BS: The Curse of Cromwell

Subject: RE: BS: The Curse of Cromwell
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 11 Oct 06 - 08:43 PM

In the village of Fishtoft in Lincolnshire, where I grew up - there used to be a local man who had elected himself The Lord Protector of Fishtoft, and he rode around all day on a horse with a sword. Such things went unremarked in those days.

But you're quite right; he wasn't a good role model.

Subject: RE: BS: The Curse of Cromwell
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 11 Oct 06 - 08:09 PM

At all times there have been some people who did not share the "standards of the day", just as there are today for the atrocities which are shrugged off and routinely accepted.

Sometimes they openly resisted, sometimes they did so covertly, more often they did their best to get by without lending their support to the commonplace atrocities, but giving a kind of silent witness.

There is a danger that if we go too far down accepting the crimes of history as inevitable, and exonerating those responsible, we are showing a failure of respect for the people who did not consent.

Subject: RE: BS: The Curse of Cromwell
From: Nickhere
Date: 11 Oct 06 - 07:39 PM

Les - I was saying how Cromwell is remembered in Ireland, not planning to write an academic treatise on same (it was pushing on for midnight). Revisionist historians may be kinder to Cromwell than memory (they wouldn't 'earn' as much academic kudos anyway if they just wrote the same old stuff about him) but apparently to people who were alive at the time and who handed down their memories he stood out as something exceptionally cruel and savage. And remember, this must have been judged against the standards of the time,since his victims and their relatives did not have the benefit of 21st cent hindsight.

I know about the rebellion of 1641, the last ditch effort of Irish catholics, Gaels and Old English (the Anglo-Norman catholic settlers) to drive out the invading English. It should be added that the Irish had supported Charles 1st in the Civil War, seeeing him as their best hope. A bad mistake as it turned out, since Charles was beheaded and Cromwell then turned his attention to Ireland to 'teach it a lesson' and ensure ther'd be no more support for a monarch (Charles' son was still about). Almost 50 years later at the Boyne, the Irish were again taking sides in an English civil war in the hope of getting a better deal for themslves. Again they backed a losing horse (James) and paid dearly for it. You could say they'd have been better off minding their own business, but the two countries were so close that their foreign policies became entertwined.

I'm still right about Crowmell being dour, though, aren't I? I gather he wasn't too popular in England either which is why his body was dug up and his head stuck on a spike after the Restoration.

By the way, if we argue about 'the standards and rules of the time' - there was no such crime as genocide officially until the Nuremberg trials. The statute of the crime had to be invented (though the fact was real) especially in time for the trials. Nor was genocide unknown prior to that: most of the colonists engaged in a good bit of it: the French, the Belgians, the English, Spanish, anyone who could....

Won't bore you with endless examples though, have a look at this rather interesting site:
Concentration camps and colonialism

Subject: RE: BS: The Curse of Cromwell
From: John O'L
Date: 11 Oct 06 - 06:29 PM

Humanity has always been humanity. We know this from the authors. Humans have always known what was wrong from what was right, and have always been aware of all the different hues in between. Military savagery is not OK just because everybody else has been doing it for centuries. Is that the best you hope for?
Be careful, history is still going on, and not a lot has changed. It might end up being what you get.

Subject: RE: BS: The Curse of Cromwell
From: Divis Sweeney
Date: 11 Oct 06 - 05:54 PM

The noted men of history will always be someones hero or villain.

Subject: RE: BS: The Curse of Cromwell
From: Les from Hull
Date: 11 Oct 06 - 05:45 PM

And there are a surprising number of people who think that Napoleon Bonaparte was a good bloke!

Subject: RE: BS: The Curse of Cromwell
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 11 Oct 06 - 05:40 PM

Cromwell wasn't alone. Nor was Stalin.

Mind in both cases you'd be pushing your luck to try to stop him doing what he thought was necessary to consolidate his power.

Subject: RE: BS: The Curse of Cromwell
From: Les from Hull
Date: 11 Oct 06 - 05:37 PM

Yeah - even Stalin's at it. No one refers to 'Parliament', 'The Army', 'The Committee of Safety', 'The Major-Generals' or any other officers of state. Or Ireton. Or Fairfax...

Cromwell had to be convinced that the execution of the King was necessary. He was at first for giving him his throne back with reduced powers. Stalin assumes that he was judge, jury and executioner!

Mind you one of those beheaded was Sir John Hotham, former Governor of Hull who tried to betray the town back to the King. And there's a road in Hull named for him too, Divis!

Subject: RE: BS: The Curse of Cromwell
From: Divis Sweeney
Date: 11 Oct 06 - 05:06 PM

Les, you are entitled to have an opinion on this or any subject as much as the next man. I enjoy reading yours. There is also a Cromwell Road in Belfast.

Subject: RE: BS: The Curse of Cromwell
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 11 Oct 06 - 04:58 PM

Well, he wasn't the same as Stalin, and Stalin wasn't the same as him. History never repeats itself.

I gather in Russia there are a lot of people who think Stalin was quite a good chap, and no doubt in time there'll be more. Out in Mongolia Ghengis Khan is a national hero, and they've just renamed their main airport after him. I suspect Saddam will have his fans in time.

That's how it goes, as history rubs off the rough edges.

In London there's the Cromwell Road, and a statue outside Parliament. The old man isn't doing too badly, considering. Just don't anyone try putting up a statue to him in Ireland.   And it'd be better is he doesn't get put up as a kind of role model. Anyone using him as a role model is likely to turn out a lot worse than he did.

Which gets us back to Stalin. Here is an extract from an interview he gave in 1934 to HG Wells:

Stalin: 'The Communists base themselves on rich historical experience which teaches that obsolete classes do not voluntarily abandon the stage of history. Recall the history of England in the seventeenth century. Did not many say that the old social system had decayed? But did it not, nevertheless, require a Cromwell to crush it by force?'

HG WELLS: 'Cromwell operated on the basis of the constitution and in the name of constitutional order...'

STALIN: 'In the name of the constitution he resorted to violence, beheaded the king, dispersed Parliament, arrested some and beheaded others!'

Subject: RE: BS: The Curse of Cromwell
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 11 Oct 06 - 04:33 PM

Yeh you're right Les, we've all had that sort of week......forgive and forget, eh?

Subject: RE: BS: The Curse of Cromwell
From: Les from Hull
Date: 11 Oct 06 - 04:16 PM

It's fine for people to post their opinions. I'll always be interested in reading people's opinions. But unless they are backed by some sort of evidence they can only be opinions.

My opinion of Cromwell. Not the sort of bloke that I would care to sit and chat with socially - and I'm sure that he wouldn't be short of opinions himself! But his reputation has suffered from people who assume that every action taken in those years was his own and only his. People assume that he was a despotic dictator in the style of say, Stalin. I don't think that historical eveidence bears this out.

There are plenty of things to hate about the Commonwealth. The failure to set up a form of government that was acceptable to the English people, and that would survive the overthrow of the Monarchy. The treatment handed out to the Levellers. And of course I deplore the sending into slavery of thousands of Irish during Cromwell's 'rule'. But that's just my opinion.

Subject: RE: BS: The Curse of Cromwell
From: Paul from Hull
Date: 11 Oct 06 - 01:31 PM

Was that a dig at our Les, Guest?

Subject: RE: BS: The Curse of Cromwell
From: GUEST
Date: 11 Oct 06 - 01:24 PM

Les, the Lord said we must be humble, and oh, if we are in the company of you we shall be humble. ...

Subject: RE: BS: The Curse of Cromwell
From: Les from Hull
Date: 11 Oct 06 - 12:25 PM

'sectarian genocidal maniac on a rampage'

The actions of Cromwell, though reprehensible by modern standards, were fairly benign for that day and age. They were in response to the Irish Uprising of 1641 which does not get nearly as much publicity as, say, the Siege of Drogheda. The actions of the English Army in Ireland were fuelled to some extent by unscrupulous pamphleteers who claimed 100,000 protestants killed by the catholics (modern estimate 12,000).

You have to understand how siege warfare worked in those days. The besiegers would batter at the walls with their cannon until they had a 'practicable breach' - a hole in the walls that they could attack through. They would then call upon the defenders to surrender. If they refused to surrender and the attackers had to storm the breach it was understood that the town would be sacked, and the defenders massacred. There are many examples in history, not least in the European 'Wars of Religion'.

It was also normal for landowners who rebelled against the 'government' to have their lands confiscated and handed over to soldiers who had fought on the 'government' side.

So sectarian? - yes (hated Catholics but he did allow the Jews back in), genocidal? - certainly not, maniac? - no evidence but plenty of evidence to the contrary, on a rampage? - reportedly lost his temper once at Drogheda.

I would urge anyone who is presenting a view of historical events or characters to make some effort to read and understand the historical context before committing their thoughts to the public.

Subject: RE: BS: The Curse of Cromwell
From: ard mhacha
Date: 11 Oct 06 - 12:07 PM

Cromwell transported thousands of Irish to the West Indies as slaves, the man was ahead of his time in most things particularly genocide, and despite trying he never quite succeeded, the English in the 1840s did a much better job.

Subject: RE: BS: The Curse of Cromwell
From: robomatic
Date: 11 Oct 06 - 11:57 AM

Loved The Movie

Subject: RE: BS: The Curse of Cromwell
From: GUEST,Cats
Date: 11 Oct 06 - 07:19 AM

I have musket ball holes in my bedroom wall and cannon balls in my garden because of him...Our house came under fire in the English Civil War on the retreat from the Seige of Lostwithiel, 1644.

Subject: RE: BS: The Curse of Cromwell
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 11 Oct 06 - 06:52 AM

"The standards of his time..."

So lets have no more silliness about witch trials or judicial torture or the slave trade or torture executions or religious persecution or historical anti-semitism or genital mutilation of women and so forth. All well within the standards of the relevant time and/or place.

Subject: RE: BS: The Curse of Cromwell
From: GUEST,Janine
Date: 11 Oct 06 - 06:38 AM

You have to judge O.C. as a man of his time. Although his military conquest of Ireland was hardly within what we would regards in the 20th/21st centuries as military acceptable (was the bombing of Dresden?), it was certainly well within the standards of his time. That's no excuse but he was certainly no Bush/Blaire.

Janine

Subject: RE: BS: The Curse of Cromwell
From: Bruce from Bathurst
Date: 11 Oct 06 - 04:18 AM

The husband of the Governor of New South Wales is Sir Nicholas Shehadie, a former front row forward who played rugby union for Australia for over ten years back in the 1940s and 50s.

A few years ago Mary Robinson, who was President of Ireland at the time, was on a State visit to Australia and was introduced to Sir Nick. She told him that although the Irish are a warm and forgiving people, there are two individuals who would not be welcomed back to Eire. One was Oliver Cromwell, still not forgiven for his activities in Ireland 450 years ago. The other was Nick Shehadie, still not forgiven for knocking out one of the star Irish players in a match in Dublin 50 years ago.

He said she was smiling when she told him, so it must be true!

Bruce

Subject: RE: BS: The Curse of Cromwell
From: Big Al Whittle
Date: 11 Oct 06 - 04:15 AM

Hm ....sounds a bit like the historian who could prove the inhabitatnts of Belsen had a reasonable enough diet.

He didn't get a reputation like that for a few lapses in table manners.

Subject: RE: BS: The Curse of Cromwell
From: GUEST
Date: 11 Oct 06 - 03:30 AM

Pasted from Amazon. Might be of interest.

Cromwell An Honourable Enemy by Tom Reilly

Synopsis
This re-examination of the Cromwellian invasion of Ireland argues that the viewpoint of Cromwell as a genocidal maniac and religious fanatic lacks solid evidence. Placing his conquest within the rules of war at the time, it concludes he was the first successful military conqueror of Ireland.

From the Author
This book is ahead of its time
As author of this book, I feel that many historians in Ireland are not ready yet for 'an honourable' Cromwell - nor indeed are the people of Ireland. I thought that I would change the history books and public opinion about this much maligned historical figure by publishing the truth about Cromwell's Irish campaign. The reaction - among the under forties on the whole - was good, but among historians and the over forties it was bad. They can't seem to accept that an amateur could discover such a fundamental flaw in Irish history ie that neither Cromwell or his men ever engaged in the killing of any unarmed civilians throughout his entire nine month campaign. The facts are there for all to see. But God bless Ireland the past is still the present here and we MUST have our English hate figures - despite the truth. How sad is that?
Tom Reilly Author - Cromwell An Honourable Enemy

Subject: RE: BS: The Curse of Cromwell
From: John O'L
Date: 11 Oct 06 - 03:29 AM

...with a bit of bin Laden thrown in?

Subject: RE: BS: The Curse of Cromwell
From: Rapparee
Date: 10 Oct 06 - 09:49 PM

Sort of like George Bush and Tony Blair, huh?

Subject: RE: BS: The Curse of Cromwell
From: Nickhere
Date: 10 Oct 06 - 09:29 PM

In Ireland, as you know, he is remembered as being a sectarian genocidal maniac on a rampage. Unfortunately we had no CNN those days to broadcast our plight around the world and put a stop to him in his tracks. When I was young, old people might talk of where he had hanged so-and-so, as if it had happened yesterday. I was watching a documentary on him on BBc ages back, and saw how he might be perceived as a hero among his own people, liberating them from the yoke of corrupt monarchy and establishing England's first republic of sorts (making him an odd icon for Northern loyalists, when you think about it). Then of course he began to cut down the maypoles, ban laughing and insist everyone dress in black.... pretty soon the English got tired of him as well. It struck me that he was a man who genuinely seemed to believe he had a mission. He seemed to have no doubt that what he was doing was absolutely the right thing.

Subject: RE: BS: The Curse of Cromwell
From: Paul from Hull
Date: 10 Oct 06 - 08:55 PM

*G*

Subject: RE: BS: The Curse of Cromwell
From: Bert
Date: 10 Oct 06 - 08:14 PM

More like a lot of both.

Subject: RE: BS: The Curse of Cromwell
From: Rapparee
Date: 10 Oct 06 - 07:15 PM

Like everyone else, a little bit of both.

Subject: BS: The Curse of Cromwell
From: GUEST
Date: 10 Oct 06 - 07:10 PM

There seems to be a lot of interest in Oliver Cromwell in another thread here. So was the man a hero or villain ?