Neil Murphy. The Tudor Occupation of Boulogne: Conquest, Colonisation and Imperial Monarchy, 1544-1550. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2019. Hardback
Murphy is a professor of Medieval and Early Modern France, emphasizing the reign of English King Henry VIII. In The Tudor Occupation of Boulogne: Conquest, Colonisation and Imperial Monarchy, 1544-1550, Murphy argues that the English occupation of the Boulogne region in France was a significant shift in the imperial history of England. Murphy is filling a spot in the scholarship of empire building in Early Modern England. Murphy argues, “First of all, rather than view the establishment of colonies in the midlands of Ireland in the mid-sixteenth century as marking the beginning of a nascent British Empire, we should consider them concerning Henry VIII’s actions in France in the 1540s.” (230) Murphy argues that the study of the English Empire glosses over their actions in Northern France in the 1540s and starts with expanding into Scotland and Ireland in the 1570s. Murphy also points out that the English invasion of Boulogne differed from previous monarch’s wars in France due to Henry VIII not claiming his right to the French throne, but instead claiming the land by right of conquest.
King Henry VIII invaded the Boulogne region in North-East France in 1544 and proceeded to Anglicanize the region. The population was deported from the area by the king, and English subjects were brought in to populate the now vacant land. The region was placed under English law and officially became English land rather than an English possession in France. The occupation and subsequent repopulation of Boulogne by the English was a major change in the English attitude towards territory outside of England proper. Before the invasion of Boulogne in 1544, English kings would justify an invasion of France by claiming the French throne. The English king would have to win over the population of France to support their adventure and occupation of land in France. Henry VIII, however, did not need to win over the population because he would import his population of English citizens into the region.
Murphy spends a significant chunk of the book explaining the actions taken by Henry VIII in Boulogne and how those actions foreshadowed those that were taken in Ireland and Scotland by the British decades later. Actions such as the violence and the military action that Henry VIII used to conquer the region. The English army that Henry VIII assembled for the conquest was the largest force that England had amassed up to that point. The violence that came with the attacks was not uncommon according to standards of war at the time. However, the violence was uncommon when it came to the English invading France. As Murphy notes, “As we shall see, the killing of peasants, scouring of woods, burning of houses and destruction of crops to create famine conditions amongst a people the English deemed to be rebels were all measures Henry VIII had implemented in the Boulonnais in the 1540s, almost seven decades before Mountjoy laid waste to Ulster.” (2) English violence during a period of conquest was not a unique phenomenon, but the English had before been attempting to win over the native population in France to lay claim to the crown. Henry VIII abandoned that idea and set about to occupy the French lands as their conqueror and not their king.
The subsequent paragraphs explain how the English conquered their newly acquired land. Henry VIII forced out the French peasants and brought in English peasants to populate the land. Bringing in English subjects made it easy for English laws and customs to be adopted. Henry VIII broke from traditional war aims and turned the newly conquered land in France into English land with English laws and subjects.
Murphy’s intended audience is an academic one. He provides archival sources and primary sources that could be hard to understand for someone who does not understand the period. Many of the archival sources are written in English; however, their form of English is different and makes some of the sources challenging to understand. Murphy uses archives, primary printed references, and secondary printed sources to build his argument and weaves them together eloquently. One downside that the sources have is that Murphy uses a large number of secondary sources. He wraps his major argument around archival sources but more primary sources would have strengthened the argument.
The book overall has many strong points. The argument is original and sets itself firmly within the field of Early Modern England. Murphy is filling a gap in the historiography and is challenging other scholarship that has been created surrounding the early British Empire. The previous historiography has placed English holdings in France and English conquests of Ireland and Scotland as distinctly different. They point out that the violence and occupation of Scotland and Ireland were unique to the region and started the first steps for the English Empire. Murphy, on the other hand, argues that English holdings in France were the beginning of England expanding outside its borders for the sake of claiming territory. The English expansion into Northern France was the first step for the English to create an empire that would span across oceans. Before England expanded into Scotland and Ireland, Henry VIII experimented with colonial conquest in Northern France.
The Tudor Occupation of Boulogne: Conquest, Colonisation and Imperial Monarchy, 1544-1550 by Neil Murphy is a wonderful book that argues against the previous historiography and creates an original argument. Murphy has created a new argument that predates the conventional starting point of the English Empire. The Tudor Occupation of Boulogne is a must-read for anyone who is studying Early Modern England or the English Empire. Murphy challenges conventional historiography and treads into uncharted territory and delivers an original argument that is delivered with eloquence. Murphy uses archives, primary sources, and a large number of secondary sources to build his argument and writes in a clear manner that allows anyone to read. Without background knowledge of England in the early modern period, a reader can still understand his argument and its impact on historiography.
Reviewed by Tyler Thompson, Graduate Student at George Mason University.
