t a l methods proposed by t h e i r colleagues. However, the means by which they sought to j u s t i f y the b r u t a l i t y , and a l s o t h e i r very presence i n I r e l a n d , d i f f e r e d considerably from those of t h e i r a s s o c i a t e s . I t seems t h a t n e i t h e r Davies nor Smith accepted the argument th a t an Irishman was somewhat l e s s than human (as some of t h e i r compatriots were proposing) and they were consequently forced to advance a l t e r n a t e j u s t i f i c a t i o n s f o r t h e i r a c t i o n s . Smith, more concerned w i t h I r e l a n d as a p o t e n t i a l l y r i c h colony, p r e f e r r e d to see England i n the r o l e of c i v i l i z e r r a t h e r than conquerer. In the same way t h a t the Romans had guided the ancient B r i t o n s to the v i r t u e s of c i v i l i t y , England, i n h i s o p i n i o n , was the harbinger 124 of c i v i l i z a t i o n to the I r i s h . For Smith,-^therefore, the reduc-t i o n of I r e l a n d , by whatever means, became only a s m a l l , perhaps i n s i g n i f i c a n t p a r t of a l a r g e r n a t i o n a l and s p i r i t u a l mission to spread the v i r t u e s of c i v i l i z a t i o n to the world. Amidst the rhe-t o r i c that accompanied such an argument, i n d i v i d u a l acts of v i o l e n c e could be r e a d i l y dismissed. S i r John Davies accepted Smith's argument when he r e f e r r e d to 12 the Romans as having c i v i l i z e d "our ancestors the ancient B r i t o n s " . However, h i s main argument was based almost e n t i r e l y on law. I t -44-r e s t e d upon two axioms: 1) t h a t the I r i s h were 'enemies' and, th e r e f o r e , outside the p r o t e c t i o n of the laws of England; and 2) that the I r i s h had no law and tha t s i n c e realms without law were mere a n a r c h i e s , . I r e l a n d had to be f o r c e f u l l y " ' r e d u c e d ' to the acceptance of E n g l i s h law. Davies wrote of the s i x t e e n t h century t h a t "the mere I r i s h were not only accounted a l i e n s but enemies, and a l t o g e t h e r out of the pro-126 t e c t i o n of law, so i t was no c a p i t a l offence to k i l l them". In a s t r i c t l e g a l sense, t h e r e f o r e , he was c l a i m i n g t h a t the k i l l i n g of Irishmen could not be punished by E n g l i s h Common Law f o r , as enemies, the I r i s h had no l e g a l s t a t u s under that law-. In t h i s way, the mere act of d e c l a r i n g the I r i s h people as enemies allowed Davies to l e g i t i m a t e t h e i r d e s t r u c t i o n . . Davies, however, was w r i t i n g i n . the seventeenth century> a t a time when the l e g a l p o s i -12 7 t i o n of the I r i s h was much e a s i e r to d e f i n e . Because the Tyrone r e b e l l i o n drew together the vast m a j o r i t y of Irishmen i n t o a s i n g l e h o s t i l e f o r c e , Englishmen i n the seventeenth century were able to c l e a r l y pronounce 'the I r i s h ' as enemies; P r i o r to t h i s the l e g a l s t a t u s of Irishmen was s t i l l very much i n a s t a t e of f l u x . Although during periods of peace i n the s i x t e e n t h century few Englishmen f e l t they had the r i g h t to k i l l any Irishman, the confusion t h a t surrounded who was and who was not an 'enemy' l e f t the s t r i c t l y l e g a l question of the d e s t r u c t i o n of Irishmen u n s e t t l e d . This u n c e r t a i n t y may account f o r much of the ten s i o n t h a t runs throughout the E l i z a b e t h a n works and i t helps to e x p l a i n the vast number of j u s t i f i c a t i o n s that the E n g l i s h o f f i c i a l s u l t i m a t e l y employed. Only - 45-i n the seventeenth century were the I r i s h s u f f i c i e n t l y depersonal- 1 i z e d t o allow t h e i r d e s t r u c t i o n to be l e g i t i m i z e d on the b a s i s of the l a c k of l e g a l s t a t u s of the I r i s h 'people' or of the I r i s h 'nation'. In p u t t i n g forward the concept that the I r i s h were enemies, Davies was l e g i t i m a t i n g E n g l i s h presence and v i o l e n c e i n I r e l a n d on the b a s i s of conquest. He, l i k e Smith, p r e f e r r e d the r o l e of c i v i l i z e r r a t h e r than conquerer and he consequently sought f u r t h e r j u s t i f i c a t i o n . According to Davies> the law was the determining f o r c e i n every aspect of l i f e : . . . a l l our peace, p l e n t y , c i v i l i t y , and moral honesty dependeth uppon the lawe. That wee enjoy our l i v e s , our wives, our c h i l d r e n , our lands, our goodes, our good names, or whatsoever i s sweete and deare unto us, we are beholding to the law f o r i t . . . w i t h o u t j u s t i c e . . . a l l kingdomes and s t a t e s would bee brought to confusion and a l l humane s o c i e t y would be dissolved.128 For him, only the implementation of E n g l i s h law would b r i n g about a f u l l r e d u c t i o n of I r e l a n d to c i v i l i t y , f o r the true causes of I r i s h i n c i v i l i t y r e s t e d i n the f a c t t h a t f o r 350 years they were 129 "not admitted to the b e n e f i t of the laws of England". He noted "that the k i l l i n g of an Irishman was not punished by our law as manslaughter, f o r our laws d i d n e i t h e r p r o t e c t h i s l i f e nor revenge 13 0 h i s death, but by a f i n e or pecuniary punishment". I n saying t h i s , he was not only lamenting that the laws of England had not been a p p l i e d to I r e l a n d , but he was a l s o condemning the I r i s h Brehon law (which favoured f i n e s over p h y s i c a l punishment) as no law at a l l . In essence, because the I r i s h were not admitted to the Common Law, t h e i r customs, according to Davies, had grown to such a -46-barbarous s t a t e t h a t I r e l a n d had to be f i r s t wholly subdued and "broken by war" before c i v i l government could be e s t a b l i s h e d and be-131 f o r e the land could be " w e l l planted and governed". He s e t about to demonstrate that the I r i s h d i d not deserve the " d i g n i t y of 132 a body p o l i t i c " , f o r by the nature of t h e i r customs the p e o p l e . m u s t of n e c e s s i t y be reb e l s to a l l good government, destroy the commonwealth wherein they l i v e , and b r i n g barbarism and d e s o l a t i o n upon the r i c h e s t and most f r u i t f u l land of the world.133 He claimed, t h e r e f o r e , t h a t the k i n g was "bound i n conscience to use a l l l a w f u l and j u s t courses to reduce h i s people from barbarism 134 to c i v i l i t y " . In essence, he lamented t h a t , i n the past, I r i s h -men had no p r o t e c t i o n under E n g l i s h law; yet because the very -nature of t h e i r customs was a n t i t h e t i c a l to that law, those customs had to be f i r s t w i l l f u l l y destroyed before c i v i l i t y could f l o u r i s h . Although he was quick to p o i n t out t h a t , i n t h i s process, the government d i d not intend to e x t i r p a t e the I r i s h , he had e f f e c t i v e l y provided a j u s t i f i c a t i o n f o r j u s t t h a t . For many Englishmen i n I r e l a n d , a l e g a l j u s t i f i c a t i o n f o r v i o l e n c e was not necessary. There seemed l i t t l e t h r e a t of l e g a l a c t i o n being taken against them and the I r i s h who f o r c e f u l l y opposed them were c e r t a i n l y not concerned w i t h l e g a l n i c e t i e s . Besides there e x i s t e d ample j u s t i f i c a t i o n from other sources. In f a c t , f o r many Englishmen, by the seventeenth century, v i r t u a l l y any e v i l e x e r c i s e d a g a i n s t Irishmen and t h e i r f a m i l i e s could be r a t i o n a l i z e d by recourse to c e r t a i n l e g i t i m a t i n g norms, which, i n essence, allowed f o r t h e i r v i r t u a l dehumanization. _47-Immoderate J u s t i f i c a t i o n s : The  Process of Dehumanization The t o t a l dehumanization argument i s long and complicated, and only r a r e l y was i t ever used i n i t s e n t i r e t y i n a s i n g l e work. Moryson, perhaps, comes c l o s e s t to i t . I t i s , t h e r e f o r e , d o u b t f u l t h a t the Eli z a b e t h a n s r e a l i z e d the f u l l impact of t h e i r argument, f o r indeed, i t was never f u l l y e l u c i d a t e d . Only i n r e t r o s p e c t i are we able to piece together and place i n t o some coherent systematic framework the various j u s t i f i c a t i o n s used and, from t h i s evidence, to speculate upon the workings of the E n g l i s h mind. In t h i s way the f o l l o w i n g c a t e g o r i z a t i o n i s an e n t i r e l y a r t i f i c i a l r e c r e a t i o n which may or may not have been accepted by Englishmen i n the s i x -teenth century. In the i n t e r e s t s of f u r t h e r understanding i t i s nevertheless e s s e n t i a l t o e s t a b l i s h some s t r u c t u r a l framework w i t h i n which the j u s t i f i c a t i o n s can achieve some cohesion. Stereotyping The one feature which forms the b a s i s f o r a l l other j u s t i f i -cations used i n the I r i s h example i s s t e r e o t y p i n g . The arguments which l e g i t i m a t e d e v i l were deeply rooted i n the s o c i a l and i n t e l l -e c t u a l makeup of sixteenth-century Englishmen and t h e i r a c t i o n s were c a r r i e d out and r a t i o n a l i z e d by reference to and i n accordance w i t h past norms and customarily accepted behavior. Stereotyping i n the medieval mode allowed f o r the formation of a h i g h l y pre-j u d i c i a l v i s i o n of I r i s h l i f e , and f o r the permanent i n c u l c a t i o n of that v i s i o n i n t o the c o l l e c t i v e ' b r i c o l a g e ' of the E n g l i s h n a t i o n . -48-Sebastian Muenster's large 1554 E n g l i s h e d i t i o n of Cosmography c o n t r i b u t e d a s i n g l e paragraph to the I r i s h . They were, he con-cluded, "voyde of h o s p i t a l i t i e . . . u n c i v i l l and c r u e l , and th e r e f o r e 135 unapt f o r w a r l i k e a f f r a y e s " . I f only because of the p e c u l i a r nature of medieval i n q u i r y , such concepts, once deeply i n g r a i n e d i n the minds of Englishmen, were " l i k e l y to be very inpervious 136 to m o d i f i c a t i o n by d e l i b e r a t e s o c i a l p o l i c y " . Margaret Hodgen states of medieval and Renaissance s c h o l a r s h i p t h a t "legend was accepted as f a c t and always i n preference to accurate observation 137 and r e p o r t i n g " . She wrote that "the medieval i n j u n c t i o n to 'guard t h a t which has been entrusted to you.' was followed only too f a i t h f u l l y . . . " and tha t "Renaissance scho l a r s who attempted to deal w i t h the k a l e i d o s c o p i c elements of human behavior found i t e a s i e r to repeat than to re-examine and reformulate; to echo o l d judgements r a t h e r than to make new ones". Their orthodoxy served 138 to "cushion them from c r i t i c i s m " . Muenster r e f l e c t e d the orthodoxy and the others followed, s u i t . Time and.time again one f i n d s the same d e s c r i p t i o n s , the same quotations, and o f t e n i n the same w o r d s — t h e I r i s h are s l o t h f u l , the I r i s h hate work, they are 13 i d o l a t r o u s , promiscuous, w i l d , ignorant, and g e n e r a l l y b a r b a r i c . Moryson quotes Campion, Rich quotes S t a n i h u r s t . . . the l i s t goes on and on. One even f i n d s the I r i s h being used as a standard of savagery and o f t e n by those without experience i n I r e l a n d . George T u r b e r v i l l e wrote of the Russians i n 1587: Wild I r i s h are as c i v i l as the Russies, i n t h e i r k i n d , Hard choice which, i s best of both, each bloody, rxide, and b l i n d . 1 4 0 -49-J. 41 Although opinions vary and c o n t r a d i c t i o n s are common, the message i s u l t i m a t e l y the same. As Moryson concludes:' not only i n l o d g i n g passangers, not at a l l or most rudel y , but even i n t h e i r h o s p i t a l i t y t o -wards them, these w i l d I r i s h are not much u n l i k e to w i l d b e a s t s , i n whose caves a beast passing that way might perhaps f i n d meat, but not without danger to be i l l - e n t e r t a i n e d , perhaps devoured of h i s i n s a t i a b l e h o s t . ^ 4 2 Or as Thomas Churchyard so eloquently put i t : The sons of shame and c h i l d r e n of Gods wrath, With w o l f i s h minds l i k e breechless bears they go; Through woods and bogs and many a crooked path: Lying l i k e dogs, i n l i t t e r dung and straw, Rude as brute beasts t h a t know no r u l e or law. Fostered from f a i t h , and fear of God and man. Unlearned, untaught of any graces good, Nursed up i n v i c e where falsehood f i r s t began. And Moryson again: For four v i l e beasts I r e l a n d hath no fence, t h e i r bodyes l i c e , t h e i r houses Ratts possesse Most wicked P r e i s t s governe t h e i r conscience, and ravening Woolves wast t h e i r f i e l d s no l e s s e . Such s t e r e o t y p i n g only served to remove from the E n g l i s h mental framework any reference to Irishmen as i n d i v i d u a l s . In t h i s way,„ i t c o n t r i b u t e d to t h e i r d e p e r s o n a l i z a t i o n , the f i r s t step towards dehumanization. What we see i n t h i s negative d e s c r i p t i o n of the I r i s h people i s the misperception of them as members of a s i n g l e homogeneous e n t i t y , devoid of personal a t t i b u t e s and e n t i r e l y 145 p r e d i c t a b l e . Such are the psychodynamics of group p r e j u d i c e . S t e r e o t y p i n g , t h e r e f o r e , allowed Englishmen t o make a c l e a r d i s t i n c t i o n between what was I r i s h and what was E n g l i s h — b e t w e e n 'savagery 1 and ' c i v i l i t y ' . In essence, i t provided those s o c i a l l y accepted norms which Englishmen used to declare Irishmen b a r b a r i c . -50-For the E l i z a b e t h a n s , t h a t d i s t i n c t i o n between barbarism and c i v i l i t y was "a moral s a n c t i o n r a t h e r than any given combination 146 of s o c i a l t r a i t s s u s c e p t i b l e to o b j e c t i v e d e f i n i t i o n " . ' As W.R. Jones s t a t e s : The a n t i t h e s i s which opposed c i v i l i z a t i o n to barbarism was a h i g h l y u s e f u l c l i c h e , and one which served e q u a l l y w e l l as a means of s e l f - c o n g r a t u l a t i o n as a r a t i o n a l i z a t i o n f o r aggression.147 E n g l i s h d e s c r i p t i o n , t h e r e f o r e , became "a weapon of atta c k r a t h e r 148 than a standard of measurement". D e c h r i s t i a n i z a t i o n The act of d e c l a r i n g Irishmen u n c i v i l allowed Englishmen to move one step f u r t h e r i n t h e i r complex process of dehumanization; to the i n e v i t a b l e d e c h r i s t i a n i z a t i o n of the I r i s h . I say i n e v i t a b l e not only because r e l i g i o n was so strong i n the p s y c h o l o g i c a l make-up of Englishmen i n the s i x t e e n t h century, but because the E n g l i s h view of c i v i l i t y made i t impossible f o r the I r i s h to be C h r i s t i a n . A f t e r the Reformation, i t was not enough t h a t the I r i s h were Roman C a t h o l i c s , i t was necessary t h a t they be declared pagan. The p e c u l i a r nature of I r i s h C a t h o l i c i s m made t h i s very much e a s i e r . Edmund Campion, i n h i s H i s t o r y of I r e l a n d (15 71), devoted s e v e r a l pages to I r i s h r e l i g i o u s s u p e r s t i t i o n s and ignorance: In some corners of the land they used a damnable s u p e r s t i t i o n l e a v i n g the r i g h t arms of Infants males unchristened (as they tearmed i t ) to the i n - , tent i t might give a more ungracious and deadly blow. He describes how an I r i s h gentleman who came to a p r i e s t d e s i r i n g to confess had to be i n s t r u c t e d that murder was indeed a s i n . -51-the P r i e s t demaunded him, whether hee were f a u l t i n the sinne of Homicide? Hee answered, t h a t hee never w i s t the matter.to be haynous before, but being i n -s t r u c t e d thereof, hee confessed the murther of f i v e , the r e s t he l e f t wounded, so as he knew not whether they l i v e d or no,15 0 Even though he was a strong C a t h o l i c and could be expected to be more l e n i e n t towards the I r i s h , Campion wrote th a t among the w i l d e r s o r t of I r i s h he found n e i t h e r d i v i n e s e r v i c e nor any form of Chapelle... no A l t e r s at a l l . . . t h e M i s s a l or Masse booke a l l torne. I cannot t e l l whether the w i l d e r s o r t of I r i s h r y y e e l d d i v i n e honour' unto the moone f o r when they see her f i r s t a f t e r the change, commonly the bow the knee, and say the Lord's prayer...The shoulder blade bone of a sheep...they use to look through, and thereby f o r e t e l l of some corse short-l y to be c a r r i e d out of the house.151 Barnabe Rich commented on the Irishman's madde manner of f a s t i n g , t h a t marcheth i n equal manner, w i t h t h e f t , w i t h murder, w i t h Treason, w i t h drunkeness, wi t h whoredom,, and w i t h a l l manner of Sodometry?152 He wonders what type of r e l i g i o n would allow a 'kern' or a l e -house-keeper ("beastly, f i l t h y " women i n his opinion) t o be h o l i e r than the Pope' three times a week, and s p o i l , rob, r a v i s h , and mur-15 3 der f o r the next fou r . A Palesman, i n 1572, f e l t t h a t "the 'outward behavyor 1 o f the I r i s h made i t . 'seemer that 'they neyther love nor dredd God nor y e t hate the D e v e l l , they are superstycyous 154 and worshippers of images and open i d o l a t e r s ' " , and Edmund Tremayne determined that the I r i s h were n e i t h e r "Papists nor Pro-t e s t a n t s but r a t h e r such, as have nether f e a r nor l o v e of God i n 155 t h e i r harts that restrameth. them from i l l " . Edmund Spenser summed up p e r f e c t l y the E l i z a b e t h a n view of I r i s h r e l i g i o n when he wrote: -52-They are a l l P a p i s t s by t h e i r p r o f e s s i o n , but i n the same so b l i n d l y and b r u t i s h l y informed f o r the most p a r t as that you would r a t h e r t h i n k them as a t h e i s t s or i n f i d e l s . 1 5 6 As mentioned above, i t was impossible f o r the I r i s h to be declared f u l l y C h r i s t i a n . This was because of the p e c u l i a r con-ne c t i o n t h a t Englishmen made between C h r i s t i a n i t y and c i v i l i t y . For them, "a people could be c i v i l i z e d without being C h r i s t i a n (the Greeks and Romans were prime examples) but not c h r i s t i a n i z e d without f i r s t being made c i v i l . to admit that "the n a t i v e I r i s h were C h r i s t i a n would, t h e r e f o r e , have been to acknowledge them as 157 d i v i l i z e d a l s o " . To have acknowledged t h e i r c i v i l i t y , would have made the E n g l i s h i n t o conquerers of a c i v i l i z e d , C h r i s t i a n people, and would have a l s o e f f e c t i v e l y put the blame f o r any y v i o l e n c e squarely on E n g l i s h shoulders. I t was, t h e r e f o r e , impera-t i v e t h a t the I r i s h be considered pagan. I t was then only l o g i c a l t h a t before they could be c h r i s t i a n i z e d they had to be made c i v i l , and t h i s i n v a r i a b l y meant through the use of f o r c e . As Spenser wrote: i t i s expedient f i r s t to s e t t l e such a course of government there, as thereby both c i v i l d i s o r d e r s and e c c l e s i a s t i c a l abuses may be reformed and am-mended...Instruetion i n r e l i g i o n needeth q u i e t times, and ere we seek to s e t t l e a sound d i s c i p l i n e -^g i n the c l e r g y , we must purchase peace unto the l a i t y . Since he b e l i e v e d t h a t " i t i s i n v a i n to speak of p l a n t i n g of laws and p l o t t i n g of p o l i c i e s t i l they be al t o g e t h e r subdued", such peace 15 9 could only be purchased at the end of a sword. Essex r e a l i z e d t h i s when he s a i d that once the I r i s h had been compelled to obedience 16 0 "they would be e a s i l y brought to be of good r e l i g i o n " . -53-Once the I r i s h were declared pagan, no argument aga i n s t t h e i r d e s t r u c t i o n could p o s s i b l y apply, f o r i t would be no more a s i n to k i l l them than i t would be to k i l l an animal. G i l b e r t ' s 161 jejune d e s c r i p t i o n of h i s a t r o c i t i e s , as i l l u s t r a t e d above, stands as a p e r f e c t example. D e c h r i s t i a n i z a t i o n , t h e r e f o r e , formed a key l i n k i n the process of c o m p a r t m e n t a l i z a t i o n — t h a t i s the e r e c t i o n of p s y c h o l o g i c a l b a r r i e r s between normally r e l a t e d 162 mental phenomena. The E n g l i s h combined d e c h r i s t i a n i z a t i o n w i t h a form of h i g h l y negative s t e r e o t y p i n g , to make the I r i s h both pagan and u n c i v i l i z e d . In t h i s way, they were allowed to e r e c t a b a r r i e r between t h e i r own conscientious moral o b j e c t i o n s and the act of v i o l e n c e i t s e l f , and thereby e f f e c t i v e l y remove a l l the 16 3 mental b a r r i e r s to a g u i l t - f r e e massacre. Thus, the dehumanizing process was complete and a l l t h a t remained was to declare i t . Dehumanization We have already seen Churchyard and Moryson l i k e n i n g the I r i s h 164 to animals; what b e t t e r way to s t r e s s t h e i r inhumanity? Lord Deputy Sidney wrote i n 156 7, "matrimony among them i s no more regarded than conjugation between unreasonable beasts","'' 6 5 and S i r John Davies noted that i n t h e i r warring nature "they were l i t t l e b e t t e r than c a n n i b a l s , who do hunt one another, and he that hath most- stren g t h and swiftness doth eat and devour h i s followers"."'" 6 6 Cannibalism seems to have been a c l e a r i n d i c a t o r of inhumanity. But, whereas Davies merely l i k e n s the I r i s h to c a n n i b a l s , Sidney and Moryson go even f u r t h e r and supply a c t u a l examples. Sidney wrote of the. s t a t e of Munster when he took o f f i c e i n 1566: -54-Out of every corner of the woods and glans they (the I r i s h ) came creeping f o r t h upon, t h e i r hands, f o r t h e i r legs could not bear them; they looked l i k e anatomies of death; they spoke l i k e ghosts c r y i n g out of t h e i r graves; they d i d eat the dead c a r r i o n s ; . . . y e a they d i d eat one another soon after,.inasmuch as the very carcasses they spared not to drag out of t h e i r graves.167 And Moryson wrote: we read of horrors seen by S i r Arthur Chichester, S i r Richard Moryson...in t h e i r r e t u r n homeward at the end of March 1603: 'Three c h i l d r e n (whereof the e l d e s t was not above ten years old) a l l e a t i n g and gnawing w i t h t h e i r t e e t h the e n t r a i l s of t h e i r dead mother, upon whose f l e s h they had fed twenty days past, and having eaten a l l from the f e e t up-ward to the bare bones, r o a s t i n g i t c o n t i n u a l l y by a slow f i r e , were now come to the e a t i n g of her s a i d e n t r a i l s i n l i k e s o r t roasted, yet not d i v i d e d from the body, being as yet raw.168 Results of the Dehumanization Process: Violence 1 The major r e s u l t of t h i s e n t i r e dehumanization process was, of course, v i o l e n c e . We see Essex s l a u g h t e r i n g 200 I r i s h men and women at a Christmas f e a s t i n 15 74 a f t e r f e e l i n g that he was being 169 f r u s t r a t e d by the queen's r e s t r a i n i n g d i r e c t i v e s . We see Edward Barkley, a l i e u t e n a n t of the same e x p e d i t i o n , give "a graphic d e s c r i p t i o n of how they had d r i v e n the I r i s h from the p l a i n s i n t o the woods where they would freeze or famish w i t h the onset of w i n t e r , and (conclude) w i t h the smug observation 'how godly a deed i t i s to overthrowe so wicked a race the world may judge: f o r 170 my p a r t I t h i n k there cannot be a greater s a c r y f i c e to God'". I t was only through an extensive process of dehumanization t h a t we are able to see Barnabe Rich h a l f - j o k i n g l y , h a l f - s e r i o u s l y proposing 171 the c a s t r a t i o n of the e n t i r e mgracious l o t , or to see the -55-massacre of l o y a l I r i s h a t M u l l a m a s t — I r i s h who had remained i n confederacy w i t h the Crown, who were summoned by the E n g l i s h under the p r e t e x t of being r e q u i r e d f o r m i l i t a r y s e r v i c e , surrounded, 172 and slaughtered "without mercy". On the I r i s h s i de we see 0 ' S u l l i v a n Beare, w i t h a proper mixture of revenge and r e l i g i o n , p r o claiming w i t h p r i d e the k i l l i n g of E n g l i s h s e t t l e r s : O'Donnell, remembering the c r u e l t y w i t h which the E n g l i s h had thrown women, o l d men and c h i l d r e n from the bridge at E n n i s k i l l e n , w i t h a l l h i s forces invaded Connacht, which Richard Bingham was holding oppressed under h e r e t i c a l typranny... he destroyed the E n g l i s h c o l o n i s t s and s e t t l e r s , put them to f l i g h t , and slew them, spar i n g no male between f i f t e e n and s i x t y years o l d who was unable to speak Ir i s h . 1 7 3 I t i s p l a i n to see t h a t once the I r i s h were declared subhuman (and the E n g l i s h , h e r e t i c s ) any a t r o c i t y could take place w i t h impunity. "Conscience and empathy, as sources of g u i l t and com-passion, p e r t a i n to human beings; they can be evaded i f the human element i s f i r s t s u f f i c i e n t l y obscured"'.}}% S o ' i n e f f e c t ' d e _ humanization " f a c i l i t a t e ( d ) the t o l e r a t i n g of mass d e s t r u c t i o n through bypassing those psychic i n h i b i t i o n s against the tak i n g of human l i f e " , f o r those i n h i b i t i o n s were not operative once those 175 destroyed were no longer, by d e f i n i t i o n , human. Moral and C u l t u r a l S u p e r i o r i t y Another r e s u l t of the dehumanizing process was the r e i n f o r c e -ment i n the E n g l i s h mind of a strong sense of moral and c u l t u r a l s u p e r i o r i t y . George De Vos w r i t e s t h a t i t i s d i f f i c u l t f o r men i n dominant p o s i t i o n s to * avoid f e e l i n g s of p o s s i b l e r e t r i b u t i o n from ex-p l o i t e d segments of t h e i r own s o c i e t y . . . the greater -56-th e e x p l o i t a t i o n of subordinate groups, the greater the s o c i a l need to maintain e x t e r n a l symbols of statu s d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n . 1 7 6 W.R. Jones a p p l i e d t h i s form of argument to medieval Europe when he remarked: "The image of the barb a r i a n , whatever i t s h i s t o r i c a l context...was the i n v e n t i o n of c i v i l i z e d man who thereby expressed 177 h i s own strong sense of c u l t u r a l and moral s u p e r i o r i t y " . Such an argument seems t o have a l s o a p p l i e d to England i n the s i x -teenth century. Once v i o l e n t acts were perpetrated and exchanged i n I r e l a n d , we can p l a i n l y see the f u r t h e r strengthening of b a r r i e r s designed to d i s t i n g u i s h and separate the two nat i o n s . For Barnabe Ri c h , England's moral supremacy was c l e a r l y understood when he remarked: For I t h i n k , that i f these people (the I r i s h ) d i d once understand the pretiousness of ve f t u e , they would f a r r e exceed us; notwithstanding, our long experience i n the sovereignty of vertue.178 and the t i t l e of a 1618 work by Thomas Gainsford i s e q u a l l y r e v e a l -i n g : The Glory of England; or a true d e s c r i p t i o n of the many e x c e l l e n t prerogatives and remarkable b l e s s i n g s , whereby she triumpheth over a l l the nations i n the world. With a j u s t i f i a b l e comparison between h e r s e l f and the eminent kingdoms of the earth...179 The d e s c r i p t i o n of I r e l a n d was, i n essence, a means whereby the g l o r i e s of England could be f u l l y revealed. Any d i r e c t r e l a t i o n s h i p between the E n g l i s h and the I r i s h was not condoned, and when contact could not be prevented, i t was em-phasized that such contact was not between equals. This was accomplished by a u t o m a t i c a l l y condemning any and a l l I r i s h acts as barbarous without q u e s t i o n , and by laughing at them. A p e r f e c t -57-example i s Moryson's d e s c r i p t i o n of "plowing by t a i l " : The I r i s h used no harness or traces f o r horses drawing i n the plough or drawing sledges w i t h c a r r i a g e , but only fastened the plough and the c a r r i a g e by writhes, to the t a i l s of the horses (or garrans f o r so they c a l l them), whereby the t a i l s of them are commonly p u l l e d o f f , and the rumps bared.1^0 A c t u a l l y "plowing by t a i l " was a unique process designed to prevent rocks from damaging the plowshare and the I r i s h only used i t i n circumstances where t h e i r heavier plows, which were p u l l e d 181 by harnessed horses, were u n s u i t a b l e . For Moryson, however, such a p r a c t i c e could have no value. Elsewhere he was to make l i g h t of the ease w i t h which Irishmen d i v o r c e d t h e i r wives: I could name a great l o r d among them, who c r e d i b l y reported to have put away h i s w i f e of a good fam i l y and b e a u t i f u l , only f o r a f a u l t as l i g h t as wind (which the I r i s h i n general abhor), but I dare not name i t , l e s t I offend the perfumed senses of some whose censure I have i n c u r r e d i n that kind.1^2 By laughing i n t h i s way, the Elizabethans sought to show th a t they h e l d none of the I r i s h customs to be of any value to them whatso-18 3 ever, and t h i s e f f e c t i v e l y destroyed any hope there may have been f o r f u t u r e r e c o n c i l i a t i o n . For the E n g l i s h , t h e i r incessant search f o r something to condemn, when combined w i t h the necessary r e p e t i t i o n of o l d condemnations, u l t i m a t e l y l e d to even l e s s of an understanding of the I r i s h . They were, t h e r e f o r e , never able to l e a r n that the t r a n s m i s s i o n of c i v i l i t y from one s o c i e t y to another e n t a i l e d more than merely a forced conformity. Henry V I I I r e a l i z e d t h i s when he claimed, i n 1520, that a m i l i t a r y conquest of I r e l a n d would "b r i n g the I r i s h r y i n apparaunce donely of o b e i -184 saunce", but, f o r the E l i z a b e t h a n s , i t seemed only n a t u r a l t h a t -58-a people as b a r b a r i c and u n c i v i l as the I r i s h should be e a s i l y brought under t h e i r c o n t r o l . That they c o n t i n u a l l y f a i l e d d i d not increase E n g l i s h ' r e s p e c t — t h e i r sense of s u p e r i o r i t y would never 185 allow i t — b u t merely E n g l i s h hatred. Such s t i f l e d aggression could only lead to more and more v i o l e n c e . Their i n o r d i n a t e sense of moral and c u l t u r a l supremacy would al s o never allow the E n g l i s h to conceded."error or admit f a u l t . In June of 1573, at approximately the same time that S i r John P e r r o t t 186 was l e a v i n g hundreds hanging on the gibbets of Munster, S i r Edward F i t t o n wrote: "But God's w i l l be done, who help t h i s poor land, f o r the misery whereof we Englishmen are not i n the l e a s t g u i l t y " . 1 8 7 P a t r i c k O ' F a r r e l l w r i t e s t h a t (the) narrowly p o l i t i c a l c o n s t r u c t i o n (the English) put on t h e i r dealings w i t h I r e l a n d had the auto-matic e f f e c t of p l a c i n g the I r i s h i n the wrong... given the axiomatic p u r i t y of E n g l i s h good i n -t e n t i o n s (that the purpose of a l l governments i s . to govern e f f e c t i v e l y ) the inescapable f a c t t h a t " I r e l a n d was i l l - g o v e r n e d could be a t t r i b u t e d only to the I r i s h and t h e i r d e l i b e r a t e f r u s t r a t i o n s of (English) good in t e n t i o n s . 1 8 8 The E n g l i s h r a t i o n a l e was thus: The I r i s h possessed an. intense hatred of E n g l i s h government, a government which enshrined a l l the i d e a l s of c i v i l i z a t i o n — l a w and order, l i b e r t y , and p r o s p e r i t y . Since they r e j e c t e d i t , the I r i s h were culpable by d e f i n i t i o n , f o r they e f f e c t i v e l y made the governing of I r e l a n d impossible. When t h i s was combined w i t h the b e l i e f t h a t the I r i s h were i d l e , l a z y , f i l t h y , and b a r b a r i c , i t i s easy to see why the Elizabethans would never admit to e r r o r . Since I r i s h ways were n a t u r a l l y a n t i t h e t i c a l to a l l good government, t h e i r r e a c t i o n to England "as the hated -59-oppressor seemed i n c r e d i b l y perverse and i r r e s p o n s i b l e , indeed a 189 crime.against England". The E n g l i s h w r i t e r s , had, t h e r e f o r e , managed to base t h e i r n a t i o n a l i s m on g a e l i c f a u l t and,, i n t h i s way, make any I r i s h r e b e l l i o n appear as a crime a g a i n s t the Eng-l i s h s t a t e . I t only stood to reason t h a t , f o r some, the destruc-t i o n of each I r i s h man, woman, and c h i l d represented a blow f o r 190 England, and i t became a p a t r i o t i c duty to k i l l I r i s h . The ' C i v i l i z i n g ' , M i s s i o n To decree I r i s h r e a c t i o n as a crime against England was one argument which allowed the E n g l i s h to l e g i t i m a t e i n d i s c r i m i n a t e k i l l i n g , but i t d i d l i t t l e to j u s t i f y t h e i r a c t u a l presence i n I r e l a n d . The o l d argument that the I r i s h , l i v i n g under the tyranny 191 of t h e i r l o r d s , were c r y i n g out f o r E n g l i s h law and c i v i l i t y , simply no longer a p p l i e d , and the conversion of the I r i s h to the 'true' r e l i g i o n , though a g l o r i o u s motive, d i d not q u i t e have the cosmic impact t h a t a n a t i o n w i t h the magnitude of England deserved. I f i t could be decreed p a t r i o t i c to k i l l Irishmen i n defence of England, how much more g l o r i o u s i t would be i f t h a t v i o l e n c e could become p a r t of a grand c i v i l i z i n g e n t e r p r i s e on the same s c a l e as t h a t of the Roman conquests. This i s e x a c t l y what many of them proposed. S i r Thomas Smith "asserted 'that God d i d make apt and prepare t h i s nation-. .. to i n h a b i t e and reforme so barbarous a n a t i o n as that i s , and to b r i n g them to the knowledge and lawe were both a goodly and ecommendable deed, and a s u f f i c i e n t work of.our age', adding t h a t i t was England's c i v i c duty to educate the I r i s h -60-brutes ' i n vertuous labor and i n j u s t i c e , and to teach them our E n g l i s h lawes and c i v i l i t i e and leave robbyng and s t e a l i n g and 192 k i l l i n g one of another'". The support t h i s argument one c o n t i n -u a l l y f i n d s references to how the Romans brought the B r i t o n s i n t o - 19 3 c i v i l i t y - a n d that the* E n g l i s h should do the same f o r the I r i s h . Such arguments tend to suggest that Englishmen were developing a sense of c u l t u r a l genesis: the b e l i e f that s o c i e t i e s w i l l evolve over time and are i n a continuous s t a t e of e v o l u t i o n . England, i n t h i s case, had simply evolved at a f a s t e r rate?than had I r e l a n d 19 4 and was consequently seen as being at a higher stage of e v o l u t i o n . Th i s , however, i s only p a r t i a l l y t r u e . Medieval s c h o l a r s h i p lacked a sense of progress. They seemed to have l i t t l e n o t ion that a s o c i e t y could evolve w i t h time--that a s o c i e t y ' n a t u r a l l y ' evolved. People described by Greeks and Romans "were s t i l l r e f e r r e d to as possessing l i v i n g , f u n c t i o n i n g c u l t u r e s , t h e i r h a b i t s unchanged, . t h e i r h a b i t a t s unmodified". 195 There was no notion that these people might no longer even e x i s t . Therefore, the iconography of the Middle Ages portrayed a r r e s t e d types of human beings, represented over the passing c e n t u r i e s as performing unvarying ceremonies, i n unvarying costumes and w i t h unvarying c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s . Medieval anthropogeography i n t h i s sense was tough mental s t u f f , so o f t e n repeated, so durable, so s a t i s -f y i n g , t h a t by the time of the Renaissance many of i t s preconceptions had been accepted as re c e i v e d ex-perience, and were employed, to the confusion of thought, i n the i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of the new peoples of the New World. I r e l a n d was a p a r t of t h i s New World. E n g l i s h Renaissance s c h o l a r s h i p showed l i t t l e advance i n t h i s area. S o c i e t i e s were s t i l l very much seen as e n t i t i e s which r e --61-mained unchanged over the c e n t u r i e s . I do not b e l i e v e that there i s any strong evidence to "suggest t h a t the sixteenth-century Englishman saw hi m s e l f as e x i s t i n g i n an ev o l v i n g world. I do, however, f i n d evidence to suggest that he di d n ' t . During the Renaissance, one of the most important areas of study was th a t of the law. J.G.A. Pocock b e l i e v e s that "the h i s t o r i c a l outlook which arose i n each n a t i o n was i n p a r t a product 19 7 of i t s law", and that E n g l i s h h i s t o r i c a l thought s u f f e r e d under the l i m i t a t i o n of "having been compelled to contemplate the n a t i o n a l 19 8 past through one system of law alone". For six t e e n t h - c e n t u r y Englishmen, those a l t e r n a t e systems of law which had, i n f a c t , con-t r i b u t e d to the a c t u a l development of the Common Law, were not a v a i l a b l e f o r study. Consequently they were of the f i r m b e l i e f t h a t 19 t h e i r Common Law had grown from "the Common Custome of the Realm", and that i t was, t h e r e f o r e , as immemorial as was tha t custom. For E n g l i s h h i s t o r i a n s , then, the Common Law had always been England's law and had remained unchanged to t h e i r very day. "This by i t -s e l f encouraged them to i n t e r p r e t the past as i f i t had been governed by the law of t h e i r own day".^^ In t h i s d e f i n i t i o n there was no room f o r the concept of a ' n a t u r a l l y ' e v o l v i n g s o c i e t y . However, Renaissance t h i n k i n g d i d r e v e a l some d e f i n i t e changes. I f the concept of a n a t u r a l l y developing c u l t u r e was non-existent, the i d e a t h a t a s o c i e t y could progress and improve was d e f i n i t e l y there. F r a n c i s Bacon wrote words to the e f f e c t that "the I r i s h were too savage to accept the reformed r e l i g i o n which r e f l e c t e d a 201 su p e r i o r l e v e l of c i v i l i z a t i o n " , and those w r i t i n g on I r e l a n d -62-were of the f i r m o p i n i o n that they were 'improving' I r e l a n d by 'reducing' her to E n g l i s h c i v i l i t y . Therefore, the concept that two s t a t e s of c i v i l i t y could e x i s t and that England was at a higher s t a t e of c i v i l i t y than was I r e l a n d , was almost c e r t a i n l y accepted by E l i z a b e t h a n w r i t e r s . However, the means whereby England achieved that advanced s t a t e was not through a process of n a t u r a l development but r a t h e r through a f o r c i b l e r e d u c t i o n from barbarism at the time of the Roman conquest. This was the E l i z a b e t h a n view. I f S i r Thomas Smith had possessed a sense of n a t u r a l c u l t u r a l evolu-t i o n , h i s argument t h a t the I r i s h were i n need of an E n g l i s h exam-202 p i e i n order to achieve proper c i v i l i t y would have made l i t t l e sense, f o r why would I r e l a n d have need of England i f i t could achieve c i v i l i t y on i t s own accord. I b e l i e v e that i t was that medieval lack of a sense of e v o l u t i o n , s t i l l a p p l i c a b l e to the sixt e e n t h - c e n t u r y authors, that made i t d i f f i c u l t f o r them to envisage an I r e l a n d as d i f f e r e n t from t h a t of the stereotype. Therefore, s i n c e I r i s h s o c i e t y could not, i n t h e i r o p i n i o n , change on i t s own accord, i t needed the help of England; hence the Roman p a r a l l e l s were invoked. T.W. Moody, i n an a r t i c l e concerning S i r Thomas P h i l l i p s of Limavady, a common s e r v i t o r i n I r e l a n d , p o r t r a y s a c c u r a t e l y the t y p i c a l E n g l i s h a t t i t u d e s towards t h e , I r i s h . He re v e a l s i n h i s d e s c r i p t i o n of t h i s s i n g l e man the a t t i t u d e s of an e n t i r e genera-t i o n . We f i n d s t e r e o t y p i n g , n a t i o n a l i s m , a b i t of the 'grand c i v i l i z i n g ' theme, as w e l l as d e c h r i s t i a n i z a t i o n — t h e t o t a l E l i z a b e t h a n . For S i r Thomas -63-the I r i s h were a people sunken i n barbarism, whom the E n g l i s h had a d i v i n e r i g h t to exp r o p r i a t e and to r u l e . He saw himself as a pioneer of c i v i l i z a t i o n i n a land of savages. The C a t h o l i c r e l i g i o n to him.was mere s u p e r s t i t i o n , i t s . p r i e s t s c h i l d r e n of Satan... he never r e l a x e d , never ceased to.-be conscious' that the I r i s h around him were enemies, and nothing but constant v i g i l a n c e could save the B r i t i s h colony from eventual d i s a s t e r . 204. CHAPTER IV THE INTELLECTUAL DEVELOPMENT OF THE ENGLISH GENTRY We have seen t h a t the p o l i t i c a l and r e l i g i o u s s i t u a t i o n f a c i n g Englishmen by the mid-century n e c e s s i t a t e d a harsher p o l i c y — a p o l i c y which caused v i o l e n c e of an extreme n a t u r e — a n d r e s u l t e d i n the need f o r extensive j u s t i f i c a t i o n . I t i s here t h a t the funda-mental s h i f t i n m e n t a l i t y becomes most apparent. One must ask why the E n g l i s h w r i t e r s f e l t a need to l e g i t i m a t e t h e i r v i o l e n t p o l i c i e s i n a manner so much more complex than d i d t h e i r I r i s h counterparts, for,, as we have seen, t h e i r j u s t i f i c a t i o n s i n v o l v e d an i n t r i c a t e network of l e g a l , p h i l o s o p h i c a l , . p o l i t i c a l , and r e l i g i o u s arguments as w e l l as the s t e r e o t y p i n g , d e c h r i s t i a n i z i n g , and u l t i m a t e dehuman-i z i n g of the I r i s h people. The I r i s h , i t seems, had no need f o r extensive l e g i t i m a t i n g agents. One must ask why, f o r the E n g l i s h commentators, r e l i g i o n was not s u f f i c i e n t j u s t i f i c a t i o n i n i t s e l f , f o r i n medieval times and f o r sixteenth-century Irishmen "not only was r e l i g i o n an acceptable sanction f o r conquest, i t was the 205 only unarguably proper one". The answers p a r t i a l l y l i e i n a c l o s e r examination of the d i f f e r e n c e between I r i s h and E n g l i s h r e l i g i o u s . m e n t a l i t i e s . R e l i g i o n i n I r e l a n d and i n England operated on two d i s t i n c t mental planes. For the I r i s h m e n t a l i t y everything was viewed " i n terms of heaven and h e l l . . . t h e r e was no world of the n e u t r a l a f f a i r s of men. E t e r n i t y c a s t i t s l i g h t — o r g l a r e — i n t o the ante-room of 206 d a i l y l i f e , c o l o u r i n g a l l t h a t was there". The I r i s h were not r e b e l l i n g simply over the r e l i g i o u s aspects of Edwardian and -65-E l i z a b e t h a n p o l i c y , f o r , i f t h a t were so, there would have been l i t t l e to r e b e l over. But they a l s o r e b e l l e d over the p o l i t i c a l , s o c i a l , and economic aspects of t h a t p o l i c y . However, in. the I r i s h mind, r e l i g i o n determined a l l , so that every p o l i t i c a l act was a l s o a r e l i g i o u s act and every a c t of economic and s o c i a l impor-tance was l i k e w i s e reacted t o on the b a s i s of i t s r e l i g i o u s e f f i c a c y . I t would be a mistake to c a r r y such an argument too f a r f o r the I r i s h were by no means unanimous i n t h e i r outlook. There were c e r t a i n l y those i n I r e l a n d who had d i f f e r e n t views on r e l i g i o n . However, w i t h respect to I r i s h v i o l e n c e i n the s i x t e e n t h century such an argument seems to a p p l y — r e l i g i o n was the only j u s t i f i c a t i o n needed. V i r t u a l l y a l l the I r i s h r e b e l l i o n s a f t e r the E n g l i s h 207 Reformation had some evident b a s i s i n r e l i g i o n . T.W. Moody w r i t e s t h a t " r e s i s t a n c e to E n g l i s h a u t h o r i t y became inseparable from the cause of the Counter-Reformation i n I r e l a n d , and the r e b e l l i o n s i n the l a t t e r p a r t of E l i z a b e t h ' s r e i g n took on the 2 0 8 character of r e l i g i o u s wars...". The Reformation and, perhaps more than anything e l s e , the d e s t r u c t i o n of sacred symbols, spurred the I r i s h i n t o v i o l e n t r e a c t i o n . During the d e s t r u c t i o n of the monasteries the E n g l i s h were described by I r i s h a n n a l i s t s as having burned the images, s h r i n e s , and r e l i c s of the s a i n t s of I r e l a n d and England; they l i k e w i s e burned the c e l e b r a t e d image of > Mary atT.r±mv which used to perform wonders and m i r a c l e s , which used to heal the b l i n d , the deaf, the c r i p p l e d , and persons a f f e c t e d w i t h a l l kinds of diseases... though great was the p e r s e c u t i o n of the Roman Emperors agai n s t the Church, s c a r c e l y had there ever come so great a persecution from Rome as this.209 -66-And i n 1552 the church at K i e r e n was looted by E n g l i s h s o l d i e r s and r e l a t e d to Irishmen by t h e i r a n n a l i s t s thus: There was not' l e f t , moreover, a b e l l , s m a ll or l a r g e , an image, or an a l t a r , or a book, or a gem, or even g l a s s i n a window, from the w a l l of the church out, which was not c a r r i e d off.210 Such i n c i d e n t s only served to confirm the arguments of the J e s u i t p r e i s t s , t h a t the E n g l i s h were i n league w i t h Satan and represented everything t h a t was d e s p i c a b l e . With each new a t r o c i t y , an under-current of I r i s h v i o l e n c e and vengeance was molded i n t o a deep-set r e l i g i o u s hatred w i t h the Counter-Reformation as i t s f o c a l p o i n t . I t was, i n essence, a form of r e l i g i o u s n a t i o n a l i s m which the I r i s h bards and J e s u i t p r i e s t s c o n t i n u a l l y r e a s s e r t e d : May we never t a s t e of death nor q u i t t h i s v a l e of tears U n t i l we see the E n g l i s h go begging down the years, Packs on t h e i r back to earn a penny pay In l i t t l e l e a k i n g boots, as we went i n our day. Time has o'erthrown, the wind has blown away A l a s t a i r , Caesar, such great names as they--See Troy and Tara where i n grass they l i e — Even the very E n g l i s h might yet die!211 For t h i s reason, the i n f l u e n c e of Roman C a t h o l i c i s m i n I r e l a n d d i d not weaken under E n g l i s h f o r c e ; the pressure only drove the I r i s h f u r t h e r under the i n f l u e n c e of the papacy. Their r e l i g i o n , i n e f f e c t , became the only agency capable of commanding nation-wide a l l e g i a n c e and o f , t h e r e f o r e , s u c c e s s f u l l y counteracting the f o r c e 212 of " s e l f - i n t e r e s t e d E n g l i s h domination". In f a c t , "a t o t a l I r i s h i d e n t i t y . . . w a s f i n d i n g , under c o e r s i v e pressure, i t s strong-213 e s t and most coherent expression i n C a t h o l i c i s m " . Therefore, f o r the I r i s h , P r o t e s t a n t i s m , and consequently England, was d i r e c t l y l i n k e d w i t h Satan. The A n g l i c a n s e r v i c e was dubbed "the -67-d e v i l ' s s e r v i c e " and a contemporary I r i s h h i s t o r i a n recorded t h a t when S i r John N o r r i s , Lord General of I r e l a n d , d i e d i n 1597, the d e v i l had come to c o l l e c t h i s s o u l which N o r r i s had promised to 214 . him. In the same way, Captain Ward, who served w i t h S i r Humphrey G i l b e r t , wrote that G i l b e r t was so noted f o r s e v e r i t y t h a t "they accounting him more l i k e a d e v i l than a man, and are so a f r a i d of him t h a t they d i d leave and give up 26 c a s t l e s . I . I t h i n k that they 215 w i l l not defend any c a s t l e s a g a i n s t him". The I r i s h view of the E n g l i s h Reformation and a l l that i t e n t a i l e d was,„therefore, t h a t a new heresy and a new e r r o r (had arisen) i n England through p r i d e , v a i n g l o r y , a v a r i c e , and l u s t , and through many strange s c i e n c e s , so t h a t the men of England went i n t o o p p o s i t i o n to the Pope and to Rome.216 Thus, as f a r as the I r i s h were concerned, the E n g l i s h , once they were h e r e t i c s , had no moral c l a i m to power. The E n g l i s h response to the Counter-Reformation was not a c o u n t e r - r e l i g i o u s argument, but a p o l i t i c a l one. In the " e v o l u t i o n of the E n g l i s h mind, there was a strong tendency both to subordinate 217 r e l i g i o n to p o l i t i c s , and to separate them a l t o g e t h e r " . This made i t extremely d i f f i c u l t f o r the A n g l i c a n Church to operate w i t h any degree of e f f e c t i v e n e s s i n I r e l a n d . For Englishmen, a f t e r a b r i e f p e r i o d of support at the mid-century, the Church became merely another department of the State and, i n 1574, one o f f i c i a l even proposed th a t i n the f u t u r e , b i s h o p r i c s should be given to s o l d i e r s . Such tendencies i n E n g l i s h thought not only f a i l e d "to allow f o r the t h i n k i n g of a people who accepted no such subordination or -68-s e p a r a t i o n , (but) i t a l s o c o n t r i v e d t o d e p i c t r e l i g i o u s d e c l a r a t i o n s 219 as a sham". For example, i n 1611, S i r George Carew s t a t e d that i r e b e l l i o n of the I r i s h would take place "under the v e i l of r e l i g i o n and l i b e r t y " , and a 1607 proclamation of James I s t a t e d that r e l i g i o n was "a cloak t h a t serves too much i n these days to cover many e v i l 220 i n t e n t i o n s " . So, i n essense, England was attempting to conquer I r i s h s p i r i t u a l f o r c e w i t h temporal power, and a l l i t succeeded i n doing was to d r i v e the I r i s h r e s i s t a n c e f u r t h e r i n t o the realm 2 of the s p i r i t u a l , even to the p o i n t of c r e a t i n g a c u l t of martyrdom. Therefore, a f t e r the Reformation, the I r i s h could not view the c o n f l i c t i n p o l i t i c a l terms, f o r t h e i r view of the world of p o l i t i c s was one which placed the Church at the centre of a l l a u t h o r i t y . They could not see the extension of E n g l i s h c o n t r o l i n I r e l a n d as any-t h i n g but the i n v a s i o n of a f o r e i g n r e l i g i o n . The E n g l i s h , on the other hand, could not view the I r i s h a l l e g i a n c e to the Pope as any-t h i n g but an a l l e g i a n c e to a f o r e i g n P r i n c e . Hence, each thought out and formulated ideas on two d i f f e r e n t i n t e l l e c t u a l planes and 222 i t was i n c o n c e i v a b l e t h a t they should meet. Thus, r e l i g i o u s v i o l e n c e l e d to hatred which only l e d to more v i o l e n c e , and every a c t i o n committed by one side merely r e a f f i r m e d the p o s i t i o n of the other. As a r e s u l t of t h i s subordination of r e l i g i o n to p o l i t i c s , the E n g l i s h w r i t e r s appeared to be very d o u b t f u l as to the e f f i c a c y of not only t h e i r v i o l e n t p o l i c i e s , but a l s o t h e i r very presence i n I r e l a n d . The purely r e l i g i o u s argument no longer f u l l y s u f f i c e d and the E n g l i s h were consequently i n need of continuous reassurance -69-and moral support. As P a t r i c k O ' F a r r e l l w r i t e s : England's f a i l u r e to contest the r e l i g i o u s f u t u r e i n I r e l a n d on e t h i c a l grounds, or indeed on any other ground than that of c o e r s i o n , amounted to an a b d i c a t i o n of any moral c l a i m to governing authority.223 As a r e s u l t of t h e i r constant f a i l u r e to convert the I r i s h to any form of c i v i l i t y , r e l i g i o u s or otherwise, and a f t e r numerous examples of poor I r i s h showing t h e i r hatred and d i s d a i n f o r Ehg-224 l i s h ways of l i f e , . a l l the o l d arguments w i t h which H e n r i c i a n Englishmen had j u s t i f i e d t h e i r presence i n I r e l a n d , g r a d u a l l y l o s t t h e i r v a l i d i t y . I r e l a n d had r e j e c t e d England and the o l d argument th a t the poor oppressed I r i s h were begging f o r the E n g l i s h to reform 225 them, no longer a p p l i e d . I t simply was not t r u e . However, the E n g l i s h gentry seemed l o a t h to face the b r u t a l r e a l i t i e s of t h e i r s i t u a t i o n and admit that they were j u s t i f y i n g t h e i r a c t i v i t i e s p u r ely by r i g h t of conquest and not through some humanitarian c i v i l i z i n g p r i n c i p l e s . They, t h e r e f o r e , needed some other method of j u s t i f y i n g t h e i r v i o l e n t acts i n I r e l a n d . I t i s f o r t h i s reason t h a t we f i n d such a p r o l i f e r a t i o n of arguments which emphasized the negative aspects of I r i s h l i f e ; t h e i r barbarism, t h e i r t o t a l i n c i v i l i t y ^ t h e i r ' n a t u r a l ' s l o t h f u l n e s s , and e v e n t u a l l y t h e i r paganism and inhumanity. They f e l t o b l i g e d to go to extreme l e n -gths to formulate s e c u l a r arguments designedlto sooth t h e i r i n j u r e d sense of moral i n t e g r i t y . Thus, as the.conquest of I r e l a n d became more d i f f i c u l t , new arguments to l e g i t i m a t e the s t r u g g l e were ad-vanced. The fundamental question, however, i s why n o n - r e l i g i o u s arguments were needed at a l l . I t i s probable t h a t one o r i g i n - of t h i s s e c u l a r i z a t i o n of E n g l i s h t h o u g h t — f o r t h i s s ubordination of r e l i g i o n to p o l i t i c s — l i e s i n the E n g l i s h Reformation. W. Gordon Zeeveld w r i t e s t h a t "the d e c l a r a t i o n of r o y a l supremacy was the most f a r reaching event i n terms of the h i s t o r y of ideas i n the Tudor 2 26 p e r i o d " . I t s consequences f o r I r e l a n d were to be e q u a l l y phen-omenal . In England, the renaissance i n s e c u l a r p o l i t i c a l thought was c a r r i e d f o r t h i n the wake of a new humanist t r a d i t i o n — a t r a d i t i o n created and spurred on by a r e l i g i o u s j u r i s d i c t i o n a l controversy. Henry V I I I , i n need of a j u s t i f i c a t i o n f o r h i s own supremacy, s o l i -c i t e d men of learning—men whose f i r s t a l l e g i a n c e was to the Crown and to England r a t h e r than to a u n i v e r s a l i s t C a t h o l i c r e l i g i o u s 227 d o c t r i n e . Humanists, mostly obscure s c h o l a r s — S t a r k e y , H a r v e l , Morrison, and others from the Padua sc h o o l — w e r e c a l l e d upon to f i n d a j u s t i f i c a t i o n f o r the E n g l i s h Reformation and f o r the r o y a l supremacy. \ These were men who "regarded the papal r e c e s s i o n as a v i n d i c a t i o n of t r a d i t i o n a l E n g l i s h l i b e r t i e s . Henry's cause was t h e i r cause, and England...was the major stake; the major i s s u e . . . 22 8 was n a t i o n a l independance". They d e l i b e r a t e l y transcended r e l i g i o u s d o c t r i n a l disputes to concentrate on two seemingly con-t r a d i c t o r y ideas: t r a d i t i o n and the 'renaissance' of c l a s s i c a l 229 forms of "good l i v i n g " . For our purposes the importance of t h i s l i e s not so much i n these ideas themselves but i n t h e i r s e c u l a r nature. "The animating and;*persisteht force of the humanists who formulated E n g l i s h p o l i c y i n the s i x t e e n t h century", and who d i r e c t l y a f f e c t e d England's I r i s h p o l i c y , "was t h e i r fundamental 230 l i b e r a l i s m " and, I might add, t h e i r obvious lack of r e l i g i o s i t y . -71-Gone were the past a l l - p e r v a s i v e r e l i g i o u s j u s t i f i c a t i o n s — j u s t i -f i c a t i o n s no longer f u l l y o p e r a t i v e i n the new i n t e l l e c t u a l c l i -mate. The humanists accepted the r o y a l supremacy as an e s t a b l i s h e d f a c t and turned t h e i r e f f o r t s to p r o v i d i n g i t w i t h a l o g i c a l and h i s t o r i c a l ' r a i s o n d'etre'. The question f o r them was riot the m o r a l i t y , but the l e g a l i t y of the supremacy.2 31 A c t u a l l y the government had no choice but to l i b e r a l i z e the i n t e l l -e c t u a l c l i m a t e of the country, because i t could no longer r e l y upon orthodox r e l i g i o u s theology to a f f i r m i t p o s i t i o n of a u t h o r i t y . A l t e r n a t e forms of j u s t i f i c a t i o n were e s s e n t i a l , j u s t as they were i n the I r i s h example. Humanists took up t h e i r challenge as a na-t i o n a l i s t i c e n t e r p r i s e so t h a t f o r them the Reformation became a mark of E n g l i s h sovereignty. As we have seen, t h i s a p p l i e d 2 32 d i r e c t l y to I r e l a n d where r e l i g i o n became "a badge of conquest", an a s s e r t i o n of E n g l i s h p o l i t i c a l sovereignty. r I t was, t h e r e f o r e , the need to transcend r e l i g i o u s d o c t r i n a l j u s t i f i c a t i o n s that c a l l e d f o r t h a change i n E n g l i s h i n t e l l e c t u a l patterns of thought. Humanists were, i n essence, forced to separ-233 ate r e l i g i o u s and p o l i t i c a l ideas and i n the process e s t a b l i s h e d a p a t t e r n seen i n the d i v e r s i t y of j u s t i f i c a t i o n s used f o r I r e l a n d . Although there seems to have been no d i r e c t l i n k between the Refor-mation scho l a r s and those who wrote on I r e l a n d , the former are important because they began a process of s e c l a r i z a t i o n which was to s i g n i f i c a n t l y i n f l u e n c e the E l i z a b e t h a n j u s t i f i c a t i o n s f o r v i o -lence. A f t e r 1550, those commenting on I r e l a n d continued the argu-mentive process f i r s t e s t a b l i s h e d by humanists i n the r e i g n of -72-Henry V I I I — a process which favoured l e g a l , n a t i o n a l i s t i c , and p o l i t i c a l arguments over t h a t of r e l i g i o n . I r e l a n d was the v i c -t i m of these n a t i o n a l i s t i c , s e c u l a r i z i n g , r e a c t i o n s i n E n g l i s h thought throughout the l a t t e r h a l f of the s i x t e e n t h century. For I r e l a n d , t h e r e f o r e , the major importance of t h i s E n g l i s h phenomena was the changes i t wrought i n the mental e v o l u t i o n of the E n g l i s h gentry. I t was the changing i n t e l l e c t u a l c l i m a t e , brought about i n la r g e p a r t by the Reformation t t h a t allowed i n -t e l l i g e n t E l i z a b e t h a n s to transcend the mental b a r r i e r s imposed by an a l l - p e r v a s i v e r e l i g i o u s m e n t a l i t y and achieve a d i f f e r e n t , though not n e c e s s a r i l y a higher, s t a t e of i n t e l l e c t u a l f o r m u l a t i o n . Once Englishmen had been forced to wholly l e g i t i m a t e t h e i r s p i r i t u a l acts ( i e . the r o y a l supremacy) by s e c u l a r arguments, r e l i g i o n , as the c r i t i c a l foundation of t h e i r thought, was s e r i o u s l y challenged. R e l i g i o n could no longer serve as the u l t i m a t e j u s t i f i c a t i o n . By the l a t t e r h a l f of the s i x t e e n t h century, t h e r e f o r e , many E n g l i s h commentators on I r e l a n d were forced to formulate extensive s e c u l a r arguments to j u s t i f y v i o l e n c e against t h e i r r e l i g i o u s enemies because the s p i r i t u a l b a s i s of t h e i r thought had been undermined by the e f f e c t s of the Reformation. With a comparison between I r i s h and E n g l i s h m e n t a l i t i e s , t h i s phenomena becomes f u l l y apparent. Modern day men make use of masquerades to j u s t i f y recreant a c t s , but consciously r e a l i z e that under other circumstances t h e i r deeds may be declared as e v i l . - The very reason that they seek a r a t i o n a l i z a t i o n f o r t h e i r a c t i o n s denotes t h i s f a c t . The e x t r a -ordinary v i o l e n c e i n v o l v e d i n a wholesale massacre, forms a grey area i n an otherwise black and white, good and e v i l s i t u a t i o n . -73-To d e c l a r e an enemy s o c i e t y e v i l does not n e c e s s a r i l y r e q u i r e a moral j u s t i f i c a t i o n , but to massacre i t s women and c h i l d r e n i s c l e a r l y another matter. Such an a c t i o n exceeds'the normal psy-c h o l o g i c a l l i m i t s of s o c i e t y , and d i r e c t l y c o n f l i c t s w i t h the community's c o l l e c t i v e sense of moral i n t e g r i t y . Therefore, some r a t i o n a l i z a t i o n i s e s s e n t i a l — a r a t i o n a l i z a t i o n which, i n e f f e c t , l e g i t i m i z e s e v i l - d o i n g without recourse to m o r a l i t y and divorces v i o l e n c e from the realm of conscience. Thus, once e v i l i s removed from the realm of m o r a l i t y i t can no longer be judged by normal e t h i c a l standards, and a l l p s y c h o l o g i c a l r e s t r i c t i o n s to acts of extreme c r u e l t y w i l l be e f f e c t i v e l y removed. The s i x t e e n t h - c e n t u r y Irishman d i d not have t h i s modern a b i l i t y , f o r he could not as yet f u l l y d i v orce h i s s e c u l a r a c t i o n s from h i s moral conscience and thereby j u s t i f y h i s v i o l e n c e without recourse to m o r a l i t y . The i d e n t i f i c a t i o n of a l l aspects of l i f e w i t h r e l i g i o u s m o r a l i t y made the conception of a purely s e c u l a r sphere of l i f e — a sphere v o i d of r e l i g i o u s p r o b i t y , conscience, and u l t i m a t e judgement before G o d — v i r t u a l l y impossible. Whereas modern man makes a conscious d e c i s i o n not to apply normal e t h i c a l r e s t r a i n t s to v i o l e n t acts i n order to j u s t i f y them, s i x t e e n t h -century Irishmen were not able to do so, f o r they were s t i l l by and l a r g e unable to d i s t i n g u i s h c l e a r l y between the r e l i g i o u s , moral, and e t h i c a l sphere of l i f e , and that which we would l a b e l as se c u l a r . Hence, .for the I r i s h , no grey area e x i s t e d ; every a c t was termed e i t h e r good or e v i l based on i t s r e l i g i o u s nature. There-f o r e , i n order t o do considerable e v i l , a gainst Englishmen, no e x p l i c i t moral j u s t i f i c a t i o n was needed, it.was understood. Once -74-the E n g l i s h were declared h e r e t i c s any f u r t h e r l e g i t i m a t i o n f o r v i o l e n c e perpetrated against them was unnecessary, and nor i s i t 2 34 f o u n d . ^ The E n g l i s h w r i t e r s , however, .viewed the s i t u a t i o n from a t o -t a l l y d i f f e r e n t i n t e l l e c t u a l p e r s p e c t i v e . Although r e l i g i o n and p o l i t i c s 7 w e r e s t i l l s t r o n g l y bound, each mutually supportive of the other, the E n g l i s h mind could, much more c l e a r l y than the I r i s h , 2 35 make a d i s t i n c t i o n between the s e c u l a r and the s p i r i t u a l realms. This means tha t whereas the I r i s h were unable to conceive of the p o s s i b i l i t y t h a t t h e i r v i o l e n c e could be wrong without drawing t h e i r e n t i r e system of b e l i e f i n t o question, the E n g l i s h could be and were plagued w i t h doubts as to the e f f i c a c y of t h e i r a c t i o n s . In other words, when one has t o t a l l y combined the sanction of r e l i g i o u s m o r a l i t y w i t h p h y s i c a l a c t i o n , as d i d the I r i s h , there i s no p o s s i b i l i t y t h a t t h a t a c t i o n can be declared morally wrong, simply because, i n t h i s sense, no a c t i o n can be devoid of m o r a l i t y . However, w i t h the d i v o r c i n g of r e l i g i o u s m o r a l i t y from p h y s i c a l acts of v o i l e n c e , as i n the case of England, the p o s s i b i l i t y e x i s t s t h a t those acts can deviate from that m o r a l i t y . One has, i n essence,.created a l t e r n a t e systems of reference, which, i n the case of sixteenth-century England, had the twofold e f f e c t of c a s t i n g doubt where there had p r e v i o u s l y been no doubt, and of al l o w i n g f o r the expansion of i n t e l l e c t u a l c a p a c i t i e s such as to permit Englishmen to draw upon concepts h i t h e r t o i n c o n c e i v a b l e . Simply because many of th e E n g l i s h gentry were at a d i f f e r e n t stage of mental e v o l u t i o n d i d not n e c e s s a r i l y mean tha t they were more i n t e l l i g e n t . A d i s t i n c t i o n must be made between the concept -75-of 'progress' and that of 'improvement'. I f one approaches the A n g l o - I r i s h s t r u g g l e w i t h the a t t i t u d e that what i s c i v i l i z e d i s n e c e s s a r i l y good and what i s 'savage' must be bad, one immediately adopts the p h i l o l o g i c a l and inherent mental c a t e g o r i z a t i o n s of the dominent ' c i v i l i z i n g ' f o r c e . . . i n t h i s case the E n g l i s h . We must drop the assumption" that ' c i v i l i z i n g ' n e c e s s a r i l y denotes moral improvement and t h a t the s o c i e t y being c i v i l i z e d i s or was somehow backward. What I am saying i s t h a t the I r i s h were merely using a d i f f e r e n t e p i s t e m o l o g i c a l framework, every b i t as sound as that of 2 36 the E n g l i s h , but simply belonging to an o l d e r t r a d i t i o n . Though f o r some r a d i c a l P r o t e s t a n t s the purely r e l i g i o u s ' d i f f e r e n c e would s u f f i c e to v i n d i c a t e t h e i r extreme measures i n I r e l a n d , most El i z a b e t h a n w r i t e r s , as we have seen, found a need f o r more ex-tensiv e j u s t i f i c a t i o n s based upon c i v i l i t y , law, j u s t i c e , conquest, and u l t i m a t e l y the very nature of humanity. CONCLUSION The s i x t e e n t h century was the most important era i n the h i s -t o r y of A n g l o - I r i s h r e l a t i o n s . In t h i s century, la r g e numbers of Englishmen confronted the I r i s h f o r the f i r s t time, and formulated a t t i t u d e s and p o l i c i e s on the b a s i s of that c o n f r o n t a t i o n which were to determine the f u t u r e s t a t e of r e l a t i o n s f o r c e n t u r i e s to come. In r e t r o s p e c t i t appears almost i n e v i t a b l e that t h a t meeting would be h o s t i l e , f o r i n the f i n a l a n a l y s i s ' c i v i l i z a t i o n ' has a l -ways triumphed over 'savagery'.. But t h i s i s perhaps the wrong approach. What was seen i n I r e l a n d was not so much a c o n f r o n t a t i o n of c i v i l i t y versus barbarism, but a c o n f r o n t a t i o n between two d i s -t i n c t c u l t u r e s , each possessing d i s p a r a t e and e q u a l l y v a l i d sys-tems of i n t e l l e c t u a l f o r mulation. P r i o r to the E n g l i s h Reforma-t i o n and the t u r m o i l of the mid-century, E n g l i s h and I r i s h could f u l l y comprehend the motives and a s p i r a t i o n s of each other, and 237 base t h e i r p o l i c i e s upon c l e a r l y understood p r i n c i p l e s . Such was not the case i n the l a t e r s i x t e e n t h century. D i f f e r e n c e s i n r e l i g i o u s m e n t a l i t y spawned d i f f e r e n c e s i n mental formulation and each n a t i o n was to carve i t s own path independently, each f i r m i n i t s b e l i e f i n the e f f i c a c y of i t s cause. So perhaps i t was i n e v i t a b l e that England and I r e l a n d would meet w i t h weapons i n hand, not because c i v i l i z a t i o n always triumphs over barbarism, but because, i n t h i s case, the ' c i v i l i z e d ' and the 'barbaric' lacked the a b i l i t y t o communicate on the same i n t e l l e c t u a l plane. NOTES Great B r i t a i n , P u b l i c Record Office,'; Calendar of St a t e Papers,  I r e l a n d , (1598-99), p. 3 00., H e r e i n a f t e r . r e f e r r e d to )as C.S.P.  I r e . ATSO see C.E.. Maxwell, I r i s h H i s t o r y -from. Contemporary Sources  1509-1610 (London: George A l l e n and Unwin L t d . , 1923), pp. 211-12. 2 C.S .P. I r e . , I (1509-73), p. 535. c f . D.B. Qumn, The E l i z a - bethans and the I r i s h (Ithaca: C o r n e l l U n i v e r s i t y Press, 1966), p. 1267" 3 Thomas Churchyard, "General R e h e r s a l l of Warres" quoted i n N. Canny, The E l i z a b e t h a n Conquest of I r e l a n d (New York: Barnes arid Noble, 1976), p. 122. He went on to j u s t i f y the slaughter of I r i s h women and c h i l d r e n by c l a i m i n g "that the k i l l y n g of theim by the sworde was the waie to k i l l the menne of warre by famine". 4 See N.Z. Davis, "The R i t e s of Vi o l e n c e ; R e l i g i o u s R i o t s i n Sixteenth-Century France," S o c i e t y and Culture i n E a r l y Modern  France, by N.Z. Davis (Stanford: U n i v e r s i t y Press, 1975). 5 N. Canny, Conquest, p. 122. Quoted i n W.G. G o s l i n g , The L i f e of S i r Humphrey G i l b e r t (London: Constable and Co. L t d . , 1911), p. 52. 7 C f . N.Z. Davis, " R i t e s of V i o l e n c e , " pp. 186-87. p I b i d . , pp. 160, 156-57. The goal of v i o l e n c e i n the French example was to r i d the community of ' p o l l u t i o n 1 . P r o t e s t a n t s were ves s e l s of p o l l u t i o n and C a t h o l i c s p o l l u t e d the land w i t h t h e i r r e l i c s . There could be no common ground. 9 Edmund Spenser, A View of the Present State of I r e l a n d ed. by W.L. Renwick (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1070), p. 181. 1 0 S e e S i r James P e r r o t t , The Chronicle of I r e l a n d 1584-1608 ed. by H. Wood (Dublin: I r i s h Manuscripts Commission, 1933), p. v i . Ludowick B r y s k e t t ' s work was e n t i t l e d "A Discourse on C i v i l L i f e " (1606) . S i r Peter Carew i s a f i n e example. See E.M. Hinton, I r e l a n d  through Tudor Eyes ( P h i l a d e l p h i a , 1935), and C.H. G a r r e t t , The Marian E x i l e s (Cambridge: U n i v e r s i t y Press, 1938.) -78-12 Quinn, ;Elizabethans, pp. 109-15. 1 3 I b i d . , p. 125. 14 Barnabe R i c h , A New D e s c r i p t i o n of I r e l a n d (1610), p. 15. 1 5D.B. Quinn, "Henry V I I I and I r e l a n d 1509-1534", I r i s h  H i s t o r i c a l S t u d i e s , XII (1960), 323. Indeed, the E a r l of Desmond entered i n t o an agreement w i t h F r a n c i s I i n 1523 (at a time when England was at war w i t h France), and again w i t h Charles V i n 1528. 1 6 I b i d . , pp. 322-23. 17 M.E. James, "The Concept of Order and the Northern R i s i n g , " Past and Present, LX (1973), 49. 18 In the s i x t e e n t h century people were not d i f f e r e n t i a t e d by ' r a c e 1 . The term 'race' meant a b i o l o g i c a l d i f f e r e n c e , and "as long as man...was regarded as monogenetic i n o r i g i n and homogeneous i n descent" the term could not apply. M. Hodgen, E a r l y Anthro- pology i n the S i x t e e n t h and Seventeenth Centuries ( P h i l a d e l p h i a : U n i v e r s i t y of P h i l a d e l p h i a Press, 1964), p. 214. 19 Moryson, f o r example, proposed t h a t the I r i s h be pushed i n t o the i n t e r i o r of the I s l a n d to make room f o r E n g l i s h s e t t l e r s on the coast, and that "no l e s s Cautions were to be observed f o r u n i t i n g them and keeping them from mixing w i t h the other, then i f these newe Colonyes were to be l e d d to i n h a b i t t among the barbarous Indians". F. Moryson, "The Commonwealth of I r e l a n d . An I t i n e r a r y . . , c o n t a i n i n g h i s ten years travel..."(1617) i n Shakespeares Europe ed. by C. Hughes (New York: B. Blom, 1967), p. 249. The seven-teenth-century s t r u g g l e of the O l d - E n g l i s h to keep from being lumped w i t h the 'mere' I r i s h under t h a t s i n g l e l a b e l i s another example. See A. C l a r k e , The Old-English i n I r e l a n d (Xondon: Macgibbon and Kee, 19 66). 20 Spenser, A View, pp. 176-77. 2 1 I b i d . 22 See below,.chapter IV. 2 3 G r e a t B r i t a i n , State Papers, Henry V I I I , XI v o l s . , Published under a u t h o r i t y of His Majesty's Commission, 1830-1834, v o l . I I , p. 52. H e r e i n a f t e r r e f e r r e d to as S.P. Henry V I I I . -79-24 S.P. Henry V I I I , I I I , 333-34. Also see Maxwell, I r i s h H i s t o r y , p. 106. 2 5 C.S.P. I r e . (1588-92), p. 205. A l s o see Maxwell, I r i s h H i s t o r y , p. 75. 2 6S.P. Henry V I I I , I I , 291. Alen to St. Leger (1537). 2 7S.P. Henry V I I I , I I I , 27. 2 8 S . P . Henry V I I I , I I , 173. Also see Maxwell I r i s h H i s t o r y , p. 23. 29 Maxwell, I r i s h H i s t o r y , p.74. 3 0S.P. Henry V I I I , I I , 10. 31 Fynes Moryson, " D e s c r i p t i o n of I r e l a n d 1599-1603," i n I r e l a n d under E l i z a b e t h and James I , ed. by H. Morley (London: George Routledge, 1890), p. 419. 3 2 I b i d . , pp. 422-24. 3 3S.P. Henry V I I I , I I , 12. 34 S.P. Henry V I I I , I I , 13. Accusing the Lord Deputy of c o r r u p t i o n was not an uncommon p r a c t i c e . I t a c t u a l l y became a hazard of the job i n the l a t t e r h a l f of the s i x t e e n t h century once p o l i t i c a l f a c t i o n s and extensive patronage networks began to grow i n England. S i r Roger'Wilbraham, f o r example, was accused of having used Her Majesty's exchequer f o r h i s own p r o f i t , of conniving w i t h I r i s h barons against the queen, and of t a k i n g excess fees f o r h i s s e r v i c e s . The charges brought against him (and endorsed by Lord Burghley) concluded w i t h : "He may p r a i s e God f o r coming i n t o I r e l a n d , f o r that hath been b e t t e r to him than Gray's Inn would have been i n many years...The country wish him away, f o r he wringeth them too much, and the people are poor, whereof he hath no c o n s i d e r a t i o n , but to serve h i s own t u r n " . C.S.P. I r e . (1596-97), 497. As quoted i n S i r Roger Wilbraham, J o u r n a l of S i r Roger Wilbraham 1593-1616 ed. by H.S. S c o t t , 1902, p. i x . These c r i t i c i s m s , however, were examples of i n d i v i d u a l p o l i t i c a l r i v a l r i e s and lacked the s i n c e r i t y of the 1515 author who had nothing to g a i n , and p o s s i b l y much to lose by expressing h i s f e e l i n g s . , -80-3 5S.P. Henry V I I I , I I , 10, 15. 3 6 Edmund Spenser, "A B r i e f Note of I r e l a n d , " quoted, i n Maxwell, I r i s h H i s t o r y , pp. 250-52. 37 ° I b i d . 3 8 S i r John Davies, "A Discovery of the True Causes why I r e l a n d was never Subdued...-; " (1612) , i n I r e l a n d under E l i z a b e t h and James I ed. by H. Morley (London: George Routledge, 1890), pp. 218-19. 39 I b i d . , pp. 218-19. Davies 1 account i s much more moderate than most of h i s p e r i o d . The greater number of authors seemed to f e e l o b l i g e d to p r a i s e some aspect of the I r i s h , u s u a l l y t h e i r f i g h t i n g s k i l l or t h e i r comely appearance,.but they u s u a l l y l i m i t e d t h e i r p r a i s e to a very few paragraphs. Some, l i k e Moryson and Churchyard found v i r t u a l l y nothing of v i r t u e i n I r e l a n d . 4 0S.P. Henry V I I I / I I I , 34 8. Robert Cowley's Pl a n f o r the Reformation of I r e l a n d (1541). 41 Davies, "A Discovery," p. 219. 42 S.P. Henry V I I I , I I , 53. Henry even " d e s i r e d to abandon the Medieval system of separating the E n g l i s h and the I r i s h i n I r e l a n d , f o r he b e l i e v e d that a d i v e r s i t y of 'tongue, language, order and h a b i t ' kept the country d i v i d e d , whereas a l l should be 'wholly together one body 1 whereof he was to be 'the only head under God'". (Maxwell, I r i s h H i s t o r y , pp. 23-4. 4 3S.P. Henry V I I I , I I , 43. 44 See above, p. 1. 4 5 S p e n s e r , A View, pp. 11-12, 21, 24-5. 4 6S.P. Henry V I I I , I I , 52. 4 7 I b i d . 48 See Ralegh's p r a i s e f o r G i l b e r t f o l l o w i n g S i r Humphrey's death, above, p. 3, note 6. -81-49 S.P., Henry V I I I , I I , 53. I b i d . 51 Cf. D.G. White, "The Reign of Edward VI i n I r e l a n d , " I r i s h H i s t o r i c a l S t u d i e s , XIV (1965), 198. ~^Cf. M.L. Bush, The Government P o l i c y of P r o t e c t o r Somerset (London: Edward Arn o l d Ltd. , 1975) , p. 2~. The act of g a r r i s o n i n g e s t a b l i s h e d the idea that I r e l a n d could be c o n t r o l e d by d i r e c t settlement of Englishmen amidst the I r i s h . E n g l i s h s o l d i e r s and p o t e n t i a l I r i s h r e b e l s , f o r the f i r s t time i n the s i x t e e n t h century, were brought i n t o d i r e c t and permanent contact on a day to day b a s i s . 53 Cf. I b i d . , p. 5. Northumberland wholeheartedly continued Somerset's I r i s h program. See Bush, Somerset, p. 134. 5 4Quoted i n White, "Edward V I , " p. 2 06. 55 Quoted i n P.. O ' F a r r e l l , I r e l a n d ' s E n g l i s h Question (London: B.T. B a t s f o r d L t d . , 1973), p. 29. 5 6Quoted i n White, "Edward VI," pp. 201-202. 5 7 I - b i d . , p. 200. 5 8 See Maxwell, I r i s h H i s t o r y , pp. 27rl28-29. I t i s i n t e r e s t i n g to note that Henry d i s t r i b u t e d the c o n f i s c a t e d monastic lands e q u a l l y among the O l d - E n g l i s h and the I r i s h l o r d s . 59 R.D. Edwards, " I r e l a n d , E l i z a b e t h I , and the Counter-Reformation," i n E l i z a b e t h a n Government and S o c i e t y , ed. by S. B i n d o f f (London: Ath'lone Press, 1961) , p. 320. 6 0 R.D. Edwards, Church and State i n Tudor I r e l a n d (Dublin:' Talbot Press, 1935), p. 126. " 6 1 I b i d . 62 R. Bagwell, I r e l a n d Under the Tudors V o l . I (London: Longmans, Green and Co., 1885-90), pp. 380-81. A l s o see M. MacCurtain, Tudor and S t u a r t I r e l a n d (Dublin: G i l l and Macmillan, 1972) f o r r a d i c a l i s m of Bale and Goodacre. -82-6 3 ' Quoted i n Edwards, Church and Sta t e , p. 131. ^ " C o n c i l i a t i o n , c o e r s i o n , and the p rotes'tan t reformation," G. A. Hayes McCoy, i n A-New. H i s t o r y of I r e l a n d , ed. by T.W. Moody e t . a l . (Oxford: C. Larendon Press, 1976), pp. 73-74. 6 5Edwards, Church and S t a t e , pp. 139-40. In 1551 C r o f t staged a p u b l i c debate (on the question of r e l i g i o u s reform) between Dowdall, Archbishop of Armagh, and S t a p l e s , Bishop of Meath, i n the hope of reaching some compromise. Leland suggests t h a t C r o f t was attempting "to labour by persuasion and address, to so f t e n h i s ' (Dowdall's) o p p o s i t i o n , and r e c o n c i l e him to the new r e g u l a t i o n s of p u b l i c worship". (Thomas Leland, H i s t o r y of I r e l a n d from the  Invasion of Henry I I , 3 v o l s . , I I (London: 1773), p. 197. A l s o See P.P. Wright S i r James C r o f t 1518-1590, (an unpublished M.A. Thesis, U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia, T969), p. 20. Primate Dowdall, however, could only remark that he "wolde never be bishope: where H o l i e Masse...was abolished". (MacCurtain, Tudor and  Stu a r t I r e l a n d , p. 65) Subsequently he l e f t the country and remained i n - e x i l e u n t i l r e c a l l e d by Mary I . Apart from t h i s b r i e f p e r i o d , the E n g l i s h Church i n I r e l a n d was to re c e i v e from government agencies l i t t l e help i n the spread of Prote s t a n t i s m i n tha t country. This f a c t only makes the p e r i o d of the P r o t e c t o r a t e i n England a l l the more s i g n i f i c a n t . 6 6 Quoted i n Quinn, E l i z a b e t h a n s , p. 133. 6 7 Edwards, Church and St a t e , p. 261. 6 8 I b i d . , pp. 260-61. 69 Cf. Wright, S i r James C r o f t , p. 15. 7 0 W h i t e , "Edward VI," p. 211. 71 . Quoted i n Maxwell, I r i s h H i s t o r y , pp. 34-5. 72 N. Smelser, "Some Determinants of D e s t r u c t i v e Behavior," i n Sanctions f o r E v i l ed. by N. Sanford and C. Comstock (San Fra n c i s c o : Jossey-Bass Inc. P u b l i s h e r s , 19 71), p. 17. 73 Above, p. 9, note 14. 74 See Maxwe11, I r i s h H i s t o r y , pp. 187-91. For examples a l s o see' White, "Edward VI," pp. 204-05, and T.W. Moody, A New H i s t o r y  of I r e l a n d , I I I (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1976), p. 71. -83-75 Spenser, A View, p. 181. Spenser s t a t e d t h a t one of h i s major purposes i n w r i t i n g h i s . "View" was. t o secure I r e l a n d against Spain, see A View, p. 140. 76 Maxwell, I r i s h H i s t o r y , p. 182. 77 C.S.P. I r e . , I (1509-73), 413. A l s o see Maxwell, Contempor- ary, p. 169. Indeed, as f a r as the I r i s h were concerned they were waging a r e l i g i o u s war; below, chapter IV. 7 8 O ' F a r r e l l , Question, p. 26. 79 Davies,."A Discovery," p. 292. 80 Cf. Hodgen, Anthropology, p. 196. 81 O ' F a r r e l l , Question, p. 27. In the case of I r e l a n d , hos-t i l i t y was mixed w i t h f e a r , f o r the I r i s h were seen not only as v i c i o u s , b r u t a l and execrable, but a l s o powerful and i n s i d i o u s . 82 Above, pp. 1-2. 83 Viscount Buttevant wrote a l e t t e r to C e c i l t h a t year which r e f e r r e d to Crosby as the one man best s u i t e d to r e v e a l the " c e r t a i n t y of a l l t hings i n t h i s kingdom (of Ireland) and p a r t i -c u l a r l y of t h i s province (of Munster)" C.S.P. I r e . , (1599-1600), 226. 84 . S i r Roger Wilbraham, J o u r n a l of S i r Roger Wilbraham, p. 26. I b i d , 8 6 1 Moryson as quoted i n Quinn, E l i z a b e t h a n s , p. 140. 8 7 See N.Z. Davis, " R i t e s of V i o l e n c e " . 8 8 Quoted i n Canny, Conquest, p. 135. 8 9 I b i d . , p. 128. 90 Smelser, "Determinants," p. 22. 91 Cf. 0 ' F a r r e l 1 , Question, p. 29. That she f e l t o b l i g e d to make such a statement i s i n i t s e l f r e v e a l i n g . I t i s almost a t a c i t -84-admission t h a t near e x t i r p a t i o n was being c a r r i e d out. 92 ' " Quoted i n Gosling,. G i l b e r t , p. 48. 93 Quoted i n Canny, Conquest, pp. 120-21. 9 4 Smelser, "Determinants," p. 22. In t h i s case, the power of personal i n f l u e n c e , and by recourse to c e r t a i n l e g i t i m a t i n g norms such as the de l e g a t i o n of r e s p o n s i b i l i t y , the processes of d e c h r i s t i a n i z a t i o n and dehumanization, and.even by recourse to l e g a l maxims. Each of these w i l l be d e a l t w i t h below. 95 O ' F a r r e l l , Question, p. 2. 9 6 T. Duster, "Conditions f o r G u i l t - F r e e Massacre", i n Sanc- t i o n s f o r E v i l ed. by Sanford and Comstock (San F r a n c i s c o : Jossey-Bass Inc., 1971), p. 31. 9 7 See Quinn, E l i z a b e t h a n s , p. 7-8. 9 8 Quoted i n Canny, Conquest, pp. 128-29. Also see below, pp. 9 9F.M. Jones, Mountjoy 1563-1606 (Dublin: Clonmore, 1958), p. 158. There e x i s t many c o n t r a d i c t i o n s i n t h e i r w r i t i n g s , even sometimes w i t h i n the same work. Barnabe Rich, f o r example, accuses the I r i s h of being "rude, u n c l e a n l i e , and u n c i v i l , so they are very c r u e l l , bloudie minded, apt and ready to commit any k i n d of mi s c h i e f e " . He then goes on to say tha t "I do not impute t h i s so much to t h e i r n a t u r a l i n c l i n a t i o n , as I do t h e i r education". A New D e s c r i p t i o n (1610), p. 15. However, when i t s u i t s h i s pur-poses s e v e r a l pages l a t e r , the I r i s h are "by nature" c r u e l and t h e i r cruelty'seems to have no s t r u c t u r e or d i r e c t i o n . I b i d . , p. 17-18. Ri c h , elsewhere accuses I r i s h women of " i d l e n e s s " , "base-ness", and of "having l i t t l e p r a c t i c e e i t h e r i n p r i d e or good huswifery", ( I b i d . , p. 36.) whi l e Spenser claimed t h a t "The I r i s h -women (have) the t r u s t and care of a l l t h i n g s , both at home and i n the f i e l d s " . (quoted i n Quinn, E l i z a b e t h a n s , p. 77.) Al s o see Moryson's c o n t r a d i c t i o n s as enumerated by Quinn, E l i zabethans, pp. 64-6. 1 0"'"Smelser, "Determinants," p. 17. C.S.P. I r e . , (1574-85), 54. Quoted i n Quinn, E l i z a b e t h a n s , pp. 124-25. -85-"*"^3Quoted i n Quinn, E l i z a b e t h a n s , p. 125. 10.4..,.. I b i d . 105 -Quoted i n Jones, Mountjoy, p. 158. Mountjoy was the Lord Deputy who defeated Tyrone at the end of the r e i g n of E l i z a b e t h . 10 6 . _ Quinn, E l i zabethans, p. 139. 1 0 7 C f . I b i d . , p. 119. " ^ 8 I b i d . , p. 131. 109 K.S. Bottigheimer, E n g l i s h Money and I r i s h Land (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 19 71), p. 10. P e r r o t t ' s work was e n t i t l e d "Discourse touching the Reformation of I r e l a n d " (1581). 1"'"0Above, pp. 1-2. A l s o see D.B. Quinn, " I r e l a n d and S i x -teenth-Century E x p a n s i o n , " H i s t o r i c a l S t u d i e s , . I (1958), pp. 27-8, where P e r r o t t ' s a t t i t u d e s and p o l i c i e s are l i k e n e d to those used by Spain i n the New World. "'""''"'"Cf. Canny, Conquest, p. 127. 112 Quinn, E l i z a b e t h a n s , p. 130. 113 Moryson, " I t i n e r a r y , " p. 258. 114 Quoted i n G o s l i n g , G i l b e r t , p. 47. 115 Smelser, "Determinants," p. 17. 116 Quoted i n Quinn, E l i z a b e t h a n s , p. 12 8. 117 P. H a l l i e , " J u s t i f i c a t i o n and R e b e l l i o n , " i n Sanctions f o r  E v i l ed. by Sanford and Comstock (San F r a n c i s c o : Jbssey-Bass Inc., 1971), p. 254. 1 1 8 C f . I b i d . 119 Quoted i n G o s l i n g , G i l b e r t , p. 47. 120 Davies, f o r example, b e l i e v e d t h a t I r e l a n d must f i r s t be -86-brought'to c i v i l i t y before i t could be taught the ways .of good government. (Canny, Conquest, p.' 135). 121 "What Smith and Essex r e a l l y wanted was to d r i v e out the r u l i n g e l i t e and r e t a i n the m a j o r i t y of the p o p u l a t i o n as d o c i l e c u l t i v a t o r s " and v i r t u a l s laves of E n g l i s h l a n d l o r d s . Canny, Conquest, p. 130. 122 Canny, Conquest, p. 135. 123 - ^ I b i d . , p. 121. 124 See Canny, Conquest, pp. 128-29. A l s o see below, pp. 42-3. 125 Quoted i n Canny, Conquest, p. 130. Davies, "A Discovery," p. 264. 127 Davies i s w r i t i n g mostly i n the past tense. Since he f e l t t h a t I r e l a n d had indeed been subdued by h i s time ( a f t e r the Tyrone r e b e l l i o n ) , lie i s , t h e r e f o r e , j u s t i f y i n g a c t i o n s that h i s f o r e -runners had committed. 12 8 S i r John Davies, Le Primer Report des Cases & Matters...en  l e s Courts d e l Roy en I r e l a n d (London, 1615) , p. 9. 129 Davies, "A Discovery," p. 264. To s t r e s s h i s p o i n t he wrote: "heretofore the ne g l e c t of the law made the E n g l i s h de-generate and become I r i s h ; and now the execution of the law doth make the I r i s h grow c i v i l and become E n g l i s h " . 1 3 0 I b i d . , p. 265. The I r i s h l e g a l system imposed f i n e s ( u s u a l l y of c a t t l e ) r a t h e r than p h y s i c a l punishment as compensation f o r crimes. 131 Davies,."A Discovery," p. 219. 132 Quinn, E l i z a b e t h a n s , p. 129. 133 Davies, "A Discovery," p. 165. Al s o see Quinn E l i z a b e t h a n s , p. 129. 134 Quoted i n Bottigheimer, Money, p. 19. -87-135 Quoted i n Hodgen, An thropology, p. 146. 136 Smelser, "Determinants," p. 23. 137 Hodgen, Anthropology, p. 66. 1 3 8 I b i d . , p. 168. 139 For example of l a z i n e s s see Quinn, E l i z a b e t h a n s , pp.. 76-78. For ignorance, see Roger Hutchinson "The Image of God" (1550) quoted i n Quinn, E l i z a b e t h a n s , p. 22. 140 George T u r b e r v i l l e , T r a g i c a l Tales (1587). Quoted i n Quinn, E l i z a b e t h a n s , p. 23. 141 See above, p. 36, note 100. 142 Moryson, " I t i n e r a r y , " pp. 162-64. 143 Churchyard quoted i n Maxwell, I r i s h H i s t o r y , p. 318. 144 Moryson, " I t i n e r a r y , " p. 193. 145 Cf. V.W. Bernard e t a l . , "Dehumanization," i n Sanctions  f o r E v i l ed. by Sanford and Cornstock (San F r a n c i s c o : Jossey-Bass Inc., 1971), p. 105. Even the words used to denote Irishmen con-t r i b u t e d to t h e i r general degradation: " w i l d " I r i s h , " i d l e " I r i s h e t c . 146 F. Jennings, Invasion of America (Chapel H i l l : U n i v e r s i t y of North C a r o l i n a Press, 1975), p. 8. 147 W.R. Jones, "The Image of the Barbarian i n Medieval Europe," i n Comparatives Studies i n S o c i e t y and H i s t o r y , X I I I (1971), p. 377. Also see Jennings, Invasion of America, pp. 6-7. 148 Jennings, Invasion of America, p. 8. 149 Edmund Campion, " H i s t o r y of I r e l a n d " (1571), i n Ancient  I r i s h H i s t o r i e s ed. by S i r James Ware (1633) , p. 21. A l s o see Barnabe Ri c h , A New D e s c r i p t i o n , Chapter 14, f o r more s u p e r s t i t i o n s . 150 Campion,. "History 1, 1 pp. 21-2. -88-151 Quoted i n Hodgen, Anthropology, p. 365. Campion e v e n t u a l l y became a C a t h o l i c martyr i n England. 152 Ri c h , A New D e s c r i p t i o n , pp. 10-17. 153 I b i d . He concluded t h a t the I r i s h were more "heathenish than amongst a people that had n e i t h e r known nor heard of God". (A Short Survey (1609), p. 2. "These views were common i n the E l i z a b e t h a n accounts of I r e l a n d . See Davies, "A Discovery," p. 292. 154 Canny, Conquest, pp. 12 3-24.. 155 I b i d . , p. 124. A l s o see other examples i n O ' F a r r e l l , Question, p.-25; Canny, Conquest, pp. 123-24; and Moryson, " I t i n e r a r y , p. 190. "^^Edmund Spenser, A View of the Present State of I r e l a n d ed. by W.L. Renwick (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1970), p. 8TI 157 Canny, Conquest, p. 125. 158 Spenser, A View, pp. 84-6. 159 * I b i d . , p. 12. Cf. O ' F a r r e l l , Question, p. 27. 1 6 1 A b o v e , p.%'2, note 119. 162 D e f i n i t i o n from Bernard et a l . , "Dehumanization,", p. 103. 16 3 F r a n c i s Jennings, Invasion of America, p. 60, s t r e s s e d that such an argument a l s o a p p l i e d to the i n v a s i o n of North America and the g u i l t - f r e e s l a u ghter of Indian t r i b e s . 164 Above, p. 4-9, l o c a t e d at notes 142-44. "''^Quoted i n O ' F a r r e l l , Question, p. 26. 1 6 6 D a v i e s , "A Discovery," p. 291. 16 V Quoted i n G o s l i n g , G i l b e r t , p. 37. -89-16 8 Moryson, "A H i s t o r y , " p . 14. For another example see W i l l i a m Farmer's account of 1601 i n Quinn, E l i z a b e t h a n s , pp. 139-40. I t i s i n t e r e s t i n g to note t h a t i n the 1620s, w i t h I r e l a n d s a f e l y i n England's nest, Luke Ger.on.was able to be s a r c a s t i c about the whole a f f a i r . He wrote " L e t t us converse w i t h the people. Lord,, what makes, you so squeamish--be not a f f r a y d . The Irishman i s no Cannibal1 to eate you up nor no lowsy Jack to o f f e n d you". See C.L. F a l k i n e r , I l l u s t r a t i o n s of I r i s h H i s t o r y and  Topography (London: 1904), p. 356. 169 Canny, Conquest, p. 121. 1 7 0 I b i d . , p. 121. 171 R i c h , A New D e s c r i p t i o n , p. 23. 172 Annals of the four Masters, pp. 169 5-97 as quoted i n Maxwell, I r i s h H i s t o r y , p. 236. A l s o see Bagwell, Tudors, I I , pp. 130-1. 17 3 Quoted i n Maxwell, I r i s h H i s t o r y , p. 211. 174 . Bernard et a l . , "Dehumanization," p. 109. 175 / 3 I b i d . , p. 103. X 7 6 G. De Vos, " C o n f l i c t , Dominance, and E x p l o i t a t i o n , " i n Sanctions f o r E v i l ed. by Sanford and Comstock (San F r a n c i s c o : Jossey-Bass Inc.,1971), pp. 162-63. 177 W.R. Jones, The Image, p. 435. v 178 R i c h , A New D e s c r i p t i o n , p. 17. 179 See Appendix to Quinn, E l i z a b e t h a n s , p. 16 2. 180 Quoted i n Quinn, E l i z a b e t h a n s , p.78. 1 8 1 I b i d . , pp. 78-9. 1 8 2 I b l d . , pp. 81-2. 3 Duster* "Conditions", p. 27. -90-1 8 4 S . P . Henry V I I I , I I , 52. L e t t e r to E a r l of Surrey. 1 8 5 C f . O ' F a r r e l l , Question, p. 25. Above, p. 1. 1 8 7C.S.P. I r e . , (1509-73), p. 508. Quoted i n Quinn, E l i z a - bethans , p i 129. 1 8 8 0 ' F a r r e l l , Question, p. 5. 1 8 9 C f . I b i d . , pp. 5-6. 1 9 0 G i l b e r t i s a p e r f e c t example. He saw h i s 'work' merely as a job f o r which he was poorly p a i d . He impoverished himself i n I r e l a n d because i t was h i s 'duty' as an Englishman to do so. See G o s l i n g , G i l b e r t , pp. 47-50. 191 See 1515 r e p o r t , above, p. 14V -„ A l s o see Quinn, E l i z a b e t h a n s , pp. 50-52. -19 2 Canny, Conquest, p. 128. 1 9 3 F o r one example, see S i r James P e r r o t t , C h r o n i c l e , p. 4. 19 4 Canny, Conquest, pp. 12 8-30 makes such an argument. 195 Cf. Jodgen, Anthropology, p. 34. 1 9 6 C f . I b i d . , p. 54. 19 7 J.G.A. Pocock, The Ancient C o n s t i t u t i o n and the Feudal  Law (Cambridge: U n i v e r s i t y Press, 1957), p. v i i . 19 8 I b i d . , p. v i i i . 19 9 Davies, Le Primer Report..." p. 2. (preface). 2 0 0 P o c o c k , Ancient C o n s t i t u t i o n , p. 30. 2 0 1 O , F a r r e l l , Question, p. 22. -91-2 0 2 A b o v e , p. 62. 203 S i r James P e r r o t t agreed when he s a i d t h a t "the c h e i f e s t means to begat c i v i l i t i e " was through o u t s i d e . i n f l u e n c e brought by "commerce w i t h forayne nacions". ( C h r o n i c l e p . 16.) 204 T.W. Moody, " S i r Thomas P h i l l i p s of Livavady, S e r v i t o r , " I r i s h H i s t o r i c a l S t u d i e s , I (1938-39), p. 272. 205 Jennings, Invasion of America, p. 44. 206 O ' F a r r e l l , Question, p. 4. 207 i e . r e b e l l i o n of S i l k e n Thomas i n the 1530s (see R.D. Edwards, Church and S t a t e , p. 4); that of James Fitzmaurice i n 1569 (see O ' F a r r e l l , Question, p. 23); and those of the Geraldine League i n 15 39 (see Edwards, Church and S t a t e , p. 115. 2 0 8 Moody, New H i s t o r y , p. x l i . 209" - "Annals of the Four Masters" quoted i n Maxwell, I r i s h  H i s t o r y , pp. 128-29. A l s o see Bagwell Tudors, I , p. 304-5, 312 and Edwards, Church and S t a t e , p. 152 f o r other examples. 210 "Annals of the Four Masters" quoted i n Edwards, Church  and S t a t e , pp. 260-1. 211 Quoted i n O ' F a r r e l l , Question, p. 30. 212 Edwards, Church and S t a t e , p. x l i i . 213 O ' F a r r e l l , Question, p. 31. 214 I b i d . , p. 22. 215 G o s l i n g , G i l b e r t , p. 45. For Churchyard's quotation to same e f f e c t see G o s l i n g , p. 51. 216* " Annals of the four Masters quoted i n Maxwell, I r i s h H i s t o r y , pp. 128-9. 217 O ' F a r r e l l , Question, p. 24. -92-2 1 8 C f . Edwards, Church .and S t a t e , pp. 220-21. 219 O ' F a r r e l l , Question, p. 24. 2 20 Maxwell, I r i s h H i s t o r y , p. 42. 221 - 0 ' F a r r e l l , Question, pp. 19, 44. The execution of Bishop O'Devany saw C a t h o l i c s "cut o f f h i s f i n g e r s , toes, even h i s f l e s h as sacred r e l i c s " . I b i d . , p. 44. See Edwards, Church and State f o r a d e t a i l e d l i s t of I r i s h martyrs. 2 2 2 0 ' F a r r e l l , Question,, pp. 28-,-42. 223 I b i d . , p. 21. 9 94 See Maxwell, I r i s h H i s t o r y , pp. 191, 152-3. 2 25 See Jennings, Invasion of America, pp. 7-8 f o r the medxeval roots of the idea t h a t Englishmen were c a r r i e r s of c i v i l i z a t i o n , and see Canny, Conquest, p. 119 f o r the sixteenth-century a p p l i -c a t i o n of t h i s argument. 9 9 f\ W.G. Zeeveld, Foundations of Tudor P o l i c y (London: Methuen and Company L t d . , 1948), p. 3. 227 I b i d . , I n t r o d u c t i o n , Passim. 22 8^_, . n — I b i d . , p. 7. 229 * I b i d . , p, 115. 2 30 u I b i d . , p.-269. 2 3 1 I b i d . , p. 121. 2 3 2 B a g w e l l , Tudors, I , p. 312. 2 33 Starkey, f o r example " i n s i s t e d on the n e c e s s i t y of separating e c c l e s i a s t i c a l from secular government and thus reco-gnized the p o s s i b i l i t y of a s e l f - s u f f i c i e n t s e c u l a r s t a t e " . Zeeveld, Foundations, p. 124. -93-234 Jennings uses much the same argument i n reference to the Crusades. The f a c t that t h e / i n f i d e l s were enemies of God meant th a t they were "outside the p r o t e c t i o n of.the moral law a p p l i -cable to tha t god's devotees... the laws of moral o b l i g a t i o n sanc-tioned behavior on only one side of that chasm". The i n e v i t a b l e r e s u l t was t h a t "no slaughter was impermissible, no l i e d i s -honorable, no breach of t r u s t shameful, i f i t advantaged the champions of true r e l i g i o n " . Jennings, Invasion of America, p. 6, 2 3 5Above', pp. 6 7j-8. -2 36 For the h i s t o r i a n , "the opposing absolutes of e v i l savagery and good c i v i l i z a t i o n (must)become morally n e u t r a l and r e l a t i v e l y comparable as ' s o c i e t i e s ' and ' c u l t u r e s ' " . Jennings, Invasion of America, p. 13. ( 2 3 7 A b o v e , p. l ' l . SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY Primary Bacon, F r a n c i s . The Works of F r a n c i s Bacon. 7 v o l s . E d i t e d by J . Spedding. London: Longmans, Green,.1868-1890. Bale, John, Bishop of Ossory. Vocacyon. of John Bale. 1552 (STC 1308) . B r y s k e t t , Ludowick. A Discourse of C i v i l L i f e . London: 1606 (STC 3958) . Campion, Edmund. "Hi s t o r y of I r e l a n d . " (1571), Ancient I r i s h H i s t o r i e s . E d i t e d by S i r James Ware. 1633. (STC 25067). " D e s c r i p t i o n of I r e l a n d 1599-1603." I r e l a n d under  E l i z a b e t h and James I . E d i t e d by H. Morley.. London: George Routledge, 1890. C a r e w , S i r George. Pacata H i b e r n i c a , I r e l a n d Appeased and Reduced... E d i t e d by Thomas S t a f f o r d . 1633. Calendar of Carew Manuscripts. Vol.. 3 (1589-1600) E d i t e d by J.S. Brewer and Wm. B u l l e n . London: Longmans, Green, Reader, and Dyer; ( e t c . , e t c . ) , 1867-73.: Churchyard, Thomas. G e n e r a l l R e h e r s a l l of Warres. London: 1579. (STC 5226) . Davies, S i r John. " P l a n t a t i o n of U l s t e r : A L e t t e r from S i r John Davies concerning the State of I r e l a n d . " (1610) I r e l a n d  under E l i z a b e t h and James I . E d i t e d by H. Morley. London: George Routledge, 1890. "A L e t t e r from S i r John Davies...to Robert, E a r l of > S a l i s b u r y , touching the State of Monaghan, Fermanagh, and Cavan." (160 7) I r e l a n d under E l i z a b e t h and James I . E d i t e d by H. Morley. London: George Routledge, 1890. -95-"A Discovery of the True Causes .why I r e l a n d was never Subdued..." (1612) I r e l a n d .under, Elizabeth., and James I . E d i t e d by H.. Morley. London: George Routledge, 1890. Le Primer Report des Cases & Matters en l e s ResoTues & Adjudges eh l e s Courts d e l Roy en .Ireland. Dublin: 1615 (STC 6361) . D e r r i c k e , John. Image of Ire1and. London: J . Daie, 15 81. Dymmok, John. A T r e a t i c e of I r e l a n d . (1600?) Dublin: I r i s h A r c h a e o l o g i c a l S o c i e t y , 1843. Gainsfor d , Thomas.- "The Glory of England..." (1618) The E l i z a - bethans and the I r i s h , by D.B. Quinn. It h a c a : C o r n e l l U n i v e r s i t y Press, 1966, p. 162. Geron, Luke. "A Discourse of I r e l a n d . " (1620) I l l u s t r a t i o n s of  I r i s h H i s t o r y and Topography. E d i t e d by C.L. F a l k i n e r . London, 1904. Harington,. John. "A Short View of the State of I r e l a n d i n 1605." Anecdota Bodleiana. E d i t e d by W.D. Macray. 1879. Moryson, Fynes. " H i s t o r y of I r e l a n d . " I r e l a n d under E l i z a b e t h and James I . E d i t e d by H. Morley. London: George Routledge, 1890. " D e s c r i p t i o n of I r e l a n d 1599-1603." I r e l a n d under  E l i z a b e t h and James I . E d i t e d by H. Morley. . "The Commonwealth of I r e l a n d . An I t i n e r a r y . . . c o n t a i n i n g h i s ten years t r a v e l . . . " (1617) Shakespeares Europe. E d i t e d by Charles Hughes. New York: B. Blom, 1967. O'Sulivan Beare, Don P. I r e l a n d Under E l i z a b e t h . (1621) E d i t e d by M.J. Bryne. Dublin. 1902. Payne, Robert. A B r i e f D e s c r i p t i o n of I r e l a n d 1589. London: 1589. (STC 19490). P e r r o t t , S i r James. The Chr o n i c l e of I r e l a n d 1584-1608. E d i t e d -96-by Herbert Wood. Dublin: I r i s h Manuscripts Commission, 1933. P e r r o t t , S i r John. "Opinion f o r the Suppressing of R e b e l l i o n and the Well Governing of I r e l a n d . " (1582) The Government  of I r e l a n d under S i r John P e r r o t 1584-8. by E.C.S. London: 1626 (STC 21490). Ri c h , Barnabe. A Short Survey of I r e l a n d . London: 1609 (STC 20999). Room f o r a Gentleman, or the second p a r t of Fa u l t e s  c o l l e c t e d f o r the True Meridian of Dublin. London: 1609 (STC 20985) . A/New D e s c r i p t i o n of I r e l a n d . London: 1610 (STC 20992) . In Defence of a New D e s c r i p t i o n . London: 1612 (STC 21003) . The I r i s h Hubub or the E n g l i s h Hue and Cry. London: 1619 (STC 200990). Sidney. Sidney State Papers 1565-70. E d i t e d by T. L a i d h i n . Dublin: I r i s h Manuscripts Commission, 1962. Spenser, Edmund. A View of the Present State of I r e l a n d . E d i t e d by W.L. Renwick. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1970. Smith, S i r Thomas. De Republica Anglorum. E d i t e d by L. A l s t o n . Cambridge: U n i v e r s i t y Press, 1906. S t a n i h u r s t , Richard. ( J o i n t Comp.) Holinshed's C h r o n i c l e s . . . (1577) London: J . Johnson e t a l . , 1807-8. Wilbraham, S i r Roger. J o u r n a l of S i r Roger Wilbraham 1593-1616. Camden So c i e t y Miscellaneous, V o l . X. E d i t e d by H.S. S c o t t . 1902. "A B r i e f e D e s c r i p t i o n of I r e l a n d made i n 15 89." Tracts  R e l a t i n g to I r e l a n d . V o l . I I . Dublin: I r i s h A r c h a e o l o g i c a l S o c i e t y , 1841. Government P u b l i c a t i o n s Great B r i t a i n . P u b l i c Record O f f i c e . Calendar.of State Papers  r e l a t i n g to I r e l a n d , 1509-1573, 1596-97, 1598-9, 1599-1600, 1600, 1600-01, 1601-08, w i t h addenda 1565-1654. London, 1860-1912. State Papers, Henry V I I I , V o l s . 1-3. Published under a u t h o r i t y of His Majesty's Commission, 1830-1834. Secondary Bagwell, Richard. I r e l a n d under the Tudors. 3 v o l s . London: Longmans, Green and Co., 1885-90. Bernard, V.W.; Ottenburg, P.; Redle, F. "Dehumanization." Sanctions f o r E v i l . E d i t e d by N. Sanford and C. Comstock. San F r a n c i s c o : Jossey-Bass Inc. P u b l i s h e r s , 1971. Bottigheimer, K a r l S. E n g l i s h Money and I r i s h Land. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1971. Bush, M.L. The Government P o l i c y of P r o t e c t o r Somerset. London: Edward Arnold L t d . , 19 75. Canny, Nich o l a s P. The E l i z a b e t h a n Conquest of I r e l a n d : A  P a t t e r n E s t a b l i s h e d 1565-76. New York: Barnes and Noble, 19 76. Cl a r k e , Aiden. The Old-English i n I r e l a n d 1625-42. London: Macgibbon and Kee, 19 66. Davis, N a t e l i e Z. "The R i t e s of V i o l e n c e . " S o c i e t y and Culture  i n E a r l y Modern France. by N.Z. Davis. Stanford: Stanford U n i v e r s i t y Press, 19 75. -98-De Vos, Georges. " C o n f l i c t , Dominance, .and E x p l o i t a t i o n . " Sanctions f o r E v i l . E d i t e d by N. Sanford and C. Comstock. San F r a n c i s c o : Jossey-Bass Inc., 1971. Duster, Troy. "Conditions f o r B u i l t - F r e e Massacre." Sanctions f o r E v i l . E d i t e d by N. Sanford and C. Comstock. San Fr a n c i s c o : Jossey-Bass Inc. P u b l i s h e r s , 1971. Edwards,- Robert D. Church and State i n Tudor I r e l a n d . Dublin: Talbot Press, (19 35) . " I r e l a n d , E l i z a b e t h I , and the Counter-Reformation." E l i z a b e t h a n Government and S o c i e t y . E d i t e d by S. B i n d o f f . London: Athlone Press, 19 61. F a l k i n e r , Caesar L., ed. I l l u s t r a t i o n s of I r i s h H i s t o r y and  Topography. London. 19 04. G a r r e t t , C.H. The Marian E x i l e s . Cambridge: U n i v e r s i t y Press, 1938. G o s l i n g , W.G. The L i f e of S i r Humphrey G i l b e r t . London: Constable and Co. L t d . , 1911. H a l l i e , P h i l i p P. " J u s t i f i c a t i o n and R e b e l l i o n " . Sanctions  f o r E v i l . E d i t e d by N. Sanford and C. Comstock. San Fr a n c i s c o : Jossey-Bass Inc. P u b l i s h e r s , 1971. Hayes-McCoy, G.A. "The Completion of the Tudor Conquest and the Advance of the Counter-Reformation 1571-1603." A New  H i s t o r y of I r e l a n d . V o l . I I I . E d i t e d by T.W. Moody, F.X. M a r t i n , and F.J. Byrne. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1976. Hinton, E.M. I r e l a n d through Tudor Eyes. P h i l a d e l p h i a . 1935. Hodgen, Margaret T. E a r l y Anthropology i n the S i x t e e n t h and Seventeenth Centuries. P h i l a d e l p h i a : U n i v e r s i t y of P h i l a d e l p h i a Press, 1964. James, M.E. - "The Concept of Order'and the Northern R i s i n g 1569 ." Past and Present, LX (19 73), 49. -99-Jennings, F r a n c i s . The Invasion of America; Indians, Colo- n i a l i s m and the Cant of Conquest. Chapel H i l l : U n i v e r s i t y of North C a r o l i n a Press, 1975. Jones, F.M. Mountjoy 15 63-1606: The Last E l i z a b e t h a n Deputy. Dublin: Clonmore, 19 5 8. Jones, W.Pw "The Image of the Barbarian i n Medieval Europe." Comparative Studies i n Society and H i s t o r y , X I I I (1971), 377. Leland, Thomas. H i s t o r y of I r e l a n d from the Invasion of Henry  I I . 3 v o l s . London: J . Nourse et a l . , 1773. MacCurtain, Margaret. Tudor and S t u a r t I r e l a n d . Dublin: G i l l and Macmillan,.1972. Maxwell, Constantia E. I r i s h H i s t o r y from Contemporary Sources  1509-1610. London: George A l l e n and Urwin L t d . , 1923. Moody, T.W. " S i r Thomas P h i l l i p s of L i v a v a d y , . S e r v i t o r . " I r i s h  H i s t o r i c a l S t u d i e s , I (1938-9), 251. , ed. A New H i s t o r y of I r e l a n d . V o l . I I I . Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1976. O ' F a r r e l l , P a t r i c k . I r e l a n d ' s E n g l i s h Question. London: B.T. B a t s f o r d L t d . , 1973. Perceval-Maxwell, M. The S c o t t i s h M i g r a t i o n to U l s t e r i n the Reign of James I . London: Routledge and Keagan P a u l , 197 3. Pocock, John G.A. The Ancient C o n s t i t u t i o n and the Feudal Law. Cambridge: U n i v e r s i t y Press, 1957. Quinn, David B. " I r e l a n d i n Sixteenth-Century European Expansion." H i s t o r i c a l S t u d i e s , I (1958).• "Henry V I I I and I r e l a n d 1509-1534." I r i s h H i s t o r i c a l  S t u d i e s , XII (1960) . The Elizabethans and the I r i s h . I t haca: C o r n e l l U n i v e r s i t y Press, 1966. -100-Renwick, W.L., ed. : A View of the Present State of Ireland,. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1970. Sanford, N., and Comstock, C. Sanctions f o r E v i l . San Fr a n c i s c o : Jossey-Bass Inc. P u b l i s h e r s , 1971. Smelser, N. "Some Determinants of Destructuve Behavior." Sanc- t i o n s f o r E v i l . E d i t e d by N. Sanford and C. Comstock, 1971. White, Dean G. "The Reign of Edward VI i n I r e l a n d . " I r i s h  His to r l e a l - S t u d i e s, XIV (1965) . Wright, P a t r i c k D. S i r James C r o f t 1518-1590. an unpublished M.A. Thesis, U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia, 1969. Zeeveld, W. Gordon. Foundations of Tudor P o l i c y . London: Methuen and Company L t d . , 1948. 

Cite

Citation Scheme:

        

Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            data-media="{[{embed.selectedMedia}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
https://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.831.1-0094089/manifest

Comment

Related Items