Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jkksz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T03:51:27.079Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

XIII. Henry VIII and Ireland, 1509–34

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 July 2016

David B. Quinn
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Historical revision
Information
Irish Historical Studies , Volume 12 , Issue 48 , September 1961 , pp. 318 - 344
Copyright
Copyright © Irish Historical Studies Publications Ltd 1961

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Pp. 124–61.

2 See P.R.O., S.P. 60/1, 1, 2, 2 (1) (Cal. S.P Ire., 1509–73, p. 1). Kildare delayed his reply to letters missive of 28 July 1509, instructing him to come to England, until 5 June 1510.

3 L. & P. Hen. VIII, i, no. 632 (7 & 22).

4 His English chief justice, John Topcliffe (who was in England in 1511 (ibid., ii, p. 1450, Ormond deeds, iv 367)) and archbishop Walter Fitzsymons, royal nominees were joined on the council by William Rokeby, bishop of Meath, who became chancellor and archbishop of Dublin on Fitzsymons’s death, Hugh Inge, the new bishop of Meath, and John Rawson, prior of St. John’s, the latter by the king’s command (Ware, Annales (1664), pp. 87–8; Memoranda Roll, Ire., 4 Hen. VIII, m. 16a (B.M., Add. MS 4791, ff. 194 seq. Ware’s extracts); L. & P Hen. VIII, i, nos 1037–8, 1221 (4)).

5 A.U., iii. 497; Ellis, Henry, Original letters, ser 1, 1. 186 (1824).Google Scholar

6 L. & P Hen. VIII, i, nos 2525 (2–4), 2484. Rokeby was reappointed.

7 Ware, Annales, pp. 92–3; L. & P. Hen. VIII, ii, no. 1705.

8 Memoranda Roll, Ire., 8 Hen. VIII, m. 4a (B.M., Add. MS 4791); Ware, Annales, p. 91; S.P. 60/1, 3–4 (14 May and 7 June 1514).

9 Kildare had on May 1 been sitting at dinner with the earl of Surrey and Rokeby at court (L. & P. Hen. VIII, ii, no. 411); the only mention of the council meeting is in the report of Darcy’s statement (Cal Carew MSS, 1515–74, pp. 6–8).

10 S.P. 60/1, 10; also, with little doubt, L. & P. Hen. VIII, Addenda, i (pt I), no. 297.

11 Cal. Carew MSS, 1515–74, pp. 6–8. Kite and Inge were both in England later in the summer but it is not known that they were consulted on political matters (L. & P. Hen. VIII, ii, nos 1153, 1269, 2017; P.R.O.I., Exchequer Inquisitions, co. Dublin, Hen. VIII, no. 2 (Rec. Comm. Cal.) ).

12 L. & P. Hen. VIII, ii, nos 99–1001, 1704.

13 Ware, Annales, pp. 94–6. Darcy was dismissed from office and the council; Lord Slane, the treasurer, died in London in 1517 and was not replaced, Sir Bartholomew Dillon, acting as general receiver from 2 July 1516 (Lib. mun. pub. Hib., i., pt. ii, p. 42). Rokeby and Inge kept their places on the council, but Kite returned to England for good in 1516 (Memoranda Roll, Ire., -8 Hen. VIII, m. 4a (B.M., Add. MS 4791)).

14 Letters of Dec. 1 and 12 (Kildare to Henry VIII; Rokeby to Wolsey), S.P. 60/1, 7, 8, belong to 1516 not 1515.

15 Stanyhurst, , in Holinshed, , Chronicles (1577), p. 80 Google Scholar; Ware, Annales, p. 97.

16 L. & P. Hen. Vili, ii, no. 4293.

17 Ware, Anc. Ir. Hist. (1633), p. 107. L. & P. Hen. VIII, iii, no. 17.

18 L. & P. Hen. VIII, iii, no. 576 (cp. Elton, G.R., Tudor revolution in government (1953), pp. 37–9Google Scholar; Richardson, W.G., Tudor chamber administration (1952), pp. 233–41).Google Scholar

19 Irish judicial matters were coming before the council, Sir Thomas More being instructed in July by the king to get Wolsey to deal with a Waterford suit against New Ross in the Star Chamber or before justices (no. 356, cf. no. 981). The earl of Shrewsbury was encouraged to take a more active interest in his Wexford liberty, being authorised to send armed men to defend his property (L. & P. Hen. VIII, iii, no. 430, cf. ii, no. 3853).

20 Testing at Dublin on that day ( Mason, W Monck, History of St Patrick’s cathedral (1820), app. p. xxxv).Google Scholar He placed the south midlands in the care of a commission, on which Ormond was prominent, in the previous May (Ormond deeds, iv. 56–8).

21 The problem is partly one of chronology. Did Robert Cowley, with Butler complaints (Cal. Carew MSS 1515–74, p. 143), precede Kildare to England? Was the ‘Sir Roger Darcy of Ireland’, rewarded by Surrey before he left England, SirDarcy, William (L. & P Hen. VIII, 3, p. 153),Google Scholar and, if so, had he preceded Kildare? And how far are the accounts in Campion (Ware, Anc. lr Hist., p. 107), Stanyhurst ( Holinshed, , Chronicles, p. 801),Google Scholar and Ware (Annales, pp. 101–2) telescoped?

22 Anglica historia, ed. Hay, Denys (1950), p. 265.Google Scholar

23 Whether or not there is anything in Polydore Vergil’s allegation that Wolsey wanted Surrey out of the way and wished to injure his reputation by involving him in Ireland (this sounds like wisdom after the event) (ibid.).

24 L. & P. Hen. VIII, iii. no. 670; iv, no. 80.

25 Tudor revolution in government, pp. 37–9, 52–8, 63, 66–9.

26 Pollard, A.F., Henry VIII (1951), p. 87.Google Scholar

27 Late October or early November, draft in Ruthal’s hand, Lambeth, Carew MS 602, p. 74 (draft with corrections in Ruthal’s hand), printed S.P. Hen. VIII, ii. 53.

28 Henry’s statement runs counter to many expositions by contemporaries and modern writers of the nature of prerogative under the Tudors. DrElton, G.R., in The Tudor constitution (1960), pp. 17–18,Google Scholar summarizes these views by saying that the royal prerogative comprised the rights which enabled the king to govern, that they were known to and capable of being defined by the common law, and that to the Tudors freedom from being bound by the laws meant ‘a right to dispense with the law if equity required it, a necessary power of flexibility’, contrasting with the Stuarts, to whom’ it meant true absolutism—freedom to disregard the law because that was under the king’ But clearly Henry in 1520 appears to mean just this. Dr Elton has concentrated his own studies in Tudor sovereignty on Thomas Cromwell’s theories and practice (cf. ‘King or minister? The man behind the Henrician reformation’, History, xl. 216–32 (1956)) and says that in the ‘thirties’ no one at that time put forward absolutist theories’ (‘The political creed of Thomas Cromwell’, R. Hist. Soc. Trans., ser. 5, vi. 86, n. 1 (1954)). Perhaps it is therefore desirable to push the inquiry back to the earlier part of the reign when Henry expressed such theories. If Dr Elton is right could it then have been Cromwell who weaned Henry from absolutist ideas?

29 Chronicle of Dublin, sub 1520, (T.C.D. MS E. 2. 19); S.P. Hen. VIII, ii. 33–9, 44–51, 57–8; L. & P. Hen. VIII, iii, no. 963.

30 S.P. Hen. VIII, ii. 37–9, 40–1, 43, 48, 58; L & P. Hen. VIII, iii, no. 963, app. no. 15 (Stile not Kite to Wolsey).

31 L. & P. Hen. VIII, iii, no. 889 (September or early October, not June).

32 S.P. Hen. VIII, ii. 51–4.

33 Ibid., ii. 62 (Dec. 16).

34 The king on April 7 forwarded to Wolsey for comment Surrey’s letters received from SirPeachev, John saying ‘he in no wyse lyketh suche newes’ (L. & P. Hen. VIII, 3, no. 1220)Google Scholar (S.P. Hen. VIII, ii. 63n.).

35 Ibid., ii. 65–72, with addition in L. & P Hen. VIII, iii, no. 1252 (the product apparently of discussions in council as well as of the views of Wolsey and Henry).

36 S.P. Hen. VIII, ii. 72–5.

37 Ibid., ii. 84. Sir John Stile, his under-treasurer was in touch with Wolsey (19 Oct., ibid., ii. 95–8), complaining about his bad temper and urging Wolsey to issue instructions to him on matters of detail.

38 Wolsey sent a draft from Calais to which the king made additions (S.P. Hen. VIII, iii. 88–9; i. 81–2).

39 L. & P. Hen. VIII, iii, nos 1630, 1646–7 (S.P Hen. VIII, i. 69–70), no. 1673 (S.P Hen. VIII, i. 71)—the king has opened letters from Surrey addressed to Wolsey.

40 L. & P Hen. VIII, iii, no. 1675 (S.P Hen. VIII, i. 72–3) : Wolsey sent over the draft printed in the note to ibid., ii. 88–9 (L. & Ρ Hen. VIII, iii, no. 1715) but the king refused to accept the naming of Ormond as lieutenant and made other changes, to which Pace referred in a letter to Wolsey of October 31 (L. & P Hen. VIII, iii, no. 1716 (S.P Hen. VIII, i. 81–2)).

41 L. & P. Hen. VIII, iii, no. 1774 (S.P Hen. VIII, i. 92). The matter referred to the legal counsel was not who should be deputy (as Elton, Dr, Tudor revolution in government, pp. 63–4,Google Scholar thought), but from whom should Ormond’s patent as deputy derive, from the king or from Surrey as lieutenant. Wolsey’s draft assumed that it would be from the king, the councillors inclined to agree but wished to hear the rest of the judges (it did in fact issue from the king so that Surrey’s lieutenancy terminated when Ormond was sworn in on 26 March 1522).

42 Dec. 2, Surrey to Pace, S.P Hen. VIII, ii. 91, Hall, , Chronicle (1808), p. 629 Google Scholar; T.C.D. MS E. 2. 19 (sub 1521–2), S.P Hen. VIII, ii, 92–7, March 6, Ormond’s patent, P.R.O., G 66/638, m. 17

43 The sequence of information on outgoings from England is L. & P Hen. VIII, iii, p. 1533, no. 800; iv no. 974 (4), iv, no. 2216, iii, pp. 1543, 1540; S.P Hen. VIII, ii. 70, 72, 71; L. & P. Hen. VIII, iii, no. 2750. The total (which is almost certainly incomplete) from March 1520 to 25 March 1522 is £19504 4s 3d. Sir John Stile went to Ireland as under-treasurer and attempted to revive English financial methods. His account for the internal revenues, Michaelmas 1519-Michaelmas 1521, showed a net receipt of £3358 13s 9½d Irish, of which .£1500 15s ll½d was transferred to the military account (the particulars of the account with the auditor’s notes is P.R.O., E. 101/248, 21, but it lacks a substantial part of the beginning of the roll).

44 L. & P. Hen. VIII, iv, no. 2693; S.P. Hen. VIII, ii. 51–5.

45 Ibid., ii. 56.

46 L. & P. Hen. VIII, iv, no. 2692; Cal. Carew MSS, 1515–74, p. 17. The bond contained the names of five members of Dorset’s family.

47 Cf., for modem summaries, Brooks, FW., The council of the north (1953), pp. 13–15,Google Scholar Williams, Penry, The council in the marches of Wales under Elizabeth I (1958), pp. 11–15 Google Scholar; Elton, G.R., The Tudor constitution, pp. 195–9.Google Scholar

48 L. & P. Hen. VIII, iv, no. 81.

49 T.C.D. MS E. 2. 19, Vergil, , Angl, hist., p. 308.Google Scholar Kildare returned with his English wife, Elizabeth Grey.

50 S.P Hen. VIII, ii. 99–102; L. & P Hen. VIII, iii, no. 5050.

51 Ormond deeds, iv. 82–3; Graves, J. and Prim, J.G.A., History of St Canice’s cathedral (1857), pp. 221–5.Google Scholar

52 T.C.D. MS E. 2. 19, Campion (Ware, Anc. Ir hist., pp. 108–9), Stanyhurst ( Holinshed, , Chronicles (1577), pp. 80–1).Google Scholar

53 Ibid., p. 81.

54 T.C.D. MS 2. 19, S.P Hen. VIII, ii. 104–17, Cal. Carew MSS, 1515–74, no. 27, Ormond deeds, iv 90.

55 Rcg. St Thomas, Dublin, p. 424, Cal. anc. rec. Dublin, i. 178–83; Cal pat. rolls Ire., Hen. VIII-Eliz., p. 194, Calendar of Archbishop Alen’s reinster, cd. McNeill, C. (1950), p. 271,Google Scholar T.C.D. MS E. 2. 19.

56 Chronicle (1809), p. 685.

57 T.C.D. MS E. 2. 19.

58 Holinshed, , Chronicles (1577), p. 81.Google Scholar

59 S.P. Hen. VIII, ii. 120–5, L. & P Hen. VIII, iv, no. 1352 (2).

60 Dublin City Records, Recorder’s Book, p. 235.

61 L. & P. Hen. VIII, iv, nos 2424, 2751, 2433; Kildare is last found testing on Nov. 5 (Cal. Carew MSS, 1515–74, 37).

62 Hardiman, J., Hist, of Galway (1958), p. 83 Google Scholar; Cal. anc. rec. Dublin, i. 177–8.

63 Campion (Ware, Anc. Ir. hist., pp. 110–15); Stanyhurst ( Holinshed, , Chronicles (1577), pp. 81–3).Google Scholar

64 S.P. Hen. VIII, ii. 126–8; L. & P. Hen. VIII, iv, no. 4094

65 S.P. Hen. VIII, ii. 129–34; Stanyhurst, ( Holinshed, , Chronicles (1577), p. 83).Google Scholar

66 Ware, Anc. Ir. hist., pp. 115–16.

67 Ormond deeds, iv. 116–28; L. & P. Hen. VIII, iv, nos 3937, 3973, 6085.

68 Ibid., iv, no. 1302.

69 See ibid., iv, nos 4422, 4510.

70 S.P Hen. VIII, ii. 135–6.

71 Ibid., ii. 136–40.

72 L. & P Hen. VIII, iv, nos 4562, 4609.

73 S.P. Hen. VIII, ii. 154 n.

74 Ibid., pp. 143–7; L. & P. Hen. VIII, iv. nos 4933, 5392.

75 Deduced from items in P.R.O., S.P. 1/67, ff. 38–48 and E. 101/420, 11 (June 19 and 30).

76 P.R.O., G 66/656 (22 June 1529). For earlier reports that he was to be associated with Ireland see Cal. Carew MSS, 1515–74, p. 43 (24 Feb. 1529); L. & P. Hen. VIII, iv, nos 2988, 3028. He had been nominal head of the Council of the North since 1525.

77 P.R.O., S.P 1/67, ff. 38–44 (inadequately calendared in L. & P Hen. VIII, v, no. 398 (see Quinn, D.B., ‘Henry Fitzroy, duke of Richmond and his connexion with Ireland, 1529–30’, in Bull. Inst. Hist. Res., 12 (1935). 175–7).CrossRefGoogle Scholar

78 P.R.O., E. 101/420, 11, f. 48; T.C.D. MS E. 2. 19, Ormond deeds, iv. 133–5.

79 E. 101/420, 11, ff. 48–48v.

80 Ibid., f. 43. Sir Thomas More was also suggested (L. & P. Hen. VIII, iv, no. 5679).

81 Skeffington and Kildare returned at the end of June 1530 (ibid., VIII, ii. 147–50).

ff. 99v, 110; instructions for Skeffington (1530 not 1529) (S.P. Hen.

82 Holinshed, , Chronicles (1577), pp. 84–5.Google Scholar

83 T.C.D. MS E. 2. 19; A.U., iii. 579; S.P. Hen. VIII, ii. 151–3, 154n; L. & P. Hen. VIII, v, nos 278 (21), 364 (12), 688.

84 Ibid., no. 657.

85 Ossory to Cromwell, Thomas (S.P. Hen. VIII, 2. 152–8).Google Scholar

86 P.R.O., S.P. 60/1, 73 (L. & P Hen. VIII, v, no. 1061)—Kildare may have been present also. He had left Ireland at the end of March (T.C.D. MS E. 2. 19).

87 List of documents not now extant, L. & P. Hen. VIII, v, no. 299 (p. 134).

88 Kildare swore before the council to maintain no Irishmen against the Butlers (L. & P. Hen. VIII, v, no. 1207 (14–16), S.P Hen. VIII, ii. 166; Holinshed, , Chronicles, p. 85).Google Scholar

89 S.P. Hen. VIII, ii. 155.

90 Elton, G.R., Tudor revolution in government (1955), pp. 76–97.Google Scholar

91 The sources are scrappy see S.P Hen. VIII, ii. 165, 177, 161, 168, 180; L. & P. Hen. VIII, vi. no. 55 (2). Kildare was wounded by a gunshot in an attack on Birr Castle in 1532 and never after fully recovered (T.C.D. MS E. 2. 19).

92 S.P Hen. VIII, ii. 161–2, 166–79, L. & P Hen. VIII, vi, no. 299; viii, no. 888.

93 S.P Hen. VIII, ii, 179–80, L. & P Hen. VIII, vi, nos 299 (p. 134), 929 (26), 1051, 1057.

94 S.P Hen. VIII, ii. 180–1.

95 Ibid., ii. 181–2 (see too Sir James Fitzgerald to the king, 30 Aug. 1533, pp. 179–80).

96 P.R.O., S.P. 1/78, f. 91 (L. & P. Hen. VIII, vi, 944), cp. no. 1381.

97 Ware, Annales (1664), p. 132, states that Alen, in the presence of Staples and Rawson, conveyed to Kildare the king’s warning that no further guns, etc., were to be taken from the Castle, but that Kildare went on doing so. If true this must have been after Alen’s return in October.

98 S.P. Hen. VIII, ii. 179.

99 Ibid,, ii. 162–6.

100 Kildare’s arrival cannot be precisely dated but February 1534 appears reasonably certain, cp. S.P Hen. VIII, ii. 183. Ware (Annales, p. 132) says that Lady Kildare went to England ahead of her husband to attempt to get the recall countermanded.

101 For the rumours and reports see L. & Ρ Hen. VIII, vii, nos 122, 152, 229, 945, 980, 1057, 1095, 1297, S.P Hen. VIII, ii. 196, 198.

102 L. & P. Hen. VIII, vii, nos 122, 229, 530 (p. 215), 957.

103 S.P. Hen. VIII, ii. 194–7