Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all,
Vanilla are planning an update to the site on April 24th (next Wednesday). It is a major PHP8 update which is expected to boost performance across the site. The site will be down from 7pm and it is expected to take about an hour to complete. We appreciate your patience during the update.
Thanks all.

What History Book are you reading?

13»

Comments

  • #62
    Jesus.
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 4,794 ✭✭✭Jesus.


    dubhthach wrote: »
    There's also the fact that at home your own worse enemey was often your own kin doing deals with the English. It's a trope repeated throughout the 16th century, of course as "conquests" go it took the Tudors close on 70 years to come to a final solution to their "re-conquest"

    17th Century mate and the Jacobites were soundly beaten throughout that war. I don't think you can put that down to dodgy deals from 100 years before that.

    The fact that Limerick capitulated so quickly in the end, considering they were well dug in and had supplies en route from France, is almost embarrassing from an Irish point of view.

    Whatever way you dress it up, "we" were hammered that time and we can only look to subsequent generations for inspiration in a patriotic sense (EG '98, '19-'21).

    I know this statement will be controversial but that generation let Ireland down. Pure and simple.


  • #63
    Ed_Stephens
    Registered Users Posts: 227 ✭✭Ed_Stephens


    I'm about to start The Kennedy Detail which is about two secret service agents, Clint Hill and Gerald Blaine and their story of what happened on November 22nd 1963. Thought it would be interesting to hear the "Other" side of the story.

    Just finished a book called Bobby Fischer goes to war about the 1972 World chess championship between the American Bobby Fischer and the Soviet Union's Boris Spassky which turned into a cold war media battle. Very interesting which delves deep into the flaws of Fischer widely acknowledged to be the greatest chess player of all time.


  • #64
    laoch na mona
    Registered Users Posts: 2,965 ✭✭✭laoch na mona


    Jesus. wrote: »

    I know this statement will be controversial but that generation let Ireland down. Pure and simple.

    unless you don't identify the aristocratic cause of the jacobites as being the cause of ireland


  • #65
    Jesus.
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 4,794 ✭✭✭Jesus.


    laoch na mona wrote: »
    unless you don't identify the aristocratic cause of the jacobites as being the cause of ireland

    Catholic and for want of a better word - "native" - Ireland


  • #66
    dubhthach
    Registered Users Posts: 3,284 ✭✭✭dubhthach


    Jesus. wrote: »
    17th Century mate and the Jacobites were soundly beaten throughout that war. I don't think you can put that down to dodgy deals from 100 years before that.

    The fact that Limerick capitulated so quickly in the end, considering they were well dug in and had supplies en route from France, is almost embarrassing from an Irish point of view.

    Whatever way you dress it up, "we" were hammered that time and we can only look to subsequent generations for inspiration in a patriotic sense (EG '98, '19-'21).

    I know this statement will be controversial but that generation let Ireland down. Pure and simple.

    I'm talking specificy about the Tudors when Ireland was actually conquered. The wars of the 17th century were another matter. As for Limerick surrendering it's quite simple the Jacobite field army had been annihilated at Aughrim, they didn't have any other options than to seek terms.

    They weren't fighting for Ireland anyways they were fighting for James II. The last generation to "fight for Ireland" (your words) in that century were those who fell at Kinsale in 1601. Given that they were up against an allied army of Dutch, English and Danes it's hardly surprising, the Dutch probably had one of the best pools of military talent at the end of the 17th century.

    1641 was more about landed elites trying to get their estates back in comparison.


  • Advertisement
  • #67
    bobbyss
    Registered Users Posts: 5,189 ✭✭✭bobbyss


    Getting through George V1 by Sarah Bradford. A lot of unnecessary details at the start re menus and food and different types of animals hunted by different royals and all that sort of thing. Was he some kind of monk or what? Little or nothing really about interest in women outside his courting of his future wife (Bowes Lyon) who really had her eye on his brother it seems. His life, in fact, is well worth reading about too. Any recommendations?

    Have a book on Roosevelt by Conrad Black on my shelf for a long while, anybody read that?

    I also have Doris Kearns' book on Lincoln ready but I would like a straightforward biography of him and I think her book is about three other rivals and not necessarily about Lincoln primarily? That is what is putting me off it even though I believe it has got outstanding reviews. Anybody read that?


  • #68
    Manach
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 9,659 Mod ✭✭✭✭Manach


    @bobbyss I'd recommend another Sarah Bradford book on Disraeli as being one of the best bio's I've read. Heard decent reviews about Black's Roosevelt but starting myself on the other Teddy Roosevelt by Morris.


  • #69
    bobbyss
    Registered Users Posts: 5,189 ✭✭✭bobbyss


    Manach wrote: »
    @bobbyss I'd recommend another Sarah Bradford book on Disraeli as being one of the best bio's I've read. Heard decent reviews about Black's Roosevelt but starting myself on the other Teddy Roosevelt by Morris.

    Ok Thanks Manach, will keep eye out for it. Is it recent?

    Re her book on George V1 she mentions, almost in passing the changing of the royal name to Windsor and how popular that seems to have been with many of the royals. (Not sure what the future Edward V111 said of it). She could have written more about that, for example, as opposed to miscellaneous stuff like how many pheasants were shot by peripheral royals.

    Not much detail in what George actually studied at Cambridge. At school there seems to have been league tables of how students did and he featured about 67 in a class of 69. (I remember lists like that when I myself was at school and how embarrassing it was for my parents and myself to come in so low in a class of 22. Maybe on a good day I came in at 16. never higher). The royals never were that academic, were they? Edward V11 was particularly inept it seems and impossible as a student.

    Got this week a book on the Normans by a Marc Morris. I am quite sure it is not the same Morris? Got that book from the library but was so impressed with the little I read of it that I had to get my own copy. That will be for the next rainy day(s). Also have enormous bio of the present queen by William Shawcross which I got for the pricely sum of 1 Euro in second hand shop.


Advertisement