• It has come to our attention that some users may have been "banned" when they tried to change their passwords after the site was hacked due to a glitch in the old vBulletin software. This would have occurred around the end of February and does not apply after the site was converted to Xenforo. If you believe you were affected by this, please contact a staff member or use the Contact us link at the bottom of any forum page.

1641 Rebellion whats the truth


former wesleyan

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 29, 2009
Messages
25,811
To be debated on DRIVETIME now.
 

kerdasi amaq

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 24, 2009
Messages
4,690
Could paid agent provocateurs have been used to incite events? If so, who would benefit?​
 
Last edited:

Stasia

Active member
Joined
Nov 19, 2008
Messages
273
Genocide?

Now, now we’ll teach the shameless Scot to purge his thieving maw,
Now, now the Court will fall to pray, for Justice is the Law,
Now shall the Undertaker square, for once, his loose accounts,
We’ll strike, brave boys, a fair amount from all his false amounts.

Come, trample down their robber rule, and smite its venal spawn,
Their foreign laws, their foreign church, their ermine and their lawn,
With all the specious fry of fraud that robbed us of our own;
And plant our ancient laws again, beneath our lineal throne.


These verses are in the voice of a 1641 Ulster Catholic rebel, speaking after a massacre of 3000 (it is claimed) uninvolved and innocent Catholic men, women and children at Islandmagee, near Larne, Co. Antrim, and while the 1641 rebels’ retaliatory massacre of Protestants was in progress. Catholic clerics sheltered Protestants to protect them from rebel vengeance. The speaker continues:

Pity! No, no, you dare not, Priest – not you, our Father, dare
Preach to us now that Godless creed – the murderer’s blood to spare;
To spare his blood, while tombless still our slaughtered kin implore
“Graves and revenge” from Guibin-Cliffs and Carraic’s bloody shore!

They banned our faith, they banned our lives, they trod us into earth,
Until our very patience stirred their bitter hearts to mirth;
Even this great flame which wraps them now, not we, but they, have bred,
Yes, this is their own work, and now THEIR WORK BE ON THEIR HEAD.

An Orange song commemorates this event, commemorates Belfast Lough “running red with Papist blood” at Carrickfergus. The poem above, called “The Muster of the North”, was written by Charles Gavan Duffy, a future Member of Parliament at Westminster, and future Premier of the State of Victoria in Australia..

In stating the rebel case two centuries after the 1641 events, “Young Ireland” leader Duffy was not advocating a replay of 1641. He was explaining that genocide was what was afoot. It’s just that the British settler movement was much better at it than anybody else over the centuries.

Cyril Falls (The Birth of Ulster, 1936) wrote a history of the Plantation from a pro-Planter perspective. He said that he could not understand why the native Irish regarded Cromwell as the greatest enemy, as Sir Arthur Chichester committed infinitely worse atrocities in the early 1600’s, clearing the way for the settlers. Cyril Falls acknowledged that the natives suffered. He compared the Ulster indigenous to the American Indians, his position being, in effect, that “you can’t make an omelette [the Plantation] without breaking eggs”.
 

The Salmon of Knowledge

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 3, 2010
Messages
465
Two forregin aul monarchs, in battle did join,
each wanting his head, on the back of our coins,
if the irish had sense we'd of drowned both in the Boyne,
And Partition thrown into the ocean!
 

Green eyed monster

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 13, 2008
Messages
2,438
These verses are in the voice of a 1641 Ulster Catholic rebel, speaking after a massacre of 3000 (it is claimed) uninvolved and innocent Catholic men, women and children at Islandmagee, near Larne, Co. Antrim, and while the 1641 rebels’ retaliatory massacre of Protestants was in progress. Catholic clerics sheltered Protestants to protect them from rebel vengeance. The speaker continues:
Indeed, there had been dozens of massacres on this scale in Ireland from around 1550-1660 and the massacres in Ireland (but especially in Ulster) against Catholics continued throughout the duration of this war in Ireland, just as they had preceded it. Eoghan Roe O'Neill went on to hang some of those involved in 1641, was this a political move - to secure a more easier alliance with others in Ireland? Maybe a gesture motivated by a fear of planter 'retaliations' in Ulster (not wanting to see ethnic bloodshed continue on the scale it was at - he himself remarked on the magnitude of the suffering in Ulster when he landed in Ireland)?

Cyril Falls (The Birth of Ulster, 1936) wrote a history of the Plantation from a pro-Planter perspective. He said that he could not understand why the native Irish regarded Cromwell as the greatest enemy, as Sir Arthur Chichester committed infinitely worse atrocities in the early 1600’s, clearing the way for the settlers. Cyril Falls acknowledged that the natives suffered. He compared the Ulster indigenous to the American Indians, his position being, in effect, that “you can’t make an omelette [the Plantation] without breaking eggs”.
He has a point in a sense, Elisabeth's privateers and those of the other Tudor rulers were more animalistic in the level of violence they brought - slaughtering people and sticking their heads on pikes, burning Catholics alive and so forth without hesitation, Cromwell's crimes (though they did involve savagery and massacres too) often took the form of policies and evils codified in 'law', it was different measures for different times - the Tudors found and intact Gaelic civilisation which they felt they had to unmake using extreme violence, Cromwell had already conquered a country already largely controlled by forces with loyalty to Britain (the Confederation of Kilkenny was not exactly an independence movement) so the country had already been softened enough that the laws and policies could just be changed and the screws turned that way.

Perhaps its been done to undermine the groups that peddle the massacre stories
The site states that the numbers of dead and the severity of the atrocities was actually multiplied by pamphleteers at the time into hundreds of thousands to give Cromwell in England the propaganda he needed to justify the severity of the destruction he wrought when he invaded.. this is not in dispute, just the depositions that were received, so i think this project is merely to see if it was exaggerated closer to the source too.

The British unified the Scots and the English in spirit through mutual animosity towards the Irish Catholic, this was part of the reason why anti-Catholic sentiment had for centuries been carefully nurtured in Britain - beyond all reason (~not something so trivial and petty as hatred or bigotry but a best laid plan~), Protestantism was the main glue holding England, Scotland, Wales and the Pro-British element in Ireland together. The idea of the massacre of Scots in the North and the perceived 'avenging' of this by the English warlord must have played a significant role in that in the 17thC, Unifying Scotland to England was always a more important goal for Westminster as they shared the same island and so it gave them security to be one land united, if you ask me this is the real reason why James I preferred that Scots be used to plant Ireland (he was also the first unified Anglo-Scottish King, plans to achieve unification had been long in planning - going back to the early 16thC), he knew the divisions that could be exploited between Irish and Scottish people and how this would benefit England and their dream of British unification, consider that only 3 centuries earlier Scotland in an alliance with France (then England's enemy) had even landed troops in Ireland in alliance with the Gael to expel the English presence. James had the most diabolical long term plans, in the end the Stuarts were only tools though and the line was thrown away when it had served it's purpose.
 

Casualbets

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 7, 2004
Messages
1,638
I'm of the opinion that the massacres that did occur were the result of local groups taking the opportunity to exact vengeance in an uprising that due to its geographical distribution and the fact that its original leaders weren't (as far as I know) militarily trained had at the first fairly little central co-ordination and didn't until owen roe o'neill joined them. I don't believe it was a policy of the leaders per se. I'll admit a smidgin of personal interest as I'm descended from Phelim O'Neill.
 

tooler

Member
Joined
Jul 28, 2009
Messages
10
I'm of the opinion that the massacres that did occur were the result of local groups taking the opportunity to exact vengeance in an uprising that due to its geographical distribution and the fact that its original leaders weren't (as far as I know) militarily trained had at the first fairly little central co-ordination and didn't until owen roe o'neill joined them. I don't believe it was a policy of the leaders per se. I'll admit a smidgin of personal interest as I'm descended from Phelim O'Neill.
you might like this then

Welcome to The Association of O'Neill Clan Website

me too
 

An Gilladaker

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 23, 2009
Messages
4,313
I'm of the opinion that the massacres that did occur were the result of local groups taking the opportunity to exact vengeance in an uprising that due to its geographical distribution and the fact that its original leaders weren't (as far as I know) militarily trained had at the first fairly little central co-ordination and didn't until owen roe o'neill joined them. I don't believe it was a policy of the leaders per se. I'll admit a smidgin of personal interest as I'm descended from Phelim O'Neill.
The oul Brits are coming clean :rolleyes::rolleyes:


http://www.politics.ie/northern-ireland/126313-brits-coming-clean-black-propaganda.html
 

An Gilladaker

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 23, 2009
Messages
4,313
It will be interesting what Ed Moloney will come up with when he reads this bound to be links with present day republicans
 

liamfoley

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 27, 2008
Messages
3,282
The depositions are of dubious veracity because they were often used by people to prove that they had a claim to land, claims that were often spurious. The 1641 Depositions were meant to be transcribed and printed in the mid 1930s but for various administrative and political reasons their publication was postponed. Less than 15 years after the war of independence some of the depositions were seen as inflammatory.
 

Molly Maguire

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 20, 2010
Messages
3,484
Website
www.slotpb.com
These verses are in the voice of a 1641 Ulster Catholic rebel, speaking after a massacre of 3000 (it is claimed) uninvolved and innocent Catholic men, women and children at Islandmagee, near Larne, Co. Antrim, and while the 1641 rebels’ retaliatory massacre of Protestants was in progress. Catholic clerics sheltered Protestants to protect them from rebel vengeance. The speaker continues:
3000 killed at Islandmagee in 1641, can hardly be 3000 souls living there now.
 

British Citizen

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 26, 2010
Messages
1,197
3000 killed at Islandmagee in 1641, can hardly be 3000 souls living there now.
Beautiful part of the country.

Yeah, it would be hard to believe you'd have found 3,000 catholics there back in 1641 - but if you look at the picture below it is one of the most easily defendable areas in the country. If there was widespread inter-ethnic violence at the time it would have been one of the best places to try and go for defence/shelter.

Only one way in or out with plenty of vantage points around to see who's heading towards you.

 

Molly Maguire

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 20, 2010
Messages
3,484
Website
www.slotpb.com
Allowing for 350 years of rising sea levels, just wonder how much of a safe area Island Magee would be at low tide in the 1640s.
Maybe it was an exit point for Scotland.
 

JohnD66

Well-known member
Joined
May 20, 2010
Messages
3,316
1641 has been used as a propaganda tool ever since - by both sides. Personally I find it somewhat depressing that we still look at it in a partisan way.

How do we even know if our ancestors were in Ireland at the time and if they were how do we know which religion/ethnicity they were?

For what it's worth, the evidence shows that yes there was a great number of attacks on Protestant civilaisn in 1641-42, not all of them lethal and that this was more than paid back by government froces/Portestant militias in 1642/43 - until a ceasefire was negoatiated. (The war was not ove but the rebellion phase was)

Anyway, re the general theme of 17th century Irish history, we there are two audio interviews with historian Padraig Lenihan (UL) at the The Irish Story .

The first one, sets the general context Padraig Lenihan and the 17th Century in Ireland | The Irish Story

The second one is specifically about war (Lenihan is a military historian) War in 17th Century Ireland | The Irish Story
 
Top