HiLo, I'm tempted to say that if you cannot contribute information to a thread, then you have no business posting or criticizing those who have posted. Arguments about the right or wrong conduct of posters, make no contribution to the discussion.
I said above that I learned most of what I know from the 1976 Leon Uris novel Trinity, and its 1995 sequel Redemption. These novels follow Fergie's outline very closely. Come to think of it, I've read quite a bit more about Irish history, mostly fiction. I suppose I've learned most of the history I know from novels, and I think that's not a bad thing. Keith asks why I thought the Uris novels gave a balanced view, and I'm not sure I would say they are balanced. I'd say they present a valid perspective, but there are many valid perspectives of this issue. The Uris novels presented what some people thought and felt during these momentous events, and they presented these thoughts and feelings very effectively.
The participants in this thread have presented a variety of perspectives. Most of them are valid, although some may not be popular.

Jim says that the Uris novels are romanticized, but I would submit that most of us tend to romanticize the causes we support - and I'm not sure that's a bad thing. It's a matter of believing in our causes so we can bring about improvement, balanced with an understanding of other perspectives so we can learn to work together to accomplish something by peaceful consensus instead of by bitter conflict.

I've read lots and lots of novels by Uris, Michener, Ken Follett, Wouk, and by many others who write in a historical context. I tend to stay awake better reading novels, than I do reading history texts. And I think that novels do a better job of presenting what's in the minds and hearts of participants in historical events.

But no, learning history through novels will never make me a scholar. Greg and I, being Americans, are better off being in a learning mode in a thread like this one.

-Joe-