Last updated 09/07/24: Online ordering is currently unavailable due to technical issues. We apologise for any delays responding to customers while we resolve this. For further updates please visit our website: https://www.cambridge.org/news-and-insights/technical-incident
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 28 July 2016
Dr Terence Ranger in a stimulating and valuable article on Strafford in Ireland has taken the story of the Byrnes’ country as an example of ‘the combination of cunning, idealism and self-interest which characterised Strafford’s methods …’. He claims that ‘the truth is more complex and more interesting’ than others who have ‘not unravelled the full story’ supposed. Dr Ranger’s version of the truth has been completely endorsed, elegantly summarised and widely circulated by Miss Wedgwood.It will be contended that Dr Ranger has not unravelled the full story of an episode, which in some respects still defies unravelling, and that he has unwittingly misrepresented Strafford’s part in it. A fuller account, however inconclusive, may be of value, if it gives more accurate information about Strafford’s income from Irish land and about one episode in his policy of plantation.
2 ‘Strafford in Ireland : a revaluation’ in Past and Present, no. xix, pp. 26–45, (Apr. 1961).
3 Ibid., p. 36.
4 Wedgwood, C.V., Thomas Wentworth, first earl of Strafford, 1593–1641, a revaluation, pp. 223–4.Google Scholar In note 1 she also refers to Kearney, H.F., Strafford in Ireland, pp. 172–80Google Scholar and my article ‘The fortune of Thomas Wentworth, earl of Strafford’, in Econ. Hist. Rev., 2nd ser., xi. 242–3 (1958). Dr Ranger does not refer to my article in this context. Neither he nor Miss Wedgwood seems to have noticed that it cites documents not mentioned by Dr Kearney, some of which are incompatible with some details of Dr Ranger’s account.
5 Cal. pat. rolls Ire., Chas I, p. 49.
6 However, the terms ‘the territory of the Birnes’ and ‘the Birnes’ could be used to include the lands of Ranelagh and Cosha (e.g. Cal. S.P. Ire.,) 1633–47, p. 199, S.M. 4, p. 97). Moreover the Book of Survey and Distribution shows that the junior branch held land in the Byrnes’ country in 1641. Carlisle’s grants and Strafford’s plans were generally concerned with the whole territory.
7 Cal. S.P. Ire., 1625–32, p. 580, no. 1821.
8 Remonstrance of Phelim MacPheagh Birne, Gilbert, , Ir corifea1., 1 175.Google Scholar
9 Cal. Pat. rolls Ire., Chas I, pp. 399–400.
10 Cal S.P Ire., 1625–32, p. 380 (no. 1138), p. 604 (no. 1912), p. 629 no. 2021); P.R.O., pat. roll 5 Chas I, pars 25, m. 2, 2 Oct. 1629.
* Kearney, op. cit., pp. 174–8, letters to Carlisle in letter book of Richard Boyle, earl of Cork, 1629–31, Boyle MSS, Chatsworth); Strafford to Charles I, 17 Sept. 1634 (Strafford MSS, letter book 3, pp. 128–9).
11 Ranger, loc. cit., pp. 36–8.
12 The words in italics are in cipher in the original.
13 This presumably means £39,000, which seems a high rate of years’ purchase for plantation land.
14 S.M. 3, pp. 128–31.
15 S.M. 3, p. 149, 23 Oct. 1634. Charles possibly thought Strafford intended the £15,000 to be for Carlisle’s grant of the crown’s title, but Strafford may have intended to include the price of Carlisle’s manor of Newcastle which both he and Parsons seem to have valued at £5,000.
16 Clarendon, , Rebellion, 1. 77.Google Scholar
17 B.M., Egerton MS 2597, f. 108, 20 Dec. 1632.
18 Ibid., f. 76; 12 Aug. 1632.
19 Ibid., f. 140, endorsed 25 June 1633.
20 Ibid., f. 150; 27 Aug. 1633.
21 Knowler, W. (ed.), The letters and dispatches of the earl of Strafforde, 1. 98.Google Scholar
22 S.M. 8, p. 39; 31 Oct. 1633. This letter to Carlisle explains that another to him (ibid., p. 53; 29 Oct.) which recommended Parson’s offer was to be shown to Parsons.
23 Ibid., p. 59.
24 Ibid., p. 69; 29 Jan. 1633–4. Strafford also instructed his brother George to assure Carlisle against a rumour, allegedly started by Parsons who feared Strafford might proceed against him, that Radcliffe would be master of the Irish Court of Wards; ibid., p. 91, 22 Mar. 1633–4.
25 There may have been an earlier commission, in the letter of 29 Oct. intended for Parsons’s sight Strafford says that he dare not stay the proceedings of the commission (not further specified) which ‘I believe by this tyme under the seale’ but this may have been an anticipation intended to worry Parsons, or another commission.
26 S.M. 8, p. 80, 8 Mar. 1633–4 and p. no, 14 May 1634. Strafford also wrote to his London agent William Raylton on 23 April to remind Carlisle of the Byrnes’ whear in I am soe ambitious to doe him service that I cannot choose but blame him, he sends not our warrant and directions for our proceeding, and whearin I trust wee shall not loose him anything that is above ground …’ (ibid., 21, f. 113).
27 Ibid., 4, f. 97.
28 S.M. 3, p. 149.
29 Ibid., 3, p. 151, 15 Dec. 1634.
30 Ibid., 8, p. 194; 12 Mar. 1634–5.
31 Ibid., 8, f. 245.
32 S.M. 8, f. 247; 11 July 1635.
33 Laud regarded commissions in the signet book as public property ( Works, ed. Bliss, , 7. 67).Google Scholar
34 B.M., Egerton MS 2597, f. 60; Parsons to Carlisle, [ ] 1631. The country’s tender ‘will amount to about 20001, wherein my proporconable share must be about 5001’.
35 Ibid.
36 S.M. 10, f. 1; Strafford to Sir James Hay, 16 Apr. 1637.
37 P.R.O., S.P. Ire., vol. 277, no. 10, undated petition of Carlisle, who fears defects ‘for that those lands lying in the said territorie which were not surrendered to the Crown yett doe belong unto your Majesty are not sufficiently granted’. This may refer to the grant of 13 Oct. 1627 (Pat. roll Chas I, pars 25, m. 3), but this ought to have been surrendered in accordance with the letters patent of 24 May 1628 (Cal. pat. rolls Ire., Chas I, p. 399). There was another grant, 2 Oct. 1629 (P.R.O., Pat. roll Chas I, pars 25, m. 2). There do not appear to be any later grants of lands in Wicklow to Carlisle on the English patent rolls.
38 He promised ‘not to continue thus still uselesse and fruitlesse in thos lardge returnes I owe your noble freindshippe’ ; B.M., Egerton MS 2597, f. 140, endorsed 25 June 1633.
39 Ibid., f. 150; 27 Aug. 1633.
40 Carlisle thought they should be worth £3,000 p.a., despite Strafford’s assurance that £1,200 was the greatest clear profit he had ever had; S.M. 8, ff. 69, 109; Strafford to Carlisle, 29 Jan. 1633–4, 14 May 1634.
41 S.M. 6, p. 330; words in italics are in cipher.
42 Laud, , Works, ed. Bliss, 7. 249 Google Scholar; 8 Apr. 1636.
43 S.M. 25, unfoliated papers, contains an estimate of the number of acres in the Birnes’ country ‘taken out of the books of surrenders’ and dated 16 March 1635–6 and a note of ‘The freehoulders demaundes’ 21 Mar. 1635–6.
44 S.M. 4, p. 277 : issued 18 July 1636, received 25 Nov. Laud’s letter was received on 19 Apr. (Works, vii. 251). Carlisle died on 25 Apr.
45 Knowler, ii. 8; 6 July.
46 See n. 44 above.
47 S.M. 4, pp. 281-2; Windsor 7 Nov. ‘and then received’.
48 What appears to be a draft of the warrant of 7 November is in S.M. 24 and says ‘wheras inquisicon is latelie taken findinge our right to all or the most parte of the said territories.…’.
49 S.M. 8, p. 398; H Dec. 1636. It might be thought that the lease mentioned was not necessarily to do with the Byrnes. However, Carlisle’s title to the manor of Newcastle was a lease for 400 years and Strafford’s letters of 16 and 17 Apr. 1637 to Hay and Lady Carlisle refer explicitly to some £7,000 having been paid by the possessionem and to payments out of this to her and Mr Paramour. Even so the references here to the arrangements for the payment of the residue are somewhat puzzling in the light of these later letters. The lease cannot be that of either the impost or license of wines, since these are referred to separately in this letter.
50 S.M. 10, f. 1; 16 Apr. 1637.
51 Ibid., ff. 2–3; 17 Apr. 1637. Carlisle died intestate, leaving debts of over £37,000 and a personal estate of £5,000. His creditors were still unpaid in 1663, Lords’ jn., ix. 49, 52–3; Acts privy council (Colonial series), i. 362, 364.
52 S.M. 17, f. 44; 28 Apr.
53 Abstract of title to manor of Newcastle in the 1656 survey of Strafford’s Irish lands — S.M. 41. It is described as a sale to the crown completed by the levying of a fine.
54 Knowler ii. 175; 5 June 1638.
55 Rushworth, J., Historical collections (1721) 8. 106, 115, 121.Google Scholar
56 Ibid., p. 115. Sir Adam Loftus testified that Strafford and Radcliffe ‘had never a penny out of the Exchequer, but on such Warrants as I durst not deny them, for their due Entertainment, and other things importing His Majesties Service’.
57 Hay had been sent to Ireland by Carlisle in 1635. He was seeking Irish land and in 1638 sought unsuccessfully for the grant of licensing wine and acquavitae (S.M. 8, p. 245, and 11, p. 44), so he must have had contacts in Ireland.
58 Knowler, i. 519; 9 March 1635–6.
59 The conveyances of Shillelagh were between July and November 1638. The survey gives no dates for those of Fairwood. Much of the manor was in Mullinacuff, Hacketstown, Preban and Rathdrum parishes.
60 S.M. 18, f. 103; 9 Aug. to StrafTord. Parsons also sent a plot of Cosha.
61 P.R.O, S.O. ι, no. 3, f. 343.
62 The patent under the Irish great seal is cited in the regrant of Strafford’s lands after his attainder, 28 Sept. 1641 ; Sheffield City Library, Wentworth Woodhouse Deeds, D. 1488.
63 Knowler, ii. 407, to Windebank.
64 The survey (S.M. 41) gives two valuations for most, but not all, the lands valued, giving totals of £1,677 and £1984. The park in Newcastle of 783 profitable and 1171 unprofitable acres is not valued. Some of the townlands in Wicklow for which neither acreage nor value is given amount to 724 acres attributed to Strafford in the Civil Survey, recorded in the Book of Survey and Distribution. Applying average values per acre for apparently similar areas in the survey gives a total of £244 for the park and £140 for the others. This leaves two townlands with no value or acreage given. There was also a considerable amount of wood in Wicklow unvalued and there would be the profits of the courts. Thus £2,500 may be a minimum estimate.
65 Newcastle and Wicklow were taken at the lower of the survey’s valuations.
66 See below, pp. 18–19.
67 The parish omitted is Dromcah (Drumkey) which does not seem to be recorded in the Book of Survey and Distribution; Lewis, (Top. diet. Ire.) gives it 1679 statute acres. As it was likely to have been Protestant owned, their total should perhaps be increased by nearly 1000 Irish acres.
68 Where Ormonde was the chief landowner with nearly 6,000 acres.
69 In addition there were 3,600 acres of bishops’ lands.
70 Half or more of this was in the manor of Wicklow, most of the rest in Fairwood.
71 Followed by Luke O’Toole with 5,500 acres.
72 Kearney, op. cit., pp. 237–8, 261.
73 B.M. Egerton MS 2533, ff. 101–15, 2 Apr. 1641, written in reply to Charles’s request for an account of Strafford’s administration.
74 P.R.O., S.P. Ire., vol. 259, f. 74V, 12 May 1641.
75 Gilbert, , Ir. confed., 1. 23–4,Google Scholar cf. iii. 342–5.
76 Ibid., iii. 129.
77 Ibid., iii. 309.
78 H.M.G., Egmont, i. 222.
79 Gilbert, , Ir. confed., 3. 284, 301, 317.Google Scholar
80 15 Chas I, cap. 6; read first on 3 June, committed 5 June and passed third reading 8 June, 1640; Commons’ jn. Ire. (Dublin, 1796), i. 143, 144, 145; Kearney, op. cit., pp. 189–91.
81 S.M. 10, ff. 17, 19, 79, 80, 111.
82 Ibid., f. 85; Strafford to Henry Percy, 21 Dec. 1637, reckoned the average yield of the previous three years would be £2,200-£2,300. In fact the year ending 25 Mar. 1637 realised £2,207 IIs., the year after £5,130 175. 3d., so that Lady Carlisle complained that she had sold at an undervaluation; Strafford to Lady Carlisle, 28 Nov. 1638, ibid., pp. 227–8.
83 Ibid., f. 111, 14 Apr. 1638.
84 Ibid., ff. 155, 170, 174.
85 S.M. 41. The original rent included a third part of the pipestaves. The survey valued pipestaves and timber at £1,000 a year and notes that after Strafford’s purchase ‘some kind of agreement there was with my lady Carlisle that shee should have 500 per annum during the said term and his lordship the woods in possession …’.
86 Ranger, op. cit., p. 41.
87 Ibid., p. 43.
88 Knowler, ii. 106; 27 Sept. 1637.
89 Carlisle’s grant of 1629 was in free and common socage at £500 p.a. rent, Strafford’s was in knight service in chief.
