Posted on 11/14/2006 8:32:32 AM PST by xzins
'The English Civil War, called by some the Puritan Revolution, was a seminal event in world history, but the English themselves preferred to call back Charles II.'
May I respectfully suggest that the restoration was a good thing as Britain then went on to have the greatest empire the world has ever seen ruling directly one quarter of the worlds land area and one third of her people. I doubt that such a small country would have stood so stoically as one behind Cromwell as they did behind their monarchy.
xzins posted a non-theological Cromwell thread here. Thought you might like reading it.
The more striking parallel to Northern Ireland is in Gaza and the West Bank.
Wait until the Iraqi civil war is over.
Oops...I meant, "sectarian violence". Sorry.
Your Scots brother in law is right, when speaking of Scotlanders. But Scotch-Irish is an American term for an American ethnic group of a particular Irish provenance. They were not longer Scots at all. They were Irish, born in Ireland. But their religion, especially, and their lowlands border provenance didn't make them like the rest of the Irish (or the Scots, for that matter). In Ireland proper, they might have been referred to as "Scots-Irish", though they weren't. Orangemen, or later, Ulstermen, would suit; nothing with "Irish" in it really would do.
In America, they were always called "Scotch-Irish". They were never called Scots-Irish. Go back and look through the historires. "Scots-Irish" is a quite recent coinage, derived from the fact that the Scots don't like to be called "Scotch" anymore. But Scotch-Irish aren't Scots. they're Irish, and identifying them as "Scots-(Irish)" implies too much that they're Scots, which wasn't so.
Another great thing about the term "Scotch-Irish" is that using it inevitably brings the objection you raise, with then allows a deeper discussion of the history.
A more accurate term for the Scotch-Irish, if one objects to the "Scotch" part, is not "Scots-Irish". It's just plain Irish. Or perhaps "Irish Presbyterians". This, however, removes the specifically American reference "Scotch-Irish", which wasn't a term used over there for Orangemen at all.
Of all the possible terms, "Scotch-Irish" is the most historically informative, for a lot of complicated reasons.
Should I apologize about the non-theological thrust of this article? :>)
Seriously, the parallels with Iraq are striking.
Wait.
So Cromwell had "right on his die" taking the English into Ireland?
Why is that?
I wasn't arguing with history, just suggesting that by the end of the Interregnum the English had had enough of the Lord Protector's rule. General Monk was among those who welcomed Charles back to the throne.
But then came the Glorious Revolution of 1688, and what amounted to the beginnings of a real constitutional monarchy. The Stuarts' delusion of the divine right of kings was no longer an issue. Especially after the Hanoverians were brought in.
You might be right, but I'm afraid you're rather wrong. While lots of people are unhappy about it, I suspect that the current political status quo in Ireland will stand for the foreseeable future.
I suspect the Stuarts didn't invent that. =]
I suspect the Stuarts didn't invent that. =]
I suspect the Stuarts didn't invent that. =]
Whoa...a triple! Sorry folks...browser trouble.
Go John Knox!
Ah yes, the first recorded example of biological warfare when evil English scientists developed potato blight to destroy their own farms in Ireland and punish their Irish workers. Sir Robert Peel was so disinterested in helping Irelands plight that all he did was repeal the corn laws and spend £100,000 buying in American maize to feed the starving, which at the time was the largest amount ever spent by a govt on aid to a natural disaster. As for your forebears illiteracy, he was in good company - literacy amongst farm workers was not considered much of a requirement anywhere 150 years ago.
A more accurate description of Ireland during this period would be "a boiling pot constantly on the verge of blowing its lid."
There was continual violence and threat of violence, and the government was constantly enforcing various Coercion Acts and suspending habeas corpus. Confrontations with violent mobs and attempted uprisings (such as the Fenian risings) occurred with regularity.
'So Cromwell had "right on his die" taking the English into Ireland?'
I presume you mean 'on his side', not 'on his die'?
Cromwell was a very pious puritan and it never entered his head that God and right were not on his side. You and I may not agree with him, but because he felt so strongly he was right, he felt he needed no propaganda to support God's work.
My own take is that there are much more valuable lessons for us today in learning from the evolution of British Army tactics in dealing with the threat of terrorists among the civilian population in Northern Ireland during the 20th century than with circumstances in Ireland during the English Civil War.
'Scotlanders'? Good grief, some of these Americanisms are getting out of hand. Surely you mean the Scottish don't you Americaner? ;-)
As for the Scotch-Irish term, I will bow to your american subversion of the English language, but the warning stands - don't try to explain how complex yout theory is to a drunk Glaswegian on a Saturday night or you will be sure to receive a Glasgae Kiss for your troubles! :D
How do you think Genghis would have handled the MSM ?
BUMP
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.