So, the only way England can have a loyal Ireland is if they settle it with English? Even if this is before Luther and his Ninety-Five Theses and religion isn't a factor?
So, the only way England can have a loyal Ireland is if they settle it with English? Even if this is before Luther and his Ninety-Five Theses and religion isn't a factor?
So, the only way England can have a loyal Ireland is if they settle it with English? Even if this is before Luther and his Ninety-Five Theses and religion isn't a factor?
I think there is another way but it require treating Ireland less like a colony and more like Scotland.
So, the only way England can have a loyal Ireland is if they settle it with English? Even if this is before Luther and his Ninety-Five Theses and religion isn't a factor?
one of the problem OTLwith english settlers coming to Ireland was they started to adopted Irish customs and began to speak Gaelic and become just as rebellious as the Irish.how many Irish will collaborate will depend on if they can make good money or keep their land.
I'll suppose I'll just have to accept the fact that making Ireland accept English rule is going to require extensive English settlement. Although I do think that in the beginning there will be some Irish who will collaborate.
Can't name the source offhand, no, sorry. I was a member of the Richard III Society for over a decade, during which I read quite a lot of different material about the period.-------------
Simreeve, I can see that. Are you sure you don't have the source? I really can't find much detail on the declaration, most accounts just say he declared himself King of England from the day before the Battle of Bosworth and used it to seize King Richard III's lands. It doesn't say anything about noble lands, which admittedly could be because he didn't. He did give out lots of writs of attainder though.
In fact the original 'English' conquest of Ireland, under Henry II, was approved by the Pope* because in those days most of the Irish weren't yet Catholics at all...Religion would always be a factor. Irish Catholics were a different breed
If you mean the 'Highland Clearances' of the 19th century, those were actually ordered by Scottish lords (albeit ones whose families might have decided that London was a better place to live) who wanted to go over to wide-scale sheep-farming in the hope that this would increase the income from their lands.They still cleared the highlands
Apart from anything else (such as, for example, the risk of Spain or France using it as a stepping-stone for an invasion of England), the Kings of England had owned Ireland -- at least in theory -- since the reign of Henry II. Giving up control of a possession because of unrest there sends the wrong message to anybody who might consider unrest in any of the kings' other possessions.What id do not under stand is Why you want the Irish to be loyal subjects of the Tudors?
OTL long term Ireland cost the English more than they got out of it and was nothing but trouble for them.
They would get a better return by putting those resource in the the America colonies.
The Irish were not nomads wandering around with cattle.I suppose one of the factors that helped with the Ulster plantation succeeding was the low Irish population there. As far as I know there were only about 40,000 Irish who wandered around with their cattle.
A the Kings of England had owned Ireland -- at least in theory -- since the reign of Henry II
Well, until Henry VIII broke with Rome, the Pope said that it did too.That is what the main problem between England and Ireland always has been.
The Irish always said that Ireland did not belong to the King of England.