Jamese Marquis (subsequently Duke) of Ormond was now commander of thd King’s forces in Ireland ; next year (1643), he was appointed Lore Lieutenant. His character has been variously judged, according to the political  and  religious   standpoint  of his   critics, but it seems to be generally allowed that he was genuinely attached to the Royalist cause. For the ” Papist rebels ” he had the utmost contempt, and he did not hold himself bound by any laws of honour when dealing with them.

Meanwhile, in August 1642, the war between Charles and his Parliament had begun. The King’s greatest need was trained soldiers. Eoghan Ruadh O’Neill had brought with him from Spain, besides a good supply of arms, some 200 veterans, and, with the help of these, he had begun to drill and train the Irish levies, in such wise that they promised soon to be shaped into a valuable and efficient force. Charles was anxious to make some arrangement by means of which a part, at any rate, of these troops might be available for his service. The Confederates, at least the Palesmen, were only too anxious to treat.
They had already addressed an humble Petition to the King, setting forth their grievances, but of this no notice had been taken. Now, however, early in the year 1643, Charles appointed Ormond and the Earl of Clanrickard to inquire into these matters, and in fact, though not at first in name, to enter into negotiations with the insurgents.
The Parliamentary party in England was naturally enough very much averse to this move. It was, so they considered, an unworthy truckling with rebellion, and, worse still, it might result in substantial aids being supplied to the King.
Already, in the preceding year (March, 1642), the Parliament had caused a considerable Scottish army under General Munroe to be sent to Ulster, where it had joined with the English troops which still remained in the Province, and had been very successful in the north-east counties. Almost everywhere they, as well as the Government troops in the other provinces, had behaved to their enemies with terrible cruelty. Lord Lisle, Sir Charles Coote and afterwards his son of the same name, and Lord Inchiquin, long remembered in Ireland under the name of ” Murrogh the Burner,” were especially notorious for their atrocious deeds.

They, in most cases, put to death, not only the garrisons of captured fortresses or of those which had surrendered, but also very frequently non-combatants, women and even children, if any were found. Massacres of unarmed peasantry even were not unusual.
As before stated, the Irish party, after the first few months, cannot be charged with any such savagery. Captured garrisons were frequently suffered to depart where they would ; prisoners often remained for long periods in the hands of the Confederate troops and were finally released uninjured. Eoghan Ruadh punished with great severity any attempt of his soldiers to plunder or ill-use the civil population, and he treated his captives with the utmost consideration and courtesy. When the English  Parliament issued a decree (1644) tnat n0 quarter should in future be given to any Irishman ” taken in hostilities ” against it, the Confederate Council did not retort, as it might well have done, by a similar decree against the Parliamentarian soldiers.
A meeting was arranged to take place at Trim between the negotiators authorised by the King and representatives of the Confederates. Hostilities were not, however, suspended. Not only generals who, like Munroe and Coote, were now acting under the orders, not of the King, but of the Parliaments of Scotland or of England, but such Royalist Commanders as Ormond and Lisle, continued the campaign in various parts of the country. Lisle defeated Preston near New Ross, but the latter captured the important Castle of Ballinakill in Queen’s Co. In Ulster, O’Neill, conscious that his men were not yet sufficiently trained, avoided important engagements as far as he could. Owing, however, to the importunities of his own soldiers, who clamoured to be led to victory and threatened mutiny if refused, he was induced to join battle at Clones with an English army led by Sir William and Sir Robert Stewart.

The arrest in the development of Irish literature, which has been noted as marking the advent of the Normans, continued during the succeeding two centuries. If original literature worthy of the name was then produced, all trace and record of it has been lost.

Yet our annals clearly show that learning and scholarship flourished and were encouraged. They record, year after year, the names of those who were famous as scholars, bards, historians, and lawyers ; they constantly preserve the names of Gaelic chiefs and Norman lords who were conspicuous for their patronage and hospitality to poets and men of learning. Every Gaelic family, and many Norman ones, still had their hereditary bards and historians occupying honoured and privileged positions.

Learned and famous books were produced, as will be shown, but these were mostly compilations. At the time that the new nations were developing popular literature, the Gaelic voice was suppressed. While England, France, Spain and Italy were creating their national languages, and the Renascence was spreading over Europe, the cultured mind of Ireland was forcibly turned back upon the past.