Author: Vincent Cervone

David Parrish

 

Jacobitism and Anti-Jacobitism in the British Atlantic World, 1688-1727 

 

Boydell & Brewer

 

199 pp. $99.00 US

 

Publication Date: 2017

 

Jacobitism and Anti-Jacobitism in the British Atlantic World, 1688-1727 was published in 2017 by David Parrish. Dr. Parrish is an Associate Professor of Humanities and Director of Academic Assessment at the College of the Ozarks. His teaching focus varies in topic, he has taught British History, American History, and World Regional Geography. Although, both of his publications are about the British Atlantic World so you can assume that his specialty is on the British Atlantic. 

 

Let me start off by saying why I decided to pick this book. I saw it on our Zotero list of potential books and it caught my eye because I have read Outlander and watched the show and a plot point is the Jacobite rebellion and the Stewart King. I wanted to see the historical side of it, not the dramatized version I’ve read and watched. David Parrish breaks his book into two parts, with 3 different sections inside of each part. I feel the way that Dr. Parrish breaks his book up and is effective given the topics of each section, the way that he’s formatted his book suits the two parts, context and cases. When you’re reading, you’re able to pinpoint what his argument is and the flow of the book is easy to follow along with, something that some books this semester I had issues with. 

 

Chapter 1 or Part 1, as mentioned previously, is broken up into 3 different parts that help to frame Parrish’s thesis statement. Part 1 covers the context of the book, what is this book about and how it fits into the historiography. Parrish starts Part 1.1 by telling the reader the outline of the chapter. “This chapter seeks to outline the significance of Jacobitism and the rage of party in the British Atlantic and suggests that both Jacobitism and antiJacobitism, part of the cultural totality of the British Atlantic and an integral facet of Whig and Tory divisions, acted as linking elements joining disparate political cultures in the British Atlantic world to a divided British body politic.” (14) Parrish backs up his claims with evidence that British leaders struggled to keep settlers in line and these settlers would go around British laws such as the Navigation Acts to get goods and services at a cheaper rate. The crown tried to regain control of the situation in the New World but problems back at home made it harder and in some states, royal appointees were removed in a series of revolts. Part 1.2 talks about how religion played a role in the British Atlantic World. Religion was a huge factor in Jacobitism “Roman Catholics, members of the Church of England and Scottish Episcopalians each in their own manner held to notions of loyalty which helped to perpetuate Stuart claims to the kingdoms of England, Scotland and Ireland, and the empire throughout the Atlantic.” (38) Parrish would continue to explain how religious decisions impacted the greater British Atlantic World forty years after the Glorious Revolution. “The threat of a Stuart restoration, especially in the years between 1689 and 1745, meant that theology became a politicised battleground as religious controversies contributed to a growing High Church attachment to Jacobitism. Throughout the early eighteenth century, debates about the jure divino nature of episcopacy brought Scottish Episcopalians into the confessional culture of the Church of England, but similar debates also encouraged Anglican schemes for a possible union with the Gallican Church in France.” (48) Jacobitism had transnational repercussions that showed that through religious discourse, some were sympathetic to the exile Stewarts and that this discourse created a divide within the Church that identified and signified the ideology of the Jacobites and the Anti-Jacobites. 1.3 discussed Jacobitism in the Atlantic public sphere. “Religious controversies, the operation of imperial politics and the appointments system provided a mechanism for public and private expressions of both Jacobitism and anti-Jacobitism. Moreover, these religious and governmental systems served as institutional networks of communication, connecting colonists to the religious controversies and party politics of mainland Britain.” (66) David Parrish in this part explained in detail how both Jacobitism and anti-Jacobitism was influenced by the public sphere and by the end of the chapter, you believe his argument. That the colonists directly engaged in the exchange of information regarding religious controversies and political discourse. Newspapers became a significant source of information for the colonists and Parrish states that despite this the public sphere did not create a homogenous political culture.

 

Part 2 is titled ‘Cases’ and this is where Parrish adds to the knowledge and sources that he’s already presented. Part 2.1, titled Occasional conformity in miniature: the rage of party, Jacobitism and anti-Jacobitism in South Carolina, c. 1702–1716 discusses how Jacobitism in South Carolina didn’t fit into the historiography despite there being a number of cases, he goes on to state that “evidence of a Jacobite political culture and accusations of Jacobitism against the governors and Anglican clergymen during periods of intense political conflict reflect elements of a contested, transatlantic language of party politics shared among Britons in the Atlantic world.” (98) Parrish would spend the chapter discussing why South Carolina was important and how the political discourse impacted the British Atlantic world, by the end of the chapter, he concludes that “Although party rivalries in South Carolina’s legislature cooled after the debates surrounding the passage of the establishment acts, religious disputes continued to inspire party affiliation. The establishment of the Church of England in the colony and the High Church Tory ascendancy in Britain from 1710 to 1714 nurtured the development of a High Church Tory interest in South Carolina, which in turn fostered elements of a Jacobite political culture, although just how prevalent Jacobite sympathies really were in South Carolina remains an unsolved problem.” (117). Part 2.2 ‘An echo to that on the other side’: Jacobitism and anti-Jacobitism in the mid-Atlantic colonies, c. 1710-1717 takes what you learned from South Carolina and moves it up to the Mid-Atlantic colonies. Jacobitism and anti-Jacobitism were a part of everyday political, religious and print discourse in the mid-Atlantic. By the end of the chapter, Parrish has listed a number of cases in which this political discourse surrounding the jacobite cause in the mid atlantic and how religion affected that discourse, Parrish writes that “The informal alliances of the High Church party in the mid-Atlantic colonies with High Church Tories in Britain fairly or unfairly associated them with a suspected Tory/Jacobite conspiracy, realised in the rising of 1715–16, which resulted in the political defeat of the High Church interests in the mid-Atlantic by the end of 1716.” (138). The final part 2.3 titled ‘Now the mask is taken off’: Jacobitism and anti-Jacobitism in colonial New England, 1702–1727 is a good finish to a surprisingly good book. Parrish in his second paragraph states the purpose of his chapter, something that he has been good at doing in his book, “This chapter argues that Jacobitism and anti-Jacobitism were fundamental elements in religious controversies and in the transatlantic political culture of colonial New England from 1702 to 1727.” (139) Parrish added to the information that he already presented, that this hot topic was woven into the discourse of the mid-atlantic, particularly through the High Church “The rise of a High Church Anglicanism in New England may not seem a credible Jacobite threat in the same manner as the rebellions of 1715 and 1745, but for Congregationalists the presence and espousal of crypto-Jacobite principles in New England associated with a High Church Tory party masked the first step towards disaffection to the Protestant succession.” (165).

 

In conclusion, Jacobitism and Anti-Jacobitism in the British Atlantic World, 1688-1727 by David Parrish offers a new insight into the Jacobite and Anti-Jacobite discussion. He views the subject not from the standpoint of the British Isles but instead on the British Atlantic World, primarily the New World. Parrish came to several conclusions but the most significant in my opinion was that “Although it is true that Jacobites were not actively plotting colonial rebellions or participating in transatlantic conspiracies to restore the exiled Stuarts, Jacobitism – and therefore anti-Jacobitism – was part and parcel of a transatlantic British culture because it was an enduring feature of British political and religious discourse throughout the first half of the eighteenth century.” (166) The prevalence in the colonies surrounding the Jacobite’s led to people being accused of being disloyal to the crown and caused animosity towards the British among the colonists. 

Book Review By Vincent Cervone, Graduate Student at George Mason University.

James Kelly

English Converts in Catholic Europe c.1600-1800

Cambridge University Press

 225 pp, $99.99

Publication date: 2020.

English Converts in Catholic Europe by James Kelly was published in 2020. Dr. James Kelly is a Sweeting Associate Professor in the History of Catholicism at Durham University. Dr. Kelly is a joint general editor of  five-volumes of The Oxford History of British and Irish Catholicism (OUP, forthcoming 2022). In addition,he is one of the co-editors of the book series, ‘Catholicisms, c.1450-c.1800’, published by Durham University IMEMS Press. His focus and interests are in post-reformation Catholic history in Europe, with a focus on Britain and Ireland, the focus of his research is on British and Irish catholic communities at home and in exile. Thus, his book on English converts in Catholic Europe is an area in which he specializes in.

Chapter 1 of Kelly’s book focuses on the recruitment process of the postulant’s choice of a covenant. This would lead to what he states is a main argument of the chapter; which was “on what basis did a postulant choose which convent they wanted to join?” What we would find out in that chapter and further on in the book is that many things went into deciding what convent they wanted to join, one of the factors that played a role in this was their nationality. Where they were from played a role in where they decided to go but the overarching theme that became clear the deeper that you go through the book was that your nationality could be different but, all converts still strongly believed that they were a part of the bigger umbrella that is the catholic church. This was despite the strife and conflicts that were ever present in the Catholic Church and within European politics. Chapter 2 focuses on the English exile converts and their commitment to the Council of Trent and its teaching on female religious life. The Council of Trent, in December 1563, at their 25th session made their rulings on male and female orders. In their ruling, they decided that female religious groups were to be enclosed (they removed themselves from the main religious body). Kelly ties in Chapter 1 in this chapter by pointing out that once a postulant chose their convent, it was the enclosed environment that the Council of Trent decided that they were to live by. In Chapter 3 we get to see how materials were incorporated into religious life. The Council of Trent shaped the way that Catholicism was run and viewed by others, their decrees made Catholic Europe shape into a more visual religion, paintings were being commissioned and the arts were present within monasteries and churches. The focus was on bringing people into worship, they wanted the world to see how great Catholicism was. This, as Kelly notes, was tied to previous and future chapters of his book, these decisions by the Council of Trent forced those in exile to adapt the way that they operated, these decrees “had a huge impact on the financial management of convents across Europe and was felt keenly by the exile English institutions. However, like their continental equivalents, the English convents found ways to negotiate these new systems and at the same time augment their spiritual experience: architecture might have enforced enclosure and shaped spiritual behaviour but could in turn be used to increase the level of esteem in which the nuns were held.” As I noted earlier, churches were now built with side chapels, which were not present in medieval churches. (Chapter 3). Chapter 4, Kelly discusses the financial aspect of English covenants in Catholic Europe, the decrees made by the Council affected the finances of these covenants, they were unable to raise funds in ways that were previously used such as quire nuns begging for alms, were no longer possible. So, other ways of raising funds became a necessity. Although nuns took vows not to hold any personal finances, depending on the covenant, some took it more seriously than others. An example that Kelly gives is the Poor Clares, who believed that nothing went to waste, even food that had started to smell. But, in order for a covenant to run properly, money needed to be brought in. So, the nuns who were responsible for the money had to balance their vows to not hold money and keep the covenant alive. Chapter 5 details the daily lives of those within the enclosure. The daily lives and rituals of those in the enclosure are commonly found in covenant archives, so Kelly had a wealth of information at his fingers. Typically, “The convent day was dictated by the rhythm of the Divine Office, a series of prayers made up of seven Hours: Matins, Lauds, Terce, Sext, None, Vespers and Compline. Praying these was each nun’s primary task and numerous advice books were written with the aim of guiding nuns through each Hour, offering them advice on how best to prepare for the contemplative day.” It was this rhythm that they were accustomed to. Kelly notes that not all covenants followed this exactly and that many changed it to fit the mission of their own covenant but that the core values still remained, the lives of the nuns were to be structured around prayer. That even though these enclosures were to be enclosed, covenants found a way to stay connected to the world around them. Chapter 6 is the wider picture of English converts and the mission of Catholicism. As Kelly has noted in previous chapters, these enclosures weren’t completely enclosed, they still had a finger on the pulse of the world. Covenants were still connected to the world in one way or another, one example that Dr. Kelly gives is “the Liège Sepulchrines had a very close relationship with several eighteenth-century rectors of the English College, Rome, particularly Christopher Maire, SJ, the Rome-based Jesuits seeking advice on feasts and indulgences on behalf of the convent’s inhabitants.” Of course, not all interactions were positive and there was some disagreement such as the incident in Lisbon. “. . . an angry exchange ensued over students from the college visiting the Bridgettine convent and allegedly compromising its observance of enclosure. The nuns’ chaplain, John Marks, wrote caustically in 1669 to the college vice-president Mathias Watkinson, ‘Had you considered the words of my letter as a considerate man would have done you might have saved yourself the labour of writing a reply and me the trouble of answering it.’” The relationships that existed between English exile institutions all shared the same goal that was mentioned earlier, the betterment of the Catholic Church. Although these religious institutions started to take a less religious approach as time went along fulfilling various social, educational and political functions.

In conclusion, I felt that Kelly did a great job at explaining English converts and covenants. He had a clear thesis and he stuck to that thesis throughout the book, he tells the audience what they’re going to be learning about and provides a number of examples. He references previous chapters and how they tie into the current chapter. English Converts in Catholic Europe reinforces and adds to a growing historiography that has become a topic of interest among historians, with its clear structure and flow. James Kelly has written an academic book that was enjoyable to read and will aid future research on the topic of Catholicism in Europe.

Book Review done by Vincent Cervone, Graduate Student at George Mason University

Alastair Bellany is a History Professor at Rutgers who specializes in Early Modern British Isles: Political and Media History. He has been teaching at Rutgers since 1996 and is the Department Chair. Thomas Cogswell is a Professor of History at Washington University in St. Louis. He specializes in Early Modern England and has taught at Riverside since 1999. Both authors are established in their fields and both focus on Early Modern England. This is the first of two collaborations between the two authors. They’re currently working on England’s Assassin: John Felton and the Assassination of the Duke of Buckingham which relates to this book. 

 

Alastair Bellany and Thomas Cogswell’s The Murder of King James I challenges what I knew about Early Modern England by stating that King James I was murdered instead of dying like natural causes as I was taught and read growing up. Before King James’s death, he had suffered a stroke that left him too weak to fight and he died a few days later. The royal physician’s had diagnosed the king with a “pure intermitting tertian ague, or a fever.” (Page 31). The king was said to have died of natural causes. The medical report that was published by the doctors said that the king’s health had taken a turn for the worse suddenly and that, on top of many underlying causes such as poor diet and previous medical history resulting in the king’s death, the autopsy on his body echoed what the doctors had said. Charles I, James’s son and successor spared no expense for his father “an estimated £50,000 was spent” (46) this was on top of Charles’s coronation, the sum was higher than the funerals and coronations of previous monarchs. This can be seen as a son mourning his father and at first glance, that’s what it was. Charles was honoring his father and establishing himself as the next monarch of England. But, you cannot help but to think in the back of your head that something was amiss, it felt like Charles was covering up his involvement in the plot to become the new monarch and as you read deeper, that starts to become a reality.

 

George Eglishman, who is the main focus of  Bellany and Cogswell’s book, which dissects and examines every piece of evidence that Eglishman detailed in his own book. The Frontrunner of Revenge Upon The Duke of Buckingham for Poisoning the most potent James, King of Great Britain, as well as the Marquis Hamilton and other nobles. In his book, Eglishman accuses the Duke of Buckingham of poisoning King James I and of poisoning of Hamilton, who was Eglishman’s patron. Eglishman had also drawn people’s attention because of the rumors that while Hamilton was on his deathbed, Eglishman had converted him to Catholicism, the rumors on top of the belief that the publication of his book would have him sharing the same fate as his patron and the late king, he fled the country and went to Brussels. Eglishman wasn’t a saint by any means and he didn’t publish this book because he cared about King James, he had a vendetta against Buckingham and Charles, who he blamed for the troubles in his life up to date.

 

Eglishman’s actions resulted in Parliament opening up an inquire into the death of King James, news of Eglishman’s work transcended social status as it became the talk of the town in London “copies had been industriously scattered up and down in the streets of the city of London.” (210) This had a profound impact on English society as other officials started to come out with accusations against the Duke himself. The Earl of Bristol used the same method to spread his own charges against the Duke (210) The select committee called forward eight doctors to testify in the trial but the most important of these judges was John Craig, who was the unnamed doctor in Eglishman’s book. Craig had been assigned to be one of King James’s doctors in 1621 and he challenged Buckingham’s intervention in the care of the king and became a prisoner in his own chambers after he said that King James had been poisoned and when the doctors marched in the King’s funeral procession, Craig did not walk with the other physicians but with the servants and when it came to payment, Craig was not paid by Charles and did not get his pension back until 1635 (214). King Charles did not take kindly to royal physicians testifying before the committee and Ramsey was forced to become a prisoner in his own home after giving testimony that Charles deemed unacceptable. Each of the royal physician’s testified that the king should only be treated by them and with their consultation and that when they noticed that a plaster had been applied to the king’s side (The Duke had applied it to the King’s side without consulting the doctors first)  they had it removed since they did not approve of it being applied. Buckingham also have the King something to drink that he said would help with the King’s illness. Over a few hours, the Duke’s intervention only made things worse for the ailing monarch. The articles of impeachment thrown at Buckingham weakened his stance and in 1628, he was assassinated by John Felton who claimed that he was spurred to do it by Eglishman’s book. In the end, Eglishman got his revenge for his patron. Buckingham was assassinated but what transpired after changed England and the role that it played in European politics.

 

After Buckingham’s death, the country started to fall apart and a Civil War erupted that divided the country. On one side you had Charles I and his loyalists and on the other, you had those that believed that Charles was a tyrant and that he deserved to be overthrown for aiding Buckingham for having a hand in his father’s death. Although George Eglishman’s The Frontrunner of Revenge wasn’t the sole reason that the English Revolution happened but it did provide a spark that complied with other factors of English society, cascaded into a full on revolution. 

 

In conclusion, I found Alastair’s Bellany and Thomas Cogswell’s The Murder of King James I to be an interesting book and I’m glad that I selected it as one of my books but it definitely was not what I was expecting when I selected it. As I was reading it, it felt like a huge cover up by Charles because he wanted to be king so badly and Eglishman came in and spoiled it for him. Cogswell and Bellany did their research and I felt that they did a good job at breaking down Eglishman’s work and explaining why it mattered. Although I liked the book, I did have several complaints with how the book was written and its contents. First of all, I found that the book was really long and could’ve used some editing. In the database that I used, it was 618 pages and I had to take multiple breaks in order to read it in its entirety. Another key problem/issue that I had with the book was that the main argument or focus that they had was George Eglishman and the impact of his book and this wasn’t mentioned until page 200 in my book. If he was going to be the central point in your analysis, then I would’ve liked for him to be presented earlier in his book. Otherwise, I felt like Bellany and Cogswell presented a good book, they broke down Eglishman’s points and how it impacted Early Modern England and fits into the historiography that we have been examining in class since the start of the semester.

 

Reviewed by Vincent Cervone, Master’s Student at George Mason University.

In Mary and Philip: The Marriage of Tudor England and Hapsburg Spain by Alexander Samson tries to explain a lot about the relationship between Mary and Prince Philip of Spain, how the commoners felt about having a foreign ruler, how the English adapted to having a queen for the first time, and how England handled the growing divide between Catholics and Protestants This book contributes to the existing historiography that we’re studying in this class by showing the divide that exists amongst historians on the marriage. Samson’s studies and focus are not on Early Modern England which would usually lead me to take what they say with a grain of salt, but I believe that Samson provides strong analysis of the relationship of the two monarchs and how it affected those around them. 

In modern interpretations of Mary I, we how historians have depicted her. In Lady Jane (1985) A reviewer called Mary ‘Edward’s half-wit sister’ which is based on Geoffrey Elton’s of the first Tudor queen statement that she was stupid. Another depiction was Kathy Burke who played Mary opposite Cate Blanchett’s Elizabeth, Mary was portrayed here as hysterical and neurotic as she moved around the dark world with her consort who was brooding and wanted nothing to do with her, this is based off the claims by Sir Francis Hastings in 1598 who said that the marriage “could not drawe the least sparke of true loue from him to his noble Queene, who so louingly made choice of him to be her husband.” and this was because Philip was unenthusiastic about their marriage.1 These are just two examples of Mary I and her husband Philip that have been played on the big screen and the performance is based off a historical source that described the character like that. The official view of Britian’s past is built around the Reformation, that the Tudors ‘rode on the back of anti-clericalism’ and turning their back on the church for encroaching on the liberties of the English Church and that the concept of the Reformation as a national liberation which restored England’s independence which would lead to England and its establishment of colonies, which would exist if not for Mary who helped Elizabeth by paving the way. 

What I gathered from the book was that the English and the Spanish were close, the two countries were tied together not only economically but also socially. There was a series of treaties between the two countries that went as far back as 1252 which was an agreement between Henry III and Castile that preceded the marriage between Edward I and Eleanor of Castile. Merchants from both countries traveled and traded in the other, showing how close the two powers were to each other. The relationship between the two started to become frayed when Henry VIII married Boleyn but a treaty in June 1542 that halted the deterioration of relations between the two countries, the Spanish responded to the despoliation of the San Salvador by Robert Reneger in 1545 by seizing English merchants’ goods in Andalusia which violated the terms of Medina Del Campo. The treaty of the Low Countries would serve as a template for the later marital agreement under Mary and Philip.  

With the death of Henry VIII, England’s new monarch was Henry’s only son Edward, but his reign only lasted until 1553 when he died of TB. After Edward, England gained its first female monarch in Mary. England had never had a female ruler, so there was anxiety surrounding her rule. The Spainards though were familiar with having a female monarch so the treaty between England and Spain surrounding foreign succession handled the gender transition. With Mary’s succession to the throne and her marriage to Philip I of Spain, the Catholic Church returned to England and those that had fled European countries to escape Catholicism under Mary’s father Henry VIII were now homeless once again, they were immediately associated with heresy and sedition under Mary. The emperor wrote in a letter that “[it] is clear that the foreign refugees with oppose her as much as any other class of people, in their fear of a change of religion.”2 At the end of the paragraph, it is noted that relations between Protestants and Catholics were not as divided as they would become later in the century.  

The marriage between Mary and Philip was met with skepticism by the English people, they did not like foreigners are they believed that they [the foreigners] only cared about themselves and not the country that they were in. Antoine Perrenot de Granvelle, bishop of Arras admitted to the Cardinal of Jaen that “the English may come with the greatest difficulty to consent to the marriage and so much more as they naturally detest foreigners.”3 The people of England did not want a foreign ruler, and that sentiment and belief led to Wyatt’s revolt where the people revolted against a Spanish ruler. Another factor that played into the English people’s distrust was that the Philip and his court did not speak English and that there would be confusion. 

Something that I like about this book is that the author tells you the truth and the sources they have at their disposal, a great example of this is in the Wyatt revolt chapter where it is stated that the verdict of historians on the cause of Wyatt’s revolt is divided. For example, David Loades argues that the reason is political and that the main concern of the English was Spanish domination. Others point to the fact that the areas where it achieved its greatest success were areas that the Reformation had its greatest effect. While the Tonbridge schoolmaster John Proctor compared the revolt to the religious wars that had desolated Germany.  

Samson went on in the later chapters by showing us the power dynamic of the relationship between Mary and Philip. What surprised me about their relationship and challenged what I knew prior to reading this book was that when they got married, both were outfits that were similar in style and Mary sat on the right of Philip which is usually reserved for the King. Prior to this book, my thought was that Philip was just using Mary for England and that he went out of his way to show people that England now belonged to Spain. Samson also in chapter seven tackled what I believe was one of the central points of the book, people in England did not believe that Mary could be a successful monarch, that she would lead England to ruin. 

Like every book that we read, there are strengths and weaknesses that we identify as we read. A strength that I noticed as I was reading was that Samson always had an example and backed up a point that he made, he never left me confused because he had a source for all the points that he was arguing in his book. A weakness that I identified almost immediately was that Samson lacked a strong opening/introduction. Instead of giving us a small summary or introduction to what he would be arguing in his book, he jumped straight to the point and left the reader in the dust. Also, there were points in the chapters that Samson lost the point, he was providing us with so much information and evidence that he could not bring it all together in the end. I believe that if Alexander Samson had given us a better introduction and wrapped all the evidence that he provided us with in the chapters and related it to his thesis/main point, that this book would be more coherent and readable.  

 

Reviewed By Vincent Cervone, George Mason Graduate Student.

Murphy, Neil. The Tudor occupation of Boulogne: conquest, colonisation, and imperial monarchy, 1544-1550. Cambridge. Cambridge University Press. 

Published in January 2019

https://doi-org.mutex.gmu.edu/10.1017/9781108653046

 

When you think of Early Modern England and what family was responsible for stabilizing and growing England into a global empire, the Tudor family is that family. In Neil Murphy’s The Tudor Occupation of Boulogne: Conquest, Colonisation, and Imperial Monarchy, 1544-1550. Murphy examines and analyzes the occupation of Boulogne under the rule of King Henry VIII which would start British Imperialism. Neil Murphy is an associate professor of History at Northumbria University in Newcastle, England and is the author of three books. The Captivity of John II, 1356-60: The Royal Image in Later Medieval England and France (2016), Ceremonial Entries, Municipal Liberties, and the Negotiation of Power in Valois France, 1328-1589 (2016) and The Tudor Occupation of Boulogne: Conquest, Colonisation, and Imperial Monarchy, 1544-1550 (2019). Which is his latest published book.  Murphy specializes in Medieval and Early Modern France.

Neil Murphy’s book The Tudor Occupation of Boulogne: Conquest, Colonisation, and Imperial Monarchy, 1544-1550. He analyzes and examines historical data on Henry VIII’s occupation of Boulogne and how it impacted the Boulonnais people and the economics of the area. The occupation and colony in Boulogne is/was one of his most significant ventures despite not getting much attention. Henry VIII’s occupation in France and the way that he handled the conquest would lay the groundwork for future English occupations such as Ulster. “David Potter has provided a thorough study of the organisation of the war between Henry VIII and Francis I in the 1540s, though he does not deal with the nature of English rule at Boulogne and usually focuses instead on the religious change that occurred under his children, ignoring the final years of his reign.”1 When you think of Henry VIII; you think about his children and the fact that he had six wives His examination of the occupation of Boulogne gives us an insight into a military occupation that is rarely talked about when you discuss the Tudor dynasty and how it ties into the Early Modern England period that we are talking about in class 

Murphy relies on and ties in several historical evidence that supports the two arguments that are discussed in each chapter. In the first chapter, King Henry VIII is starting his venture into Boulogne, where he will establish a colony. The only prior knowledge that I had of Boulogne was what William Palmer had to say about the conquest, having previously learned about the conquest when I was in high school. Murphy argues that the conquest was not a waste of millions but instead a sign of what was to come for the future of imperialism in England, that what happened in Boulogne served as a sort of blueprint to the future of England under the Tudors. The occupation of Boulogne was not seen by everyone as a success or even necessary. William Palmer called it a “useless military endeavor that cost £1,000,000” and Bruce Lenam said that that “he [Henry VIII] was pouring millions into a futile bid to re-create the Anglo-French empire of Henry V’ and placing his government ‘deep into debt in pursuit of strategic lunacies in France” (2) 

Henry’s strategy in France was to lay claim to France and demand that the French pledge themselves to him, Henry VIII knew that the French would not listen to his demand and by making this demand/summon he was able to label those who did not pledge to be traitors and apply harsh methods of warfare against them which included taking their goods and their homes. Henry’s claim wasn’t based on claiming the throne, instead his claim to the French land was by conquest, which was unique. In 16th century Europe, the rules that were used in siege warfare offered little protection to those we were under siege and the citizens of Boulogne knew that. Henry VIII was clever in his tactics, he knew what the rules were, and he used them to further his cause in France, another unique about the occupation of Boulogne was that King Henry VIII personally led the siege himself, which was uncommon because being on a battlefield meant that the monarch was vulnerable and that enemies would target them. Henry leading the siege also gave him the ability to grant clemency to anyone that surrendered to him, which the port city of Boulogne did when they saw the size of Henry’s army. Henry VIII spared the citizens and gave them safe passage to the city of Abbeville. Even though Henry went against all rules of warfare up to this point, this moment would be essential to his occupation, this made him look like a just ruler and that those who fell in line behind him would be treated fairly. Which was not the truth because Henry would employ other tactics to keep the peasants in line. The takeaway from this chapter that I got was that King Henry’s occupation of Boulogne and the surrounding area did not go over well. The villagers who left Boulogne with Henry VIII’s protection were pillaged once they were out of sight by both the British and the French and were left exposed to the elements and at the mercy of others. Britian’s scorched earth policy along with the famine that would take place would result in the deaths of the refugees and other villagers.  

Chapter 3’s focus was on Cartography and how King Henry and the British used treaties and their power to enact laws upon the Boulonnais along with the use of maps to benefit Henry VIII’s occupation of the Boulonnais lands. As stated in the second paragraph by William Palmer, the occupation and conquest in the area put significant financial strain on the British people and played a factor in the Treaty of Camp, the people back home did not want to be involved in conflict in France. So, Henry agreed to give the area back to the French after a period of eight years in exchange for money, although evidence shows that Henry planned to keep the territory for longer, if not permanently. Mapping was another way that Henry and the British ruled over the area, they would change the landscape in the Boulonnais to support their occupation. In the figure below, what you see is the village of Ambleteuse, the picture shows the village which contains a church and 32 houses. The figure after that is when the church and the surrounding houses were destroyed and replaced by a large fortress.  

 

Both maps were made by John Rodgers, and they show how the area was developed and changed under Henry VIII, it went from containing housing and a church to becoming New Haven, a military stronghold that helped the British keep control of the Boulonnais.  

In the next chapter, it discusses the British Settlement in the Boulonnais which had been started in the previous chapters.  

The above photo shows English Settlements in France if you look closely at the above figure, you will note that all settlements by the British were either on the coast of France or had direct access to a river. This was because the British would use waterways to transport goods and men to and from locations. The lands that came under English rule, cultivation of the land played a significant role in the success of the colonies that Henry set up, without proper cultivation of the land, “As part of its efforts to encourage the cultivation of land, the privy council set limits on the number of animals those people given lands in the Boulonnais were permitted to transport from England.”3 These themes would continue in the following chapters and would lead to the author’s central point that the occupation of Boulogne under King Henry VIII was the start of English imperialism and was a pivotal moment and action late in his lifetime that would set up England under his children.  

So, in conclusion, the strength of Neil Murphy’s book was that he showed both sides of the story, he showed those that agreed with Henry’s decisions and those that did not agree, and he then provided his own educated, scholarly opinion on what was going on and what was going on. He also was able to detail how Henry’s conquest in France during the 1540’s would be echoed later when England went into Ireland. The weakness of the book in my own opinion was that Murphy tried to cover so much in this book that details were missing, there is so much information that is being given to you that you are almost forced to accept what the author was saying and some of the sources that he (Murphy) used didn’t seem to originally be in English so the translations were difficult to understand, so I had trouble understanding the context of the quote or if it was accurate

 

Reviewed by Vincent Cervone, Graduate Student at George Mason University.