A supplement, not an argument: Someone here has a tagline about "The past is another country. They do things differently there". When you read a lot of history, after a while you get over ascribing nasty and nefarious motives to people in a far different time, because you have learned how different the environment, the threats to security, the world they lived in, was. We live in a world where lots of people keep pets and think of it as normal and a pleasant part of life. But there are people elsewhere (Sweden, I think) who consider keeping pets as we think of slavery, an offence against nature and morality. I am trying to keep that in mind; however it is a struggle, when I consider what I know about what Cromwell and his minions, did to the people of Ireland - because he won, and because he had the guns and swords. Ann L. In a message dated 3/1/2010 12:16:14 A.M. Pacific Standard Time, [email protected]_ (mailto:[email protected]) writes: Well, I did read the book including the footnotes and glanced through his bibliography. The book is definitely part of the anti-English polemic that the Irish are so fond of, but that doesn't mean it is wrong. Another person could of course re-shuffle the same data and come up with a different conclusion and on and on -- fodder for future dissertations and books
Anyone interested in the Cromwell-inspired genocide in Ireland might also read: "Hell or Connaught!: The Cromwellian Colonization of Ireland, 1652-1660" by Peter Berresford Ellis (1975) But the Irish weren't the ones who dug up his body in Westminster, gave it a posthumous execution for regicide in 1661, cut off the corpse's head and hung it on a pole outside Westminister for 25 years. His own disavowed him for being a religious zealot, a hypocrite and a mass-murderer. > From: [email protected] > Date: Mon, 1 Mar 2010 14:33:52 -0500 > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [S-I] "Irish in the Caribbean" > > A supplement, not an argument: > > Someone here has a tagline about "The past is another country. They do > things differently there". > > When you read a lot of history, after a while you get over ascribing nasty > and nefarious motives to people in a far different time, because you have > learned how different the environment, the threats to security, the world > they lived in, was. > > We live in a world where lots of people keep pets and think of it as normal > and a pleasant part of life. But there are people elsewhere (Sweden, I > think) who consider keeping pets as we think of slavery, an offence against > nature and morality. > > I am trying to keep that in mind; however it is a struggle, when I consider > what I know about what Cromwell and his minions, did to the people of > Ireland - because he won, and because he had the guns and swords. > > Ann L. > > > > In a message dated 3/1/2010 12:16:14 A.M. Pacific Standard Time, > [email protected]_ (mailto:[email protected]) writes: > > Well, I did read the book including the footnotes and glanced through his > bibliography. The book is definitely part of the anti-English polemic that > the Irish are so fond of, but that doesn't mean it is wrong. Another person > could of course re-shuffle the same data and come up with a different > conclusion and on and on -- fodder for future dissertations and books > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message _________________________________________________________________ Hotmail: Powerful Free email with security by Microsoft. http://clk.atdmt.com/GBL/go/201469230/direct/01/
Well, at least Cromwell is gone - dead and buried... ;-) Cliff. Johnston "May the best you've ever seen, Be the worst you'll ever see;" from A Scots Toast by Allan Ramsay ----- Original Message ----- From: "Henry Barth" <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, March 02, 2010 1:35 AM Subject: Re: [S-I] "Irish in the Caribbean" > > Anyone interested in the Cromwell-inspired genocide in Ireland might also > read: > > > > "Hell or Connaught!: The Cromwellian Colonization of Ireland, 1652-1660" > by Peter Berresford Ellis (1975) > > > > But the Irish weren't the ones who dug up his body in Westminster, gave it > a posthumous execution for regicide in 1661, cut off the corpse's head and > hung it on a pole outside Westminister for 25 years. > > > > His own disavowed him for being a religious zealot, a hypocrite and a > mass-murderer. > > > > > > > > > >> From: [email protected] >> Date: Mon, 1 Mar 2010 14:33:52 -0500 >> To: [email protected] >> Subject: Re: [S-I] "Irish in the Caribbean" >> >> A supplement, not an argument: >> >> Someone here has a tagline about "The past is another country. They do >> things differently there". >> >> When you read a lot of history, after a while you get over ascribing >> nasty >> and nefarious motives to people in a far different time, because you have >> learned how different the environment, the threats to security, the world >> they lived in, was. >> >> We live in a world where lots of people keep pets and think of it as >> normal >> and a pleasant part of life. But there are people elsewhere (Sweden, I >> think) who consider keeping pets as we think of slavery, an offence >> against >> nature and morality. >> >> I am trying to keep that in mind; however it is a struggle, when I >> consider >> what I know about what Cromwell and his minions, did to the people of >> Ireland - because he won, and because he had the guns and swords. >> >> Ann L. >> >> >> >> In a message dated 3/1/2010 12:16:14 A.M. Pacific Standard Time, >> [email protected]_ (mailto:[email protected]) writes: >> >> Well, I did read the book including the footnotes and glanced through his >> bibliography. The book is definitely part of the anti-English polemic >> that >> the Irish are so fond of, but that doesn't mean it is wrong. Another >> person >> could of course re-shuffle the same data and come up with a different >> conclusion and on and on -- fodder for future dissertations and books >> >> ------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to >> [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the >> quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > _________________________________________________________________ > Hotmail: Powerful Free email with security by Microsoft. > http://clk.atdmt.com/GBL/go/201469230/direct/01/ > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the > quotes in the subject and the body of the message
Actually, books like "Hell or Connaught" as already mentioned, are only one side of the story -- and the side of the people who tried to kill your ancestors. You've been brainwashed by your old enemies if you think they present a fair view. Perhaps you should do some additional reading and then try to reconcile the view points. May I suggest "Cromwell, An Honourable Enemy" by Tom Reilly (also a source of great controversy since he has dared to look at things with a fresh view instead of parading about the same old hatred sans any facts or data), "God's Englishman" by Christopher Hill, "The Century of Revolution 1603-1704", Christopher Hill, also his book "Liberty Against the Law: Some Seventeenth Century Controversies", and "Cromwell in Ireland" by James Scott Wheeler. For starters. Then you may come to realize any number of things including: 1. Cromwell was a moderate (hard to believe till you actually read more than one of these books) and he worked to maintain stability in England, often it appears at the exense of everyone else. Unfortunately he sent the extremists off to Ireland in the hopes that their energies could be put to productive use (it was) and dispersed. This of course led to very bad results for Ireland. 2. History has not been written by his supporters (nor that of the Irish), but by the enemies of both, which is why Cromwell has been demonized (as well as his grave desecrated), as have been the Irish and even your own supposed "Ulster Scot" ancestors (crude, orange, mean as can be -- especially to the American Indians). To get a clear understanding of the period requires a lot of research and the reading of more than one book. 3. The Irish propaganda machine often trumps the British, especially among those who think reading one or two books in one or two traditions, preferably soft cover. I am no great reader but I have read these books and a few more whose names I forget right now. If nothing else I've learned it's a very complex time and Cromwell a very complex character and his historic portrayal is historically inaccurate because his enemies wrote it. So you are also being brainwashed by the Restoration government and its heirs. As we speak actual scholars (or at least pimply faced grad students) who have actually studied this material in both Dublin and in the UK are attempting to reframe it all in a way that makes sense. Who is right? We'll never know, though we can realize it is complex. Each writer throws things into a new perspective, like a multi faceted gem. It's actually a complex and to get a full view you need to examine more than one facet. What we do know is that Cromwell saved the posteriors of your ancestors and, if it weren't for him, you'd be saving money today to buy lots of green beer for St. Patricks Day. Ie, if enough of your ancestors survived the 1650s to produce you, they'd have been assimilated into the vast Irish nation by now. Yes, some would say it was Monroe's army who saved our posteriors, and it did for a couple years before the leaders settled down to marrying rich Irish widows and getting their hands on the local real estate. (For starters, read "Scottish Covenanters and Irish Confederates" by Stevenson). The only man who could get an army sizable enough to defeat the Confederates (which included not just many Irish but many English) was Cromwell. Not the Scots, Parliament, King Charlie (now there's a sorry creature for you), no one. The Ulster Scots of the day certainly didn't view him as a heroic figure but they did appreciate that he restored stability and left them alone. He provided what they wanted: A Protestant government in Ireland and stability after more than ten years of chaos, so they could get back to the usual: growing food and praying. Cromwell was largely (alas) a man of his times, and it was a very bad time. He was a bad guy, now in a bad place now along with all his enemies who were just as bad as he was and a large number of his victims who were bad people too but more incompetent bad people than he and his temporary friends. That's the problem with forming temporary coalitions to defeat the extremist bad guys on either side -- these coalitions are unstable like the bad guys who are in them. Meanwhile there's the bad guys with no power at all fomenting rebellion, hatred, violence, greed, and propaganda who centuries later will be whining and howling. But it doesn't justify letting yourself be brainwashed by the Irish or Victorian English historians though. Would your ancestors laugh? "Brains was never our strongpoint, you know!" or cry "Geez, we suffered and bled to produce this sorry soul who can't even get his bit of history straight?" Donno. Frankly my interests are the records produced that might name a few of mine. "Cromwell in Ireland" is great for that. Linda Merle ----- Original Message ----- From: "Henry Barth" <[email protected]> To: [email protected] Sent: Tuesday, March 2, 2010 2:35:29 AM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern Subject: Re: [S-I] "Irish in the Caribbean" Anyone interested in the Cromwell-inspired genocide in Ireland might also read: "Hell or Connaught!: The Cromwellian Colonization of Ireland, 1652-1660" by Peter Berresford Ellis (1975) But the Irish weren't the ones who dug up his body in Westminster, gave it a posthumous execution for regicide in 1661, cut off the corpse's head and hung it on a pole outside Westminister for 25 years. His own disavowed him for being a religious zealot, a hypocrite and a mass-murderer. > From: [email protected] > Date: Mon, 1 Mar 2010 14:33:52 -0500 > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [S-I] "Irish in the Caribbean" > > A supplement, not an argument: > > Someone here has a tagline about "The past is another country. They do > things differently there". > > When you read a lot of history, after a while you get over ascribing nasty > and nefarious motives to people in a far different time, because you have > learned how different the environment, the threats to security, the world > they lived in, was. > > We live in a world where lots of people keep pets and think of it as normal > and a pleasant part of life. But there are people elsewhere (Sweden, I > think) who consider keeping pets as we think of slavery, an offence against > nature and morality. > > I am trying to keep that in mind; however it is a struggle, when I consider > what I know about what Cromwell and his minions, did to the people of > Ireland - because he won, and because he had the guns and swords. > > Ann L. > > > > In a message dated 3/1/2010 12:16:14 A.M. Pacific Standard Time, > [email protected]_ (mailto:[email protected]) writes: > > Well, I did read the book including the footnotes and glanced through his > bibliography. The book is definitely part of the anti-English polemic that > the Irish are so fond of, but that doesn't mean it is wrong. Another person > could of course re-shuffle the same data and come up with a different > conclusion and on and on -- fodder for future dissertations and books > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message _________________________________________________________________ Hotmail: Powerful Free email with security by Microsoft. http://clk.atdmt.com/GBL/go/201469230/direct/01/ ------------------------------- To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message
His own didn't disavow him. This is post a Civil War, the Cromwellian system couldn't be made to work permanently and people felt that the return of the Stuarts was a good thing. Generally they were quite wise and only went for the "Regicides" and those who would not fall in line on say the religious settlement. It was the returned Caviller party which insulted Cromwell. His own were generally keeping very quirt and their heads down. The Cromwellian plantation of Ireland is tied in with the fact that he had to borrow to finance his war and he used Ireland to repay those who had leant (I think without checking my sources on a 40 year old memory, Edward Andrews > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] > [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Henry Barth > Sent: Tuesday, March 02, 2010 7:35 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [S-I] "Irish in the Caribbean" > > > Anyone interested in the Cromwell-inspired genocide in > Ireland might also read: > > > > "Hell or Connaught!: The Cromwellian Colonization of Ireland, > 1652-1660" > by Peter Berresford Ellis (1975) > > > > But the Irish weren't the ones who dug up his body in > Westminster, gave it a posthumous execution for regicide in > 1661, cut off the corpse's head and hung it on a pole outside > Westminister for 25 years. > > > > His own disavowed him for being a religious zealot, a > hypocrite and a mass-murderer. > > > > > > > > > > > From: [email protected] > > Date: Mon, 1 Mar 2010 14:33:52 -0500 > > To: [email protected] > > Subject: Re: [S-I] "Irish in the Caribbean" > > > > A supplement, not an argument: > > > > Someone here has a tagline about "The past is another > country. They do > > things differently there". > > > > When you read a lot of history, after a while you get over > ascribing > > nasty and nefarious motives to people in a far different > time, because > > you have learned how different the environment, the threats to > > security, the world they lived in, was. > > > > We live in a world where lots of people keep pets and think > of it as > > normal and a pleasant part of life. But there are people elsewhere > > (Sweden, I > > think) who consider keeping pets as we think of slavery, an offence > > against nature and morality. > > > > I am trying to keep that in mind; however it is a struggle, when I > > consider what I know about what Cromwell and his minions, > did to the > > people of Ireland - because he won, and because he had the > guns and swords. > > > > Ann L. > > > > > > > > In a message dated 3/1/2010 12:16:14 A.M. Pacific Standard Time, > > [email protected]_ (mailto:[email protected]) writes: > > > > Well, I did read the book including the footnotes and > glanced through > > his bibliography. The book is definitely part of the anti-English > > polemic that the Irish are so fond of, but that doesn't mean it is > > wrong. Another person could of course re-shuffle the same data and > > come up with a different conclusion and on and on -- fodder > for future > > dissertations and books > > > > ------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > > [email protected] with the word > 'unsubscribe' without > > the quotes in the subject and the body of the message > > _________________________________________________________________ > Hotmail: Powerful Free email with security by Microsoft. > http://clk.atdmt.com/GBL/go/201469230/direct/01/ > > ------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from the list, please send an email to > [email protected] with the word 'unsubscribe' > without the quotes in the subject and the body of the message