| ; |
The troubles in Munster, which were
later to develop into the long Geraldine rebellion, began in the old quarrels
and jealousies that no time could heal between the Desmonds and the house
of Ormonde. Three members of the Geraldine family, in particular, took
an active part in these wars, the Earl of Desmond and his brother Sir
John, and their cousin, Sir James FitzMaurice FitzGerald, who was later
to become known as "the Arch-traitor." The then Earl, the fifteenth
of his line, was Gerald or Garrett, son of the James Fitzjohn FitzGerald
who in St Leger's time had done homage to Henry VIII. He was a warlike
youth, who had passed his early years in fighting the MacCarthys, and
was on one occasion imprisoned by them for six years in his own castle
of Askeaton. He had also supported O'Brien, Lord of Inchiquin, against
the Earls of Thomond and Clanricarde, inflicting on them a disastrous
defeat.
He succeeded to his title in 1558, on his father's death, by the English
law of primogeniture, and went to England "with a willing mind and
intention," attended by a hundred gentlemen, to make his submission
to Elizabeth in person. She received him very graciously and confirmed
to him all his lands, seignorities, and privileges by letters patent,
so that he returned in quiet possession of his estates. But "the
worm of ambition and the damnable spark of envy" [1]
caused the old wars between him and the Butlers to break out afresh, although
Joan, Ormonde's mother, was now Desmond's wife. Thomas Butler, the tenth
Earl of Ormonde, known as "the Black Earl" (Tighearna Dubh),
was the most powerful representative of the great family of the Ormondes,
whose strong Lancastrian leanings had made them special favourites at
the Tudor Court, and who in their sympathies had remained more English
than the Geraldines. Nevertheless, some members of the family had followed
the example of the Kildares, who, though they adopted English ways when
they visited the Pale, were in their own country clad in Irish fashion,
spoke Irish, and ruled their dependents by native law and custom. The
Black Earl of Ormonde had been brought up in England. He had adopted the
Protestant religion and had been knighted on the accession of Edward VI.
His father it was who, having been suspected of hostility to the Government,
had been called to London and poisoned with seventeen of his followers
at Ely House at a banquet to which he had been invited by his own retainers.
Edward VI, who ascended the throne in the following year, did what he
could to expiate the foul deed and sent the young Ormonde back to his
country with honour, where he was received with general rejoicings. He
entered into friendly relations with Sussex, the Lord Deputy, and became
Lord Treasurer of Ireland. During the wars in the North he had assisted
Sussex against Shane O'Neill, but his position became difficult when Desmond
came forward as champion of the Irish and Catholic cause, the position
being complicated by their close family relationship. So long as the Countess
of Desmond lived her efforts to patch up the quarrel between her son and
her husband were unremitting and were partially successful. The rash courage
of Desmond was no match for the subtle ability of the Black Earl, nor
were his large bodies of loose kerne, 5000 strong, or his 750 horse which
employed themselves in raiding Ormonde's lands competent to resist the
great ordnance which Ormonde was able to put into the field. At Bohermore,
between the counties of Limerick and Tipperary, the two armies stood for
fourteen days facing each other, but the entreaties of the Countess prevailed
to keep them asunder. On her death in the two Earls, "much like thunder,"
[2] burst out afresh, and at Affane on the Blackwater the Black Earl,
in company with the Decies, came upon Desmond when he was ill supported,
shot him in the thigh and took him prisoner, slaughtering all his followers.
At this moment, when he was being carried, wounded and beaten, off the
field, the spirit of his race flared up. "Where is now the great
Earl of Desmond?" cried one tauntingly, as he passed. "Where,
but on the necks of the Butlers," was the reply. The Queen summoned
both Earls to London to answer for their turbulence. She kept Ormonde
at Court for five years and paid the handsome Earl much attention; but
he complained that Desmond's brother, Sir John, was meanwhile wasting
his lands and fighting the English.
[2] Russell, op. cit., p. 22.
From the first appointment of Sir Henry Sidney to office in Ireland he
had been called upon by Ormonde to support him in his quarrels with Desmond.
It was a task which Sidney disliked, as much because of Ormonde's underhand
efforts to bring him into disgrace at Court and his personal disloyalty
to his rule as because he believed the case against Desmond to have been
"forejudged to Desmond's disadvantage." Nevertheless, in examining
the matter closely he adjudged that Desmond owed reparation to Ormonde
for the destruction of his lands, on hearing which the Earl made "sundry
and several speeches of very hard digestion, falling into some disallowable
heats and passions," not, perhaps, surprising in a man who had been
mulcted of £20,000. Sidney did not like Desmond, he found him "a
man void of judgment to govern or will to be ruled," and his country,
from Youghal to the borders of Limerick, "like as I never was in
a more pleasant country in my life, so never saw I a more waste and desolate
land...There I heard such lamentable cries and doleful complaints made
by that small remnant of poor people that yet was left, who hardly escaping
from the fury of the sword and fire of their outrageous neighbours, or
the famine,...make demonstration of the miserable estate of that country."
He speaks of "the horrible and lamentable spectacles he has beheld,
the burning of villages, the ruin of churches, the wasting of such as
have been good towns and castles; yea, the view of the bones and skulls
of the dead subjects who, partly by murder, partly by famine, have died
in the fields, as in troth, hardly any Christian with dry eyes could behold."
[3] All reports of the time confirm Sidney's observations. The rebels
forced the peaceable inhabitants either to join them or to starve by famine.
They also "sent naked to the city the men, not sparing (a shameful
thing to be reported) to use the honest housewives of the country in like
manner, and torment them with more cruel pains than either Phalaris or
any of the old tyrants could invent." In this destructive warfare
James FitzMaurice lent a hand. Among his feats was the taking of Kilmallock
by a night surprise attack. The town was so wealthy that they were engaged
for the space of three days and nights in carrying away its riches on
their horses to the woods of Atherlow, and dispersing them among their
friends and companions. They tore down and demolished the houses and set
fire to the town "so that Kilmallock became the receptacle and abode
of wolves in addition to all the other misfortunes up to that time."
[4] These descriptions, which are hardly exceeded in horror by the account
given by Spenser of the condition of Munster after the long Desmond rebellion,
show the result of the fifteen years' misrule which had passed since Cusack
had visited the province in 1553.
[3] Sidney's report to the Queen, April 20, 1567, in Collins's Letters
and Memorials of State, i, 24 , Cal. S.P.I., Eliz., vol. xx No., 66 at
same date.
[4] Annals of the Four Masters, 1571 (vol. v, pp. 1633-1655).
Sidney kept Desmond in his company as a prisoner, and placed the charge
of his dominions in the hands of his brother, Sir John of Desmond, in
whom he had much greater confidence. Sir John seems to have governed well
and kept the country quiet. But this plan was suddenly brought to an end
by the enemies of both. In 1567, while Sidney was in England, leaving
Sir William FitzWilliam as Deputy, the two Desmond brothers were sent
for as though for a conference in Dublin; they were captured and sent
over to the Tower of London without Sidney's knowledge. "And truly,"
he wrote in after days, "this hard dealing was the origin of James
FitzMore's [FitzMaurice's] rebellion and consequently of all the evil
and mischief of Munster, which since hath cost the Crown of England and
that country £100,000." This imprisonment was largely owing
to Ormonde's representations, for he was high in the Queen's favour. In
spite of the Queen's assurance to Desmond's Countess that the slight restraint
to the Earl "would do him no harm," the two brothers remained
in London for seven long years, part of the time occupying one small room
and suffering often from cold and hardships. The accusations against the
Earl were that he was still oppressing his tenants with "coyne and
livery", that he was encouraging and siding with the Queen's enemies,
and that he had committed against Lord Roche, the Lord Barry, and other
chief nobles of the South such extreme disorders that Sussex was ashamed
to go into them more closely, he having wasted the country "with
as much cruelty as any foreign enemy, French or other, could use."
Against Sir John there was no definite accusation. In their own country,
meanwhile, their absence was taken advantage of by an elder brother, Thomas
Roe FitzGerald, who had been set aside as illegitimate, to endeavour to
establish his claim to the earldom, Ormonde helping him to carry on a
civil war and devastate the country.
This attempt to unseat the imprisoned earl brought more actively into
the field James FitzMaurice FitzGerald, the Earl's cousin, who stoutly
supported the Earl's rights, and for the whole seven years fought on his
behalf partly against the usurper, but more often against the Government,
with forces strengthened by an intermixture of Scottish mercenaries. This
James was a restless but brave and gallant man, quick-spirited and witty,
of an adventurous and politic mind. He became the chief centre of Irish
hopes and English fears in his day. His powers of organization were pitted
not only against the astute policy of Ormonde and the ruthless severity
of Fitton, but against the stern and untiring vigilance of Perrot. The
latter was appointed President of Munster in 1568, but did not actually
take up office till 1571. It had been one of Sidney's methods of governing
the country to appoint Presidents in Connacht and Munster, these provinces
being too distant from Dublin to be kept under the immediate eye of the
Lord Deputy, and in constant need of a governor on the spot. The idea
was a sound one, but the choice of governors was not always equally wise,
and they were sufficiently removed from the central authority to be able
to act almost independently. They governed in concert with the military
authorities on the spot. Soon after Perrot's appointment Ormonde, who
had returned to Ireland in 1569, was made General for Munster, Lord Deputy
FitzWilliam having declared in a letter to Burghley that the South was
always the "ticklish" part of Ireland and that Ormonde alone
could manage it. Ormonde was given a free hand in his enemy's country,
even at a moment when his own brothers were in open rebellion. He was
authorized to "banish and vanquish those cankered Desmonds,"
and Pelham, the Lord Justice, who had been sent down to Munster only to
find "the burden of this service too hard" for him, approved
the appointment, Ormonde being thought "a hard match for Desmond"
even in his private dealings, and without the aid of the Queen's forces.[5]
Complaints were later laid against Ormonde that he had not prosecuted
the war against Desmond as vigorously as was expected of him,[6] but his
own reports of his second campaign in 1580 was that he had executed and
put to the sword forty-six captains and leaders under Desmond, with eight
hundred notorious traitors and malefactors and above four thousand of
their men, a record of services rendered that might have satisfied even
a Tudor Government.[7] The result of it all is summed up in the Queen's
complaint of Ormonde. She "found it strange" that after two
years Ormonde, who had promised with only three hundred soldiers to reduce
Desmond, yet having more than fifteen hundred had done nothing. "There
were now a thousand more traitors than at his coming."[8]
[5] Carew, Cal., ii, No. 227, pp. 189-190 (December 26 1579).
[6] "Observations of the Earl of Ormonde's Government, as Lord General
of Munster," Carew, Cal., ii, No. 494, pp. 325-327 (March 1582).
[7] Ibid., ii, No. 593, p. 415.
[8] Cal. S.P.I., Eliz., lxxx, Nos. 82, 87, pp. 289, 290 (1581).
Sir John Perrot, the blustering, choleric, energetic man who arrived in
Ireland in 1571, was commonly reported to be a son of Henry VIII, whom
he resembled both in appearance and character. "God's death,"
he exclaimed, when, on his return from Ireland he was tried on a charge
of high treason at Westminster," will the Queen suffer her brother
to be offered up a sacrifice to the envy of his frisking adversary?"
A German lord who was present at his Parliament in Dublin declared that
"he did never see any man comparable to Sir John Perrot for his porte
and majesty of personage," while among his English associates he
left a memory of hard usage and haughty demeanour such as none of his
predecessors had done. He would have no chief come to his Parliament but
in English attire, and provided cloaks of velvet and satin for those that
had them not. It vexed him that they thought their native garb fitter
for comfort and quite as rich. The Irish liked the bluff, hard-swearing,
active Deputy, who never objected to lodge in a half-burned house when
campaigning, and when the enemy took refuge beyond the bogs would "rip
off his boots and plunge into the bog, driving them before him and his
light horse with staves instead of pikes." He took his revenge on
James FitzMaurice for burning the town of Kilmallock and hanging the chief
townsmen at the market-cross, by putting the heads of fifty of James's
followers in their place. He never forgave FitzMaurice for breaking his
engagement, offered by the rebel himself and accepted by Perrot, to end
the war by a hand to hand fight with sword and target, both clad in Irish
trews. On the day appointed Perrot was at the place of meeting, resplendent
in new trousers of scarlet and attended by the lords of the province to
see the fight; but FitzMaurice did not come. The President was furious
and swore "that he would hunt the fox out of his hole without delay."
When FitzMaurice came in at Kilmallock and asked for pardon Perrot made
him lie prostrate on the ground and placed the point of his sword next
his heart. When, in January 1584, Perrot returned to Ireland as Lord Deputy,
and found his old enemy planning to rise again and Turlogh inciting him
to come out, he was told that FitzMaurice said "that since the Deputy
had arrived he could do nothing." He put down the incipient rebellion
without any delay, and he wrote to the Earl of Warwick after FitzMaurice's
submission saying that the province was so quiet that "the idle sort
fall as fast unto the plough as they were wont to run into mischief."
Though Perrot's word was generally respected he did not scruple to take
extreme means to attain his ends. He excused his capture of O'Donnell
by saying that it saved blood-money; and he tried to suspend Poynings'
Act when it suited his policy. It was to his suggestion that the Queen
gave ear when, in 1573, she debased the Irish coinage and nearly ruined
the country. He made many enemies, who slipped over to London to undermine
his influence and finally succeeded in turning the Queen against him,
and he only escaped execution by dying in the Tower before the sentence
on him was carried out.
Toward the close of 1572 it had been decided to send Desmond with his
brother home to his own country in the hope that his return would quiet
the distracted land. He had long been only a nominal prisoner, having
been released from the Tower in midwinter 1570, on account of the state
of Sir John's health, and they had since been living with 'old' Sir Wareham
St Leger at his house at Southwark and "ranging abroad in London"
among their friends, restrained only from wandering outside the radius
of twenty miles from the metropolis. Sir Wareham, who had always been
friendly to Desmond, had been President of Munster before the appointment
of Perrot, and was to return there in 1579 as Provost Marshal, a new post
created during the rebellion. He was the pronounced foe of Ormonde, whom
he accused on one occasion of treason, and there is no doubt that the
Earl, placed between his rebellious brothers the Butlers on the one hand,
and Desmond on the other, frequently played a doubtful part. His dealings
in the field were clear enough but his private policy was less certain.
In January 1573 Desmond and Sir John were received by her Majesty, and
she made an earnest appeal to them to be loyal and to establish their
possessions in peace. Desmond was fully restored and an Act of Oblivion
passed, the two brothers being accompanied to Dublin by Fitton, who was
sent to restore order in Connacht. Fitton detained Desmond in Dublin for
a further period of five months, and though he was only under an "easy
restraint" the time was wearisome to a man who had already suffered
long confinement, who was now pardoned and restored, and whose enemies
were all the time, as he complains, "taking up his rents and revenues
of which he had great need." An appeal to the Earl of Leicester in
May failed to bring him his release, and at length, at daybreak one morning,
he succeeded in making his escape from Dublin, and mounting a fleet horse
he arrived safely, five days later, in the wild fastnesses of Kerry. Once
among his own people, he flung off English dress and instantly set about
arranging a new combination with Turlogh O'Neill, the sons of Clanricarde,
and "all the gentlemen of Thomond."
His cousin, James FitzMaurice, who had so faithfully upheld his claims
during his long imprisonment, now naturally looked for some reward of
his fidelity. He asked that some lands should be assigned to him from
the wide Desmond territories on which he might settle down. But the Countess,
Dame Eleanor Butler,[9] desired to preserve the earldom intact for her
only son, and vehemently opposed any division of the property. Disgusted
by his cousin's ingratitude, James flung himself into rebellion, "studying
nothing day nor night, but how to procure to stir both heaven, earth and
hell to do the Earl mischief." He entered into alliance with Edmond
FitzGibbon, "the White Knight," the Seneschal of Imokilly, and
others, and gradually their ideas enlarged and gave birth to wider schemes.
The rumours of plans for planting Munster with English, the severe rule
of Perrot, the religious disquiet, combined with the danger in which England
stood from the machinations of France, Spain, and Rome, and the general
unrest, suggested to their minds an armed resistance to England under
the title and appeal of the Catholic League, and with the aid of foreign
powers. James was advised to apply to France and Spain and lay before
them his case. He was to complain how hardly the English used the Irish,
"taking away from some their lands, from others their lives, and
from all their religion." This service James FitzMaurice undertook.
He fled to France and laid his case before the French king, Henry II,
who was willing enough to assist him but was dissuaded by his counsellors.
Failing here, he went on to Spain, but Philip had then newly made peace
with the English Queen and sent on James to Rome, where he found Pope
Gregory XIII quite ready to lend his aid against the heretic queen. He
had even cherished ideas of conquering Ireland for his nephew the Marquis
Diergnoles, surnamed Bon Compagnion. He introduced FitzMaurice to the
English adventurer, Stukeley, whom the Pope created Marquis of Leinster,
giving him eight hundred soldiers who were to serve under him in Ireland;
other troops subsequently added were, O'Sullevan Beare says, mostly Italian
desperadoes whom the Pope wished to get rid of out of Italy; all these
were to be paid out of the Papal exchequer.
[9] Desmond's first wife, Joan, had died in 1565. It was singular that
he should again marry into the family of the Butlers.
It would seem that James was acting independently of Desmond. There had
been "hot wars" between them, and they seem never to have been
on good terms; on James's return Desmond refused to join him and declared
his intention of marching against him. In February 1576, when Sidney was
touring the South, Desmond "very honourably attended on" him,
offering fealty and service to the Queen. FitzMaurice was then at St Malo,
"keeping great port, himself and his family well apparelled and full
of money; having oft intelligence from Rome and out of Spain; not much
relief from the French king, that I [Sidney] can perceive, yet oft visited
by men of good countenance." Sidney believed that if James landed
while he was in the North, he might take and do what he would with Kinsale,
Cork, Youghal, Kilmallock, and even Limerick, so great was his credit
among the people. He urgently pleaded for the coming of Sir William Drury,
as being the only man able to deal with the situation.[10] James, meanwhile,
was getting more promises than performances from abroad, and, impatient
to return to Ireland, he left Stukeley to bring over the troops and himself
travelled back by way of France, where the new king, Henry III, received
him graciously, promising everything he asked; thence he went to Spain
and Portugal, finally landing on the coast of Kerry with three ships,
some money, and a few soldiers, and bearing the consecrated banner blessed
by the Pope. With him came the afterward well-known Dr Saunders as his
confessor.
[10] Carew, Cal., ii, No. 36, p. 42.
The news of FitzMaurice's intended invasion accompanied by French troops
kept Ireland in a ferment during the years 1577-78; munitions and money
were hastily sent over, and men were ordered to Ireland from Wales and
the southern counties, while the coasts were patrolled by three ships
set apart for that duty.[11] The Earl was becoming impotent; so weak of
body as "neither can he get up on horseback...but that he is holpen
and lift up, neither when he is on horseback can he of himself alight
down without help." Sidney thought there was less danger to be apprehended
from him than from any other member of his kindred.[12] The conspiracy
was spreading into Connacht, however, and Malbie was kept busy trying
to check it and to prevent a union with Munster, but Sir John of Desmond
was contemplating an alliance with Mary Burke, Clanricarde's daughter,
as a means to further the project of union between the provinces, "though
he have another wife living, and she another husband." [13]
[11] Carew, Cal., ii, No. 59, pp. 84-85.
[12] Ibid., ii, No. 83, p. 127.
[13] Ibid., ii, No. 70, p. 110.
A chief organizer was the Dr Saunders whom FitzMaurice had brought over,
and who was more sought for and more dreaded by the government than any
of the heads of the rising. Large rewards were offered for his capture,
but he seemed to carry his life securely in his hands. It was largely
through his wider views of the European situation that what was at first
a family feud developed into a formidable combination against England
of which Spain and Rome were to reap the advantage. He succeeded in drawing
the brothers Earl Gerald and Sir John of Desmond into the plot, and he
was "made more accompt of " than twenty men; "yea! John
of Desmond made more accompt of him than of his own life." He was
the accredited envoy of the Pope, who gave him money for the enterprise.
He was less successful in Lisbon, however, the King having requested him
to depart on learning that he was fitting out ships for Ireland; while
in Spain they doubted that any Geraldine was left alive in Ireland. When
James FitzMaurice asked Saunders as to the progress he was making in fitting
out ships in Portugal, and heard that the King refused to allow him any
ships or soldiers, he is said to have answered, "I care for no soldiers
at all; you and I are enough; therefore let us go, for I know the minds
of the noblemen in Ireland." [14] James's proclamation ran as follows:
"This war is undertaken for the defence of the Catholic religion
against the heretics. Pope Gregory XIII hath chosen us for general captain
in this same war,...which thing he did so much rather because his predecessor
Pope Pius V had before deprived Elizabeth, the patroness of the aforesaid
heresies, of all royal power and dominion, as is plainly declared by his
declaratory sentence, the authentic copy whereof we also have to show.
Therefore now we fight not against the lawful sceptre and honourable throne
of England, but against a tyrant which refuseth to hear Christ speaking
by His vicar." [15]
[14] "Examination of James O'Hale, Friar," Carew, Cal., ii,
No. 474 (xii), p. 308, and cf. No. 307, p. 217.
[15] Ibid., i, No. 268, p. 400.
It is remarkable that, in announcing his war as a war of religion, the
most formidable of all the Desmond leaders should emphasize the fact that
he regarded the sceptre of England as a lawful one, against whose claims
he would not contend, though he lifted up the banner of religion against
the present Queen Elizabeth, who was held to be illegitimate on account
of Henry VIII's marriage to Anna Boleyn during the lifetime of his previous
Queen. James considered her as a usurper or "pretensed queen"
as well as a heretic. It was only under such a banner that all the nation
could rally. It had shocked the conscience of a Catholic people that a
woman and a Protestant should hold herself as head of the Church. This
view is quaintly expressed by Viscount Baltinglas in a letter to the Earl
of Ormonde in 1580, when efforts were being made to bring him into the
rebellion. He says: "The highest power on earth commands us to take
the sword...Questionless it is great want of knowledge and more of grace,
to think and believe, that a woman, uncapax [incapable] of all holy orders,
should be the supreme governor of Christ's Church; a thing that Christ
did not grant unto his own Mother. If the Queen's pleasure is, as you
allege, to minister justice, it were time to begin; for in this twenty
years past of her reign we have seen more damnable doctrine maintained,
more oppressing of poor subjects, under pretence of justice, within this
land, than ever we heard or read...done by Christian princes." [16]
[16] Carew, Cal., ii, No. 443, p. 289.
The news of the landing of James FitzMaurice and Saunders at Dingle on
July 1, 1579, spread rapidly through Ireland. They had brought only three
vessels and a few men, but were backed by unlimited promises from the
King of Spain, who was said to be sending thirty thousand men, well appointed,
with plentiful supplies of money and munitions, on whose landing it was
confidently expected that the country would rise. Desmond and the Earl
of Clancar swore a solemn oath to unite their forces, the oath being administered
by Dr Saunders in the most solemn manner.[17] The Pope's banner was displayed,
and the people were taught by Saunders that a new Government would settle
them in their religion. Combinations were in progress in the North between
Turlogh O'Neill and O'Donnell, the Baron of Dungannon and even Sorley
Boy being drawn into the conspiracy, and there were rumours of great numbers
of Scots assembling in Ulster under the direction of O'Neill.[18] The
country was in a state of eager expectation and unrest. In Pelham's sarcastic
words; "Since the advertisements of the foreign invasion every man
here looketh about him, for howsoever the world may delight in change
upon promise of golden mountains, I suppose it is now considered that
what foreign prince soever come, he will not allow to any freeholder more
acres than he hath already, nor more free manner of life than they have
under our sovereign. And further, I am told that some of the traitors
themselves begin to consider that the invader will put no great trust
in those that do betray their natural prince and country ." [19]
[17] Ibid., ii, No. 304, p. 215.
[18] Ibid., ii, No. 172, p. 172.
[19] Pelham to the Earl of Leicester, Ibid., ii, No 316, p. 221.
The landing was ill-fated from the first. FitzMaurice was joined by Sir
John of Desmond, a man little inclined to rebellion, but soured by his
long and unjustifiable imprisonment in London. He was disappointed too
because the birth of his brother's son had destroyed all his hopes of
succession to the family estates.[20] The rebellion opened with an act
of treachery on the part of Sir John. He was marching into Kerry with
the aged Sir Henry Davells, High Sheriff of Cork, who was his foster-brother
and had been his close friend. Davells had on more than one occasion used
his money and influence on behalf of Sir John when he was in difficulties.
But Sir John now turned upon him in the middle of the night in Tralee
Castle, where they had lain down together to rest. There he slew him in
his shirt, three of his companions being slain with him. FitzMaurice professed
the greatest horror of the deed; "to murder a man naked in bed when
he might have had advantage of him on the highways" was wholly against
his code of honour, and he refused to have any further dealings with Sir
John during his lifetime, though the murderer defended his action by saying
that the clergy had told him that it was meritorious to kill a heretic.
Neither was the wild licence permitted by Sir John to his soldiery pleasing
to his cousin. No news came of Stukeley or his reinforcements, and it
was only later that it was learned that on his arrival with his troops
in Portugal, the king of that country, who had always been opposed to
the Irish enterprise, had bought over him and his men and had induced
them to join a force he was raising to fight the Moors in Barbary. Shortly
afterward the tidings leaked through that all of them had been cut to
pieces by the Moors. Thus the hopes of foreign aid came for the moment
to naught.
[20] This poor child, later to be known as "the Tower Earl,"
was born in the house of Sir Wareham St Leger, in London, of Desmond's
second wife.
FitzMaurice himself fell in the same year (1579). His near kinsman, Theobald
Burke, on whose assistance he had counted, took the field against him,
and at Bohereen, five miles from Limerick, FitzMaurice found him stationed
to impede his passage. He had left the main body of his troops behind
him, not anticipating danger, but both parties fought furiously until
a lad discharged his fowling-piece full at FitzMaurice, who was distinguished
by a yellow doublet, and mortally wounded him. For a time he managed to
conceal his injury and fell only after having slain both the Burkes and
driven off their men. Then, exhorting the bystanders never to make peace
with the English, the chief instigator and leader of the insurrection
passed away. The widow of Theobald Burke, his kinsman, received head-money
for his death, and his cousin, Maurice Fitzjohn, cut off his head. The
body, wrapped in a caddowe, was buried by a huntsman under an old oak,
but it was found, brought to Kilmallock, and hanged on a gibbet, where
it was used as a target by soldiers "who in his lifetime durst not
look him in the face." [21] The conduct of the war fell into the
hands of Sir John, of whom the authorities said that he "slept not,"
the Earl declaring to the Lord Deputy that he was in no way implicated
in the rebellion. Desmond seems to have suffered from the extremest pangs
of indecision, natural enough in a weak man who had already felt the pains
of long imprisonment and knew the certain end of a man accounted to be
a traitor. The writer of the story of the Geraldines thought him "not
well established in his wits." At one time we find him praying the
Queen "for one drop of grace to assuage the flame of my tormented
mind," while at another he throws himself wholly into the rebellion
and "plainly puts on a rebel's mind." Elizabeth received his
letters with promises of forgiveness and terms for his acceptance which
the authorities in Dublin thought too liberal to be shown to him, and
Pelham, then newly gone into Munster, in vain tried to induce him again
to put himself into the power of the authorities.
[21] Russell, "Relation of the FitzGeralds," op. cit., p. 31.
The double game of dissimulation could not be kept up for ever. On November
2, 1579, Desmond was proclaimed a traitor.[22] That he had ever since
his escape from Dublin been entering into combinations against the Government
[23] and that he was now deeply involved in the new enterprise cannot
be denied; but the terms of submission proposed to him by Pelham and Ormonde
were such as he could hardly be expected in any circumstances to accept.
They included the delivery of Dr Saunders and the strangers who had come
over with him; the possession of his chief castles of Askeaton and Carrigofoill,
and the prosecution of the rebellious members of his own family.[24] The
curt and irritating letters of Pelham to the Earl also show a settled
intention of allowing him no chance of escape.[25] Pelham's actions were
swift and his method of policy clear. He sums it up in his report to the
Queen on August 12, 1580: "I give the rebels no breath to relieve
themselves, but by one of your garrisons or other they be continually
hunted. I keep them from their harvest, and have taken great preys of
cattle from them, by which it seemeth the poor people...are so distressed,
as they,...offer themselves with their wives and children rather to be
slain by the army than to suffer the famine that now in extremity beginneth
to pinch them." [26] In the admiring records of his contemporaries
Pelham was "a painful gentleman." It was in his period of service
that the detestable system of warfare which would accept no submission
except the suppliant came "with bloody hands," i.e., hands that
were stained with the blood of some near relation who sided with the rebels,
took firm root in English policy in Ireland. To do "some acceptable
service" was Pelham's constant admonition to the chiefs of the insurrection
when they wanted to come in; and it was by this means that the heads of
the rebellion were cut off one after another.[27] The policy was carried
on by Sir George Carew and his associates. Even Sidney, in the case of
Shane O'Neill, had been known to adopt it. It was successful in quelling
the rebellion, but at the cost of spreading throughout the country a universal
mistrust even of a man's nearest friends and allies, who might, in an
underhand fashion, be selling him to the Government.[28]
[22] The proclamation is given in Carew, Cal., ii, No. 146, pp. 162-163.
[23] Ibid., ii, No. 96, p. 135.
[24] Carew, Cal., ii, No. 140, p. 160.
[25] Ibid., ii, Nos. 142, 145, pp. 161, 162. The Lord Justice went down
to Munster on the death of Sir William Drury (ibid., ii, No. 130, p. 157).
[26] Ibid., ii, No. 452, p. 293.
[27] Ibid., ii, No. 453, p. 293; No. 441, p. 287; No. 449, pp. 291-292;
etc.
[28] Even so early as January 1568 the then Countess of Desmond writes
that the country "is in such disorder that few men can trust a father,
son, or brother" (Cal. S.P.I., Eliz., vol. xxiii, No. 16.11).
In 1579 Pelham has to confess that neither his predecessor nor he, even
with the aid of the Earls of Kildare and Ormonde, "could get any
espial for reward against the rebels," an avowal most honourable
to the whole country, for the temptations both in money and personal safety
were purposely made high. By the end of the war, however, the country
was swarming with spies of all sorts—English, Irish, and foreign,
working for the Government on the one hand and for the Irish confederates
on the other. No man dared to trust the servant in his house, the tutor
of his children, or the sworn confederate of his counsels. It produced
also a contempt mingled with dread of the double-dealing of the English
Government which has never been entirely dissipated. This is expressed
in many of the finest poems of the period, which from this time onward
become channels of protest against the dissimulation and terrors practised
by the ruling powers.[29] All countries of Western Europe were at this
period working by the same system of political corruption; the question
appeared to their Governments, not one of morality, but one of high politics.
And it has to be remembered that at the moment when the rebellion in Kerry
and Cork was in progress, England was in a state of peril in which she
has seldom stood before or since, and that the rebellion of the Desmonds
was closely linked up with the expected descent of Spain upon her shores.
Ireland was the weak spot, the place selected by the Spanish admirals
for the landing of the men of the great Armada which was being prepared
in Spanish harbours, and of which the handful of troops entrusted to FitzMaurice
had been designed as the forerunners. It is little wonder that from the
English point of view it did not appear a time for quiet talks with men
in league with the enemy, when the expectation of foreign forces was making
the whole country "stand upon their tiptoes." [30]
[29] Cf. Tadhg Dall O'Higgin's address to Brian O'Rorke in O'Grady's
Catalogue of Manuscripts in the British Museum, p. 418, and Hull, Poem-book
of the Gael, pp. 169-171; E. Knott, Poems of Tadhg Dall, ii, 72-79.
[30] Malbie to Leicester, Carew, Cal., ii, No. 460, p. 298.
There was no doubt that by the middle of 1580 the rebel organization was
breaking up. Desmond's first act after his proclamation as a traitor had
been to sack and burn the town of Youghal, which was betrayed into his
hands by the Mayor and townsmen. The Earl of Clancar, at first his adversary
but now his confederate, committed a similar outrage at Kinsale.[31] Ormonde,
who followed Desmond to Youghal and was refused admission for his English
garrison, took his revenge by hanging the recalcitrant Mayor before his
own door, after which he entered the town and fortified it. Youghal had
been one of the favourite seats of the Desmond family, and we may well
believe the report of Pelham a few weeks later that Desmond was either
dead or benumbed of his limbs by an extreme palsy.[32] Pelham got no commendation
from the Queen for the severity of his actions. She was deeply displeased
that Desmond had been proclaimed; and Pelham, "being utterly unable
to bear her Majesty's indignation," besought to be relieved of his
charge.[33] His wish was acceded to in the following year, 1580, when
Lord Grey de Wilton was sent over to replace him. Meanwhile, Sir John
and his brother played a slowly losing game. Pelham was as indefatigable
as he was merciless. He and Captain Zouche ploughed through the bogs of
Slieve Lougher in wet and stormy weather by a march of twenty-one miles
to intercept Desmond, and it was only by chance that they were seen in
time for the Earl with his Countess and Saunders to escape.[34] The terrible
execution done at Carrigofoill Castle on March 25 struck terror into the
countryside. The house was "circuited by the sea" and was held
by sixteen Spaniards and fifty others, commanded by one Captain Julian,
who said he kept it for the King of Spain. They fortified it by every
device that occurred to them, but Captain Mackworth entered the outer
walls after a fierce fight and drove the Spaniards up to a turret on the
barbican wall; some of them sprang down from this height into the water
to endeavour to escape by swimming, but were shot as they passed by. Others
took refuge in the vaults. The Spaniards in the turret were seized as
they came down and executed.[35]
[31] Ibid., ii, No. 184, p. 176.
[32] Ibid., ii, No. 214, p. 186.
[33] Ibid., ii, No. 224, p. 188; No. 226, p. 189.
[34] Pelham's report, in Carew, Cal., ii, No. 410, p. 267.
[35] Pelham's report, in Carew, Cal., ii, No. 349, pp. 237-238.
On the report of the fate of Carrigofoill, Askeaton Castle surrendered
at once ard Ballylogh, Desmond's other castle, was vacated by its garrison,
who tried to fire it as they left. The loss of the Earl's chief seats
drove him back into the woods and secret recesses of Atherlow or the fastnesses
of Kerry. From time to time he wrote long letters to the Lord Justice,
who "pleasantly jested at these things" while his victim fled
before him. He had many narrow escapes. On one occasion he was so nearly
captured that his pursuers "found the aqua-vitae, wine, and meat
provided for their dinner" and thankfully possessed themselves of
the provision. Of the two, the English troops seem to have been often
the worse off for food; supplies did not arrive and money was short, they
were constantly ill and were always ready to mutiny in consequence. When
Grey came down he reported that there was nothing wrong with the captains
except that there were more sick than whole, Pelham himself was "touched
with the disease of this country" and complained that the toil of
the war was unfit for one of his years. The young military captains of
companies that were now sent over were generally able officers, trained
in that great school of warfare, "the wars of Flanders." Names
like Mackworth, Zouche, Raleigh, Sir Humphrey Gilbert, are familiar in
other connexions than the Munster wars. From a distance it seemed a lighter
task to repress a rebellion in Munster or Connacht than to stand up against
the trained armies of Spain or France in the Low Countries, under commanders
of world-wide fame. But one after another learned by experience that "it
was easier to talk at home in London of Irish wars" than to be in
them, and one officer after another, distinguished in service abroad,
lost his reputation in Ireland and appealed pathetically to be relieved
of the thankless and interminable guerilla warfare that they met with
in that country.
At length, toward the close of 1580, the confidence which had "so
bewitched" the Irish of the coming of foreign aid met its reward.
It was reported, and with truth, that a mixed force of from six to eight
hundred Spaniards, Italians, and Basques had landed at Smerwick in Kerry,
where the Earl still lay concealed when Sir John and Saunders, weary of
Pelham's close pursuit and not too well agreeing with Desmond, went off
to join the rising of Baltinglas in Leinster. An interesting letter from
Captain Richard Bingham to Leicester written on October 18, 1580, from
Smerwick Harbour, gives an account of the course of events. He had been
sent round by sea and entered the harbour of Ventry shortly after the
Spaniards, to find them fortifying themselves in that old fort of Smerwick
which Pelham had carefully examined a few months before and had pronounced
to be "a vain toy and of little importance;" they were now restoring
it into a fort of passable strength. Since their time it has been known
as the Fort d'Ore, or Golden Fort, from the exaggerated tales of the fabulous
wealth brought over by the foreigners. Bingham learned from some French
fishermen who had been captured by the Spaniards, but who had stolen away
in the hope of escaping, of the disasters that had befallen the foreign
fleet on the English coast. One of their largest vessels and one smaller
ship had been lost sight of in the storm they had met on their way over,
and only two ships and a galley remained. Of these the larger, a baskeyne
of 400 tons, carried on board the Pope's nuncio and their colonel, both
Italians; an Irish bishop; two preachers, Jesuits and friars, all Italians;
with 400 men, some munitions, and 12,000 ducats in money. The expedition
would appear to have been rather an Italian religious crusade than a Spanish
army for the relief of Desmond.
The report of the mariners was that the vessels had on board "a
thousand poor simple Bysswynes, very ragged, and a great part of them
boys." Not an Armada, certainly, or likely to stand a siege by the
trained troops of Mackworth and Grey. More than two hundred of the eight
hundred men they brought with them had to be shipped back to Spain in
the great baskeyne,[36]"sick and malcontent with the country and
their evil and hard entertainment." Of the others "very many
do die daily"; these Southerners being quite unable to endure the
damp and storms of the Dingle in this winter season. No doubt it was some
of these "wild Basques and straggling Italians" whom the State
Papers report Ormonde to be busy chasing shortly afterward in the mountains
about Tralee. Most of them seem to have been Italian brigands to whom
Pope Gregory XIII had promised pardon for their misdeeds if they would
join the Irish expedition. Bingham thought that only five hundred at most
had survived of the original body. Already, by October 18, Ormonde had
arrived before the fort of Smerwick with "divers English Captains"
of whom Raleigh, Zouche, and Mackworth, were the chief, and had begun
to skirmish about the fortress. There was little fighting. The Italian
commander, San Joseph, was a coward, or else he probably could see at
once that his ragged Basques, "most of them boys," could make
no sort of stand against the disciplined troops outside. The black and
white ensigns which they had hung out beside the Pope's banner had to
be hauled down. Instead, the white flag was hoisted alone, and a parley
called for.[37] Their camp-master and one Plunkett, an Englishman born
near Drogheda, who seems to have acted as interpreter and guide, met Captains
Mackworth and Zouche, who demanded their commander and, according to the
official report, would agree to nothing but unconditional surrender.[38]
"After they had remained some while in consultation, the Colonel
and Captains came forth, trailing their ensigns rolled up and yielded
to my Lord's demands and left pledges to yield up the fort the next morning."
The Earl and Sir John, who had promised to relieve the fort with four
thousand men, never showed themselves. The report continues: "The
morrow after, being the ninth of this month [November], the forts were
yielded, all the Irishmen and women hanged, and upward of four hundred
Italians, Spaniards, Byskins [Basques] and others put to the sword. The
Colonel, Captain, Secretary.
[36] Carew, Cal., ii, No. 482, pp. 314-316.
[37] W. Camden, Ann. Rerum Angl. et Hib. (ed. Hearne, 1717), ii, 342-343.
[38] Grey to Walsingham, S.P.I., Eliz., vol. lxxviii, No. 27 (November
11, 1580).
Camp-Master, and others of the best sort [were] saved to the number of
twenty persons. Dr Saund[ers],...an Englishman Plunkett, a friar and others
[were] kept in store to be executed after examination had of them..."
At the end of this letter is added: "This day was executed an Englishman
who served Dr Saunders, one Plunkett, of whom before is written, and an
Irish priest; their arms and legs were broken and hanged upon a gallows
upon the wall of the fort." Grey's own report to the Queen adds some
details: "I sent straight some gentlemen in to see their weapons
and armures laid down and to guard the munition and victual there left
for spoil. Then put I in certain bands, who straight fell to execution.
There were 600 slain...whereof 400 were as gallant and goodly personages
as I ever beheld. So hath it pleased the Lord of hosts to deliver the
enemy into your Highness' hands." [39] We learn from another report
that Captains Raleigh and Mackworth,[40] who held the ward for that day,
were those who led the slaughter in the castle, "many or most part
of them being put to the sword." The tradition of the country, well
known to Russell and believed by him,[41] though he was a royalist, was
that Grey put the garrison to the sword in cold blood after having, on
promise of their life, made them stack their arms and surrender the place,
"for which breach of promise and bloody act her Majesty gave him
small thanks." Tradition is often right, especially in Ireland, and
"the faith of Grey" became a synonym for an atrocious perjury.
In regard to the Queen's displeasure, however, her own letters show no
sign of such grace in her. The only regret she expresses is that the principal
head of the expedition had not been reserved for her own judgment, "either
justice or mercy as to us should have been found best." It seemed
to her reasonable that the principals should receive punishment before
the accessories, which "would have served for a terror to such as
may hereafter be driven to so wicked an enterprise." [42] They would
apparently have received justice without mercy at her hands. It must be
said for Elizabeth that when she was dealing with a rising of her own
subjects only, such as Shane or Hugh O'Neill or Desmond, she was always
disposed to employ means of pacification. The Queen's instructions to
Grey on his departure show her anxiety for the good treatment of her Irish
subjects. The soldiers are to be restrained and severely punished if they
misconduct themselves; she confesses that "in truth, we being interested
alike in our subjects of both regions, do carry a like affection to them,"
and that it is through "ill-disposed persons" that a contrary
impression has been given. She excepts none but those who have been in
open rebellion.[43] But an insurrection made in concert with her deadliest
enemies, either in Scotland, France, or Spain, met with no mercy, as it
seemed to her to have no justification; the dangers involved were too
great, and no means were too severe to check or punish the fomenters or
actors in such an enterprise. Any other sovereign in Europe would have
thought the same. She appointed Zouche Governor of Munster, and Grey was
promised that he should have no cause to "forthink [regret] his serviceable
act."
[39] S.P.I., Eliz., vol. lxxviii, No. 29 (November 12, 1580); see also
Hooker, in supplement to Holinshed's Chronicles, at date 1580. Grey's
report does not agree with that made to Captain Bingham, in which it is
stated that the best of the troops were reserved.
[40] Captain Mackworth was later murdered by the O'Connors. See Carew,
Cal., ii, No. 495, p. 328 (March 1582).
[41] Russell, "Relation of the FitzGeralds," op. cit. (1638).
[42] The Queen to Lord Deputy Grey, December 12, 1580; Pope-Hennesey,
Raleigh in Ireland, Appendix ii, pp. 212-214.
[43] Carew, Cal., ii, No. 422, p. 277 (July 15, 1580).
Zouche's first concern in taking over office was to lay hold of Sir John
of Desmond, with whom were the MacSweeneys, and Dermot O'Sullevan, Lord
of Dunboy, father of Philip O'Sullevan Beare the historian. Sir John was
a far abler commander than his brother, and at the battle of Gort-na-Tibrid
(now Springfield), in Co. Limerick, his vigorous onslaught had broken
the English line and driven the troops to retreat with the loss of three
hundred men. At this battle Dr Saunders, the unwavering supporter of the
Geraldines, stood praying on the hill above the battlefield during the
whole course of the conflict. In spite of official reports of his death
at Smerwick, he is said to have died of hunger under a tree in Kerry shortly
after this battle. He was a distinguished man, who lectured at Oxford
and afterward at Louvain and wrote several controversial works.
Several times Sir John snatched victory from the troops sent to find
him, and it was only by an ambush set for him by Zouche that he fell at
last. Zouche was informed that Sir John had arranged to meet the son of
Viscount Barry at Castle O'Lehan (now Castle Lyons) for discussion of
their plans. Setting an ambush on the path, he awaited the coming of Desmond's
small party, and surrounded them, but before they could capture Sir John
he was shot full in the throat by one Thomas Fleming, who had formerly
been his servant. His body was brought to Cork and hanged in chains over
the city gate, where it remained as a spectacle to all beholders for three
or four years, until a great storm of wind blew it off. The head was then
sent to Dublin and spiked on the castle wall. Zouche sent to the Queen
Desmond's "fair turquoise ring, set in gold," and it was suggested
that her Majesty might do well to bestow on him the traitor's lands. The
proclamation had promised £500 for the taking of Sir John; "but
where," ask the official dispatches, "is the money?" [44]
[44] S.P.I., Eliz., lxxxviii, Nos. 14, 15 (January 12, 13, 1582).
The suppression of the rebellion was now practically accomplished. For
two years more the feeble old Earl held out with his cousin Maurice FitzGerald,
a gallant leader who subsequently rose high in the Spanish navy, until
the Queen, wearied by the awful accounts that were continually reaching
her of the condition of the country, offered a general pardon and Act
of Oblivion to all who would come in, hoping thereby to detach the minor
lords from Desmond's party and force him to surrender. A considerable
number submitted, among them David Barry, son to Lord Barrymore, Patrick
Condor, and the Seneschal of Imokilly.[45] Barry was most graciously received
and was restored to all his honours and dignities on his father's death.
The Earl, who was still in hiding in the woods of Aghadoe, but harassed
by the untiring watchfulness of Zouche's troops, at last "growing
feeble, and extremely falling sick," was betrayed by his own foster-brother,
one Owen Moriarty, in whom the Earl reposed so much confidence that he
was privy to all his secrets. He informed the garrison at Castlemaine
that the Earl was to be found in a miserable hovel; here he was surrounded
by the soldiers, who took him out and beheaded him on the night of November
II, 1583.[46] One Daniel O'Kelly was rewarded for the act, but was later
executed for highway robbery. Fifteen years later, Moriarty was hanged
on a gibbet at his own door by the Lord of Lixnaw. All the Desmond lands
were declared forfeited to the Crown.
[45] The Earl of Ormonde received 2109 gentlemen into protection in 1583
(ibid., cii, No. 123).
[46] Russell, "Relation of the FitzGeralds," op. cit., p. 39.
To the poor, Desmond's rebellion brought unrelieved misery, and when they
met the Earl "they cursed him bitterly for the war." When, in
1580, Viscount Baltinglas endeavoured to stir him up to fresh efforts
for the Catholic faith "his people came and cried with one voice
that they were starved and undone, and therefore would forsake him in
it, as not able to endure the war any longer." [47] They flocked
over to Wales in such numbers to escape the miseries at home that West
Wales was practically recolonized by them, Richard Griffiths, writing
to Wolsey, speaks of twenty thousand as settling in Pembroke and Tenby,
"most part rascals out of the King's rebellion, the Earl of Desmond,
and very few out of the English Pale." They were "so powdered
among the inhabitants" that in some villages "all are Irish
except the parson." [48] Desmond's subordinate Lords, MacCarthy Reagh,
Sir Dermot MacCarthy, and "other very great possessioners" in
Cork complained that they were so exacted upon by the Earl that they were
become in effect his thralls and slaves. Munster was becoming a veritable
waste. The accounts given by Spenser show the horrors of the time, the
inhabitants dying by the roadsides of hunger or endeavouring to subsist
on herbs and cresses. It was left to the new planters to restore some
show of prosperity and cultivation to the devastated regions.[49]
[1] Thomas Russell, "Relation of the FitzGeralds" (1638), in
Unpublished Geraldine Documents, ed. S. Hayman and J. Graves, p. 21.
[47] Carew, Cal., ii, No. 457, p. 296.
[48] Ellis, Original Letters (1824), i, 191-194; Harl.
MSS., No. 6250, fol. 20-24 (1603).
[49] Spenser, View of the State of Ireland (ed. Morley, 1890), pp. 143,
163.
END OF CHAPTER XV
|
|
