Page:Catholic Encyclopedia, volume 1.djvu/803

This page needs to be proofread.
729

ARMAGH


729


ARMAGH


the Spaniards were entirely outclassed and defeated. It says much for llicir lieroisin that only one ship was reported captured; but three sank, four or five ran ashore, and the Duke of Medina Sidonia took the resolution of leading the nmeli damaged rem- nant round the north of Scotland and Ireland, and 80 back to Spain. But for that very difficult voyage they had neither a chart nor a pilot in the whole fleet. More and more shi|is wore now lost in every storm, and at everj' point of danger. Eventually, on the 13th of September, the duke returned to Santander, having lost about half his fleet and about three-quarters of his men.

III. The Sequkl. โ€” Great as were the effects of the failure of the Armada, they are nevertheless often exaggerated. The defeat no doubt set bounds to the expansion of Spain, and secured the power of her rival. Yet it is a mistake to suppose that this change was immediate, obvious, or uniform. The wars of religion in France, promoted by Elizabeth, ended in weakening that country to such an extent that Spain seemed withii\ two vc;irs after the Armada to be nearer to universal tlomination than ever before, and this consununation was averted by the reconciliation of Henry IV to Catholicism, which, by reuniting France, restored the balance of power in Europe, as was acknowledged by Spain at the peace of Vervins in 1.598. Even the change of sea- power was not immediate or obvious. In reality England had always been the sui)erior at sea, as the history of Drake and his colleagues clearly shows. Her weakness lay in the smallness of her standing navy, and her want of adequate amiiumition. Spain took so long to attempt a readjustment of the balance of sea-power, that Knglaml liad ample time to organize and arm a su|ierior Hcet. But Spain, thougli she failed at sea, remained the chief power on land and, having recognized her naval inferiority, strengthened her land defonios with such success that the depredations of the Engli.sh in her colonies after the defeat were incom|)aral)ly lass than those which had occurred before. Iter decline ensued because the causes of the ilijeal were not remedied. Slave-labour, with its attendant corruptions, in the colonies, want of organization, of development and of free government at home, joined with grasping at power abroad โ€” these, and not any single defeat, however great, were the causes of the decline of the great world-power of the sixteenth century.

IV. Catholic Co-oi'er.miox. โ€” Among the many side issues which meet the student of the history of the Armada, that of the co-operation or fa\our of the Pope, and of the Catholic party among the Eng- lish, is naturally important for Catholics. There can be no doubt, then, that though Spanish pre- dominance was not at all desired for its own sake by the Catholics of England, France, and Germany, or of Rome, yet the wide-spread suffering and irrita- tion caused by the religious wars which Elizabeth fomented, and the indignation aroused by her religious persecution, and the execution of Mary Stuart, caused Catholics everywhere to sympathize with Spain, and to regard the Armada as a crusade against the most dangerous enemy of the Faith. Pope Sixtus V agreed to renew the excommunication of the queen, and to grant a large subsidy to the Armada, but, knowing the .slownass of Spain, would give nothing till the ex|iedition should actually land m England. In this way he saved his million crowns, and was spared the reproacli of having taken futile proceedings against the heretical queen. This excommunication had of course been richly deserved, and there is extant a proclamation to justify it, which was to have been published in England if the invasion had been successful. It was signed by Cardinal Allen, and is entitled "An Admonition to the Nobility and Laity of England ". It was in-


tended to comprise all that could be said against the queen, ana the indictment is therefore fuller and more forcible than any other put forward by the religious exiles, who were generally very reticent in their complaints. Allen also carefully consigned his publication to the fire, and we only know of it tlin)ui;h one of Elizal)eth's ubiiiuitous spies, who had previously stolen a copy. There is no doubt that all the exiles for religion at that time shared Allen's .sentiments, but not so the Catholics in England. They hatl always been the most conser\'ative of English parties. The resentment they felt at being persecuted led them to blame the (lueon's ministeis, but not to question her right to rule. To them the preat power of Elizal>eth was evident, the forces and mtontions of Spain were unknown quantities. They might, should, and did resist until complete justifi- cation was set before them, and this was in fact never attempted. Much, for instance, as we know of the Catholic clergy then labouring in England, wo cannot find that any of them used religion to advance the cause of the Armada. Protestant and Catholic contemporaries alike agree that the English Catholics were energetic in their preparations against it. This being so, it Wiis inevitalilc that the leaders of the Catholics abroad should lo.sj inllucnce, through having sided with Spain. On the other hand, as the pope and all among whom they lived had been of the same mind, it was evidently unjust to blame their want of political insight too harshly. In point of fact the change did not come until near the end of Elizabeth's reign, when, during the appeals against the archpriest, the old leaders, especially the Jesuit father Uobert Persons, were freely blamed for the Spanish alliance. The terms of the blame were exaggerated, but the reason for complaint can- not be (U-nicd.

Tlic liteniture tlmt has* Rathered round the Armada ia voIuminouM. and ha.s of course l)een largely influenced by the national and reliRious prejudices of the contending nations. A trifle may suffice to indicate how the wind has been blowing. Almost all writers hitherto have written of the " Invincihle " Armada, thinking; that they were using an epithet applied to their tieet by the Spaniards themselves, and one that con- fessedly betrayeil Spanish pride. Now it appears that it was only one of the insults of contemporary English pam< phletecrs. and is not foimd in anv ccmlemporary Spanish writer. (Laughton. p. xi.t.) On the English siile the most representative of the old school are J. L. Motley, Rise of the Dutch Republic, and J. .\. P'noUDK, History of England, XII. and English tieamrn of the SCctrenlh Century. The last writer is notoriously inaccurate, hut the worst fault of both is their reliance upon coloured, and even grossly preju- diced, evidence. The oliler Spanish view is given by F. Strada. Dc Bella Belgico, and L. Cabrera de CoRnoBA, fclipe Seguncto, 1G19. Hut all these writers have been superseded by the publication of English and .Spanish State papers, es- pecially by J. K. Laughton and J. 8. Corbett. in the publi- cations of the Navy Record Society (London, 1891'-03). I. II: and the Spani-sn collections of Captain C. Fernandez DuRo. Iai Armidn Invenciltle (Madri<l, 1884\ and Armada Eapiulohi. II, III (.Madrid, 1S9(ยป: and Martin Hume, .Spanish Cnlciuiars. Still the chief desideratum at present is a more ample collection of Spanish papers, illustrating the whole naval war from the beginning. D. I>E Alcedo Y Herrera, Piratcrias y aggressiunes de fos ItUjUsei en la America EspaAola (Madrid. 1882), contains little about the period under review. The most scholarly account of the hghting yet publishecl is that of an .American student, W. F. Tit.TON, Die Katastrophe der spnnischen Armada (Freiburg, 1894). J. S. CoRBKTT, Drake and the Tudor Navy, endeavours to reconcile the old English tra<litions with modern dis- coveries, not always scicntiiically. For Papal and Catholic views see J. A. v. IICbner. Siile Quint (^Paris, 1S70. best edition): T. F. Knox, Letters of Cardinal Allm (London 1882).

J. 11. POLI.EN.

Armagh, The .Vuchdiocese of, founded by St. Pat- rick about 445, as the primatial and metropohtan see of Ireland. The .\rcndioce,se of Armagh at pres- ent comprises almost the whole of the counties Armagh and Louth, a great part of Tyrone, and por- tions of Derry and of Meath. It is divided into fiftv-five parishes, two of which, .\rmagh and Dun- dalk, are mensal parishes attached to the see. The Diocesan Chapter, re-established in 1856. consisted