#Elizabethan Conquest of Ireland

[stairnaheireann]

#OTD in 1597 – Death of Fiach MacHugh O’Byrne (Fiach Mac Aodh Ó Broin), Lord of Glenmalure.

Fiach MacHugh O’Bryne (Fiach Mac Aodh ÓBroin) was the son of the chief of the O’Byrnes of the Gabhail Raghnaill. His sept, a minor one, claimed descent from the 11th century King of Leinster, Bran Mac Maolmordha, and was centred at Ballinacor in Glenmalure, a steep valley in the fastness of the Wicklow mountains. Their chiefs styled themselves as Lords of Ranalagh. The territory of the Gabhail…

[dwellordream]

“...We must again turn to politics fully to understand the people’s response to Reformation. The great difference between Ireland and the other British realms was that Ireland’s English rulers did not treat its people as they treated the Welsh or Highlands Gaels. Wales had been incorporated into a United Kingdom with England in the 1530s, with parliamentary representation and mostly native administration of church and shires. The Scots Highlands, of course, were never subject to English administration: the union of crowns, when James VI succeeded Elizabeth in 1603, did not subjugate the independent realm of Scotland. But Ireland had been a “lordship” of the English crown since the Anglo-Norman conquest of the twelfth century. 

In 1541, in the wake of a major Irish rebellion, it became in effect a colony when Henry VIII claimed the title of king, not just overlord, of Ireland. The Irish population in the sixteenth century was divided into three very unequal parts: the most numerous and least powerful Gaelic Irish; the “Old English,” or semi-Gaelicized descendants of the Anglo-Norman conquest living in or near the Pale around Dublin; and the “New English,” or post-Reformation arrivals often given land confiscated from Irish rebels. The New English also got the most powerful and lucrative administrative positions. The Gaelic Irish and Old English, unlike the Scots, certainly never invited English alliance. Henry, Edward, and especially Elizabeth were their oppressors. 

Real parliamentary power lay in Westminster; the Irish parliament could only do as it was told. English planters had fiscal and tax advantages over natives and occupied lands seized violently from Gaels. And to hold land at all after the Reformation, one had to swear the oath of supremacy, acknowledging the English monarch as supreme head of the church in his or her realms. The Irish people came to recognize Protestantism as part of the machinery of oppression. Despite the negative associations of Protestantism with English domination, there were a few early successes for Protestants in Ireland. The Elizabethan government sensibly permitted a Latin translation of the Book of Common Prayer in 1559, so that some people were lured in by the similarity of the service to the familiar Mass.

 A particularly zealous Protestant preacher, Bishop John Bale, won a few converts in Ossory and Kilkenny. And the first Jesuit mission of 1542 reported “the few faithful [Catholics] are too poor to support us” and others had been “subdued by fear.” They gave up the mission after just a few weeks and fled to Scotland, where they were arrested. But at this early stage, the Irish seem rather more confused than persuaded by Protestantism. The situation changed dramatically when Elizabeth determined to impose the new faith by force, along with a systematic repression of Irish culture—language, music, dress, law, and religion. Catholics’ estates were forfeit to the Crown, and one whose property was valued under £20 could be imprisoned for a year. 

Now the traditional and very popular faith long maintained by the preaching friars in close alliance with the aes dána, the Gaelic learned orders of Ireland, provided the banner of resistance to English domination at all social levels. Counter-Reformation missions strengthened the resolve of the Irish people to wield that banner in the face of real persecution. Irish students returned from Spanish and French seminaries to build on the popularity of the mendicant orders working from centers in the west of the island, beyond effective English rule. Chan-tries beyond the Pale had never been dissolved and now supported Catholic clergy. Observant Franciscans led successful missions, joined by Jesuits in 1542, 1560, and especially 1598. 

Ordinary people flocked to hear them say masses and preach, whatever the danger. As one scribbled notebook entry indicates, the people had come to understand English Protestantism not as a path to spiritual freedom but as divine punishment for their sins. Periodically over the course of the century, Gaelic chieftains raised rebellions against English tyranny. These were always brutally repressed, the families of the defeated often systematically starved out in the aftermath when the Crown seized vast tracts of Irish land and turned it over to English and Scots “planters.” 

The Ulster plantation of 1609 was the culmination, settling radically Calvinist Scots in the Gaelic heart of the north, where Hugh O’Neill’s rebellion had recruited so many and failed so miserably in the 1590s. For the Irish people, all things English—including Protestantism—were thus impossibly tainted. Reformed religion was part of a foreign attack on Irish identity. The aes dána, so effectively enrolled for Protestantism in Scotland, became the voice of Ireland’s vigorous, irretrievably Catholic identity. In their writings we find a startling image of the Reformation’s failure in Ireland: by 1600 the usual Gaelic word for “Protestant” became albanac´ or sasanac´—“Scot” or “Englishman.””

- Margo Todd, “A People’s Reformation?” in Reformation Christianity

[arcticdementor]

Let us begin with the comments section from a Youtube video of Michael D. Higgins’ presidential inauguration in 2011, the moment when the national anthem is played and many of the participants sang along with varying degrees of commitment and enthusiasm, a moment of palpable awkwardness. A comment that could have come from the pen of D.P. Moran himself sets the tone: “You see the mumbling and fumbling, even by An Uachtarán (sic.) English-speaking all, they persist in this charlatanic flummery, miming and mummery”.

A shrewd and appropriately poetic observation that may have a much wider, even metaphorical extension than the issue of mere competency in the Irish language and, of course, the day that was in it. Other commenters continued in this vein, “It is funny because many Irish are extremely anti-british BUT hate their own language”. Funny indeed, but not funny-haha, for this is a remark that more or less summarises in just one sentence the essential core of Douglas Hyde’s 1892 address, ‘The Necessity for De-Anglicising Ireland’. We can conclude this very brief review with a comment that really captures a certain aspect of the Irish Ireland movement, “[f]orget the ’32 County Republic’, without the language Ireland might as well rejoin the commonwealth”.

How remarkable it is to notice from a brief perusal of the comment section of a YouTube video that essentially nothing has changed since Hyde and Moran’s time, at least not in matters bearing on the well-being of the national psyche. Maybe there has been a change. Perhaps things have become worse?

We have very fine motorways, ingenious globalist finance schemes that are the envy of the world, we are garrisoned by the Silicon Valley Expeditionary Force, and we lead the world in the production of erection pills. These are all very impressive achievements if you are signed up to the Globalist’s “Ireland Inc.” vision but somewhat less inspiring if you hold to another.

In the first quarter of the twentieth century, the controversial figure of D.P. Moran (1869-1936) was an important influence on the cultural discussion that paralleled the political struggle for independence in Ireland at this time through his journal the Leader, founded in 1900. Not only his own writing, but his skill and vision as an editor, propelled The Leader to become a central locus of discussion and debate in what was known as the ‘Irish Ireland’ movement. Readers interested in a general account of D.P. Moran and his work should start with Paul Delaney’s 2003 article ‘D.P. Moran and the Leader: Writing an Irish Ireland Through Partition‘ and which contains much additional information in the notes.

…

The philosopher Martin Heidegger has observed in another context how obliviation involves not merely an obliviating of the matter at hand as conscious act, for we would surely remember doing such a thing, but rather a forgetting of a forgetting.  Complete obliviation comes when I do not remember that I have forgotten something: I have forgotten it and I have forgotten that I have forgotten it. This had become the strategic aim of the Elizabethan conquests and continued (continues?) to guide state policy here for a considerable period thereafter, namely, to obliviate the Irishness of the Irish and make of them good Englishmen.

The radical transformation of the Irish proposed by Edmund Spenser and his contemporaries would have to complete this oblivation in order for it to be truly successful. He understood all too well that real and lasting conquest will come not so much from crushing the body but from wiping the mind and recreating a new identity, and the only medium through which this mental conquest take place must be language: “wordes are the image of the minde, soe as, the[y] proceeding from the minde, the mynd must be needes affected with the wordes. Soe that the speach being Irish, the hart must needes be Irishe; for out of the aboundance of the hart, the tonge speaketh” (Spenser, A View of the Present State of Ireland, 1596). Replacing one system of images with another will at the same time transform the mind, from Irishman to Englishman.

Now, it should be readily apparent that the success of such a project rests on the degree to which obliviation can be brought to completion. Consider this; do any of the current inhabitants of Anatolia pine over the loss of Hittite? Are there disconsolate Iraqis lamenting the passing of Sumerian in ballads composed in Arabic and sung in the coffee houses of Baghdad? Hardly likely as these respective languages, insofar as they can be reconstructed at all, are solely the province of a small group of international scholars of ancient near eastern languages. These languages have been effectively obliviated and with them, the mentalities and worlds they constituted.

…

That Spenser’s project has not been entirely successful does not mean that all is well, rather it has created a very unhealthy mentality that to this day continues to bedevil Irish well-being within individuals and as a nation. Much emphasis has been placed on the external and physical damage wreaked by colonial conquest and foreign domination upon the Irish nation, but all too little has been devoted to examining the internal or mental, emotional and even spiritual damage.

…

Hyde believed that language is the front-line, so to speak, wherein this mentality replicates itself trans-generationally; “[it] continues to apparently hate the English, and at the same time continues to imitate them; how it continues to clamour for recognition as a distinct nationality, and at the same time throws away with both hands what would make it so.” I might add that this mentality is seen at its strongest and concentrated form among the Irish bourgeois-state class.

This mentality has had layers added and been rendered somewhat more complex with the advent of Globalisation, the cultural hegemony of America, and the reflexive tendency to look abroad for any and all solutions to problems on the underlying assumption that nothing good can come from within. Local solutions are routinely derided as “Irish solutions to Irish problems”, sometimes with just cause.  The relevant Wiki article defines this phrase as “any official response to a controversial issue which is timid, half-baked, or expedient, which is an unsatisfactory compromise, or sidesteps the fundamental issue.” Some commentators of the Irish condition, the present author included, contend that underlying this mentality and its accompanying tendencies is a deep psychical wound, and while acknowledging that this claim is deemed by some to be objectionable, it is nevertheless defensible.

…

Independent Ireland never really decolonised itself. If you want to see what decolonisation looks like, consider what happened in Hong Kong in 1997. At the stroke of midnight of the beginning of July 1st as the Union Jack came down, and the flag of the People’s Republic of China was raised, a fleet of vans with workmen spread across the territory unscrewing and removing every symbol of British rule, every ‘ER’, every lion and unicorn, every crown, so that when the citizens of Hong Kong arose the next morning and went about their business, not a trace of the British state was left to be seen anywhere. All this shows is what observers of the situation there always knew – the British never really got into the minds of the Chinese people. One hundred years on, the lion and the unicorn is still atop the Custom House. A failure in the external domain indicates failure internally.

…

At this point, the question must surely become: “Who are you?” For years now, we have been saturated with endless (and boring) discussions revolving around questions as to what it means to be Irish, but with no satisfactory conclusion. Of course not! Because the elephant in the room is assiduously avoided throughout. It is necessarily an endless inquiry because a priori there is tacit agreement that the obvious solution to the problem that generates the question in the first place will not be adopted, namely, to restore our own language to the condition of normality. And to anticipate a frequent objection; normalising Irish does not mean abandoning English. The Dutch are renowned for their fluency in English, yet Dutch is the normal language of national life in the Netherlands.

[cincinnatusvirtue]

Let’s talk tactics: Highland Charge

The Scottish Highlands historically has maintained its own unique culture which touches on virtually all aspects of life, food, drink, fashion, family, religion and even warfare.  In the art of warfare the Scottish Highlands contributed in two ways one its rugged topography leading to a guerilla style of warfare and two in its infantry tactics and one that conjures almost a romantic vision, the Highland Charge.   Before we discuss the tactic itself, we need to know the history of the region from ancient times until the modern era and how topography and tradition shaped the Highland Charge.

Historically, Scotland has been viewed by many an invader to be wild and untamed land.  This was true of the Romans during the age of Roman Britain from the 1st-4th centuries AD.  The Roman legions encountered a number of various Celtic tribes that caused them troubles in the modern day regions of England, Wales and the Lowlands of Scotland.  The areas that often leant the Romans the most difficulty were areas of rugged topography, namely the Britons of Wales in particular the Ordovices and Silures of the mountains of North Wales and valleys of South Wales respectively.  Topography in war is a sometimes underappreciated part of strategy and it took many years and much loss of life and the development of forts and garrisons to finally subdue these tribes in Wales.  The same can be said of the Highlands of Scotland.  The Lowlands known to the Romans as Caledonia was conquered but this remained the greatest extent of Rome’s northward expansion.  To the north in the Highlands with its rugged mountains, hills and many glens were a related but distinct Celtic people, the Picts, who spoke a language identified as Celtic but somewhat distant from the Common Brittonic southern tribes.

The Romans associated the Picts as pirates in later Roman Britain along the coasts and fierce warriors in the interior of the country, conducting raids and disappearing into the Highlands before the Romans could send legions after them.  Rome’s response to this was to build and garrison Hadrian’s Wall along the modern English/Scottish border.  The Picts were never subdued by Rome unlike the rest of Britain and this was to have a ramifications overtime and echoes throughout history in the Highlands in which they resided.

In time as the lower portions of Britain saw the Romans retreat, leaving the Romano-Britons to their own defense and the subsequent establishment of the Welsh and Cornish as distinct Celtic nations so to would the Picts meld with their fellow Gaels from Ireland and Western islands of Scotland’s coast giving birth to the modern Scots.  While the southern Britons in the start of the Middle Ages faced the Anglo-Saxon threat.  The Scots merged into their own kingdoms with the Gaels becoming overlords of the Picts and eventually both Celtic confederations synthesizing into one distinct entity.

In time Scotland, like the rest of British Isles was subject to Viking raids and the establishment of Viking petty kingdoms, but unlike England and even parts of Ireland, Scotland’s Viking rule was largely relegated to the Hebrides, Orkney and Shetland islands on its periphery, the Highlands and much of lower Scotland remained the Scots Gaelic speaking land that forged out of the blending with the Picts.  The topography of the Highlands as always contributed to this isolation.

As the Middle Ages wore on, the Kingdom of England would see troubles in its attempts to subdue Scotland, especially of note was the Scottish Wars of Independence against England under Edward I and Edward II of England.  Despite some English successes their overall rule of Scotland remained somewhat limited due to in part to Scotland’s difficult to manage geography and its Clan system.

The Clan system had been a tradition found in Scotland and Ireland throughout the centuries, an important dynamic that social groups were built around.  The Highland clans had a fierce sense of independence from both the English and Scottish crowns and from each other at times, alliances were formed and rivalries as well.  Murder, warfare alternating with peace and cooperation were part of Clan lifestyle throughout the centuries.  The romantic and distinct image of the kilt and tartan clad Highlander Clans really forged in the 15th-17th centuries.  Gradually, English rule, settlement and influence over the Lowlands of Scotland lead to the spread of the English language being spoken along with a distinct derivative Germanic language called simply “Scots” quite separate from this the Highlanders retained their Scots Gaelic language and Celtic traditions.  Once again geographic isolation a contributing factor.

The Highlander Clans alternated their allegiance to the Crown of Scotland when it suited them.  Some clans would rebel against the Crown while others supported them, less out of honor bound duty to the king and more pragmatically for the chance to rid themselves of a rival and gain riches and territorial expansion for their own clan.  Clans were led by chieftains who in time were granted titles of nobility and rewarded with wealth and land for their service to the Crown.  Highlander Scots became famed for their prowess in combat and became mercenaries throughout Europe, serving in various armies at various times.  Some Highlanders became involved in England’s conquest of Ireland, namely after the Elizabethan era establishment of the Plantation of Ulster in the North of Ireland, Highlanders would side with both the native Gaelic Irish and English and Lowlander Scots depending on motivation ranging from cultural and familial ties to money and the promise of wealth.  Ultimately, the English gained control over Ireland and the Scottish Highlanders added to the mix with Lowlanders and English to form the Scots-Irish or Ulster-Scots community of Northern Ireland.

By the late 17th century Scotland had much upheaval due to Stuarts of Scotland becoming the royal dynasty of England as well.  They remained separate kingdoms under one monarch.  The War of Three Kingdoms and the English Civil War along with religious fervor all caused Highlanders to alternatively suffer and profit, largely depending on which winner they would back.  By the year 1688, James II of England/VII of Scotland with his Catholic leanings was overthrown and in the so called Glorious Revolution by his Protestant daughter Mary and her husband and his Dutch nephew and her cousin William, Prince of Orange and Stadtholder of the Dutch Republic.  They were crowned William and Mary of England and a de-facto personal union now existed between the Kingdoms of England, Scotland, Ireland and the Dutch Republic.  James II/VII fled to France and later to Ireland to conjure up support among the Irish Catholic populace in hopes of regaining the throne, he also raised some support from loyal Scots and French soldiers too.  This started the Williamite War, the British theater of the Nine Years War.  William III of England now forged an army of Protestant forces made of English, Scottish, Irish, French, Dutch and Danish troops.  Famously in 1690 at the Boyne River north of Dublin, Ireland, James and William’s armies met.  However, the better trained Protestant forces won the day and James fled Ireland ultimately returning to France.  However, he never accepted in theory that he or his direct Catholic descendants were not the rightful rulers of Britain.  This was to have repercussions in the form of the Jacobite Rebellions and it would play out its final stages with the Highlander Scots and the famed Highlander charge.

The House of Stuart tried to regain the British throne in exile with French support in the early 18th century.  William and Mary had no children and they were succeeded by James other daughter, Anne.  Anne like Mary and William was raised Protestant and under her rule Great Britain was formed with the 1707 merging of the Crowns of Scotland and England officially as one with a single parliament based in London as opposed to a separate Scottish one as had been the case for the last century.  Anne in turn passed away without an heir and was replaced by her closest Protestant relative, the Elector of Hanover from Germany, now George I of Great Britain.

The Jacobites were supporters of the Stuart royalist cause in exile and hoped to restore them to the throne of Britain.  Jacobites were so named for the Latin name for James was Jacobus.  Jacobitism as an ideology had Stuart restoration as it central tenant but the individual motivations were varied largely depending on the country the Jacobite supporter was located in.  In Ireland, it was support for a Catholic monarch in and the promise of religious toleration that James II had granted earlier.  In England and Wales a Catholic minority showed Jacobite support but largely its greatest support was found among royalist conservatives or Tories who believed in the divine rights of kings and felt the Glorious Revolution had been an unlawful usurpation and was in violation of what they saw as God’s natural order.  Nevertheless, the vast majority of England and Wales were Protestant and anti-Catholic so it is a matter of academic debate among historians just how strong Tory support of Jacobitism really was.  In Scotland the reasons were also varied.  For some, the Jacobite cause was in solidarity amongst the Scottish Catholic minority.  For Highlanders, their own feudal Clan system prized a tradition of feudal service to a landlord, namely the King.  Despite the Highlanders varied legacy of service and opposition to the King was a matter of pragmatism but the essential relationship between Highlander Clans and the Crown was still rooted in a traditional belief in the divine rights of a monarch as feudal landlord of all Scotland and the Clan chieftains were loyal subjects granted a certain degree of autonomy in exchange for their recognition of King’s nominal authority and service to the Crown in times of need.  This established a looser form of nobility than the later English influenced tradition.  However, the traditional ideological and religious causes were in reality only the surface for Highlander support for the Stuart cause, as always economics, a sense of autonomy coupled with what they saw as a defense against an encroachment on their way of life was the primary motivation.  Opposition to the Act of Union 1707 which united Scotland and England into one nation under a common monarch and Parliament was viewed by some Highlander Clans, particularly in the northwest of Scotland as to the detriment of Scotland namely for economic reasons and due to certain laws barring Scottish nobility from serving in the House of Lords in London, opposition to the Union was also strong in Edinburgh, the modern capital of Scotland and seat of its own Parliament.

From their positions in France and later Rome, Italy the Catholic Stuarts with French funding often tried to stir rebellions to their cause back in Britain.  From 1689-1745 a number of Jacobite Rebellions occurred with the goal of Stuart restoration being central to their goals.  1715 and the final one of 1745-46 were the most notable, particularly for their support among the Highlander Scots.

1715′s rebellion was a clash of Highlanders in some ways.  Under John Erksine, 6th Earl of Mar Highlander clans were rallied to the Jacobite cause and army was assembled with took over the Highlands and spread on down to Stirling Castle in the heart of Scotland.  They had declared James II’s son James  Francis Edward Stuart the new King of Scots, he was also referred to as the “Old Pretender”.  In opposition to him was the Hanoverian British government and its commander in Scotland, John Campbell, 2nd Duke of Argyll.  Campbell was a well known Highlander Clan with the Earls and Dukes of Argyll as its primary chieftain, the Campbells of Argyle had become very wealthy and politically well connected, perhaps the most well connected Highlander Clan in Scotland by the 18th century.  Argyll led his force against Mar the Battle of Sheriffmuir in November of 1715.  Both sides would claim victory but it was inconclusive, the Highlanders fought on both sides of the battle, largely depending on which clan one was a member.  Ultimately, the Jacobites were beaten at the later Battle of Preston and the cause was frustrated in its goal once more.

1745 would see the most famous Jacobite Rebellion, it was an outgrowth of the concurrent War of the Austrian Succession.  During the greater European wide War of the Austrian Succession, France and Prussia formed a coalition with Spain and other German and Italian states against Austria, Great Britain, the Electorate of Hanover and the Dutch Republic with other German supporters and limited Russian support.  The new Jacobite leader was Charles Edward Stuart, known to the Jacobites as the “Young Pretender” after his father and to the Scots he was affectionately called “Bonnie Prince Charlie”.  Charles was smuggled into Scotland to start an uprising when British military power there was weakest due to the bulk of Britain’s military being on the continent in war against the French coalition.  Charles had hoped for French support to help knock Britain out of the war and raise him to the throne but bad weather prevented this from happening.  Nevertheless, he gathered local support mostly from the Highlanders of northwestern Scotland.

He captured Edinburgh and was declared King and subsequently the Highlander Jacobites routed the Hanoverian British government forces in September 1745 at the Battle of Prestonpans, thanks to the Highland Charge.  Further success was later had at Falkirk Muir in January 1746, once again the Highland Charge was instrumental to Jacobite success.  However, by spring of 1746 the good fortunes of the Jacobite cause was fading.  That winter they had marched into England toward London which caused a panic.  They made it as far as Derby but realizing the French support they long hoped for never materialized and now facing a large, disciplined and experienced government army fresh from war on the continent, under the command of Prince William, Duke of Cumberland and son of King George II, the Jacobites returned to Scotland in high spirits but achieving no last strategic outcome.  With Cumberland in pursuit the Jacobites retreated to the Highlands themselves, there they hoped to blend in and lead the government force on to ground of their own choosing where they could defeat them decisively.  

Since 1689, government forces had been often been overrun by the Highland charge tactic in battle. Largely this was due to lack of discipline in government troops and the Highlanders fighting on topography of that catered to their advantage.  The Duke of Cumberland was aware that these elements had lead to government defeat in the past, he was not apt to repeat the mistake of past commanders.  The battle that finally took place in April 1746, known as the Battle of Culloden, fought near Inverness in the Scottish Highlands was not fought in the hilly or mountainous terrain that favored the Highlanders but instead on a boggy moor ground which slowed their advance in the face of modern weaponry (muskets and canister shot from cannons), the result was an hour long battle culminating in the last Highland Charge in history and the last major battle on British soil.  It ended in bloody fashion for the Jacobites, Charles was thoroughly defeated, though he escaped Scotland back to the continent, disguised in drag.  His Highlander force was butchered in the aftermath of the battle and so with Culloden died the Highland Charge tactic and effectively the Jacobite cause with which it had become so linked...

The Highland Charge tactic itself was essentially a infantry shock tactic.  It required speed and relied on overwhelming force, it was psychological weapon as much as a physical weapon.  Enhancement to its success was the charge being initiated downhill from the high ground head on into the enemy’s front or flank.  The Scottish Highlands being rife with hilly and mountainous countryside, were a logistical nightmare for large armies used to fighting pitched battles, a lesson the Romans on down to the English had learned.  In turn, they were the perfect place for a loose fighting formation like the Highlander Clans which operated as functionally a guerilla army against their opponents, they possessed local knowledge of the terrain and could blend in to hide from the enemy and then ambush and disappear seemingly at will.  The tactic developed overtime from the original Scottish Highland tactic of fighting in tight formation.  The Scots overwhelmed the enemy with their ferocity in battle, heavy weaponry and unsettling war cries.  in battle they fought with battle axes or two-handed heavy swords called claymores.  By the 17th century with weapons shifting to gunpowder based firearms and artillery, these tight formations were becoming vulnerable to ranged weapons which could cause many casualties at a distance.  The Highlanders instead adapted the formation to one more reliant on terrain, looser and faster in format overall but still using the goal of traditional overwhelming force with unsettling war cries.  The weapons and clothing were also adapted to better accommodate the charge.  Instead of a claymore, the Highlanders carried a single handed broadsword which was large but lighter, they also carried a targe shield for defense and a smaller dirk thrusting dagger.  Their clothing below the waist was reduced to a kilt.  

The Highland charge was launched downhill on firm open ground at great speed in a wedge formation with loud war cries to raise the attacker’s morale as well as frighten a hopefully inexperienced and ill-disciplined enemy.  The charge was meant to hit the enemy as high speed and break their lines with the “savagery” of their fighting, sometimes the mere sight and sound was enough unnerve and overrun the enemy.  The Highland charge always anticipated a number of casualties due to a initial musket volley from the enemy, but the speed would be too much for them to reload in an era of single shot firearms.  By the time the enemy was reloading they were struggling unnerved by the wails of the Highlanders and already being engaged with swords and dagger hacking and stabbing them to death.  In many cases like at Killiecrankie, Prestonpans and Falkirk Muir the charge was successful due to the essential elements, speed, terrain and ill-disciplined enemies.  Psychologically terrifying and well timed it proved to be a classic shock tactic.  It shortcomings however were the danger of modern ranged weapons like artillery and muskets hitting the enemy at range, especially those fired by a professional disciplined army not inclined to turn and run at the sound and fury of the charge.  Additionally, its implementation over broken ground or flat terrain or a combination of two in the face of modern weaponry like at Culloden could yield fatal consequences.  The Highland charge has its roots and a resemblance in the ancient shock charge tactics of the Scots Celtic forbearers of Britain against Roman legions and other enemies.  It embodied an ancestral connection and became a romantic image in and of itself, forever etched in the minds of historical memory when we think of the Scottish Highlands, kilted-tartan clad men running at full speed with sword, shield and dagger in hand, screaming like a banshee right into the enemy’s front, cutting down their opponent with fierce and wild abandon.  The ultimate image of the barbarian fighting to preserve his way of life and freedom in the face of modernity.  That’s the kind of image Killiecrankie and Culloden conjure, the image Walter Scott in the later Victorian era somewhat revived.  The ultimate picture of Scottish romanticism on the battlefield...

[pianotuna]

Tag Masterlist

Settings

ancient China // ancient Korea // ancient Egypt // ancient Israel // ancient Greece // ancient Rome // ancient Arabia // ancient Polynesia // ancient Mexico // medieval England // medieval Europe // medieval France // medieval Hungary // medieval Ireland // medieval Italy // medieval Scotland // medieval Spain // regency England // Renaissance Europe // Renaissance France // Renaissance Italy // Renaissance Russia // Renaissance Spain // Elizabethan // Golden Age of Piracy // colonial America // Regency France // Regency Sweden // Renaissance Czechoslovakia // Renaissance England // Spanish California // American West // Australian West // Victorian America // Victorian Denmark // Victorian England // Victorian Europe // Victorian France // Victorian Germany // Victorian Ireland // Victorian Scandinavia // Victorian Thailand // Edwardian America // Edwardian Canada // Edwardian England // Edwardian Europe // Edwardian Russia // 1920s // 1930s // 1940s // 1950s // 1960s // 1970s // 1980s // modern era

Trojan War // Judean War // Norman Conquest // Crusades // War for Scottish Independence // Anglo-Spanish War // Russian Revolution // French and Indian War // Revolutionary War // French Revolution // Napoleonic Wars // War of 1812 // Mexican-American War // American Civil War // Mexican Invasions // Spanish-American War // World War I // Great Depression // World War II // Cold War // Space Race

Africa // America // Antarctica // Arabia // Atlantic Ocean // Australia // Austria // Belgium // Bohemia // Canada // Caribbean Islands // Czech Republic // Eastern Europe // Egypt // England // Europe // France // Greece // India // Italy // Japan // Mascarene Islands // Mediterranean Islands // Mexico // Monte Carlo // native American // New Zealand // North Pole // Pacific Islands // South America // Thailand // Transylvania // worldwide

American Midwest // American Northwest // American Southeast // Arizona // California // Casablanca // Chicago // Colorado // Florida // Georgia // Hollywood // Las Vegas // London // Louisiana // New England // New Orleans // New York // North Carolina // Paris // South Carolina // Tennessee // Texas // Venice // Virginia // Washington, DC

alternate universe // apocalypse // dystopia // fantasy world // futuristic // space

Asgard // Cookietown // Enchanted Forest // Flutterfield // Land of Sweets // Middle Earth // Narnia // Neverland // Oz // Panem // Ravka // Stormhold // Themyscira // Westeros // Wizarding World // Wonderland

Tropes

arranged marriage // childhood friends // coworkers // different worlds // enemies to lovers // fake relationship // family // friends to lovers // fugitives // marriage of convenience // married couple // neighbors // non-canon // old lovers // parents // partners in crime // penpals // single parent // star-crossed lovers // teacher x student // unrequited love // villain x heroine // villainess x hero // villain x villainess

link to part 2

[digpdf]

[READ-PDF] History of Britain and Ireland: The Definitive Visual Guide - D.K. Publishing Book’s

 History of Britain and Ireland: The Definitive Visual Guide PDF

by : D.K. Publishing

  ==>>DOWNLOAD OR READ THIS BOOKS<<==

 History of Britain and Ireland: The Definitive Visual Guide

 Read Online and Download History of Britain and Ireland: The Definitive Visual Guide. From the Roman conquest of 43 CE to the Norman conquest of 1066, and from the Elizabethan age to the Iraq and Afghan wars of the 21st century, DK's History of Britain and Ireland traces the key events that have shaped Great Britain and Ireland from earliest times to the present day..

History of Britain and Ireland: The Definitive Visual Guide by D.K. Publishing

Tags: History of Britain and Ireland: The Definitive Visual Guide by D.K. Publishing Free download, epub, docs, New York Times, ppt, audio books, Bloomberg, #NYT, books to read, good books to read, cheap books, good books,online books, books online, book reviews, read books online, books to read online, online library, greatbooks to read, best books to read, top books to read History of Britain and Ireland: The Definitive Visual Guide by D.K. Publishing

[shakespearesglobeblog]

On Spenser and Ireland

 Ahead of our Research in Action workshop exploring Elizabethan poetry, Research Intern John King shares an insight into Edmund Spenser.

The London-born poet Edmund Spenser (c. 1552 – 1599) is best known for his allegorical epic poem The Faerie Queene (1589) and the pastoral verses of The Shepheardes Calendar (1579). Although we study him mostly for his stylistic innovations with verse, Spenser wrote during a period of significant colonial upheaval and, as a civil servant, lived in great proximity to, and participated in, the tempestuous events of the Second Desmond rebellion and the Nine Years War that characterised the final decade of the Elizabethan age in Ireland. As one of many young men to take advantage of the schemes to colonize Ireland under Elizabeth’s reign, Spenser’s personal fortune was inexorably tied up with the success of English conquest.

Spenser first came to Ireland in August 1580 as private secretary to the queen’s representative, the Lord Deputy Arthur Grey (1536-1593). It is unclear whether this life in Ireland was entirely of Spenser’s choosing: his appointment may well have been a result of an unfavourable portrait of the politician William Cecil in the satirical poem Mother Hubberds Tale, the manuscript of which no longer survives. Either way, his expatriate life was not without its advantages: he was able to acquire land and wealth at a rate far beyond what he might have achieved as a civil servant in England. By the time he obtained the lease for New Abbey, County Kildare, in 1582, he is identified as ‘Gent.’: this was a significant rise in social status from modest beginnings as a ‘sizar’ at Pembroke Hall, Cambridge, where he undertook a servant’s duties alongside his undergraduate studies and received financial support.

Spenser’s commander Lord Grey was a notoriously hard-line Protestant, and concerns about his extreme anti-Catholic outlook had delayed his appointment as Lord Deputy. This reticence proved well-advised when, in 1580, he ordered the massacre of 600 Spanish and Italian troops at the Fort d’Oro, Smerwick, following a three-day siege and their surrender. The scandal was a likely factor in Grey being recalled to England; Spenser, who may have been present at the slaughter, later defended his commander’s actions in the political tract A View of the Present State of Ireland (1598) against accusations of being ‘a bloodye man’ who regarded the life of the queen’s ‘subjectes noe more then dogges’. The tract is arranged as a dialogue between two speakers who present arguments for the eradication of Irish Brehon law, customs, religion and language, and lament the intermarrying of previous generations of English settlers with native Irish so that they ‘should soe muche degenerate from their first natures as to grow wild.’ This anxiety of Englishness derives from the fact that the descendants of the twelfth century Norman settlers in Ireland (Sean Ghaill) largely shared a language and religion with the native Irish. One of the so-called Sean Ghaill, Lord Roche, was involved in a protracted, and ultimately successful, lawsuit against Spenser over the illegal seizing of land during the plantation of Munster, as well as for allegedly threatening his tenants, stealing his cattle, and beating his servants. In 1597, Roche’s son David came out in open rebellion against the Crown.

In September 1598, Spenser was nominated Sheriff of Cork by the Privy Council as ‘a man endowed with good knowledge in learning, and not unskilful or without experience in the service of the warres.’ This accolade was never bestowed, as on the 15th of October his chief residence, Kilcolman Castle, was sacked and burned by local Irish forces, of which Roche’s son was thought to have been a prominent member. Spenser and his family escaped through an underground tunnel and sought refuge in Cork. Ben Jonson would later assert that Spenser’s infant son, Peregrine, died in the fire, though no other record survives of this. The following December, Spenser left Ireland for the last time, delivering letters to the Privy Council in London from Sir Thomas Norris, president of Munster. He died there on January 13th 1599 and is buried in Westminster Abbey.

The Globe will host a Research in Action workshop entitled ‘Performing Elizabethan Poetry: Spenser and Shakespeare’ on Monday 12 June in the Sam Wanamaker Playhouse, in collaboration with the International Spenser Society and University College Dublin. Book tickets.

[angrycollectordaze-me-blog]

Paper代写：British isolationist diplomatic thought

本篇paper代写- British isolationist diplomatic thought讨论了英国的孤立主义外交思想。英国作为一个岛国，外交重现实而轻理想。从都铎王朝开始到如今的英国脱欧，孤立主义是英国外交的一条主线，具有与生俱来的特点。孤立主义是一种可进退的外交理念，只要不涉及英国的重大利益，就尽可能保持在欧洲之外，英国愈是强大，孤立主义愈发明显，并成为试图控制欧洲局势乃至世界局势的一种手段。英国的孤立主义不是理想主义外交理念的体现，而是交织于现实主义的外交政策之中。英国脱盟也是英国孤立主义外交思想的涌动。本篇paper代写由51due代写平台整理，供大家参考阅读。

As an island nation, Britain values reality over ideals in diplomacy. From the beginning of the Tudor dynasty to the recent brexit, "isolationism" has been a main line of British diplomacy with inherent characteristics. "Isolationism" is a diplomatic concept that can be advanced or withdrawn. As long as it does not involve Britain's major interests, it should be kept outside Europe as far as possible. The stronger Britain is, the more obvious "isolationism" becomes, and it becomes a means of trying to control the situation in Europe and even the world. British isolationism is not the embodiment of the ideal foreign policy, but interweaves in the realistic foreign policy. Britain's departure from the eu is a surge of isolationist diplomatic thinking.

British isolationism diplomatic problem was discussed, the first two points: one is the British foreign policy has multiple dimensions, do not always reflect isolationism, even during the period of the idea of isolationism prevailed, in one's hand still has a different voice, for example, sol the marquis last term widely referred to as "splendid isolation" period, but as prime minister he never use the word "splendid isolation". Second, British politicians' diplomatic propositions have multiple dimensions, which cannot be simply defined as rigid isolationism or interventionism. For example, glastonbury was the main representative who opposed British interference in external affairs, but actively interfered in Egypt. Palmerston was the originator of gunboat diplomacy, but he also advocated keeping out of European wars and not going anywhere. British isolationism is not the embodiment of the ideal foreign policy, but interweaves in the realistic foreign policy. As an island nation, Britain values reality over ideals in diplomacy. In the author's opinion, in terms of Britain's European affairs, from the beginning of the Tudor dynasty to the recent brexit, isolationism's influence on the British foreign policy has been prominent or hidden by turns, but it has been working all the time.

The Tudor dynasty was the formation period of the British nation state and the beginning of the modern history of Britain. The hundred years war between Britain and France was the driving force of the formation of the British nation state. The war not only ended the political pattern of the British king "governing by sea" since the Norman conquest, but also ended the status of the vassal of the French king and his covetousness for the French throne, and turned to focus on the internal management of the British mainland. As the defeated party of the hundred years war between Britain and France, Britain lost all the French territories outside the port of Calais, which can be said to be a complete failure. But it also ended Britain's territorial dispute with France and the idea of taking over continental Europe. In short, from the beginning of the Tudor dynasty, Britain had little idea of competing for European territory in foreign affairs. The main purpose of the relationship with Europe was to protect the British mainland from the invasion of continental powers and maintain its economic and trade interests in the continent and the world. Therefore, maintaining the balance of power in Europe, being independent from Europe and trying not to get involved in the European war have become the basic principles of Britain's relations with Europe. From such a perspective, the British "isolationist" diplomatic thought is "inherent", which dates back to the founding of the British nation state. In other words, when Britain started to go out into the world and carry out modern diplomatic activities, it made clear the positioning of British diplomacy according to the historical geographical situation. Isolationism is an idea that can be pushed back and forth, and the stronger Britain becomes, the more it becomes apparent and becomes a means of trying to control the situation in Europe and the world.

Henry vii practiced peaceful diplomacy, tried to avoid being involved in European disputes and tried to improve relations with European countries. Henry vii had two sons and two daughters. His eldest son, Arthur, married princess Catherine of Spain. After Arthur died of illness, he arranged for his second son, Henry, to marry his sister-in-law, Catherine. His eldest daughter, Margaret, was married to king James iv of Scotland, and his youngest daughter, Mary, was first engaged to Charles, the eldest grandson of the holy Roman emperor, Maximilian I.

Later in Henry viii's reign, Britain became involved in military conflicts in Europe, mainly in response to the threat of European powers against Britain or the conquest of wales, Ireland and Scotland. That is to say, Henry viii's foreign wars were mainly limited to the need to consolidate the British homeland, rather than to seek the expansion of the European continent. Henry viii's Britain began to emerge as one of the great powers of Europe, but one of the greatest threats to him remained the great power of the time, France. As early as 1295, Scotland signed the Auld Alliance with France. In 1513, James iv of Scotland invaded the north of England in keeping with an "old alliance" dating back more than 200 years. On July 1, 1543, England forced Scotland to sign the Greenwich treaty in order to break this "old alliance" and strive for favorable conditions for French relations. The main purpose of the treaty was to realize Henry viii's plan to merge the two countries. According to the treaty, England made peace with Scotland, Mary I, daughter of James v of Scotland, married Edward vi of England, and their descendants would inherit the throne of the kingdom of England and the kingdom of Scotland. Mary will be accompanied by an aristocratic English family until she is ten, and will live in England until she is married to Edward. However, the Scottish parliament rejected the treaty on 11 December, and Mary I's mother strongly opposed the marriage, sending her back to her native France to be raised. This led to eight years of conflict between Britain and the Soviet union, known as Rough Wooing.

England was involved in the spanish-french war because of the marriage of Mary I, the eldest daughter of Henry viii, to king Philip ii of Spain. Therefore, Elizabeth I firmly remembered this historical lesson and only used marriage as a means to communicate relations between major countries, but did not accept the proposal of European royal family to ensure the diplomatic independence of Britain.

On July 6, 1560, the treaty of Edinburgh signed by Britain, France and the Soviet union was an important node in Elizabeth I's foreign relations. At this point, the threat of franco-soviet alliance was eliminated, and Spain replaced France as Britain's biggest enemy. Spain is Europe's maritime hegemon and colonial power, which is bound to collide head-on with Britain, which has the same needs. After the uprising of the Netherlands in 1566, Spain took a crackdown on the Netherlands, and Britain believed that once Spain controlled the Netherlands, it would directly threaten the security of Britain. To make Britain more anxious, Spain firmly supported the Catholic forces in Britain, murdered Elizabeth I and replaced her with Mary of Scotland. After Elizabeth I executed Mary, king Philip ii of Spain directly demanded the British throne. In this context, Britain began to fall out with its former Allies, most famously in the naval battle between England and Spain in 1588, when Britain finally defeated the so-called Armada and won.

Elizabethan Britain had grown into a European power. If we say that the nation state was still in the process of formation in the period of Henry viii, Britain sometimes could not completely get rid of the "diplomatic" thinking in the middle ages. By the later period of Elizabeth I, the nation state in Britain had been forged and matured. Three generations of Tudor monarchs, Henry vii, Henry viii, and Elizabeth I, accomplished the most important task of creating a nation state. Under the framework of the nation-state, the diplomatic thinking of Britain has become more and more clear, and the isolationist diplomatic thought has been developing continuously, becoming the traditional thought of British diplomacy. This isolationist thought is mainly reflected in: in European affairs, as long as it does not involve Britain's fundamental interests, it will try to stay out of the European war; To maintain the balance of power in Europe mainly through peaceful means of diplomatic mediation. We will protect overseas colonies and seek maximum economic and trade benefits in the world. During the Stuart dynasty, the British political culture changed greatly, but the isolationist diplomatic thought was still obvious. In the European wars of the 1930s, Britain basically took a wait-and-see attitude. After the thirty years' war, France under the rule of Louis xiv became the real hegemon of the European continent. The Netherlands had the monopoly power of maritime trade, and its business empire was in the ascendant, seriously threatening the maritime trade and colonial expansion of Britain. To this end, the British diplomatic efforts to avoid the European continent's edge, further promote mercantilist diplomacy, vigorously develop the naval force, for the future British empire preparation conditions. After the three anglo-dutch wars, Britain gained the control of the world's oceans and trade. The former maritime powers, such as Spain, Portugal and the Netherlands, were surpassed by Britain one by one, and Britain's status as a maritime power in the world has been determined. As a result, Britain became more concerned with overseas trade and colonial interests, and less easily involved in European disputes.

On July 9, 1686, Austria, the Netherlands, Sweden, Spain, savoy, Bavaria, Saxony and other countries established an alliance in augsburg, Germany, in order to curb the expansion of France. On September 24, 1688, the French invaded palatinate and the allied war broke out. James ii stayed out of the anti-french camp as he tried to restore Catholic and authoritarian rule in Britain in the hope of gaining the support of king Louis xiv. In 1689, the arrival of Mary, the eldest daughter of James ii, and William, the Dutch husband, into the British monarchy dragged Britain into the dutch-led anti-french alliance. Therefore, the glorious revolution prompted a change in British diplomacy: Britain began to get involved in the affairs of the European continent, and then the war of succession of Spain, the war of succession of Austria, the seven years' war, and the Napoleonic war, in which Britain was the main participant and the target was mainly France. Even so, Britain was "half-hearted" in the war. For example, in the first coalition war against France, Britain was only willing to pay money instead of sending troops. The foreign secretary glenville even said that young people leaving their jobs to fight in the war would cause the stagnation of British industry and reduce Britain's natural strength.

It should be pointed out that the above wars are different from the dynastic wars in the middle ages. From the very beginning, nation-states have turned wars into wars between countries, and countries fought for national interests through wars. Until the 20th century, European countries regarded wars as a means to pursue their own interests, and fought for territories, resources and wealth at any cost. Of course, Britain's intervention is still not for the sake of territorial interests in the European continent, which is fundamentally different from other participating countries. The purpose of Britain is still for the security of its homeland, hoping to curb the hegemony of France and promote its own commercial interests through the balance of power in Europe. On November 20, 1815, France signed the second treaty of Paris and the treaty of the alliance of four countries with the seventh anti-french alliance, ending the Napoleonic wars. Britain defeated its arch-enemy France through this war. Since Louis xiv, the great pressure on Britain caused by the French hegemony in Europe has been eliminated. From then on, Britain firmly maintained its world hegemony and stepped into the glorious days of the 19th century.

In 19th century Britain has strong inherent fragility, it must rely on external resources to support their strong, diplomatic expression comes out is not national relations as the main factors of foreign policy, but to fully protect the interests of the empire and the safety of sea lanes, trying to maintain the continent's peace at the same time, avoid involvement in the war. In this period of vulnerability, Britain tried to control the situation in Europe and even the world through isolationism.

The g4 treaty wants to restructure a new alliance with Britain to replace the "holy alliance" of Russia, Austria and Austria, which see the European revolution as a threat to the post-war order, so the big powers should be ready to crush the revolution. Britain's foreign secretary, John castlerre, argued that the victors should establish a regular mechanism of consultation to preserve peace in Europe, but that the g4 treaty was a guarantee of the implementation of the Paris peace treaty, not a document of interference in the internal affairs of other European countries. Britain's job is to co-ordinate relations between Europe's big powers to ensure peace, not to interfere in continental affairs. Known as the "father of the system of regular meetings", it was in Britain's interest to keep the peace in Europe through consultation, and it did play a role in keeping the peace in Europe, especially after France's participation. This mechanism has since found more expression in the league of nations and the United Nations.

In January 1820, colonel liangelo, an aristocratic Spanish officer, established a revolutionary government and announced the restoration of the 1812 constitution. On May 5th the cabinet released a report drawn up by Mr Castlerre. "Nothing weakens or even destroys the true function of an alliance more than trying to go beyond its concepts and principles of responsibility and obligation," the report states. "The current situation in Spain has undoubtedly contributed significantly to the political turmoil in Europe," castresto stressed in the house of Commons, but there is still much uncertainty about intervention in Spanish affairs, and "the alliance has never been a world government, or interfering in the internal affairs of other countries."

In August 1822, before he was due to take office as foreign secretary, canning laid out Britain's basic position on the Spanish question: we need not take part in the struggle on either side, but only be firm and unwavering spectators in it. All nations for themselves, and god for all. As soon as he became foreign secretary, he gave instructions to the duke of Wellington: at the verona conference on Spanish intervention, he stated publicly that "whatever happens, Britain will not be a member of the intervention". On March 31, 1848, palmerston, a leading British foreign policy hardliner, told parliament that his duty as foreign secretary was to not recklessly hold Britain to account for terrible wars. In April 1848, he wrote to queen Victoria: in the succession of great events in Europe, the policy of the British government was to wait and see, to avoid unnecessary involvement or involvement. In the house of Commons foreign affairs debate on July 20, 1866, foreign secretary Stanley g. Our policy is to observe, not to act, and not to intervene by force.

In 1868, when a new revolution broke out in Spain, Prussia gave the provisional Spanish government the mandate to make Leopold, cousin of king William of Prussia, the new king. This meant that the hohensollens would take over Spain, which was bound to provoke a fierce reaction from France. Britain saw Prussia as a counterweight to France, and a prussian-led Germany as a solid and reliable partner. Britain therefore asserted to the outside world that no great power had the right to interfere with the Spanish people's right to choose a new monarch.

要想成绩好，英国论文得写好，51due代写平台为你提供英国留学资讯，专业辅导，还为你提供专业英国essay代写，paper代写，report代写，需要找论文代写的话快来联系我们51due工作客服QQ：800020041或者Wechat：Abby0900吧。

[steenpaal]

Mary Seymour - Wikipedia

Mary Seymour (30 August 1548 – c. 1550?), born at her father’s country seat, Sudeley Castle in Gloucestershire, was the only daughter of Thomas Seymour, Baron Seymour of Sudeley, and Katherine Parr, widow of Henry VIII of England. Although Katherine was married four times, Mary was her only child. Complications from Mary's birth would claim the life of her mother on 5 September 1548, and her father was executed less than a year later for treason against Edward VI.

In 1549, the Parliament of England passed an Act (3 & 4 Edw. 6 C A P. XIV) removing the attainder placed on her father from Mary, but his lands remained property of the Crown.

As her mother's wealth was left entirely to her father and later confiscated by the Crown, Mary was left a destitute orphan in the care of Katherine Willoughby, Duchess of Suffolk, who appears to have resented this imposition.[1] After 1550 Mary disappears from historical record completely, and no claim was ever made on her father's meagre estate, leading to the conclusion that she did not live past the age of two.[2]

Speculations on Mary's adulthood

Victorian author Agnes Strickland claimed, in her biography of Katherine Parr, that Mary Seymour did survive to adulthood, and in fact married Sir Edward Bushel, a member of the household of Queen Anne of Denmark, consort to King James VI of Scotland and I of England. Strickland's theory suggested that the Dowager Duchess of Suffolk, after her marriage to Richard Bertie in 1553, and before she fled England during the Marian Persecutions in or after 1555, she arranged Mary's marriage to Bushel. The problem with this theory is that Mary would have been aged six at the time.[3]

Another theory states that Mary was removed to Wexford, Ireland and raised under the care of a Protestant family there, the Harts, who had been engaged in piracy off the Irish coast under the protection of a profit sharing arrangement with Thomas Seymour.[citation needed] A lozenge-shaped ring inscribed "What I have I hold" was reputed to have been an early gift to Thomas by his brother Edward, and was passed down through generations of the Seymour-Harts until at least 1927.[citation needed]

There was reference to "Mary" found in old Elizabethan texts of 'The Late Queen's heir.' However, this could be various other women.[citation needed] Historian S. Joy states that "Mary definitely lived past the age of 10, but after that little is known."[citation needed]

A more modern theory, from Linda Porter, author of a 2010 biography on Katherine Parr, suggests that a 1573 Latin book of poems and epitaphs written by John Parkhurst, Katherine Parr’s chaplain, contains the following reference to Mary:

I whom at the cost Of her own life My queenly mother Bore with the pangs of labour Sleep under this marble An unfit traveller. If Death had given me to live longer That virtue, that modesty, That obedience of my excellent Mother That Heavenly courageous nature Would have lived again in me. Now, whoever You are, fare thee well Because I cannot speak any more, this stone Is a memorial to my brief life

Porter suggested that this was an epitaph written by Parkhurst on the occasion of Mary's death, around the age of two. Porter further speculates that Mary is buried in Lincolnshire, near Grimsthorpe, the estate owned by the Duchess of Suffolk, "where she had lived as an unwelcome burden for most of her short, sad life."[4]

Portrayals in fiction

The story The Red Queen's Daughter by Jacqueline Kolosov centres around Mary Seymour, and speculates a life in which she never marries, and becomes lady-in-waiting to Queen Elizabeth I.

The novel The Stolen One by Suzanne Crowley states that Mary survived and was raised by a 'witch' in the English countryside. A similar premise allows Seymour's supernatural powers to help her friend Alison Bannister search for her lost child in The Phantom Tree by Nicola Cornick.[5]

Ancestry

Ancestors of Mary Seymour

References

^ Linda Porter (2010) Katherine the Queen

^ "Catherine Parr: Children". The Six Wives of Henry VIII. PBS. Retrieved 2008-10-11. 

^ Agnes Strickland, Elizabeth Strickland. Lives of the Queens of England from the Norman Conquest, 1842. pg 296.

^ Linda Porter, History Today Magazine, "Lady Mary Seymour: An Unfit Traveller", Volume 61, Issue 7, 2011.

^ ISBN 9781474050692

External links

[stairnaheireann]

#OTD in 1579 – Death of rebel leader, James Fitzmaurice Fitzgerald.

Fitzgerald was a Roman Catholic nobleman who led two unsuccessful uprisings against English rule in the province of Munster. He was a member of the 16th century ruling Geraldine dynasty who rebelled against the crown of Queen Elizabeth I in response to the onset of the Tudor conquest of Ireland. He led the first of the Desmond Rebellions in 1569, spent a period in exile in continental Europe, but…

[stairnaheireann]

#OTD in Irish History | 5 May:

1586 – Death of Lord Deputy of Ireland, Henry Sidney. Sidney was brought up at court as the companion of Prince Edward, afterwards King Edward VI, and he continued to enjoy the favour of the Crown, serving under Mary I of England and then particularly throughout the reign of Queen Elizabeth I. He was instrumental in the Elizabethan conquest of Ireland, serving as Lord Deputy three times. His…

[stairnaheireann]

#OTD in Irish History | 8 May:

1567 – Shane O’Neill’s army crosses the Swilly estuary at Farsetmore, and is defeated in a pitched battle by Hugh O’Donnell. Many drown while trying to escape; O’Neill loses 1,300 men. 1597 – Death of Fiach MacHugh O’Byrne. Fiach Mac Aodha Ó Broin was Lord of Ranelagh and sometime leader of the Clann Uí Bhroin, or the O’Byrne clan, during the Elizabethan conquest of Ireland. 1796 – John Pitt…

[stairnaheireann]

#OTD in 1597 – Death of Fiach MacHugh O’Byrne (Fiach Mac Aodh Ó Broin), Lord of Glenmalure.

#OTD in 1597 – Death of Fiach MacHugh O’Byrne (Fiach Mac Aodh Ó Broin), Lord of Glenmalure.

Fiach MacHugh O’Bryne (Fiach Mac Aodh ÓBroin) was the son of the chief of the O’Byrnes of the Gabhail Raghnaill. His sept, a minor one, claimed descent from the 11th century King of Leinster, Bran Mac Maolmordha, and was centred at Ballinacor in Glenmalure, a steep valley in the fastness of the Wicklow mountains. Their chiefs styled themselves as Lords of Ranalagh. The territory of the Gabhail…

[stairnaheireann]

#OTD in 1597 – Death of Fiach MacHugh O’Byrne (Fiach Mac Aodh Ó Broin), Lord of Glenmalure.

#OTD in 1597 – Death of Fiach MacHugh O’Byrne (Fiach Mac Aodh Ó Broin), Lord of Glenmalure.

Fiach MacHugh O’Bryne (Fiach Mac Aodh ÓBroin) was the son of the chief of the O’Byrnes of the Gabhail Raghnaill. His sept, a minor one, claimed descent from the 11th century King of Leinster, Bran Mac Maolmordha, and was centred at Ballinacor in Glenmalure, a steep valley in the fastness of the Wicklow mountains. Their chiefs styled themselves as Lords of Ranalagh. The territory of the Gabhail…

[stairnaheireann]

#OTD in 1597 – Death of Fiach MacHugh O’Byrne (Fiach Mac Aodh Ó Broin), Lord of Glenmalure.

#OTD in 1597 – Death of Fiach MacHugh O’Byrne (Fiach Mac Aodh Ó Broin), Lord of Glenmalure.

Fiach MacHugh O’Bryne (Fiach Mac Aodh ÓBroin) was the son of the chief of the O’Byrnes of the Gabhail Raghnaill. His sept, a minor one, claimed descent from the 11th century King of Leinster, Bran Mac Maolmordha, and was centred at Ballinacor in Glenmalure, a steep valley in the fastness of the Wicklow mountains.

Their chiefs styled themselves as Lords of Ranalagh. The territory of the Gabhail…

[stairnaheireann]

#OTD in 1597 – Death of Fiach MacHugh O’Byrne (Fiach Mac Aodh Ó Broin), Lord of Glenmalure.

#OTD in 1597 – Death of Fiach MacHugh O’Byrne (Fiach Mac Aodh Ó Broin), Lord of Glenmalure.

Fiach MacHugh O’Bryne (Fiach Mac Aodh ÓBroin) was the son of the chief of the O’Byrnes of the Gabhail Raghnaill. His sept, a minor one, claimed descent from the 11th century King of Leinster, Bran Mac Maolmordha, and was centred at Ballinacor in Glenmalure, a steep valley in the fastness of the Wicklow mountains.

Their chiefs styled themselves as Lords of Ranalagh. The territory of the Gabhail…