development in the treatises themselves ‘in the face of royal indifference’ – not only did they become more nuanced, and engaged in factional disputes, but more importantly they began to recommend ‘particular reformation’ to entice a reluctant king to engage in the ‘reduction’ of Ireland piecemeal, at the least. The Kildare rebellion forced Henry VIII into ‘engagement’ with Ireland but not necessarily to reform. Cromwell was keen to receive information about Ireland, but there is ‘no evidence that he had read the documents prepared earlier in the reign’ (p. 166). It is striking to learn that the letters and papers relating to Ireland that Cromwell amassed, like Wolsey’s before him, ‘disappeared into the Tower’ after his fall (p. 183). In any case, there is ‘no sign’ that royal policy in Ireland was shaped by the treatises sent from Ireland (p. 170). Nonetheless, the tantalising suggestion is made that St Leger in the 1540s gathered together ‘disparate ideas’, some of them reflected in such treatises and ‘fashioned them into a new political policy for Ireland’ (p. 186). To conclude, Maginn and Ellis have done a great job of work in presenting the text of an invaluable compendium from a critical time in Tudor policy formation for Ireland. The importance of this book lies primarily in its consideration of how Tudor policy was formulated. The implication of this work is that we need to reconsider the revisionist paradigm for Tudor Ireland. The sheer ignorance and indifference of the early Tudor monarchs towards Ireland, and the contrasts in conditions in much of the Pale with England (as reflected in the accounts of contemporaries), are not compatible with the notion that an ‘English state’ encompassed much of Ireland from the later middle ages. The texts in the compendium, and the discussion in this book, show that we need to look again at what conditions in the Pale were actually like and at what an older generation of historians termed ‘Gaelicisation’. The Discovery of Tudor Ireland shows that historians of Tudor Ireland have a great deal yet to discover!

中文翻译：

---

书评：城市领袖：都柏林的第一批公民，1500–1950 年麦克马努斯鲁斯格里菲思丽莎-玛丽（编辑），城市领袖：都柏林的第一批公民，1500–1950 年（都柏林：四法院出版社，2013 年，224 欧元，精装本，页码。 €14.95 平装本）

论文本身的发展“面对皇室的冷漠”——它们不仅变得更加细致入微，卷入派系纷争，更重要的是，他们开始推荐“特别改革”以吸引不情愿的国王参与“削减” '爱尔兰的零碎，至少。基尔代尔叛乱迫使亨利八世与爱尔兰“接触”，但不一定要改革。克伦威尔渴望获得有关爱尔兰的信息，但“没有证据表明他阅读了在位初期准备的文件”（第 166 页）。令人震惊的是，克伦威尔积累的与爱尔兰有关的信件和文件，就像沃尔西在他之前的一样，在他倒下后“消失在塔中”（第 183 页）。无论如何，“没有迹象”表明爱尔兰的王室政策是由爱尔兰发出的论文所塑造的（第 19 页）。170)。尽管如此，还是提出了一个诱人的建议，即 1540 年代的 St Leger 将“不同的思想”聚集在一起，其中一些思想反映在此类论文中，并“将它们塑造成爱尔兰的新政治政策”（第 186 页）。总而言之，马金和埃利斯在展示爱尔兰都铎政策形成的关键时期的宝贵纲要方面做了大量工作。这本书的重要性主要在于它考虑了都铎王朝的政策是如何制定的。这项工作的含义是我们需要重新考虑爱尔兰都铎王朝的修正主义范式。早期都铎王朝君主对爱尔兰的无知和漠不关心，以及与英格兰大部分地区的情况形成鲜明对比（如同时代人的叙述所反映），与“英国国家”从中世纪后期开始就包括爱尔兰大部分地区的观点不符。纲要中的文本以及本书中的讨论表明，我们需要重新审视帕莱的实际情况以及老一代历史学家所说的“盖尔化”。爱尔兰都铎王朝的发现表明，爱尔兰都铎王朝的历史学家还有很多尚未发现的东西！