Ireland under the Tudors (Vol. 1-3). Bagwell Richard
Чтение книги онлайн.
Читать онлайн книгу Ireland under the Tudors (Vol. 1-3) - Bagwell Richard страница 32
Poynings leaves Ireland, 1496.
Poynings quitted Ireland in January 1496, leaving the government in the Bishop of Bangor’s hands. Important as was the recent legislation, it cannot be said that Henry had made any real change in the system of government. His great idea, like that of his descendants, was to make Ireland pay her own expenses, and for that purpose he sent over two able officers, with instructions to overhaul the entire system of government. Plenty of zeal seems to have been shown, but the result was not encouraging. No year passed in Ireland without some small war, and the established custom of hiring native mercenaries tended to prevent any improvement. Sir James Ormonde and other leaders found their account in constant disturbance, and expense always more than kept pace with revenue.63
Friars employed by the Government.
The accounts of Vice-Treasurer Hattecliffe, to whom Henry committed the control of Irish finance, seem to show that Poynings and others found a difficulty in obtaining the aid of subordinate officers. They had, however, a resource which Elizabeth lacked, in the power of employing priests and friars. Thus we find a Franciscan of Dublin sent to spy out the manners of the people inhabiting the marches of the Pale, and again acting as a messenger between the Council in Dublin and the Deputy in the field. A canon named John Staunton was sent to act as a spy ‘in Munster and elsewhere about the Earl of Desmond, Perkin Warbeck, and other rebels.’ On another occasion a Carmelite was the means of communication between the Government and Sir James Ormonde, and it is probable that many more of the messengers were clergymen, though the fact is not so mentioned.64
Turbulence of the Geraldines. Restoration of Kildare, 1496.
That there was no peace, and consequently no diminution of expense, is not to be altogether attributed to the rapacity of Sir James Ormonde and other leaders of kerne and gallowglasses. The Geraldines took care that the country should be disturbed during the Earl’s absence, as we find by the following significant entry:—‘Two shillings to Philip Messanger for carrying the Lord Justice’s letters directed to Richard Paynteneye of Carbury, Edward Dowdall of Slane, to the sovereign of Athboy, and others, ordering them to have sundry fires made on sundry mountains—viz. the mountains of Tara, Lyons, Athboy, and Slane, to warn the King’s lieges in case James, the Earl’s son, and others the King’s Irish enemies, should bring a power to invade the English districts.’ Several other payments were made to the same messenger for services in connection with these Geraldine inroads, and Henry came gradually to think that Kildare did more harm as a prisoner than he could possibly do if he were at liberty. Whether the account of the Earl’s behaviour at Court, which has been copied from the ‘Book of Howth’ into most histories, be true or not, there can be little doubt that Henry thought it better that he should rule all Ireland, than that he should have further opportunities of showing that all Ireland could not rule him. The gravest charge against him was that of conspiring with O’Hanlon to murder Poynings, and this was disposed of by the evidence of O’Hanlon. Prince Henry became titular Lord-Lieutenant, the attainder was reversed by the English Parliament, and Kildare received a commission as Lord Deputy under the King’s son. His first wife, Alison Eustace, is said to have died through the agitation caused by his imprisonment, and he now added to his influence by marrying Elizabeth St. John, the King’s first cousin. Leaving his son Gerald as a hostage at the English Court, he returned to Dublin as soon as possible, received the sword from Deane, successfully invaded the O’Briens and Macnamaras, and was fully reconciled to the Archbishop of Armagh. The Great Seal was given to Fitzsimons, Archbishop of Dublin, a prelate who had the courage to tell Henry that a certain courtly orator flattered him too much. ‘Our father of Dublin,’ replied the King, ‘we minded to find the same fault ourselves.’65
Warbeck’s third visit, 1497.
On July 20, 1497, Perkin Warbeck again made his appearance at Cork. He got no help this time from Desmond, who had been pardoned, and who had perhaps made up his mind that the adventurer was an impostor. Sir James Ormonde was accused of favouring him. The citizens of Waterford at once gave Henry notice, and with four ships fitted out by themselves gave chase to Perkin, who found no encouragement in Ireland, and lost no time in going to join the Cornish malcontents. Narrowly escaping capture at sea, he managed to raise a force of 6,000 or 7,000 men, besieged Exeter and Taunton unsuccessfully, and then ran away without striking a blow, and took sanctuary at Beaulieu in Hampshire. The inglorious close of his career is unconnected with Ireland, and he seems on this last occasion to have had no Irish allies. The citizens of Waterford received from the King a cap of maintenance to be borne on certain occasions before the mayor, and the title of Urbs intacta, in which the city still glories. The sum of 1,000 marks which he had promised for the capture of Perkin was not, strictly speaking, earned by the Waterford men; and their loyal and, doubtless, very costly exertions, received no money recompense from the frugal King.66
Considerations as to Simnel and Warbeck.
The modern historian, whose fortune it has been to clear up all doubts about Perkin Warbeck, takes Lord Bacon to task for overrating the excellence of the pretender’s acting. But Bernard Andreas, the principal if not the only contemporary writer, certainly gives one to understand that he played his part very plausibly.
‘Carried to Ireland by a fair wind he suborned with his very cunning temptations a great part of the barbarians of that island. For he unfolded and retold from his ready memory all the times of Edward IV., and without book repeated the names of all his familiars and servants as he had been taught them from a boy. He habitually added circumstances of time, place, and person, with which he very easily persuaded the levity of those men. And with the help of such figments the matter grew so important, that men of prudence and high nobility were induced to believe the same. What followed? Certain prophecies concerning him were scattered far and wide by false prophets, which completely blinded the mental perceptions of the common people.’
It must be admitted that Lord Bacon did not speak without considerable authority. A contemporary French poem, which was probably also written by Bernard Andreas, gives a very unflattering account of Ireland as a cave of robbers, ‘where is neither peace, love, nor concord, but only treasons and the foulest deeds.’ Such material help as the pretender received was entirely among the Anglo-Irish. The native annalists do not mention him, whereas Simnel is, at least by one writer, spoken of as an undoubted prince of the blood royal.67