Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Was Oliver Cromwell - founder of the British empire - the greatest ever Englishman?
The Daily Mail UK ^ | 1st January 2011 | Dominic Sandbrook

Posted on 12/31/2010 10:16:57 PM PST by Alex Murphy

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-116 next last
To: calex59

You beat me to it.

Samuel Johnson, Lord Acton, Graham Hancock, Michael Palin, J. R. R. Tolkien, Robin Hood, William Byrd, Eric Clapton.....one cannot swing a dead cat in Merrie Olde England without hitting someone superior to Cromwell.


41 posted on 12/31/2010 11:54:01 PM PST by Renfield (Turning apples into venison since 1999!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Alex Murphy

What about William Wilberforce.


42 posted on 01/01/2011 12:01:47 AM PST by savagesusie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Alex Murphy
Cromwell was the man who couldn't climb down. A good man, a strong man who became the very monster against which he originally rebelled. A fascinating, tragic study of the Great Man in history. What he did in Ireland puts him, I think, well outside the bounds of common human decency, and after him the British found themselves grateful for the return of the crown he had banished. I'm not sure one could conjure a more ambiguous judgment.

For me, Churchill.

43 posted on 01/01/2011 12:13:42 AM PST by Billthedrill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RegulatorCountry

That is kind of harsh. Sherman just destroyed property. He didnt try to erase the southern population, just its production.
Cromwell has been compared to Pol Pot. Which, from what I read, is closer to the truth.


44 posted on 01/01/2011 12:14:48 AM PST by Yorlik803 (better to die on your feet than live on your knees.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: RegulatorCountry

You don’t see what you don’t want to.
That’s not my problem, it’s yours.


45 posted on 01/01/2011 12:20:02 AM PST by IrishCatholic (No local Communist or Socialist Party Chapter? Join the Democrats, it's the same thing!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Yorlik803

The Irish entered into a confederacy with English Royalists and the era in question is in fact known as Confederate Ireland, so the comparison of Cromwell to Sherman is very apt for several reasons.

Just how did Oliver Cromwell erase the Irish Catholic population, or attempt to do so? Provide historically documented facts, please, and not wild partisan guesstimates from people with an historic axe to grind.

I do have Irish ancestry, and am not without sympathy. I’ve been there many times and have friends in the Republic of Ireland. I love the country and it’s people. But there is an element of grudge that has built over the centuries that is very much like my beloved south and southerners as far as Sherman.

I also have Anglo-irish ancestry, English who held plantations in Ireland. Scotch-Irish ancestry, too. So, it’s not at all unfamiliar to me, as far as either religon or history. But, my points of view very likely will not match yours, so far as interpretation of historic fact is concerned.

There are two sides to every story, at least, if not more than that.


46 posted on 01/01/2011 12:31:46 AM PST by RegulatorCountry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: IrishCatholic

The article is not anti-Catholic, your church is only mentioned in passing. Cromwell was a controversial figure, and there are reasons Irish Catholics dislike him. But, that’s not the sum total of the man, it was barely touched upon, and your distaste for him is not the sum total of his existence.


47 posted on 01/01/2011 12:37:29 AM PST by RegulatorCountry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: Natural Law

“You are entitled to your own faith and own opinion, but not your own history or facts. Charles I never tried to impose Catholicism on anyone including the Scottish Puritans. His crimes against the Puritans was in not more forcefully imposing the Reformation on the Catholic Scots. He was executed because he lost a civil war in which nearly 5% of the English population was killed. “

The information I posted was obtained from Conservapedia and is not my personal opinion.

Charles I’s persecution, and actual war against, the Scottish puritans is well documented.

If Cromwell overreacted or if his army committed war crimes, I’m not defending that. However, it should not be alleged that he just went about killing Irish Catholics without provocation. It was a war, and just like the war we are in now, innocent people get killed.


48 posted on 01/01/2011 12:38:01 AM PST by Persevero (Homeschooling for Excellence since 1992)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Darren McCarty

“Fighting back? The bastard should have stayed the hell out of Ireland.”

He was commissioned by the Parliament at the time, as a civil war had broken out. He did not start the civil war.

Perhaps you believe that no one should have defended the Scottish Puritans; I disagree with you there.


49 posted on 01/01/2011 12:39:53 AM PST by Persevero (Homeschooling for Excellence since 1992)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: FlyingEagle

Charles I destroyed the Church of England


50 posted on 01/01/2011 1:13:23 AM PST by achilles2000 ("I'll agree to save the whales as long as we can deport the liberals")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: RegulatorCountry
I see him as ... a flawed if occasionally brilliant man who fervently believed what he believed.

Oh, please. Cromwell's disgusting career demonstrated that he only cared about himself. He revolted against his king for simply not having called upon Parliament (of which he was a member) but later, as dictator, he went so far as to actually dissolve a Parliament in session because it didn't give him what he wanted ("It's good to be the king" but 'it's better to be the dictator'). He killed his king for supposed treason against the kingdom while being, himself, the leader of the revolution which initially deposed him. He came to power championing the 'Levelers' and rallying them to his cause, but later, much like Hitler did the SA, he eliminated them after they had served his purpose. He established a psuedo-republic for the declared purpose of instituting rule-of-law, but then proceeded to run the country like a modern third world generalissimo. He destroyed the ancient vestiges of English monarchy in an attempt to end forever the inherited title but, in the fashion of the North Korean Kims, he established his son as his successor. Finally, he killed MANY people, all in the name of Christ, and all of them where Christian.

Cromwell was, truly, the PERFECT Puritan.

51 posted on 01/01/2011 1:37:07 AM PST by Brass Lamp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Alex Murphy
They took the gold off the walls and put it into their bank accounts while the poor remained poor.
52 posted on 01/01/2011 1:46:09 AM PST by Berlin_Freeper (Stupid Obama still lacks the experience needed to be President.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: familyop
Cromwell was one of the predecessors of our American founding fathers for religious freedom.

Those Founders from Virginia, which colony contributed the most in numbers and significance, would heartily disagree. Virginia's status as "The Old Dominion" rests upon the fact that Cromwell's Puritan Revolution never to root in the colony and it remained loyal to royals. Neither would Marylanders agree with you, as their colony had been established to protect Catholics from Puritan persecution. The Carolinians, North and South, would likely have remembered the namesake king of their eponymous colonies. Maybe your idea of "religious freedom" is of the Massachusetts variety.

53 posted on 01/01/2011 2:05:41 AM PST by Brass Lamp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Brass Lamp
Puritan Revolution never to root in the colony

"to" = 'took'.

Happy New Year!

54 posted on 01/01/2011 2:15:16 AM PST by Brass Lamp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: Alex Murphy

Cromwell murdered Charles I. When Charles II finally resumed the throne of England, he had Cromwell executed and Cromwell’s body was left hanging in public for a very long time.


55 posted on 01/01/2011 2:32:29 AM PST by NoControllingLegalAuthority (What this country needs is an enema.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Alex Murphy

Sir Douglas Bader would get my vote.


56 posted on 01/01/2011 2:45:58 AM PST by onona (dbada)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RegulatorCountry

Maybe “Erase” was too strong of a word. But he had no love for Catholics or the Irish. The seige of Drogheda, where he killed 3,500 civilians, including Priests and Nuns and of Wexford where 1500 civilians where put to the sword are examples{ I excluded military casualites because they were under arms, or maybe they werent. But still I didnt add them because they can be justifed}
Of course these figure may be inflated because the Irish hated Cromwell so much they blew up the numbers for propaganda purposes.
But we are looking at these thing from our viewpoint. Mass killing were pretty much the rule durning that time. And when you add religion to this, it got ugly. The irish probily would have done the same if the roles were switched. Religion tends to bring out the ugly in some people.
I am German Catholic so I have no dog in this fight. But the Irish still use his name as a curse. That doesnt happen for no reason.
As for Sherman, There is no evidnace that he committed any type of mass killings. He may have burnt every thing in sight and committed other what we would call “War Crimes” but there was no such things as war crimes in either Cromwell or Shermans time.
I am capable of looking at the two sides of every story. In between the truth is in there. But there is no denying that Cromwell was a cast iron basterd.


57 posted on 01/01/2011 4:10:47 AM PST by Yorlik803 (better to die on your feet than live on your knees.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: calex59

I agree.


58 posted on 01/01/2011 4:14:06 AM PST by sauropod (The truth shall make you free but first it will make you miserable.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Alex Murphy

The most famous of Brits.

James Bond 007,
British, secret agent, of Scottish & Swiss parentage.

Mrs. Emma Peel(The Avengers)
British, dilettante secret agent, partner to John Steed

John Steed(The Avengers)
British, secret agent

The Prisoner
British, former British secret agent?

Sherlock Holmes
British, pioneering consulting detective

Mr. Lee(Enter the Dragon)
Chinese, Hong Kong, British subject, Kung Fu master

Mrs. Emma Peel
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emma_Peel
James Bond
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Bond
Mr. Steed
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Steed
Simon Templar aka: The Saint
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simon_Templar


59 posted on 01/01/2011 4:28:30 AM PST by Mandingo Conservative (Satan was like the first "community organizer", just ask Eve, the first liberal useful idiot!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mandingo Conservative

I prefer Basil Fawlty myself.


60 posted on 01/01/2011 4:46:22 AM PST by sauropod (The truth shall make you free but first it will make you miserable.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-116 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson