Under the Bloody Flag (12 page)

Caldey Island, Pembrokeshire. According to the
Description of Penbrokshire
by George Owen, written during 1602 and 1603, the inhabitants of the island were afraid to keep oxen because of the threat from pirates or their purveyors, who regularly raided for provisions. (Author’s collection)

Reports from officials in Irish ports reveal the growing importance of Ireland for the expanding range of English depredation. In April 1549 the mayor of Waterford informed the Lord Deputy, Edward Bellingham, of the activities of pirates during the previous three years. Much of this was small scale and casual in nature, involving petty plunder by groups of rovers whose identity was occasionally known to their victims. During 1547, for example, a vessel bound from Kinsale to Dungarvan, with a lading of wheat and malt for Thomas and Robert Hyat, was attacked by a small English ship with a crew of ten or eleven mariners under the command of Thomas Fyshebill. One member of the company of the Irish vessel, Robert Lovedaye, was taken aboard the pinnace. He recognised at least six of Fyshebill’s men, and urged them ‘not to meddle with Hyat’s goods for that he was his neighbour and a man that he knew well’.
¹¹
Against the wishes of Fyshebill, evidently Lovedaye and other members of the company, including Robert Hyat, were sent ashore in a boat with a chest of their possessions and three or four bags of wheat. Before reaching land, Lovedaye was forcibly taken out of the boat by a small group of pursuing rovers, concerned that ‘he should not go ashore to be their confession’.
¹²
About one year later, indeed, Lovedaye was a leading witness in a case heard by the High Court of Admiralty, during which he identified six of Fyshebill’s company, who were being tried for piracy.

It was difficult to guard against this kind of opportunistic robbery at sea, though the size of some groups of rovers exposed them to the risk of capture. In July 1548 officials in Youghal informed the Lord Deputy of their seizure of a pirate, operating under the name of Smith, and his followers, who had plundered local fishing boats. But this success was offset by a report from Kinsale of a recent outbreak of pestilence which killed most of the male inhabitants, leaving an empty town ‘with few men and naughty neighbours’, including several groups of pirates who were threatening to blockade entry into the port.
¹³
One of them, Richard Coole, had married the aunt of a local landowner, Barry Oge, and resided in his castle, which he used as a base to pillage visiting vessels. About the same time the mayor of Cork complained that English pirates were boldly haunting the mouth of the haven. They were accompanied or followed by groups of Scottish, French and Spanish rovers. Later in the year a Scots pirate was cruising off Lambay Island and the Head of Howth, within easy reach of Dublin.

The inability of the regime to combat the spread of piracy across the Irish Sea was starkly underlined by the activities of Thompson and Coole off Waterford during the summer of 1548. Towards the end of July the mayor announced Thompson’s arrival to the Lord Deputy, adding that he threatened ‘to do them mischief for the taking of his boy by Watkin Apowell’.
¹⁴
Thompson was captured, but within a month he was set at liberty by a powerful lord, O’Sullivan Beare, on the payment of a large ransom. In response to Coole’s seizure of a Portuguese vessel which was brought into the port during August, the Lord Admiral sent one of his servants to Waterford to ensure that it was restored to the original owners. But the action invited retaliation from the pirates, who demonstrated their local power by plundering and seizing shipping. Although some of the pirates were captured, in September the mayor requested their speedy discharge, partly because of the cost of maintaining them, but also on the grounds that they ‘behaved very ill in gaol’.
¹⁵
The problems facing Waterford seemed to get worse during October, with the arrival of more pirates or rovers led by David Power and James Gough. When they were denied the opportunity to re-victual, Power and his associates plundered a Portuguese vessel in the harbour. As a result, the mayor complained that other foreign shipping refused to visit the port.

Local responses to the spread of piracy across the Irish Sea were uncertain and deeply ambivalent. Faced with an increase in the number of pirates and rovers operating along the coast, in November 1548 the mayor of Cork requested advice from the Lord Deputy as to whether they should be apprehended or killed. Several weeks later, officials reported the arrival of Thompson and Richard Stephenson, who had served under Robert St Leger, on Christmas Day with a ship laden with a cargo of wine, figs and sugar. The Lord Deputy authorized the inhabitants of the port to trade with Thompson and Stephenson, as it seemed that their goods were not stolen, and they had recently received pardons. At least part of this was misleading or based on misinformation. In 1549 the council instructed the Lord Deputy to publish a proclamation offering rewards for the capture of notorious pirates, who included Thompson. But such inducements appear to have made little difference to the situation in and around Cork, where the mayor admitted that ‘the people of the adjacent country have long traded for [the] … wares’ of Thompson and Stephenson.
¹⁶

Officers acting on behalf of the Lord Admiral struggled to deal with the problem. In January 1549 the mayor of Cork noted that some of the port’s neighbours had been compelled to restore goods purchased from pirates as a result of recent inquisitions by Admiralty officials. About the same time, another of the Admiral’s officers, Thomas Wodloke, requested the mayor to arrest Henry Strangeways and fifteen other members of Thompson’s company. Wodloke complained, however, that the mayor ‘was loth to make variance between Cork and the pirates without special commandment’.
¹⁷
Indeed, the inhabitants were reported to be making ordnance for the pirates as well as supplying them with provisions. Weeks after his arrival, Thompson was still trading in the port, possibly in competition with another English rover who brought in a Flemish prize. Competition between rival groups of pirates or rovers could easily become hostile. In February 1549 a Danzig ship was brought in by the
Mary
Winter
, owned and sent out by Thomas Winter, apparently on the grounds that it was sailing for Scotland with a cargo of wine. But it was tempting and easy prey for Thompson, Coole and Freeman, who recaptured the prize and claimed it as their own.

In order to deal with the pirate threat, in 1549 Walter Cowley, the Solicitor-General in Dublin, proposed to the Lord Admiral that some of the King’s ships should be sent to Ireland. The proposal was linked with more ambitious measures for the defence and security of English interests, which included the reduction of Ireland through the construction of forts and the establishment of presidencies and councils in the provinces of Munster, Ulster and Connacht. The activities of pirates and rovers during the wars with Scotland and France thus raised wider concern about the vulnerability of Ireland to external threat. In March 1549 rumours circulated that the French and Scots intended to expel the English from Ireland. An earlier report had warned of the exposure of Skerries, a favourite haunt of pirates near Dublin, to a French landing, particularly as it was the ‘only road in those seas for them betwixt Brittany and Scotland, being in their direct trade into the Frith of Dumbarton’.
¹⁸

Lacking the resources for the effective defence of Ireland or the Irish Sea, the regime adopted improvised tactics which included the employment of pirates for military purposes. In 1549 the council authorized the Lord Deputy to use pirates against the MacDonnells, who had renewed their raiding from the Western Isles across the North Channel during the 1540s, either in conflict or cooperation with Gaelic leaders in the north. One of those employed was Richard Coole, whose testimony illustrates the adaptable and criss-crossing careers of many of the pirates and rovers operating during these years. Coole was a mariner from Minehead in Somerset. By his own admission, he served as a pirate for one year, during which time he took several prizes, including one taken off Caldey Island in December 1548. After petitioning the Lord Deputy for a pardon, he took part in an expedition to recover Strangford Castle from the Scots. Thereafter, he was involved in action against an Irish rebel. Although Bellingham promised him a pardon, it is not clear if the bargain was fulfilled. Coole subsequently sailed to the Isle of Man, ‘landed his mate as a pledge’ and was captured ‘of his own good will’.
¹⁹
In May 1549 Rice ap Morgan and two associates received £100 as a reward for his capture. He was imprisoned in the Tower, where his fellow prisoners included the rebel leader Robert Kett and his brother William. He was still in custody at the end of October, awaiting examination by the officers of the Lord Admiral, though his career of sea roving was far from over.

The increase in piracy and maritime disorder during the later 1540s had serious consequences for the Lord Admiral. Within a divided and faction-ridden regime, it presented his rivals with an opportunity that they exploited to engineer his downfall and execution during 1549 on the grounds of high treason. Although the main charges against Seymour concerned his alleged scheme for an ‘alteration in the state’, it was supported by damaging accusations concerning his dealings with pirates.
²⁰
These included claims that he cultivated relations with pirates, ignoring orders from the council and his brother, the Lord Protector, for the restitution of plunder which was concealed for his own profit. While the captors of pirates were imprisoned, moreover, pirate leaders were freed, as if the Lord Admiral was ‘authorized to be the chief pirate, and to have had all thadvantage thei coulde bring’.
²¹
Allegedly, the Lord Admiral’s purchase of the Scilly Isles, and his plan to acquire Lundy Island, both well-established haunts for pirates, were seen as a sinister attempt to provide a safe refuge, where he could conspire with the pirates against his rivals. These accusations, which lacked corroborating evidence, were intended to destroy an ambitious and powerful competitor at court by equally ambitious and self-seeking rivals. Nonetheless, they suggest that the spread of piracy was facilitated by vested political interests within a weak and self-interested regime. Such conditions created opportunities for officials and others to manipulate the porous boundary between piracy and public service for private gain.

The end of the war with France in 1550, followed by peace with Scotland in 1551, brought little respite to the problem of disorderly plunder and piracy. English, Scottish and French rovers continued to be active, provoking widespread complaints about the extent of illegal spoil. The council was forced to take repeated action to ensure that ships and goods belonging to the subjects of the King of France or the Emperor, captured since the peace, were restored, while also seeking the return of English vessels taken by the Scots or French. Scottish rovers continued to plague the east coast. Some were able to use Ipswich as a base to spoil Flemish shipping; others raided in the Irish Sea or ranged into the Channel, visiting long-standing pirate hunting grounds. In October and November 1550 the council ordered the arrest of a Scots pirate, who had robbed a Spanish vessel and seized a Breton ship off the Isle of Wight, but with little effect. French rovers of varying legality also remained active in the Channel and the western approaches, where they preyed on English and Irish shipping, occasionally seizing Iberian vessels. In November 1551 the council ordered the release of a French man-of-war and two Portuguese prizes which had been seized by the mayor of Tenby.
²²

A Tudor merchant’s house in Tenby, Pembrokeshire. Pirates and rovers occasionally visited this small, but busy port, to dispose of plunder and take on supplies. In 1562 a Scottish pirate, Alexander Hogg, was arrested in the port. (Author’s collection)

Yet the volume of complaint against the French and Scots appears to have been outweighed by the clamour against the activities of English rovers. In response to an appeal from the French ambassador about the cost and delay in pursuing cases of spoil and piracy before the High Court of Admiralty, during 1550 the council revived a previous practice of appointing commissioners for depredations, with the authority to provide speedy justice for French claimants. Their appointment failed to appease the ambassador. Nor did it reduce the level of complaint reaching the council, although it provided an opportunity for the latter to pass contested cases of depredation to another agency. The commissioners were involved in hearing such cases intermittently, and sometimes in association with the High Court of Admiralty, through to the 1570s. But their use met with limited success.
²³

Alongside the widening range of English piratical venturing, localized spoil and pillage flourished. Many of those involved in this form of depredation continued to haunt the Channel as well as the entrance to the Thames, operating from bases along the south coast, which included Calais. Local support and maintenance for such activity meant that it was rarely an anonymous crime: pirate captains and their leading associates were well known to local officials and increasingly to the council. But attempts to apprehend such men were frustrated by delays in the investigation and administration of complaints about spoil, which gave pirates and rovers time to go into hiding or return to the sea. In October 1550 the council dealt with allegations of piracy against Henry Stafforde dating back to May 1547. It took another three months for the council to instruct Robert Reneger to seek and arrest Stafforde and one of his accomplices, William Piers of Southampton, who was reportedly a servant of the Lord Protector.
²⁴