You’re right to express frustration about the lack of Irish context in English histories of the tudor period. 1599 is satisfying because it places great emphasis on Essex’s Irish campaign. But no mention of the late Nicholas White, I think.
The main selling point of Morgan’s book is the assertion that O’Neill was educated in the Pale, rather than in England. Is there a serious distinction? Hard to tell, because there’s no explanation of the nature of the education.
I disagree completely that Fitzwilliam was lazy – very sly and aggressive, probably an embezzler of government coffers, and of course a cousin of Mildred Cecil.
I’m a fan of John Perrot because he was willing to compromise from a position of strength and to lead his government with moderation – probably taking too seriouly his father’s advice about politic drifts & amiable persuasions. And he had no problem tearinto his critics – I think he gave Mabel Bagnal’s father a box on the snout during a cabinet meeting at Dublin. But, in person, he probably came across as a boor and a piss head. There is a passage in one of his letters where he looks forward to drinking usguebeagh with a friend in “the Covent Garden” – quaint.
Anyway, pretty sure if men like Perrot had remained in charge, Ulster would not have suffered so terribly.
Try James Shapiro’s 1599: A Year in the Life of William Shakespeare
http://www.amazon.co.uk/1599-Year-Life-William-Shakespeare/dp/0571214800
You’re right to express frustration about the lack of Irish context in English histories of the tudor period. 1599 is satisfying because it places great emphasis on Essex’s Irish campaign. But no mention of the late Nicholas White, I think.
The main selling point of Morgan’s book is the assertion that O’Neill was educated in the Pale, rather than in England. Is there a serious distinction? Hard to tell, because there’s no explanation of the nature of the education.
I disagree completely that Fitzwilliam was lazy – very sly and aggressive, probably an embezzler of government coffers, and of course a cousin of Mildred Cecil.
I’m a fan of John Perrot because he was willing to compromise from a position of strength and to lead his government with moderation – probably taking too seriouly his father’s advice about politic drifts & amiable persuasions. And he had no problem tearinto his critics – I think he gave Mabel Bagnal’s father a box on the snout during a cabinet meeting at Dublin. But, in person, he probably came across as a boor and a piss head. There is a passage in one of his letters where he looks forward to drinking usguebeagh with a friend in “the Covent Garden” – quaint.
Anyway, pretty sure if men like Perrot had remained in charge, Ulster would not have suffered so terribly.