Genre and Identity in British and Irish National Histories, 1541-1691
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
“NO ROOM IN HISTORY”: GENRE AND IDENTIY IN BRITISH AND IRISH NATIONAL HISTORIES, 1541-1691 A dissertation presented by Sarah Elizabeth Connell to The Department of English In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the field of English Northeastern University Boston, Massachusetts April 2014 1 “NO ROOM IN HISTORY”: GENRE AND IDENTIY IN BRITISH AND IRISH NATIONAL HISTORIES, 1541-1691 by Sarah Elizabeth Connell ABSTRACT OF DISSERTATION Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in English in the College of Social Sciences and Humanities of Northeastern University April 2014 2 ABSTRACT In this project, I build on the scholarship that has challenged the historiographic revolution model to question the valorization of the early modern humanist narrative history’s sophistication and historiographic advancement in direct relation to its concerted efforts to shed the purportedly pious, credulous, and naïve materials and methods of medieval history. As I demonstrate, the methodologies available to early modern historians, many of which were developed by medieval chroniclers, were extraordinary flexible, able to meet a large number of scholarly and political needs. I argue that many early modern historians worked with medieval texts and genres not because they had yet to learn more sophisticated models for representing the past, but rather because one of the most effective ways that these writers dealt with the political and religious exigencies of their times was by adapting the practices, genres, and materials of medieval history. I demonstrate that the early modern national history was capable of supporting multiple genres and reading modes; in fact, many of these histories reflect their authors’ conviction that authentic past narratives required genres with varying levels of facticity. For example, I show that Geoffrey Keating’s ca. 1634 Foras Feasa ar Éirinn invokes the repetitive typological structure of medieval scéla (“stories”) to refute accounts of the Irish past that were written in support of the Tudor re-conquest of Ireland while Roderic O’Flaherty’s 1685 Ogygia accomplishes similar anti-colonial aims by mustering the cumulative genres of medieval Ireland. On the other side of the Irish Sea, Daniel Langhorne’s 1676 Introduction to the History of England includes a vigorous defense of the tradition that Brutus the Trojan first settled Britain because the Brutus legend validated England’s monarchial government and authority over Scotland and Wales, both of which had been challenged by the Interregnum. In his historical and 3 poetic works, Edmund Spenser shows that mixtures of fiction and history are necessary to imagine the empire that is at the heart of British identity. Ultimately, I argue that the “room” sixteenth- and seventeenth-century scholars found in history for a great wealth of genres and historiographic practices shows that we must construct equally capacious disciplinary and period models if we are to encompass the complex and varied genres of early modern history. 4 ACKNOWEDGMENTS I am profoundly indebted to a great many people for their help, advice, and support on this project. I first want to thank my dissertation committee: Professor Patrick Mullen, who sent me down this research path six years ago by noting in the margin of a short paper I had written on Geoffrey Keating, “I think there’s a dissertation in this,” and who has brought his expertise in Ireland’s literature and involvement with the community of scholars working in Irish studies to help me along the way. Professor Kathleen Kelly, who showed me how to maintain my love for medieval literature even when I am working with early modern texts and who has always encouraged me to explore new ways of approaching my research. And Professor Marina Leslie, without whose unflagging enthusiasm, detailed and insightful responses, and commitment to helping me make my arguments and interventions clear, I could not have completed this project. I also owe thanks to Melissa Daigle-Briggs, for her exceptional support and patience, and Professor Erika Boeckeler, for helping me to articulte the essential argument of my research. I have benefited in many ways from my friendship with the brilliant Shannon Garner- Balandrin, who has been a research partner, beta-reader, confidante, and cheerleader for many years. Tabitha Kenlon, my esteemed writing buddy, provided feedback, commiseration, and pizza in equal measures and was incredibly kind in letting me practice my arguments with her. Andrea Szirbik, Leah Thompson, and Jamie Gleason made sure I never forgot about my own potential for awesomeness and all of my friends at Water Street Bookstore made sure I never forgot how much I actually love books, no matter how stressful writing got. My sister, Meaghan Connell, helped me to keep from disappearing down a research rabbit hole, served as a consulting linguist on my research, sent me the entire candy aisle of a Tesco to get me through the last month of writing, and made sure I didn’t wear inappropriate shoes to my defense. 5 I owe all of my family for their support: my brothers for bringing a sense of humor to my writing process, my father for helping me keep a balanced perspective when I threatened to become overly dramatic in responding to research challenges, and my mother, who brought me to a lighthouse so I would have a beautiful place to write, who sent me love and care packages, and who has listened to pretty much every idea I’ve had since I started this project. I also need to thank Sherri and Bruce Weiler for their kindness and encouragement, for making me part of their family, and for helping me to make the most of my academic opportunities. And the smallest members of my family, Thursday and Sagan, for providing the emotional support that only cats can: purring hugs, wet-nosed kisses, and, if all else fails, knocking over my books when it is time to take a break. Finally, my thanks and love to my husband, who has been there for me in so many ways over the past seven years, from making inspirational Henry VIII cards to running out for emergency treats during late-night writing sessions, to helping me let off steam by spawning skeletons for me to smash in Skyrim. I could not have done this without you. 6 TABLE OF CONTENTS Abstract 2 Acknowledgements 5 Table of Contents 7 Introduction: No Room in History 8 Chapter 1: “Undecent Breaches” and “Poeticall Fictions” in the Records of Britain and Ireland 27 Chapter 2: “No Nation Voide of Myxture”: Coupling National and Textual Mixtures in Sixteenth- and Seventeenth-century British Histories 63 Chapter 3: Chronicles of Modernity: The Medieval Forms and Genres of Roderic O’Flaherty’s Ogygia 101 Chapter 4: The Poetics and Politics of Legend: Geoffrey Keating’s Foras Feasa ar Éirinn and the Invention of Irish History 144 Chapter 5: “The So Long Received Tradition of Brutus”: The Resurgence of Settlement Legends in Restoration Britain 180 Coda: No Room in Literature? 220 Works Cited 226 7 Introduction No Room in History Theorizing the Historical in the Sixteenth and Seventeenth Centuries In the address to the reader from his 1689 Hibernia Anglicana, historian Richard Cox (1650–1733) remarks that it is “strange” that the affairs of the “Noble Kingdom” of Ireland should have found “no room in History” but remain obscure to the island’s own inhabitants and even in England. 1 Cox writes that although England is “a Learned and Inquisitive Nation, skilful beyond comparison in the Histories of all other Countries,” and though Ireland is “a Kingdom subordinate to England, and of the highest importance to it,” the English are nonetheless “very imperfectly informed in the Story of Ireland.” To support his claim that there are not yet any “compleat or coherent” histories of Ireland, Cox dismisses a substantial body of historical texts, including Ireland’s medieval chronicle tradition and the later historical projects completed by scholars such as Geoffrey Keating (b. c. 1580, d. in or before 1644), Roderic O’Flaherty (1627x30–1716x18), and James Ware (1594–1666). According to Cox, previous historical works on Ireland are “very faulty, and have no coherence”; they are no better than “Scraps and Fragments” or “very silly Fictions”; and they are guilty of jumbling “Times, Persons and Things together.” “It must therefore follow,” Cox concludes, “That an Entire and Coherent History of Ireland must be very acceptable to the World, and very useful to the People of England, and the Refugees of Ireland, especially at this Juncture, when that Kingdom is to be re-conquered” and he claims that Hibernia Anglicana will lay the groundwork for just such a history. 1 Birth and death dates given for writers are from the online Oxford Dictionary of National Biography. The introductory sections of Hibernia Anglicana, including the address to the reader as well as Cox’s “An Apparatus: Or Introductory Discourse to the History of Ireland, Concerning the State of that Kingdom before the Conuest thereof by the English,” are unpaginated. 8 The rhetorical move Cox makes here, asserting that previous historical works are inadequate and that his own text will fill a scholarly void, demonstrates a strategy shared by many of his contemporaries, whose histories frequently begin with similarly disparaging representations of earlier scholarship. 2 Cox’s particular charges against the texts that make up Ireland’s historical record, that they are incoherent, inaccurate, and incapable of distinguishing fact from fiction, are characteristic of many early modern writers’ complaints about their sources, especially those that were penned by medieval chroniclers. The purpose Cox gives for his work in enabling England to understand this important subordinate kingdom demonstrates an explicit political focus often apparent in early modern national histories, which were generally represented as works intended to produce national identities and establish claims of sovereignty.