Southern Ireland’s first defense to British Invasion.
Andy Ciccone || Ireland’s history of resistance has gathered increasing interest over the past few decades. While the IRA and solidarity with Palestine have been at the forefront of the social media content surrounding Ireland as an example of colonial resistance, this solidarity did not happen overnight. While the Irish have been tormented by the British as long as written records have existed, one particular war has been largely lost to the history books. This war was unique in that it tied land defense with community defense, and this war was the Desmond Rebellions.
While we have discussed what Indigenous Ireland once looked like over broad stretches of time, diving into the sixteenth century offers a helpful way to understand how the Irish related to the land compared to the English, who had arrived to extract and exploit it. This isn’t to say that the Irish had perfected the landscape for thousands of years— as we discussed, the development of agriculture had caused massive deforestation and famine long before the English induced it— but as we’ll see, the Irish closely aligned with the needs of the ecosystem, and when that land was under attack, they rose to defend it.
We will look mainly at the southern region of Munster for this discussion.
Like much of Europe, pre-English colonization reflected a feudal system, with constant tension across the island as kings vied for power. As the English took power in Ireland, tension arose between the feudal lords and the English monarchy. What would later become known as the Desmond Rebellions were fundamentally shaped by the triangulated tensions between the lords, the traditional Irish land-based social structures based on regional lords, and the Tudor crown’s centralizing policies. In sixteenth-century Ireland, Anglo-Irish lords like the Earls of Desmond derived their power from feudalistic rights such as “bonaght” or “coyne and livery” (billeting military personnel and their horses) and “cuttings and spendings” (tribute, often in cattle), which were vital for maintaining their military forces.
The Irish system of succession, tanistry, which aimed to pass power to the “fittest” adult relation, often led to violent power struggles within clans, further complicating land tenure alongside the custom of “gavelkind” (equal land distribution to the decedent’s children). These internal tensions had historically been somewhat effective at reducing extensive power consolidation across the island before British colonization.
In the early-mid sixteenth century, the region was primarily dominated by three major contending clans: the Desmond Geraldines, the Butler Earls of Ormond, and the O’Brien Earls of Thomond. The Butlers and Geraldines had a long-standing and bitter rivalry, and their territories bordered each other. This feud centered on controlling areas like Clonmel on the Suir River, the manors of Kilsheelan and Kilfeace in Tipperary, and the ownership of prize wines from Youghal and Kinsale. The Butlers generally maintained closer ties with the English Crown. At the same time, the Desmond Geraldines were often pushed closer to the Irish, especially after the attainder and execution of the seventh Earl of Desmond in 1468.1
Gerald Fitzgerald, Desmond’s 14th/15th Earl, inherited a contentious earldom in 1558. He had a reputation for truculence and violence even before his accession, which worsened the tensions already in place. He faced a financial crisis due to his subordinates’ refusal to pay rents and the burden of inherited debts and forfeited recognizances, exacerbated by long imprisonments in England. This compelled him to rely on extortionate measures like coyne and livery, a system of military taxation and billeting practiced by Irish chiefs and Anglo-Irish lords in sixteenth-century Ireland. Even as the Crown proscribed these practices, Gerald created an aggressive system of double taxation, enforced by physical intimidation.
The Tudor crown found Desmond’s dependence on force intolerable, seeking to extend English law and local government and abolish “coyne and livery” through “commutation” or “composition”—replacing uncertain feudal rights with fixed cash payments. This would erase the flexibility that many of the Lords relied upon to address wars and unexpected economic strains and leave them reliant on the crown. From the English perspective, this conversion was crucial for the survival of Anglo-Irish peers. It mirrored a similar process in England, where it had provided guaranteed and often greater revenue while allowing them to disband costly and unproductive “idle” military retinues. For tenants, the promise of fixed rents was intended to shield them from their lords’ informal and often arbitrary demands.
While Desmond initially agreed to this in 1573, believing it would bring “greater quiet and greatest gain,” the inconsistent application of these policies by English provincial presidencies, which sometimes acted more like “superior local war-lords,” undermined the intended stability. Crucially, English “plantation” or settlement schemes by adventurers like Sir Peter Carew threatened existing Anglo-Irish and Irish landowners by staking land claims. For instance, Sir Warham St. Leger’s obtaining mortgages on Desmond’s estates, including Kerrycurrihy, significantly triggered James Fitzmaurice’s rebellion, as it was perceived as disposing of his cousin’s lands.2 This led to a confederation of chiefs to defend their lands against a “new conquest”.
Former allies felt a “sense of betrayal” as the new system compelled them to pay fixed rents to a new overlord, pushing some, like Sir John of Desmond, into rebellion. The ruthless application of composition schemes by figures like Sir Nicholas Malby, who sent troops against Desmond’s tenants and raided his properties, made it impossible for Desmond to control his people and ultimately forced him into rebellion in 1579. The resulting conflict led to immense waste and devastation in Munster, characterized by scorched-earth policies, massive livestock seizures, and widespread crop destruction by both crown and rebel forces, causing unprecedented famine and a “substantial depopulation” of the province. This catastrophic impact paved the way for the subsequent Munster plantation, where lands were considered abandoned and open for redistribution.
The rebels in the Desmond Rebellions, primarily Anglo-Irish and Gaelic Irish lords and their followers, employed tactics deeply rooted in traditional Irish warfare. These tactics aimed at countering the centralizing policies of the Tudor crown and preserving their power, which was fundamentally dependent upon force. In most instances, rebel forces did not seek to defend fixed positions or engage Crown forces in pitched battles.
A cornerstone of their approach was guerrilla warfare, actively avoiding pitched battles against the better-equipped English forces, as the English themselves recognized the Irish’s inability to win open engagements. Instead, rebels operated from “bases in the woods and mountains,” constantly moving through challenging terrain like “woods and water and mountains to safe refuges” that were difficult for English forces to penetrate. Cattle raiding (prey) was a widespread and traditional tactic, sustaining rebel forces and denying resources to the English and their loyalists. Singular instances eliminated as many as 140 cattle and 300 sheep from Waterford, 7,000 cattle from Decies, and 4,000 cattle from Kerrycurrihy and Kinelea.3 The practice of “creaght” (herds of cattle) also provided a natural hideaway and mobile food source. In some instances, rebels employed a form of scorched-earth policy, burning their own crops and villages to prevent their use by English troops, contributing to widespread devastation.
While generally lacking the artillery necessary for effective sieges, which gave the Crown a significant advantage, the rebels could take towns and castles. However, the English artillery often forced Irish chiefs into a guerrilla existence if they openly defied Crown authority.
A core aspect of their military strategy involved reliance on feudal levies and professional mercenaries. Their forces included “kerne,” light infantry drawn from the free peasantry, often seen by the English as unorganized masses. They also heavily relied on “gallowglass,” heavy infantry mercenaries, frequently of Scottish origin, who had been integral to Irish chiefdoms since the mid-thirteenth century. Mobilization occurred through a “rising out,” a military summons requiring freeholders and tributary families to place their forces at the lord’s disposal for clan warfare or conflicts with the English. These traditional forces were crucial for maintaining their “sheer force of arms” and status through the “continuing potential to resort to violence”.
Rebel leaders, particularly the Earl of Desmond, actively sought to consolidate traditional power and resist English law upon their return from English detention. They asserted their “traditional rights” and refused to yield “me possession of me council and followers and also me religion and conscience not barred”.
The rebels also exploited English weaknesses. They capitalized on the English inability to effectively manage their often unpaid and mutinous troops. English unfamiliarity with the Irish routes and roads was a significant advantage for the rebels. English forces also suffered severely from disease, such as the “Irish ague” and “flix” (dysentery and marsh fever), and a primitive medical service, which severely depleted their numbers. Leaders like James Fitzmaurice also employed stratagems and deceit against English commanders, including setting ambushes and using white flags to escape difficult situations.
A key rebel strategy was pursuing foreign aid from European Catholic powers, including Spain, France, and the Papacy. This lobbying was a constant factor in the Desmond Rebellions, driven by the belief that foreign intervention was essential for victory against the English. Fitzmaurice, in particular, emphasized the religious motivation, seeking support against the “heretical oppressors”. Their requests ranged from financial subsidies and military personnel (arquebuses, artillery, specialized officers) to political legitimacy and naval support.
The Desmond Rebellions, among the most brutal military conflicts in sixteenth-century Ireland, were not isolated incidents but two distinct uprisings. The first rebellion occurred between 1569 and 1573, and the second from 1579 to 1583. Both were initiated by James Fitzmaurice Fitzgerald, a cousin of Gerald, the fifteenth Earl of Desmond, and fundamentally reshaped Ireland’s history and relationship with England.
The First Desmond Rebellion (1569-1573)
The first rebellion was primarily ignited during the seven-year imprisonment of Gerald, the fourteenth Earl of Desmond, in England from 1567 to 1573/4. In his absence, Desmond had delegated the responsibility for governing and defending his lordship to James Fitzmaurice as captain general of the Geraldines. Fitzmaurice, a landless retainer whose livelihood depended on the survival of the House of Desmond, saw the gradual imposition of English law and social organization as an existential threat. His personal bitterness stemmed from the fact that the farm of Kerricurrihy, which his father had received as a reward, had been revoked by Desmond and granted to Sir Warham St. Leger, an English presidential nominee. St. Leger then used Kerricurrihy as a base for other English adventurers to acquire land in Munster.
Fitzmaurice’s resentment fused with a broader grievance concerning the threat to the traditional Irish way of life, epitomized by the plight of the old ecclesiastical order. By 1569, Fitzmaurice’s intentions became explicitly radical: he launched an all-out attack upon the newly settled English of Munster, ravaging St. Leger’s Kerricurrihy and besieging Youghal. He justified these actions by proclaiming that the English were Protestants who would overturn the rightful Christian order, thus transforming the Geraldine defensive reaction into a holy war.
A significant catalyst for the rebellion was Munster’s aggressive English colonization schemes. Adventurers, mostly from southwestern English counties like Devon and Somerset, sought to “plant” Munster by staking out fraudulent claims on lands, often reoccupied by Irish septs during the Wars of the Roses. The proposed infringements on lands, including those of Sir Edmund and Edward Butler, led to their temporary alliance with Fitzmaurice and a growing confederacy encompassing various tribal chiefs in Munster and Connaught, despite their historical differences. Fitzmaurice held a secret assembly or “parliament” at Cork, where a confederation was formed to resist English governors, and appeals for aid were sent to Spain and the Papacy.
The rebellion’s initial actions included seizing lands, capturing towns like Kilmallock without a fight, and allowing the open practice of Catholic rites where they had been discontinued.
Fitzmaurice’s resilience in the rebellion eventually compelled the Crown to restore Desmond to Ireland, and Fitzmaurice himself only submitted when the Earl’s return was announced. Gerald, the Earl of Desmond, who had been imprisoned in England since 1567, was released and returned to Ireland in 1573. However, he initially escaped detention in Dublin to rally support in Munster. He was eventually reconciled with the Crown in 1574, leading to a “relative quiet” settling over Munster that year.
Following the conclusion of the First Desmond Rebellion, a period of complex political maneuvering unfolded, marked by the Earl of Desmond’s brief defiance and a pivotal event known as Desmond’s Combination.
Upon his release from seven years of imprisonment in England in 1573, Gerald returned to Ireland but was detained in Dublin under new English conditions. These terms demanded he abandon traditional feudal dues, disband his armed retainers, and surrender his jurisdiction in Kerry. Feeling that English officials, particularly Lord Deputy Fitzwilliam and President Perrot, sought his “utter destruction,” Desmond “jumped bail” and escaped to Munster.
There, he openly defied the Dublin administration, reasserting his palatinate jurisdiction, refusing English sheriffs, and restoring the Catholic Bishop of Limerick, Hugh Lacy, along with the “old religion”. This period of open defiance and perceived “general political weakness” among the Geraldines encouraged his sub-lords to pursue their own agendas, prompting Desmond to resort to “increasingly spectacular displays of violence” to maintain his authority.
Amidst these rising tensions, Desmond’s followers and friends convened in July 1574, producing a document later called “Desmond’s Combination”. This gathering, which included Sir John of Desmond (the Earl’s brother) and some twenty gentlemen (but notably not James Fitzmaurice Fitzgerald), advised the Earl to resist the Lord Deputy’s “unreasonable demands” and refuse to yield more hostages. The document contained a powerful oath to “renounce God, if we do spare life, lands and goods —to maintain and defend this our advice against the said lord deputy or any ogher that will covet the said earl’s inheritance”.
Despite this show of defiance, Desmond eventually submitted to the Crown again in August 1574, after Queen Elizabeth, preoccupied with supporting English efforts in Ulster, offered a conciliatory pardon. This “generous settlement” allowed Desmond to retain coyne and livery. However, this “reconciliation” came at a significant cost, as it alienated many of his most ardent supporters.
The rebellion had led to widespread devastation and immense economic costs in Munster, including the destruction of agricultural herds, the burning of crops and towns, and significant population decline due to fighting, famine, and disease. Gerald’s submission to the crown left many unsatisfied and would continue to foment over the following years.
Concurrently, James Fitzmaurice’s forces were depleted by the continuous harassment from English forces, notably Sir John Perrott and the Butlers. Having lost his Scottish mercenaries and received no tangible foreign aid despite his efforts, Fitzmaurice made a humble submission to the Lord President of Munster in the church at Kilmallock on February 23, 1573. He had indicated his desire to submit months prior, and ultimately took a solemn oath, gave up one of his sons as a hostage, and offered to serve against other rebels.
While he gave up the fight in Ireland, Fitzmaurice continued his “holy war” overseas in France, drumming up support against the English in hopes of a future war, which would come a few years later, despite the threats from the Crown regarding the failed first rebellion. The First Desmond Rebellion transformed traditional feudal rivalry into a religiously charged struggle against English conquest and set the stage for a deeper, more devastating conflict. It forged new alliances and antagonisms, leaving Desmond in an untenable position between the Crown and his alienated kinsmen and followers, making the subsequent uprising almost inevitable.
The Second Desmond Rebellion (1579-1583)
The second rebellion began in July 1579, again with James Fitzgerald’s return to Ireland from abroad, accompanied by a small expeditionary force of about sixty men, including Doctor Sanders and two friars bearing ensigns, a bishop with a crozier-staff and mitre, symbolizing their holy cause. Having sought foreign aid from Catholic powers for years, he landed at Dingle on July 18, 1579, and immediately began fortifying a site at Smerwick, which they called Fort del Ore. He issued earnest pleas and a Latin proclamation to Irish and Anglo-Irish leaders across the island, emphasizing the religious motivation for the war and requesting their assistance.
A crucial turning point that effectively forced Earl Gerald’s hand into the rebellion was the assassination of Henry Davells by Sir John of Desmond, the Earl’s brother. Davells was a government envoy sent to liaise with Desmond. This act irrevocably committed Sir John to the rebellion. It provided a rallying point for those hesitant Anglo-Irish and Irish lords, including the Earl’s own followers, who were cautiously watching the situation.
The Earl of Desmond, although initially informing the Lord Justice of his intention to crush the invaders, found his traditional forces failing to materialize, with most of his swordsmen joining Fitzmaurice. His attempts to remain neutral or work with the English became increasingly untenable. The English forces under Sir Nicholas Malby, who had assumed command in Munster, further pressured Desmond by operating independently within his territory, billeting troops on his tenants, commandeering his castles, and raiding his residence. Malby’s demands for Desmond’s total surrender to presidential authority ultimately left Desmond with no choice but to defy the Crown openly, picking up the papal banner Fitzmaurice had brought. Days later, in November 1579, Desmond was officially proclaimed a rebel.
The second, and more brutal, rebellion ended with the deaths of its key leaders and immense destruction across Munster, which made the first rebellion seem mild in comparison. Fitzgerald returned to Ireland in July 1579 and was mortally wounded in a skirmish with Theobald Burke only a month later, on August 18, 1579, and died shortly thereafter. His untimely death was a severe blow to the Catholic Irish cause he had initiated.
A few months later, on November 10, 1580, after a brief siege and negotiations, the British ordered the slaughter of the entire 600-man garrison that had followed Fitzgerald, whom they considered rebels, including Spanish & Italian religious figures. This “bloody episode” was a significant turning point, convincing the English that Irish independence must be ended. The slaughter was so brutal that no further foreign aid was forthcoming from the Papacy or Spain after this event.
Thomas Butler, the Earl of Ormond, a loyal favorite of Queen Elizabeth and hereditary rival of Desmond, was appointed the Queen’s general in Munster in October 1579. Ormond’s forces engaged in a scorched-earth policy, burning and spoiling the country and confiscating cattle to starve the rebels into submission. This systematic devastation, along with the fighting and related famine and disease, led to a massive depopulation of Munster. Sir Warham St. Leger estimated that 30,000 people had starved to death in Munster in the six months leading up to March 1582, and the total deaths from conflict, famine, and disease might have been as high as 48,600, or 32.4% of Munster’s population. Ormond’s campaigns severely weakened the Geraldine forces, forcing Desmond into hiding.
The Earl of Desmond, by then a “wandering and unhappy wretch,” insisted on retaining his lands and religious practices, refusing to surrender fully. His wife, the Countess, submitted unconditionally in April 1583. Reduced to a handful of followers, the Earl was finally tracked down in the woods of Glanageenty between Tralee and the Atlantic on November 10, 1583, and decapitated. His headless body was displayed in Cork before being secretly buried by his former followers.
The rebellion was ultimately unsuccessful, resulting in overthrowing and destroying the traditional social order in Munster, which paved the way for the subsequent Munster plantation. The conflict cost Queen Elizabeth over £250,000. It led to mass emigration from Munster and the confiscation of vast estates through the attainder of Desmond and his followers in the Irish Parliament of 1586.
The Desmond Rebellions, particularly the second uprising between 1579 and 1583, had profound and devastating lasting impacts on Munster. They fundamentally transformed its social, economic, and political landscape and left a legacy of bitterness and mistrust.
The ferocity of the conflict led to Munster’s unprecedented and substantial depopulation. Edmund Spenser, a contemporary observer, vividly described the province as being reduced to such wretchedness that surviving inhabitants resembled “anatomies of death” and “ghosts crying out of their graves”. They were so weakened that they crawled on their hands and knees, consuming watercress, shamrock, carrion, and even human corpses for survival.
This depopulation was due to a combination of factors: direct conflict, but chiefly famine and disease. Most of those who died from disease and starvation were likely women and children, while combat casualties were predominantly adult males.
The province suffered immense economic costs due to widespread physical destruction and lost economic activity. Vast stretches of the countryside were laid waste, and towns like Youghal, Tralee, Dingle, and Dungarvan were burned, sacked, or demolished multiple times. Agricultural production plummeted due to systematic cattle-raiding and crop burning by both rebel and Crown forces, denying food to the enemy. By 1583, there was “no harvest” in Munster.
The rebellion’s ultimate failure directly paved the way for the Munster Plantation. Gerald, the Earl of Desmond, was posthumously attainted in 1586 by the Irish Parliament, leading to the confiscation of his vast estates. This amounted to approximately 577,000 acres of land that the Geraldines had ruled for nearly 400 years. The confiscated lands were divided into seignories and granted to English and Welsh “undertakers” who aimed to transform Munster into a profitable, Anglicized colony.
The rebellion intensified the religious divide, especially James Fitzmaurice Fitzgerald’s religiously charged initiation of the second uprising to restore the Catholic faith. It galvanized a “holy war” that solidified Catholicism as a key element of Irish identity against English Protestant rule. The perception of English rule as oppressive and threatening to the “old way of life” deepened. This contributed to the beginning of a nascent Irish nationalism, uniting disparate Anglo-Irish and Irish lords, although this unity remained fragile.
The Desmond Rebellions, particularly the second, were cataclysmic events that fundamentally reshaped Munster. They eradicated the traditional Anglo-Irish feudal power and opened the door for systematic English colonization, albeit one that would face continued, religiously and culturally charged resistance. These rebellions left a death toll nearly on par with the Great Hunger (which caused almost one in three to die in Cork County three centuries later), and left a permanent mark on the landscape.
If you’ve enjoyed this piece, which is equal to a 16-page chapter of (so far) a 1484-page book with 1085 sources, you can support our work in several ways. The first is by sharing this article with folks you think would find it interesting. Second, you can listen to the audio version of this article in a future episode of the Poor Proles Almanac wherever you get your podcasts. If you’d like to financially support the project and get exclusive access to our limited paywalled content, you can become a paid subscriber on Substack or Patreon, which will both give you access to the paywalled content and, in the case of Patreon, early access to the audio episodes as well.
The Poor Prole’s Almanac: Restoration Agroecology is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.
Footnotes
1 Brady, Ciaran. “Faction and the Origins of the Desmond Rebellion of 1579.” Irish Historical Studies, vol. 22, no. 88, Sep. 1981, pp. 289-312. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/30006729.
2 Sasso, Claude Ronald. The Desmond Rebellions, 1569-1573 and 1579-1583. 1978. Loyola University Chicago, PhD dissertation. Loyola eCommons, ecommons.luc.edu/luc_diss/1868.
3 McCormack. “Social and Economic Consequences of the Desmond Rebellion.” Irish Historical Studies. .
Discover more from Class Autonomy
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
