Provided by the author(s) and NUI Galway in accordance with publisher policies. Please cite the published version when available. ‘Every Kingdom divided against itself shall be destroyed’: Title Gaelic succession, overlords, uirríthe and the Nine Years’ War (1593-1603) Author(s) McGinty, Matthew Publication Date 2020-06-18 Publisher NUI Galway Item record http://hdl.handle.net/10379/16035 Downloaded 2021-09-25T23:05:57Z Some rights reserved. For more information, please see the item record link above. ‘Every Kingdom divided against itself shall be destroyed’: Gaelic succession, overlords, uirríthe and the Nine Years’ War (1593-1603) by Matthew McGinty, B.A, M.A Thesis for the Degree of PhD, Department of History National University of Ireland, Galway Supervisor of Research: Dr. Pádraig Lenihan May 2020 i Table of Contents Abstract………………………………………………………………………iv Acknowledgements…………………………………………………………. v Abbreviations………………………………………………………………. vi Conventions………………………………………………………………….viii Introduction………………………………………………………………….1 Chapter One: ‘You know the nature of the Irish, how easily they are divided’: Tanistry, Overlords, Uirríthe and Division……………………………………………18 Chapter Two: There can be no sound friendship between them’: Divisions among the O’Neills and O’Donnells……………………………………………………62 Chapter Three: ‘The absolute commander of all the north of Ireland’: The formation of the Gaelic confederacy in a divided Ulster…………………………………..92 Chapter Four: ‘It will be hard for me to agree you’: Keeping the confederacy together before the arrival of Docwra…………………………………………………131 Chapter Five: ‘Little or nothing could have been done of ourselves’: Docwra’s arrival, defections and the turning of the tide of war…………………………………191 Chapter Six: All the nobles who were previously with us have now become our enemies’: The final defections and the ending of the war……………………………….243 Conclusion……………………………………………………………………270 Appendix……………………………………………………………………...281 Bibliography…………………………………………………………………..285 ii Declaration I hereby certify that this material is entirely my own work and has not been taken from the work of others save to the extent that such work has been cited and acknowledged within the text of my own work. I have not obtained a degree in this University, or elsewhere, on the basis of this work. Signed: Matthew McGinty iii Abstract The late sixteenth century was a tumultuous period for Ireland. The Tudor government’s attempts to extend their authority, laws and customs into an autonomous or semi- autonomous Gaelic Ireland was met with fierce resistance as the local Gaelic lords were determined to preserve their traditional power and way of life. The struggle between the two opposing worlds escalated over the final decades of the century and culminated in the Nine Years’ War, one the most bloody and influential conflicts in Irish history. The war was fought between the crown government and a Gaelic confederacy headed by two Ulster chieftains, Hugh O’Neill, Earl of Tyrone, and Hugh Rua O’Donnell. Tyrone and O’Donnell did not have the full backing of Gaelic and Gaelicised Ireland as the island was a riven land. Much of the dissension in Gaelic Ireland was internal clan feuds which were a result of Gaelic succession practices. There was also conflict between clans as the stronger tried to impose their overlordship on the weaker. Such factiousness was open to exploitation by the government as rivals could be played off each and Gaelic allies recruited to their side. Such allies could prove to be very useful during conflict as they provided guides, spies, provisions and soldiers. During the Nine Years’ War the Gaelic confederacy mirrored wider society and thus it was a house of cards plagued by numerous divisions. Taking advantage of the different rifts among Tyrone and O’Donnell’s collation was a key policy of the crown government. This study examines Gaelic succession and how it led to divided clans and internal wars over the position of chieftain. The poor relations between clans will also be touched upon. The study will then evaluate the part these two forces of disunity, and the government’s exploitation of them, played during the Nine Years’ War and how much of a bearing they had on the outcome of the war. iv Acknowledgments I would like to thank my supervisor Dr. Pádraig Lenihan for all his help during this lengthy process and my parents for the invaluable support they provided. v Abbreviations A repertory A repertory of the inrolments on the patent rolls of Chancery in Ireland, John Caillard Erck (ed), 1846, Vol.1, part 1 APC Acts of the Privy Council of England, 32 Vols, J.R Dasent (ed), London, 1890-1907 AFM O'Donovan, John (ed and trans), Annala Rioghachta Eireann: Annals of the kingdom of Ireland by the Four Masters, from the earliest period to the year 1616, 7 Vols, Dublin, 1990 ALC Hennessy, William (ed.), The Annals of Loch Cé, 2 Vols, London, 1871 AU Hennessy, William and B. MacCarthy (eds), Annals of Ulster, 4 Vols, Dublin. 1887-1901 Beatha Aodha Ruaidh Ó Cléirigh, Lughaidh, Beatha Aodha Ruaidh Uí Dhomhnaill (The Life of Aodh Ruadh O Domhnaill), 2 Vols, Paul Walsh (ed and trans), Dublin Irish Texts Society, 1948, 1957 Carew manuscripts Calendar of Carew Manuscripts Preserved in the Archiepiscopal Library Lambeth, 1515-1624, 6 Vols, J.S Brewer and W. Bullen, London, 1867- 73 Cal. Pat. Rolls Calendar of the Patent and Close Rolls of Chancery in Ireland, 3 Vols, James Morrin, Dublin 1861 Cecil Papers Hatfield House Archives, The Cecil papers CSPI Calendar of State Papers Relating to Ireland, 24 Vols, H.C Hamilton et al (eds), London, 1860-1912 CSP Simancas Calendar of State Papers, Spain (Simancas), 4 Vols, Martin A S Hume (ed), London, Her Majesty's Stationery Office, 1892-9 Irish Fiants Nicholls, K. W. (ed), The Irish Fiants of the Tudor Sovereigns. 4 Vols, Dublin: De Burca, 1994. vi Salisbury Manuscripts Calendar of the manuscripts of the Most Honourable the Marquess of Salisbury ... preserved at Hatfield House, Hertfordshire, 24 Vols, R.A. Roberts et al (eds), London, 1883-1976 S. P Henry VIII State Papers: King Henry the Eighth. Vols 2 and 3, Part 3 London: His Majesty's Commission for State Papers, 1834 SP 52 State papers Scotland Series 1, Elizabeth I, 1558-1603 SP 63 Irish State Papers, Elizabeth to George III vii Notes on Conventions Dates have been given in old style but the year will begin on the 1st January instead of the 25th March which was the custom in Tudor governed territories. In quotations, the original spelling has been kept as much as possible. viii Introduction Introduction Looking back, two decades after the Nine Years’ War, Phillip O’Sullivan Beare laid most of the blame for the defeat of the Gaelic confederacy on the divisions within it and the Tudor government’s deft exploitation of these fault lines. By taking advantage of the disunity, the government was able to secure the defections of several prominent Gaelic confederates and for O’Sullivan this stratagem was so successful that it crippled the Gaelic confederacy and led to its downfall. Furthermore, O’Sullivan thought that so many Gaelic confederates defected and served with the government that the Irish were ‘conquered not so much by the English as by one another.’1It was not just O’Sullivan Beare who recognised the role divisions and infighting played in the defeat of the Gaelic confederacy. Richard Hadsor, an Old English lawyer from the Pale, stated a year after the conclusion of the war, that ‘Yf the mere Iryshe in their late Rebellion hadd the understanding to unite themselves together in one body quod omen Deus avartat [which omen God avert] and leave their factious emulacions and contencions for superiority … and yelde themselves & their estates in subjection to certen chieftaynes’ then Ireland would have ‘been in greate danger to be lost.’2 This study will examine the Gaelic confederacy’s structural weakness identified by both O’Sullivan Beare and Hadsor. To demonstrate this a detailed narrative of the emulations and contentions during the Nine Years’ War is necessary. First though, the fissures within the Gaelic confederacy need to be understood and situated in the wider context of the socio-politics of Gaelic Ireland as the confederacy’s divisions were not unique but a reflection of the fractured nature of Gaelic society. Why was Gaelic Ireland so fractured? There were two major forces of disunity which produced division, Gaelic succession practices and the bad relationship between overlord and their uirríthe, uirrí in the singular, vassal chieftains who owed economic and military services. O’Sullivan Beare identified one of these forces as the cause of dissension within the Gaelic confederacy. He blamed disunity on internal clan feuds over the position of chieftain which were a by-product of Gaelic succession. The government could take advantage of these feuds when a chieftain rebelled as they could appeal to one of his rivals for military assistance and in return the crown would support their claim to their clan’s 1 O’Sullivan Beare, Philip. Ireland Under Elizabeth. Matthew Byrne (ed), Port Washington, Kennikat Press, 1970, pp.57-8 2McLaughlin, Joseph, “New Light on Richard Hadsor II: Documents XLVII: Richard Hadsor's 'Discourse' on the Irish State, 1604” Irish Historical Studies, Vol.30, no.119 pp. 342, 349-50 1 Introduction lordship.3 It is important to note that when using the word ‘clan’ this thesis employs the Kenneth Nicholls’ definition which is as a patrilineal descent group forming a definite corporate entity with political and legal functions and who possessed particular lands. This definition is little concerned with linking a clan to the socio-familial sphere. The term sept (deriving from sliocht meaning division) is another label used to describe these corporate entities. The terms clan or sept may also refer to small descent groups within a larger clan who still remained part of the larger clan.