The Sack of Baltimore, 1538

                                    

                                                                                                                 by  Edward O'Mahony

                                       

 

   On the 4th of March, 1538, three ships sailed into Baltimore harbour carrying four hundred armed men from Waterford intent on wreaking revenge on the O'Driscolls, the premier maritime lords of the 15th and early 16th century in south-western Ireland, with whom they had been in conflict for over two centuries. Over the next five days, the invaders burned the O'Driscoll's villages and boats, tore down their castles, and laid waste to the countryside. By the time the men of Waterford left, the power of the O'Driscolls had been broken for ever.

   The origins of the conflict lay in the early 14th century, when the great law and order (1) established by the Normans in the early years of the colonisation of Ireland began to break down. A particular cause of this breakdown was the Bruce invasion of 1315 to 1318, during which Robert Bruce's brother, Edward, ravaged the country at the head of a Scottish army. This event  coincided with a severe famine, and together, these factors led to a decline in the authority of the English administration, the disintegration of the colonial settlement and local revivals of power among the Gaelic Irish. These trends were amplified by the arrival of bubonic plague in the summer of 1348, which had a disproportionate effect on the urbanised colonial areas where the population was reduced by at least a third and possibly by as much as a half. (2)

    The revival of the Gaelic Irish had a further and more significant effect, in that many of the colonial population, particularly the Anglo-Norman families resident outside of the towns, were attracted to their language, habits and dress. The adoption of a Gaelic Irish life-style by the colonists often led to a rejection of the king's authority and caused them to join with the so-called Irish enemies in attacks upon the colonial settlement. In addition, many of the English who possessed lands in Ireland were absentees, who were unwilling to spend the time and money necessary to defend their lands.(3) This had the effect not only of endangering their own possessions but also of placing lands belonging to the king and other lords in jeopardy. (4)

   In 1361, the English king, Edward III, sent his second son, Lionel of Clarence, to Ireland with an army of 1,500 men in an attempt to address some of these problems. Disagreements between the Anglo-Irish colonists and Lionel's English-born followers hampered military campaigns against the Irish enemies, however, and the only enduring legacy of the mission was the Statute of Kilkenny of 1366. This statute acknowledged that there were two groups in Ireland, the English and the Irish, and in an attempt to stop the gaelicisation of the colonial population, prohibited intermarriage between the English and Irish populations, as well as other trading and social contacts. By 1368, however, that is, within two years of Lionel's departure, Edward III was once again hearing complaints that the land of Ireland was on the verge of ruin. (5)

     In that year, among many other events, the Anglo-Irish family of le Poer  united with the O'Driscolls of Baltimore to attack the city of Waterford, as part of a long-standing feud the le Poers had with the city. The le Poers were among Norman families who had settled in Ireland in the 12th and 13th centuries. At the apex of the family stood two leadership figures, the baron of Dunoil (also known as Dunhill) who owned lands situated between Dunhill and Islandkane on the coast of Waterford, and the head of the le Poers, who owned lands in the northeast of Waterford as well as in southern Kilkenny at Gracecastle. The le Poers were among the Anglo-Irish families who became increasingly gaelicised and lawless during the 13th and 14th centuries. In 1268, one of the younger le Poers, Mathew le Poer, kidnapped the bishop of Lismore, while in the late 1280s, Robert le Poer was indicted for indulging in private warfare with the Aylwards of Faithlegg. In addition, a Walter le Poer was accused of destroying a large part of Munster in 1301, while his father, Andrew le Poer was hanged sometime before 1305 in Ross, for being a brigand.(6)

    In an attempt to bring some order to the region, the justiciar John Wogan appointed the 24-year-old baron of Donoil, John fitz Peter le Poer, sheriff in August 1305. With this unprecedented move, which marked a considerable devolution of peace-keeping functions from royal administrators to the local baronetage, it was hoped that the more unruly members of the le Poers would be kept in line. The baron, however, appears to have used his position for his own aggrandisement and prestige and was replaced within six months, though by another le Poer. (7)

   In the 1320s, the le Poers came into conflict with the Geraldines of Desmond. At that time, the le Poers were allies of Richard de Burgh, earl of Ulster, to whom they also appear to have been related. De Burgh had been instrumental in hindering the expansion of John fitz Thomas, the future earl of Desmond, in his attempts to further his influence in Munster and in the lordship of Ireland as a whole. One of the issues in dispute between the le Poers and fitz Thomas was the lordship of Kilmeadan. In 1325, writs had to be issued to restrain Arnold le Poer, seneschal of the liberty of Kilkenny, and John fitz Thomas from assembling soldiers and men-at-arms for the purpose of attacking each other. Following de Burgh's death in 1326, which robbed the le Poers of a powerful and important ally, the two sides came into conflict and a number of skirmishes took place.(8) Supposedly because of a public insult that le Poer gave fitz Thomas, these skirmishes escalated into open warfare the following year.

    Le Poer had reportedly called fitz Thomas a rimer, a wandering Gaelic poet of a type that was despised by the Irish. For fitz Thomas, who was an Irish speaker and who had an appreciation of ancient Irish literature, this was an enormous insult. The le Poer's manors in Waterford and Kilkenny were attacked and Arnold le Poer’s lands in County Waterford were burned and laid waste. Among the casualties were John fitz Benedict le Poer and the son of the baron of Donoil, who were both killed. The baron himself found it necessary to find refuge in the city of Waterford, where he died in 1328.(9)  In addition, Arnold le Poer was ordered to appear before the justiciar and was eventually sent to prison in Dublin, where he died.

In the same year, 1328, the le Poers fought another pitched battle against the Geraldines, in which the new baron of Dunoil, Sir Piers le Poer, and twelve members of his family were killed.(10) With the destruction of the le Poer leadership, the more turbulent elements of the family went completely out of control.(11)

   In July 1329, fitz Thomas was granted the title of earl of Desmond as well as the shrievalties (the office of sheriff) of Waterford and Cork.(12) Since the conflict between the le Poers and the city of Waterford began around this time, it is probable that it was the establishment of Desmond control over the city and the associated eclipse in le Poer prestige that started it.

    The terrible revenge that the le Poers subsequently took out on the citizens of Waterford is illustrated by a poem that was probably written around 1330 by an anonymous Waterfordman:

 

                           Yonge men of Waterford lernith now to play

                           For your mereis plowis ilad beth away,

                           Scure your hafelis yt habith i lei,

                           And fend you of the Poers that walketh by the way.

 

                          For yf thi take you on and on,

                          From them scapith ther never one,

                          I swear by Christ and St. John

                          That off goth your hede.(13)

 

                         [Young men of Waterford learn how to fight

                           For your plowing mares are being led away,

                           Burnish your weapons that have long lain unused,

                           And defend yourself from the Poers when they come by.

 

                           For if they take you on your own,

                           From them not one will escape,

                           I swear by Christ and St. John

                           That off goes your head.]

 

    In fact, so dangerous had the area outside the city become, that in 1331, the mayor of Waterford had to seek an exemption from the normal requirement that he proceed to Dublin to take the oath of allegiance to the Crown on acceptance of office. This exemption was to become the norm, and was reconfirmed as late as 1400.(14) In 1345, the le Poers once again attacked the countryside around the city of Waterford, burning, destroying, and spoiling most of it. On this occasion, however, the mayor of the city assembled an army and rode out against them. Having defeated the le Poers, the mayor had the prisoners taken back to Waterford, where he proceeded to have them hanged, drawn, and quartered. Then, as a warning to others, the prisoners' heads and limbs were placed at various vantage points around the city.(15) It was generally realized, however, that this would not stop the le Poers for long and that there was little the government could do about it. As a result, in the same year, 1345, the mayor of Waterford was legally empowered by the king to negotiate with the le Poers for the purpose of concluding peace.(16)

    What makes these events particularly remarkable, is that during this period, Waterford itself was second only to Dublin in importance, a point best illustrated by the fact that that the third statute of every Parliament formally confirmed the liberties and franchises of the three leading towns, Dublin, Waterford, and Drogheda, and always in that order.(17) These priviledges dated back to when the city was granted autonomy from the county in 1215, and they provided the citizens of Waterford with freedom from, among other things, tolls, lastage, passage, pontage, and all other customs throughout the king's realm.(18) In return, the city paid an annual fee farm of 100 marks to the crown.(19)

   Because of its situation on the south-east coast of Ireland and its safe harbour, Waterford was a convenient first port of call for wine ships heading into the Irish Sea, particularly from south-western France. There, the English royal dependencies of Aquitaine and Gascony supplied almost all the wine drunk in medieval Ireland and England.(20) The rest came from Spain and Portugal, which developed a trade in wine with Ireland towards the end of the 13th century, as England's fortunes in Gascony began to fade.(21) Waterford was also perfect for the distribution of wine, through the Suir, Barrow, and Nore river system, which allowed wine to be taken deep inland. In addition, the same river system allowed the collection of bulky commodities such as wool and hides, both of which formed a substantial element in the city's economy.(22)

    Another substantial export was fish, which also formed a major part of the diet of the townspeople in Waterford.(23) Hake, herring, and salmon, as well as other types of fish, were all caught off the southern coast of Ireland.(24) It was probably a refusal by Waterford fishermen to pay black rent to the O'Driscoll's of Baltimore that was to bring the city into conflict with that West Cork clan.(25)

      Not much is known of the early history of the O'Driscolls. They were originally the owners of a large tract of land stretching from the Kenmare River  to the Old Head of Kinsale, but had been pushed back to the area around Baltimore, first by the O'Mahonys in the 7th century and later by the MacCarthys and O'Sullivans in the 12th century, who were reacting to Norman pressure on their own territories in Tipperary and Cork. The O'Driscolls were, however, left with some valuable fishing grounds off the coast of Baltimore, with which they were able to support themselves by charging for fishing rights and by placing impositions on ships that used their territorial waters.(26)

   As noted above, it was probably these charges that led to conflict with the citizens of Waterford and caused the O'Driscolls to join up with the le Poers in 1368.  According to the Book of Howth: " The 4th Sept. 1368, 12 (sic) Edw. III., the Poers trained Hohidriskoll with his galleys and men to come to them to the county of Waterford, to endamage the citizens. John Malpas, then mayor, with the best men of the city, and with Walter Devenish, sheriff of the county, Richard Walsh, master of the hospital of St. John of Jerusalem, and justice of the peace, and a number of merchants, strangers and Englishmen, set forth to encounter the said galleys. They met at Clonecomanmore. The mayor, sheriff, justice of the peace, 36 citizens, and 60 merchants, strangers, and Englishmen were slain; on the other side, the Baron of Donhill and his brother Bennett Poer, with divers others..."(27)

    Six weeks later, on the Monday after the feast of St. George, the le Poers struck again, no doubt believing that the loss of so many men had left Waterford defenceless. Led by Richard Mor Poer, the le Poers assembled a large body of men, both horse and foot, and proceeded to destroy all the countryside up to the walls of Waterford. They then marched to St. John's Bridge in the suburbs of the city, but were defeated there by its citizens. The cost to Waterford was once again high, however, with 24 of what were described as the better men of the city being killed.(28)

    In the past,(29) the large number of men from outside Waterford who were willing to risk their lives in defence of the city has been remarked on. According to official documents,(30) 80 men from outside Waterford, many of them from Coventry, Dartmouth, Bristol, and other parts of England, were killed in the battle. Since these were all ports or cities on England's western coast, where a significant trade was carried on with Ireland, the destruction of Waterford would also have meant the destruction of their livelihoods. What is remarkable, nevertheless, is the disproportionate nature of their casualties, with twice as many outsiders being killed as citizens. This, however, can be traced back to the fact that it was required by law for the burgesses of Waterford to possess arms and armour, with the minimum requirements being a helmet, a hand weapon, and a coat of mail.(31)

    In 1374, the le Poers and the O'Driscolls attacked the city again, tearing down some of the defensive walls and levelling the great clock in the market place.(32) The devastation caused by this attack must have been so great that on December 16 of that year that the king was forced to issue an order to the stewards and sheriffs of Wexford, Tipperary, and Kilkenny: "...to cause proclamation to be made that every man of Ireland of whatsoever estate or condition willing to come to the city of Waterford with wheat and other victuals for sale..." could travel there without being hindered-presumably by customs charges or other special interests.(33)

    That this was not enough, however, can be seen in the fact that  the following year, 1375, the mayor and citizens of Waterford were forced to send a petition to the king and council seeking assistance. After recalling the events of 1368 and 1374, the petition noted:"..the country round is despoiled, burned and destroyed up to the walls and the ships and goods therein are taken at sea so that there are no ships or barges in the city, where there used to be more than elsewhere throughout Ireland, and also because of the great tribute of 100 marks which they bring yearly to the king, and their great costs in making their belfry of the Blessed Trinity, (which has now been thrown to earth for a year to the great comfort of their enemies), repairing the ancient walls of the city, which were fallen through their weight....they are become so poor that they cannot bear the said charges or stay there longer unless they be relieved...."(34)

    To assist the city, the citizens asked to be granted the custom known as "cocket", a tax on hides of wild animals.(35) This was granted to them for ten years on April 13, 1376, with the exception of 100s to be paid annually to the Exchequer of England.(36) The granting of this subsidy at a time when England was in the middle of the Hundred Years War (1339-1453) is indicative of  how perilous the state of Waterford was. That city was far from being alone, however, with the rest of the country being in equally bad shape. In January 1373, for example, the citizens of Youghal also sent the king a report in which they complained how rebels were constantly destroying the countryside and killing the city's inhabitants, and they begged the king for subsidies with which to strengthen the defences of the city.(37)

     In 1388, the English council granted the "cocket" to Waterford for another three years: "....in consideration of the damages and losses sustained by the mayor and commonalty of Waterford in Ireland by the arsons, homicides and thefts of the king's Irish enemies and English rebels [the O'Driscolls and the le Poers], and by various invasions of other enemies of the parts adjacent, and also by the capture of ships, barges, and other vessels and the ransom of their men by the French and Spaniards, and in consideration of the intolerable expense incurred by them in repairing the wall and fortification of their city..."(38) The reference to the French and Spaniards is an interesting example of the way in which the political situation in the 14th century affected trade. The French, and particularly the Bretons, had been a continuous scourge since the start of the Hundred Years War, while intermittent warfare between Spain and England during the 14th century had resulted in frequent attacks on merchant shipping, particularly in the southern coastal area where a number of important sea routes converged: wine ships sailing from Gascony and Spain; fishing boats sailing from the west of England; Irish and English merchants trading in hides; and merchant venturers traveling on the Iceland route.(39)

     In 1380, the Spaniards had posed a genuine threat to the southern ports, when a section of a fleet of Spanish and French galleys, which had been raiding the English coast, showed up off Kinsale. The inhabitants set out to confront the fleet in a number of English and local ships, and in the ensuing battle, 400 of the foreigners are said to have been killed and five of their ships captured. In addition, 21 English vessels that had been captured were recovered. Perhaps inspired by this victory, the following year, 1381, admirals were appointed for the ports of County Cork for the purpose of combating the O'Driscolls who were constantly preying on passing ships.  How well the admirals fared is unknown, though they do not seem to have been very effective.(40) Certainly, it would appear that things did not improve for the city of Waterford, since on October 24, 1390, the so-called cocket custom granted to the city was renewed for another ten years.(41)   

    Following a truce with France in 1389, the English king, Richard II, turned his attention to Ireland.(42) On October 2, 1394, Richard II landed in Waterford at the head of an enormous army numbering between 6,000 and 7,000 troops, the largest army ever sent to Ireland and the equal of many of the English armies used in France during the Hundred Years War.(43) From Waterford, the king proceeded north  to Dublin, in the process inflicting a heavy defeat on Art McMurrough of Leinster.(44) Over the next year, Richard II received the submission of most of the leaders of the three groups he famously described as living in Ireland: 'wild Irish, our enemy; Irish rebels; and obedient English.', (45) promising the Gaelic Irish in particular justice and the guarantee of  the king's law. Nevertheless, with the departure of the king to England on May 15, 1395, Ireland relapsed into a state of anarchy and even Richard II's return on June 1, 1399, was unable to salvage the situation. Richard II himself was shortly after overthrown by Henry of Lancaster, the future Henry IV.(46)

     Not much is known of the activities of the O'Driscolls and the le Poers during this period, although the latter are listed in a report compiled by Alexander Balscot, the bishop of Meath, as belonging to the category of the so-called English rebels, which also included the Butlers, Geraldines, Berminghams, Daltons, Barretts, and Dillons. According to Balscott, the men of these families wished to be regarded as gentlemen of blood but were in fact sturdy robbers in league with the Irish enemies.(47) As for the O'Driscolls, it is likely that they continued to carry out attacks on merchant shipping. 

    By 1413, it would appear that the citizens of Waterford had had enough, for in that year: "Simon Wickin, mayor, and Roger Walsh and Thomas Saultes, bailiffs, with a band of men in armour, went in a ship on Christmas Eve towards Balentemore, 'and at night on Christmas Day, at supper time, landed his men, and in good order came to the gate of O'Hidriskoll's great house or castle within the said haven, and called to the porter, willing him to tell his lord that the mayor of Waterford was come unto the haven with a ship of wine, and that he would gladly come in to see his lordship. Upon notice therof given by the porter to O'Hidriskoll, the gate was set open, and the porter presently taken by the mayor, and put aside. And so the mayor entered into the great hall, where O'Hidriskoll and his kinsmen and friends, sitting at boards, made ready to sup; commanded O'Hidriskoll and his company not to move or fear, for he would not, nor meant not to draw no man's blood of the same house, more than to dance and drink, and so to depart. With that the said mayor took up to dance O'Hidriskoll and his son, the prior of the Friary, O'Hidriksoll's three brethren, his uncle, and his wife, and having them in their dance, the mayor commanded every of his men to hold fast the said persons; and so, after singing a carol, came away, bringing with them aboard the said ship the said O'Hidriskoll and his company, saying unto them they should go with him to Waterford to sing their carol, and make merry that Christmas. And they being all aboard, made sail presently, and arrived at Waterford, St. Steven's Day at night, where with great joy received they were with lights."(48)

    This story provides a fascinating glimpse into life in 14th and 15th century Ireland. The mayor-whose audaciousness would appear to have been remarkable even for that period-seems to have addressed the O'Driscolls in Irish. This, together with the fact that the mayor and his men had no difficulty finding the residence of the The O'Driscoll, is indicative of the nature of commercial relations during this period, when despite legislation forbidding such contact,(49) the merchants of Waterford and other cities in Ireland would have had regular commercial dealings with their reputed Irish enemies. In fact, Wicken was one of  a group of 90 named citizens of Waterford, which included the then mayor of the city, John Lombard, who were pardoned by the king in 1408 of all treason, trespasses, debts, and arrears, for trading with the Irish.(50) Nothing is known of the fate of The O'Driscoll and his family, though it is probable they were simply held for ransom-as was the custom at the time-and subsequently released.

    Nevertheless, the attacks on Waterford did not stop, and the city had to endure repeated assaults during the 15th century.(51) In 1430, following a petition to the English council, the mayor and citizens of Waterford were awarded an annual grant of 30l. for three years, to be spent "..on the repair and defence of the town. According to the annotation, "It appears that the city....has been so wasted as well by Irish enemies and English rebels as by armed Bretons, Scots, and Spaniards coming by sea, that during the last three years the goods and chattels of the petitioners and their shippping have been utterly destroyed, and the ditches, walls, towers, gates, and portcullises....are so old and ruinous in many places  as to be all but fallen to the ground..."(52)

  Twelve years later, in 1442, the mayor and citizens of Waterford were once again petitioning the king, Henry VI, for help. According to the petition: "...the city, ..has now fallen into such poverty as well through the robberies, destructions, and oppressions done by Irish enemies, English rebels, Scots, Bretons, and Spanish, as because of late certain Bretons took a balinger (53) of Flanders coming with merchandise to the value of 4000 marks to the said citizens; and that their goods are daily wasted and suffice not to repair the walls and towers, and many citizens have left and daily leave the city.." On March 21, 1442, the king responded to the plea by granting the city 30l. a year again "..for the fortification of the walls and towers..", this time for 30 years to be taken out of the fee farm grant of 100 marks that the city paid annually to the crown.(54)

    By the end of the decade, it had become clear that the English government no longer had the resources to defend the city. In 1447, in recognition of the fact that "...the Poers for a long time past have been traitors and rebels..." the mayor and commons of Waterford were authorized by the king "..to ride upon them with banners displayed, to prey and rob, burn and kill them.." and to do the same to other families, namely the Walshmen, Graunteyns and Datens, who according to the king, "..now lately are become rebels and traitors, as the said Poers are.."(55) The following year, 1448, Henry VI appears to have increased these provisions by granting "..to the mayor and commonalty of Waterford in Ireland, who have shown that many rebels in the counties of Kilkenny, Tipperary, Wexford, and Waterford, with an armed force of the king's Irish enemies and divers other nations, rebels, felons, traitors, and fugitives of those counties, perpetrate invasions, slaughters, burnings, plunderings, robberies, captures, fines, ransoms, hangings, and other intolerable misdeeds on the said mayor and commons and other lieges of the king there by land and water-that they, by assent of the mayor, may gather all persons, whose estate or condition is suitable, to ride and go on foot as often as they will with standards displayed against the said rebels and all who favour, aid, receive or victual them, and spoil, burn, and slay the same..."(56)

    Around this period, climatic changes caused an apparent migration of herring shoals to the south and west of Ireland, in turn attracting English and foreign fishing fleets, particularly Spanish, to the area. Because herring had to be salted within 24 hours if it was to retain its flavour, fishermen would pay dues to the local lords for the priviledge of using the havens and bays of the Irish coast to refit, revictual, and land their catch for salting. These dues could be considerable, as the example of 'Mac Fineen Duff' of Ardee shows, who was reportedly paid £300 annually by Spaniards for permission to fish in Kenmare Bay.(57) This additional wealth is one of the reasons for the great revival in the construction and refurbishment of monastic houses, friaries, and castles that took place during the 15th century, particularly in the Gaelic and gaelicised regions of the western seaboard.(57) The remains of castles belonging to the O'Driscolls, O'Mahonys, McCarthys, and O'Sullivans, all of whom benefited from the fishing industry, can still be seen today strategically placed along the south-western seaboard.

    Such payments going to a well-known enemy as the O'Driscolls naturally worried the government and in 1449-1450 legislation was passed to prevent fishermen from Wexford, Waterford, Cork, and Kinsale from operating off Baltimore, because of the victuals and arms it brought the local chieftain, Fineen O'Driscoll.  In 1457-1458, the city of Waterford passed further regulation designed to stop individual merchants from trading with the enemy in time of war.(59) Generally, however, these laws and regulations appear to have been ignored, and the priority became to simply restrict the practice during times of conflict. In 1463, an act of Parliament legalised commercial dealings with the Irish for the inhabitants of Cork, Limerick, Waterford, and Youghal, with the exception of arms, "..and provided that they do not victual the said enemies in time of war."(60) In 1465, parliament had to pass further  legislation forbidding foreign fishing vessels from operating among the so-called Irish enemies of the king, because they were being supplied with large amounts of money by each vessel, in addition to victuals, harness, and armour.(61) In the same year, 1465, Waterford city authorities restricted the sale to the Irish in time of war of iron, salt, wine, cloth, corn, victuals, armour, weapons, boat making material or boats, while in 1480 further regulations prohibited the sale of  guns, gunpowder, crossbows or arrows to anyone outside the city. These regulations, however, were usually qualified by the proviso 'without license of the mayor and council for the time being', which indicates that the intention was not to stop the trade but simply to regulate it.(62) 

       Toward the middle of the 15th century, the head of the le Poer(63) family in Curraghmore, Richard le Poer, began to achieve prominence in County Waterford. A descendant of the first Lord of Dunhill, le Poer became sheriff of the county in 1456, a position he was to hold for 20 years. However, he used the position primarily to enrich himself and his family and eventually had to be  removed by an act of parliament. In the act, he was accused, in particular, of taking part with "..other rebels, ..[in carrying out an]..assault on the mayor, bailiffs, and commons of Waterford, both by sea and land, murdering, slaying divers of the citizens and spoiling and robbing them of their goods and has put many of them to fire and ransom. And not only the citizens but also foreigners resorting to the city for trade, as English, French, Spaniards, Portugals, Britains and Flemings, to the utter destruction of the said city..."(64) It was also Richard le Poer who would appear to have been involved in bringing the O'Driscolls to Tramore in order to attack Waterford in 1461.

   "On 19th June 1461, O'Hidriskoll arrived at Tramore."(65) The O'Driscolls had been invited there by the le Poers, and in response the mayor and citizens of Waterford armed themselves and went to do battle with them.(66) "The mayor and citizens met him and the Poers at Ballymacdave, and gained the victory, killing 160. O'Hidriskoll Og and six of his sons were taken prisoner."(67) In addition, three of the O'Driscoll's galleys were also captured, and it is believed that those ships are the three galleys now emblazoned on the city of Waterford's coat of arms. (68) The city's casualties in this battle are not recorded, but since it became increasingly difficult from then on to get anyone to fill the position of mayor, one of whose jobs was to lead the city's forces in battle, it is thought they were probably heavy.(69)

   After Richard le Poer was deposed in 1476, Waterford City was granted the right to elect the sheriff of the county. Nevertheless, Richard's son and heir, Piers le Poer subsequently became sheriff of the county as well, and he was able to strengthen his authority over the county by marrying the daughter of Gerald Fitzgerald, the Lord of the Decies.(70)

    A number of years earlier, in 1461, the War of the Roses had broken out in England and was to continue intermittently for three decades. As a result, by 1474, when King Edward IV noted that Waterford had been .."impoverished for the past six years by ill success in trade and loss of goods of the citizens and the death and capture of divers merchants of the city .." and pointed out that there was ".. no law, justice, or government around the city but murder, robbery, and war by the Irish and rebel English.." the English government was no longer in a position to provide the city with any practical help. All the king could offer was the reversion of an annuity of 10l. For the citizens of the city to get it, however, they first had to wait for the beneficiary of the annuity to either die or lose it in some other fashion.(71)

    In 1485, the War of the Roses came to an end with the Battle of Bosworth and the accession of King Henry VII. The new king began a process of strengthening and centralizing authority; a process that was ultimately to have devastating effects on Ireland under his successors. Around the same time, Waterford began to experience a major economic revival, with the development of woolen, leather, and fishing industries bringing in much needed money to the city. The increased prosperity of the city brought about a building boom, with churches and monasteries updated and modernised, while the city's defences were also strengthened and improved. In particular, Reginald's Tower was fitted with adaptations to accomodate cannon, while outer ringworks were added to the tower upon which cannon were mounted for the port's protection. (72) These defences came into their own in 1497, when the forces of the pretender, Perkin Warbeck, laid seige to the city from July 24 to April 3. Cannon fire from Reginald's tower sank a ship blocking the river, killing all on board, (73) and marking the first time any city in Ireland had used artillery for its defence. (74)

   Two years later, the citizens of Waterford were able to use their loyalty to successfully petition the king not to force them to take part in campaigns outside the city, but to allow them just to defend their own city. As noted above, the citizens of Waterford had been allowed to ride out with banners displayed to fight rebels since 1447, but they claimed that the money that could have been spent on defence and fortifications was being wasted in military campaigns ordered by the lord deputy or his officers. Their request was granted together with a request that the city not be given over to the lords of the land, presumably the Butlers or the Earl of Kildare. (75)

    In 1518, the citizens of Waterford were able to use their superior military power to deliver a crushing blow to their long-time commercial rival of New Ross. In that year, certain named "..citizens and commonality of the City of Waterford...on the authority of Patrick Roope, Mayor of said city, together with many Spaniards, French, Bretons and Irish, came riotously with a fleet of boats and ships, in pirate or warlike fashion, variously armed, namely, with surcoats, coats of mail, helmets, shields, spears, swords, lances, cross-bows, weapons, bows, arrows, broad axes, and bombards or cannon, with the intent to assault and besiege the town of Ross, on the 22nd day of May..." (76) To save itself, the town was forced to hand over a mace of silver gilt, which was valued at £20, but not before it reportedly suffered damage worth one hundred pounds of silver. (77) With that one act, Waterford finally established itself as the premier port of the region.

    In 1533, Garret Mor Fitzgerald, the ninth Earl of Kildare, who had been chief governor of Ireland with only brief interruptions since 1513, came into serious conflict with King Henry VIII of England and was summoned to London. While there, his son Thomas, better known by the sobriquet of Silken Thomas, launched his ill-fated rebellion on June 11, 1534. The English government responded by sending the largest army seen in Ireland since the days of Richard II under the command of Sir William Skeffington and by August 1535, the rebellion had been crushed. Thomas and five of his uncles were executed in February 1537.(78)

   For his services in the wars in Ireland [presumably Silken Thomas's Rebellion], Sir Richard le Poer of Curraghmore, Kt., grandson of the same Richard le Poer who had been dismissed from the post of  sheriff in 1476, was created Baron of Le Poer and Coroghmore on 13th September, 1535. Sir Richard, whose wife, Katherine Butler, was the second daughter of Piers, 8th Earl of Ormonde, was not to enjoy his new title for very long, however. Only a few weeks later on the 10th of November he was killed by the ""traitour" Owen O'Callaghan. The baron's son, Piers, who had been born in 1522 , was still a minor and his wardship was granted to his uncle, James, Earl of Ormonde.(79)   

   With the second Baron of le Poer and Coroghmore still a minor in the following year,1538, and the family under the controling influence of the Earl of Ormonde, there were no le Poers to assist the O'Driscolls when the men of Waterford next responded to an attack by the latter.  According to the Carew Manuscripts, quoting older sources (80): "On 29th February 1538, 29 Hen. VIII., John Morgan being mayor, and James Wodlock and David Walsh, bailiffs, four Portingall [Portugese] ships, coming laden with wines from Spain to Waterford, were driven by tempest to the west coast of Ireland, that is to say, toward Clere [Cape Clear], Baltymore, and the Old Head of Kinsale."(81) One of them, known as La Santa Maria de Soci,(82) " in which were Thomas Wise, James Graunt, James Porter, Richard Hoseman, Patrick Strange, and Patrick Doben, merchants and merchant attorneys, was driven into a bay, "(83)The chief captains of the Islands, Fynyn O'Hidriskoll, his son Conor and base son Gilly Duff (84) "covenanted to bring the ship into the haven of Baltymore for three pipes of wine. (85)

    The ship anchored before the chief island, called Inyshyrean [Sherkin], in front of the strong fortress called Downighlong. When the gentlemen and pirates of those parts had drunk the said wine they desired more, and invited some of the said merchants to dinner in the said castle, and detained them there in irons. They then manned their Irish galleys, took the said ship, and distributed 72 tuns (86) of the wines that were in her.

    On 3rd March, news of this was brought to Waterford, and Piers Doben with 24 men sailed in a pickard, " that was known as the Sunday of Waterford (87) and which was described as "well-appointed of artillery".(88) Doben and his crew arrived in Baltimore harbour at noon the next day to find the Portugese ship still occupied by the O'Driscolls. As the Waterfordmen boarded the ship from one side, Gilly Duff and 24 of his men fled over the other. When the ship had been recaptured, Doben manned her and released the prisoners; of the cargo, only 25 tuns of wine still remained. He then had the great hall of the O'Driscolls bombarded by the ships cannon before setting home for Waterford.(89) On the 27th of March, the mayor took La Santa Maria de Soci, another ship, and the great galley of Waterford, and with 400 men under the command of Bailiff Woodlock, as chief captain, and Pierce Doben, James Walsh, James Sherlock, Henry Walsh, and John Butler as under captains, sailed for Baltimore.(90) On the night of Wednesday, the first of April, the expedition arrived within the haven of Baltimore and appear to have anchored off Sherkin Island facing the castle, which was guarded by men and artillery. The Waterfordmen proceeded to bombard the castle all night, until at dawn the garrison fled, allowing them to land on the island and besiege the fortress there.(91) "They took the castle, set up St. George's standard, and in five days destroyed all the villages of the Island. They also destroyed the Friars Minors' near the castle, and the mill of the same; 'and then the fortress, being double-warded with two strong piles or castles, and goodly walls with barbicans, halls and houses of office, totally was cast down and raised to the earth, and fallen into the sea.' Fynyn's chief galley of 30 oars, and three or four score small pinnaces, were taken. 'Nigh thereunto there is an island, where Fynyn's most privy habitation and pleasant dwelling is found with a grove in circuit thereof.' These were destroyed, and then our men entered into another island [Cape Clear] and burned all the villages. Afterwards they went to the mainland, and burned and destroyed Baltymore and the church tower there. they also under-mined and broke Teig O'Hidriskoll's goodly moated castle. One of the castles being set a-fire, Wm. Grant was on the top, and could not come down. Mr. John Butler, a captain, tied a small cord to an arrow, which was shot, a hawser having been made fast thereto. Grant fastened it to one of the pinnacles, slided down, and was received by his fellows upon beds. " And so all the army came to Waterford on Good Friday, with great joy and comfort."(92)

     Following the raid of 1538, the power of the O'Driscolls was effectively broken, and there is no record of the O'Driscolls ever attacking Waterford or any merchant vessels again.

                                                     

                                                                                                                            *

                                               

   Waterford continued to prosper throughout the 16th and 17th centuries, no doubt helped by its unquestioning loyalty to the crown throughout all the rebellions of the period. The le Poers also continued to prosper by siding with the government, though many of their actions resulted in constant annoyance to the citizens of Waterford. (93) Despite the destruction of their fleet, the O'Driscoll's continued for many years to charge fishermen using their waters. As the political situation changed during the 16th century, however, the sept was gradually brought under the control of the English government. In 1573, the then head of the family, Fineen O'Driscoll, acknowleged English sovereignty over his territory through the process of surrender and regrant. (94) Following the battle of Kinsale in 1601, however, the O'Driscolls were forbidden to charge fishermen in their territory, and with this primary source of income gone, Fineen O'Driscoll was forced to mortgage his lands. Within a few short years, Baltimore was completely colonised by English settlers and the O'Driscolls had been dispersed. (95)

    The conflict between the city of Waterford and the families of the O'Driscolls and le Poers can be seen as a microcosm of medieval Ireland. Driven back to the coastline by O'Sullivans and McCarthys, themselves the victims of Norman expansion, the O'Driscolls had no choice but to turn to the sea and piracy to survive. In turn, the le Poers were just one among many Norman families that became increasingly  both gaelicised and independent of authority over the centuries. It was only natural that they should come into conflict with the city of Waterford, which remained English in character and loyal to the crown. It should also be remembered that constant warfare was a hallmark of the period throughout Europe, and Waterford was only among many Irish towns and cities to come under attack. The fact that the city survived would indicate that despite all the hardships its citizens undoubtedly endured, the profits to be gained from trading in Waterford made it worth the risk.(96) The accession of the Tudors to the throne of England after 1485 brought with it a determination to finally subjugate Ireland, and their policies would appear not only to have given the citizens of Waterford the courage and ability to carry out the 1538 raid but also to have convinced the le Poers to side once more with the crown. In addition, and perhaps even more importantly, the end of the 15th century saw the introduction of guns and artillery, which made even the strongest castles in Ireland vulnerable. It is in fact quite possible that Baltimore would not have been captured in 1538 but for the presence of artillery. The destruction of Baltimore and with it the power of the O'Driscolls, can therefore be seen very much as a portent of what was to happen to the remainder of Gaelic Ireland by the end of the 16th century.

 

 

******************************************************************************************************************************************

 

                                                      Footnotes

 

1. Lydon, James F., The Lordship of Ireland in the Middle Ages, (Dublin, 1972); p. 143

2. Ibid., p. 208

3. For an examination of the effect of absenteeism on Waterford and East Cork see Harbison, Sheelagh H., "The absentee problem in Waterford & East Cork during William of Windsor's administration, 1369-1376," pp. 5-16, Decies, May 1983.

4. Cosgrove, Art; Late Medieval Ireland, 1370-1541, (Dublin, 1981); pp. 1-2

5. Ibid; pp. 4-5

6. Parker, Ciaran, "Local government in County Waterford in the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries, Part II. The Sheriffs of Waterford in the Early Fourteenth Century 1304-1350," pp.79-89, Decies 1995; pp. 79-80

7. Ibid; pp. 80-81

8. Ibid; pp. 83-84

9. Power, Patrick C.,  History of Waterford City and County, (Dublin, 1990); pp. 36-38

10. Ibid; p.38

11. Parker, Ciaran, "Local government in County Waterford in the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries, Part II. The Sheriffs of Waterford in the Early Fourteenth Century 1304-1350," pp.79-89, Decies 1995; p. 85

12. Ibid; p. 84

13. As quoted in Power (1990); pp. 47-48

14. Cosgrove (1981); p. 44

15. McEneaney, Eamonn, ed., A History of Waterford and its Mayors from the 12th Century to the 20th Century, (Waterford, 1995); p. 60

16. Ibid; p. 79

17. Lydon, James, "The City of Waterford in the later Middle Ages," pp. 5-15, Decies (12) 1979; p. 5            

18. McEneaney, Eamonn, "The government of the municipality of Waterford in the thirteenth century," pp. 17-27, Decies, January 1980; p. 19

19. Parker, Ciaran, "Local government in County Waterford in the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries, Part I. The Office of Sheriff, c. 1208-1305," pp. 17-24, Decies,  Autumn 1994; p. 17 and Cal. doc. Ire. 1171-1251; p. 90.

20. O'Neill, Timothy, Merchants and Mariners in medieval Ireland, (England, 1987); p. 44

21. Ibid; p.48

22. Ibid; p.55

23. McEneaney (1995); p. 77

24. O'Neill (1987); pp 33, 37, 38

25. McEneaney (1995); p. 68                                           

26. Healy, James N., The Castles of County Cork, (Dublin, 1988); p. 184

27. Cal. Carew MSS, Vol. V (Book of Howth); pp. 470-471

28. McEneaney (1995) ; p. 66

29. Ibid.; p. 66

30. Cal. pat. rolls 1374-1377;  p. 145

31. O'Neill, (1987);  p. 91

32. Nolan, William and Power, Thomas P., Waterford History & Society, (Dublin, 1992); pp. 147-176

33. Cal. close. rolls., Ed. III, 1374-1377; p. 111

34. Cal. pat. rolls. 1374-1377; p. 145

35. Ibid.; p. 145

36. Cal. fine. rolls., 1369-1377, p. 344

37. Harbison (May 1983); p. 5

38. Cal. pat. rolls., 1385-1389; p. 492

39. O'Neill (1987); p. 126

40. Ibid; p. 126

41. Cal. pat. rolls., 1388-1392; p. 314

42. Cosgrove (1981); p. 17

43. Lydon (1972); p. 234

44. Cosgrove (1981); pp. 20-21

45. Lydon (1972) p.232

46. Ibid; p. 237

47. Cosgrove (1981); p. 29

48. Carew Mss.; p. 471

49. Stat. Ire. John-Hen. V; pp. 365, 499

50. McEneaney (1995);  p. 76

51. Nolan (1992);  pp. 147-176

52. Cal. pat. rolls, 1429-1436;  p. 68

53. A two-masted sailing vessel of between 20 and 50 tons in capacity that was used for both fishing and the carriage of goods and was one of the commonest types of ship in use in the 15th century; O'Neill (1987); p. 109

54. Cal. pat. rolls., 1441-1446; p.58

55. Stat. Ire.,  Henry VI; p. 83

56. Cal. pat. rolls., 1446-1452; p. 132

57. Cosgrove, Art, ed.; A New History of Ireland, Vol II., Medieval Ireland 1169-1534, (Oxford, 1987); p. 504

58. O'Neill (1987); p. 36

59. Nolan (1992); pp. 147-176

60. Stat. Ire., Edward IV; pp. 139-141

61. Cosgrove (1987); p. 504

62. Nolan (1992); pp. 147-176

63. As by this stage they were beginning to be known

64. Power (1990); pp. 45-47

65. Cal. Carew MSS, Vol. V Book of Howth); p. 471

66. McEneaney (1995); p. 79

67. Cal. Carew Mss, Vol. V Book of Howth; p.471

68. Waterford Corporation; The Royal Charters of Waterford (1992); p.25. The earliest surviving illustration of these coat-of-arms dates from 1510; McEneaney, p. 106

69. McEneaney (1995); p. 79

70. Power (1990); p. 47

71. Cal. pat. rolls., 1467-1477; p. 459

72. McEneaney (1995); pp. 81-82

73. Power (1990); p. 44

74. McEneaney (1995); pp. 81

75. Power (1990); p. 45

76. As quoted in Flood, William H. Grattan, "Naval Affray between the Citizens of Waterford and Ross in 1518," pp.124-125, Journal of the Waterford  & South-East of Ireland  Archaeological Society Vol. V, 1899; p. 125

77. Flood (1899); p. 125

78. Cosgrove (1981); pp. 99-120

79.  De La Poer, Count E., "Sir Piers le Poer of Curraghmore, Kt., 2nd Lord le Poer and Coroghmore," pp. 65-68,  Journal of the Waterford  & South-East of Ireland Archaeological Society Vol. XIII, 1910; p. 65

80. Cal. Carew MSS., Vol. V Book of Howth;  p. 474

81. Ibid;  p. 474

82. McEneaney (1995) p. 111

83. Cal. Carew MSS, Vol. V Book of Howth.;  p. 474

84. McEneaney (1995);  p. 111

85. One pipe equals 126 gallons. O'Neill (1987); p. 45

86. One tun equals 252 gallons. Ibid., p. 45

87. McEneaney (1995) p. 111

88. Cal. Carew MSS, Vol. V Book of Howth;  p. 474

89. McEneaney (1995) pp. 111-112

90. Cal. Carew MSS, vol. V Book of Howth;  p. 474

91. Notes and Queries, "Baltimore Besieged by Waterford Men," pp. 84-85,  Journal of the Cork Historical and Archaeological Society, Vol. I, 1895; p. 85

92. Carew MSS, Vol. V Book of Howth;  p. 474-475

93. See pp. 42-47 in "Documents Illustrating the State of the Co. Waterford in the 16th Century", pp. 38-53, Journal of the Waterford  & South-East of Ireland  Archaeological Society January-March, 1902

94. Cal. S. P. Ire., 1509-1573; p. 523

95. MacCarthy-Morrogh, Michael; The Munster Plantation, English Migration to Southern Ireland 1583-1641 (Oxford 1986); pp. 151-154

96. John Malpas, for example, the mayor of Waterford killed in 1368, is mentioned by name as an exporter of corn and is known to have traded wine, fish, and hides with England, Scotland, France, and Spain. O'Neill (1987); p.27.

 

 

                                       BIBLIOGRAPHY

 

 

PRIMARY SOURCES:

 

1.  Statutes and Ordinances and Acts of the Parliament of Ireland King John to                Henry V, ed. Henry F. Berry (Dublin 1907)

 

2. Calendar of the Close Rolls, Edward III, Vol. XIV., A.D. 1374-1377, (London     1913)

 

3. Calendar of the Patent Rolls, Edward III, Vol. XVI, A.D. 1374-1377, (London          1916)

 

4. Calendar of the Fine Rolls, Edward III, Vol. VIII A.D. 1368-1377, (London     1924)

 

5. Calendar of the Patent Rolls, Richard II, A.D. 1385-1389, (London 1900)

 

6. Calendar of the Patent Rolls, Richard II, Vol. IV, A.D. 1388-1392, (London     1902)

 

7. Calendar of the Patent Rolls, Henry VI, Vol. II, A.D. 1429-1436, (London     1907)

 

8. Calendar of the Charter Rolls, Henry VI - 8 Henry VIII, A.D. 1427-1516,     (London 1927)

 

9. Calendar of the Patent Rolls, Henry VI, Vol. IV, A.D. 1441-1446, (London      1908)

 

10. Calendar of the Patent Rolls, Henry VI, Vol. V, A.D. 1446-1452, (London        1909)

 

11. Calendar of the Patent Rolls, Edward IV. Henry VI, A.D. 1467-1477,       (London 1900)

 

12. Statute Rolls of the Parliament of Ireland, Reign of King Henry The Sixth,       ed. Henry F. Berry, (Dublin 1910)

 

13. Statute Rolls of the Parliament of Ireland, First to the Twelth years of the                            reign of King Edward the Fourth, ed. Henry F. Berry, (Dublin 1914)

 

14. Statute Rolls of the Parliament of Ireland, Twelth and Thirteenth to the                       Twenty-First and Twenty-Second years of the reign og King Edward the                                     Fourth, ed. James F. Morrissey, (Dublin)

 

15. Calendar of the Patent Rolls, Edward IV. Edward V. Richard III., A.D. 1476-            1485, (London 1901)

 

16. Calendar of the State Papers relating to Ireland, of the reigns of Henry VIII,        Edward VI, Mary, and Elizabeth, 1509-1573, ed. Hans Claude Hamilton        (London, 1860)

 

17. Calendar of the Carew Manuscripts preserved in the Archepiscopal Library                           at Lambeth, Book of Howth, Misc.,Vol. VI, ed. J. S. Brewer and Wiliam       Bullen (London 1871)

 

 

SECONDARY SOURCES

 

Books:

 

1. Cosgrove, Art, Late Medieval Ireland, 1370-1541, (Dublin, 1981)

 

2. Cosgrove, Art, A New History of Ireland, Vol II., Medieval Ireland 1169-1534,     (Oxford, 1987)

 

3. Healy, James N., The Castles of County Cork, (Dublin, 1988)

 

4. Lydon, James F., The Lordship of Ireland in the Middle Ages, (Dublin, 1972)

 

5.  MacCarthy-Morrogh, Michael, The Munster Plantation, English Migration to Southern Ireland 1583-1641, (Oxford 1986)

 

6. McEneaney, Eamonn, ed., A History of Waterford and its Mayors from the 12th     Century to the 20th Century, (Waterford, 1995)

 

7. Nolan, William and le Poer, Thomas P., Waterford History & Society, (Dublin,

    1992)

 

8. O'Flanagan, Patrick and Buttimer, Cornelius G., Cork: History and Society,              (Dublin, 1993)

 

9. O'Murchadha, Diarmuid, Family Names of County Cork

 

10. O'Neill, Timothy, Merchants and Mariners in medieval Ireland, (England, 1987)

 

11. Power, Patrick C.,  History of Waterford City and County, (Dublin, 1990)

 

 

Periodicals:

 

1. Bernard, Jacques, "The Maritime Intercourse between Bordeaux and Ireland c. 1450 - c. 1520," pp. 7-21. Irish Economic and Social History Vol. VII (1980)

 

2. Flood, William H. Grattan, "Naval Affray between the Citizens of Waterford and Ross in 1518," pp.124-125, Journal of the Waterford  & South-East of          Ireland  Archaeological Society Vol. V, 1899

 

3. Harbison, Sheelagh H., "The absentee problem in Waterford & East Cork    during William of Windsor's administration, 1369-1376," pp. 5-16, Decies, May 1983

 

4. Irish, Bill, "Ship-building in Waterford," pp.40-41, Decies, Autumn 1992

 

5. Lydon, James, "The City of Waterford in the later Middle Ages," pp. 5-15, Decies (12) 1979

 

6. McEneaney, Eamonn, "The government of the municipality of Waterford in     the thirteenth century," pp. 17-27, Decies, January 1980

 

7. McEneaney, Eamonn, "Waterford and New Ross trade competition, c. 1300," pp. 16-24, Decies, Nos. 1-12, 1976-79

 

8. Notes and Queries, "Baltimore Besieged by Waterford Men," pp. 84-85, Journal of the Cork Historical and Archaelogical Society, Vol. I, 1895

 

9. Parker, Ciaran, "Local government in County Waterford in the thirteenth     and fourteenth centuries, Part I. The Office of Sheriff, c. 1208-1305," pp. 17-24, Decies Autumn 1994

 

10. Parker, Ciaran, "Local government in County Waterford in the thirteenth       and fourteenth centuries, Part II. The Sheriffs of Waterford in the Early       Fourteenth Century 1304-1350," pp.79-89, Decies 1995

 

11. De La Poer, Count E., "Sir Piers le Poer of Curraghmore, Kt., 2nd Lord le       Poer and Coroghmore," pp. 65-68,  Journal of the Waterford  & South-East       of Ireland  Archaeological Society Vol. XIII, 1910

 

12. Sargent, W.A., "Old records of the  corporation of Waterford," pp 240-248,       Journal of the Waterford  & South-East of Ireland Archaeological Society Vol. XIII, 1910                           

 

13. Walton, Julian C., "Piracy off Tramore Bay, 1546," pp. 15-16, Nos 1-12,       Decies, 1976-79

 

14. Went, Arthur E. J., "Foreign Fishing Fleets along the Irish Coasts,"pp. 17-      24, Journal of the Cork Historical and Archaeological Society, Vol. LIV.       (Second Series) 1949

 

15. "Documents Illustrating the State of the Co. Waterford in the 16th Century",       pp. 38-53, Journal of the Waterford  & South-East of Ireland  Archaeological       Society January-March, 1902

Hosted by www.Geocities.ws

1