ВУЗ:
Составители:
Рубрика:
12
Her deputies in Ireland were Englishmen newly appointed from
England, and no longer those old Norman-English Irish lords who had so often
proved to be simply their own masters in the past. The Crown’s army was now
mainly composed of English soldiers from England – not just the Irish retainers of
those lords. Force ‘when necessity requireth’ was applied equally against the Old
English and the Gaelic Irish, with unprecedented savagery.
Answer the questions.
1. How did Henry VIII decide to put an end to open rebellion against the Crown?
2. Whom was the change in land tenure important for?
3. Was English government effective? Why do you think so?
4. What changes did Elizabeth bring to Ireland?
5. What was new obedience to English law greatly strengthened by?
III. Retell the text.
Unit Eight.
I. Read and translate the text.
There were no less than six separate rebellions of the Old English themselves,
with or without Gaelic Irish allies, against Elizabeth’s new order. And, although as
part of the traditional pattern of warring alliances, Gaelic chieftains also fought on the
side of Elizabeth’s armies, other Gaelic chieftains resisted that new order with equal
determination. In all this it was the ordinary Gaelic Irish population who took the
burnt of the punishment. These new English of Elizabeth’s saw Ireland and its natives
as a territory and a population to be conquered and civilized much as the Spanish
conquistadors of the same century viewed South America. And they acted in much
the same way.
For some of Elizabeth’s officials the methods used went too far. A former Tudor
deputy, Sir James Croft, denounced ‘these inexpert captains and soldiers that hath
slain and destroyed as well than unarmed as the armed, even to the plowman that
never bare weapon, extending cruelty upon all ages, from the babe in the cradle to the
decrepit age…’
But the voice of Elizabethan officialdom felt few such scruples. The earl of
Leicester in the 1570s declared: ‘… temporizing [or moderately conducted] wars are
to be used with civil and expert men, but savages and those rural rascals are only by
force and fear to be vanquished.’ And Sir John Davies stated: ‘A barbarous country
must first be broken by a war before it will be capable of good government.’
This was the consensus, and in practical terms it worked. By the end of Elizabeth’s
reign Ireland was for the first time ever under something like the effective control of
the English government. But there was another consensus: an Irish one. In this time
of Elizabeth there was laid that foundation of traditional Irish hatred for governing
Englishmen, which was to remain so deep in Irish consciousness.
12
Her deputies in Ireland were Englishmen newly appointed from
England, and no longer those old Norman-English Irish lords who had so often
proved to be simply their own masters in the past. The Crown’s army was now
mainly composed of English soldiers from England – not just the Irish retainers of
those lords. Force ‘when necessity requireth’ was applied equally against the Old
English and the Gaelic Irish, with unprecedented savagery.
Answer the questions.
1. How did Henry VIII decide to put an end to open rebellion against the Crown?
2. Whom was the change in land tenure important for?
3. Was English government effective? Why do you think so?
4. What changes did Elizabeth bring to Ireland?
5. What was new obedience to English law greatly strengthened by?
III. Retell the text.
Unit Eight.
I. Read and translate the text.
There were no less than six separate rebellions of the Old English themselves,
with or without Gaelic Irish allies, against Elizabeth’s new order. And, although as
part of the traditional pattern of warring alliances, Gaelic chieftains also fought on the
side of Elizabeth’s armies, other Gaelic chieftains resisted that new order with equal
determination. In all this it was the ordinary Gaelic Irish population who took the
burnt of the punishment. These new English of Elizabeth’s saw Ireland and its natives
as a territory and a population to be conquered and civilized much as the Spanish
conquistadors of the same century viewed South America. And they acted in much
the same way.
For some of Elizabeth’s officials the methods used went too far. A former Tudor
deputy, Sir James Croft, denounced ‘these inexpert captains and soldiers that hath
slain and destroyed as well than unarmed as the armed, even to the plowman that
never bare weapon, extending cruelty upon all ages, from the babe in the cradle to the
decrepit age…’
But the voice of Elizabethan officialdom felt few such scruples. The earl of
Leicester in the 1570s declared: ‘…temporizing [or moderately conducted] wars are
to be used with civil and expert men, but savages and those rural rascals are only by
force and fear to be vanquished.’ And Sir John Davies stated: ‘A barbarous country
must first be broken by a war before it will be capable of good government.’
This was the consensus, and in practical terms it worked. By the end of Elizabeth’s
reign Ireland was for the first time ever under something like the effective control of
the English government. But there was another consensus: an Irish one. In this time
of Elizabeth there was laid that foundation of traditional Irish hatred for governing
Englishmen, which was to remain so deep in Irish consciousness.
