![]() 8 A harsh verdict on Ormond’s performance as lord lieutenant has been delivered in M.7 For comparison with the 1646 peace negotiations see M.6 Signed on 17 January 1649, the Second Ormond Peace promised religious freedom to Roman Catholics in (.).5 The Inchiquin Truce was a deal concluded by the Confederation after a succession of disastrous mili (.).It will conclude by considering what the episode suggests about Irish Catholic views of their commonwealth and its precise relationship to its Protestant ruler alongside a consideration of the Catholic hierarchy’s teaching on the subject of spiritual and temporal allegiances. This essay begins with a consideration of the context in which Lorraine’s offer emerged, before analysing the intricacies of the negotiations between the Duke and a number of Irish delegations and their significance. ![]() It assesses the fluidity of Irish Catholic perceptions of faith, nation and King after Charles IV, Duke of Lorraine, offered “to succour our friends in distress, especially in the cause of religion” by leading the royalist war effort in Ireland at the close of the Wars of the Three Kingdoms (Clanricarde 5-7). 3 This essay focuses upon a largely unexamined but highly significant episode during which the “hidden transcript” of Irish Catholic political thinking spectacularly intruded onto the public domain. Little effort has been made to truly investigate the “hidden transcript” of Irish Catholic political thinking (Scott). 2 Yet despite the collective articulation of such principles by Irish Catholics, when discussing their religious and political views, historians have always privileged their statements to the government, especially those made by their “Old English” legal-constitutionalist spokesmen, which sought to downplay the impediment of their confessional allegiance. This prioritisation of religious values was again revealed in the Irish Catholic Confederation ’s Oath of Association of 1642 (Ó Buachalla Clarke). It was further underlined by their willingness to take a revised oath in 1628 when a financially strapped Charles I waived the offending clause. This was demonstrated in 1605 by their refusal to swear an oath of allegiance to James I which would have required foreswearing the pope’s indirect deposing power. This essay is informed by a belief that throughout the seventeenth century the vast majority of Irish Catholics, either in Ireland or in exile, privileged their religious allegiance over their political attachment to the Stuarts. ![]() Historians have also stressed that those Irish Catholics who remained at home were committed to Stuart rule the Gaelic Irish because the Stuarts were scions of the Gaelic Irish dynasty that had established the Scottish monarchy under King Fergus I the “Old English” 1 because of that group’s longstanding commitment to the English crown. This opposition centred on religious conflict and resentment at having lost out in the redistribution of land, wealth and power that the Stuarts sponsored (Canny 418-31).
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |