Oliver Cromwell: Son Of A Bitch

Curly Judge · 11-08-2012 11:03AM

From my reading of Irish history, what happened post William of Orange was far worse than anything post Oliver Cromwell.

later12 · 11-08-2012 11:04AM

When is history ever black and white. It's not even black and white on what Hitler was doing in Germany (yeah yeah, well it isn't).

Just like Hitler though, all of the good things that Cromwell did - however socially perverted the genesis of his ideals - do not outstrip nor excuse the bad.

I think people get irritated when the positive features of Cromwell's reign (and it was a reign) are pointed out. That's because sometimes people prefer black and white caricatures of men, and the prospect of a portrait in technicolour threatens to dissipate their long held passions associated with Cromwell, and patriotism, and Ireland. Also, trolls like to do it a lot.

I don't feel like celebrating Cromwell; I don't think he should be celebrated anywhere on these islands. But some of his breakthroughs do deserve a positive recognition, I think that's reasonable.

Anyway, if you are the vengeful type, the story of his unfortunate head is worth a read
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oliver_Cromwell's_head

Colmustard · 11-08-2012 11:11AM

Duckworth_Luas wrote: »

Oh for ****s sake!!!!!!! I've read some stupid **** on Boards but this is the Katie Taylor gold medal winner!

How about this then.

I am for putting a big statue of him on Horseback in bronze across from the GPO just to p1ss off all the nationalists.

Colmustard · 11-08-2012 11:13AM

The thing about history is, it changes all the time.

Duckworth_Luas · 11-08-2012 11:14AM

Colmustard wrote: »

How about this then.

I am for putting a big statue of him on Horseback in bronze across from the GPO just to p1ss off all the nationalists.

What nationalists? Cromwell is a hero to British nationalists!

Anyway, why would you like to have a statue of your hero outside a knickers shop?

Seriously, grow up!

Wibbs · 11-08-2012 11:17AM

Colmustard wrote: »

I am following that Sky Atlantic series the Borgias, it dramatises, the selling of indulgences, the power struggles, the hypocrisy and general C church corruption. t's a camp show and not terribly accurate but the gist of the church back then is all there.

They could each be as bad as the other. At that time the Protestant churches were killing way more "witches" and heretics than the inquisition(the italian inquisition couldn't even hand down death sentences). They had swivel eyed loony witch finders paid to round up and frame people for witchcraft. Puritans, just one of the mad number of post reformation sects(they were damn near coming up with a new one every week in England) were... well puritanical. Restrictive, joyless fcukers*. The phrase "he/she has catholic tastes" meaning they have a wide range of tastes illustrates the differences. Corruption and power struggles were just as rife.

That Borgia pope while being OTT in some respects was also one of the few popes to not be a towering anti semite. He gave sanctuary to thousands from the rest of Europe and let them keep practicing their faith. That Borgias show while entertaining is about as historically accurate as the Tudors. The real Borgia pope was a short tubby Spaniard with a big nose. Jeremy Irons he was not.

Heel of the hunt, Prod or Cath they could be as equally good or as equally batshít crazy and evil as each other.

*they didn't wear black either as believe it or not black was considered ostentatious because it was expensive to get a colourfast black dye. They wore muted browns.

Colmustard · 11-08-2012 11:18AM

Duckworth_Luas wrote: »

What nationalists? Cromwell is a hero to British nationalists!

Anyway, why would you like to have a statue of your hero outside a kickers shop?

Seriously, grow up!

A "British nationalist" LOL

Do not think it would look good on the traffic Island across from the GPO. For entertainment we could watch all the nationalist faint when it is unveiled.

later12 · 11-08-2012 11:22AM

Colmustard wrote: »

A "British nationalist" LOL

gutenberg · 11-08-2012 11:26AM

Wibbs wrote: »

They could each be as bad as the other. At that time the Protestant churches were killing way more "witches" and heretics than the inquisition(the italian inquisition couldn't even hand down death sentences). They had swivel eyed loony witch finders paid to round up and frame people for witchcraft. Puritans, just one of the mad number of post reformation sects(they were damn near coming up with a new one every week in England) were... well puritanical. Restrictive, joyless fcukers*. The phrase "he/she has catholic tastes" meaning they have a wide range of tastes illustrates the differences. Corruption and power struggles were just as rife.

That Borgia pope while being OTT in some respects was also one of the few popes to not be a towering anti semite. He gave sanctuary to thousands from the rest of Europe and let them keep practicing their faith. That Borgias show while entertaining is about as historically accurate as the Tudors. The real Borgia pope was a short tubby Spaniard with a big nose. Jeremy Irons he was not.

Heel of the hunt, Prod or Cath they could be as equally good or as equally batshít crazy and evil as each other.

*they didn't wear black either as believe it or not black was considered ostentatious because it was expensive to get a colourfast black dye. They wore muted browns.

Bolded bit: I can assure that they did.

LordSutch · 11-08-2012 11:31AM

NinjaK wrote: »

boards is full of west brits, they probably support what he did

Will never forgive him what he did to the Abbeys, Glastonbury Abbey comes to mind :mad: Cromwell was/is a hero to many, and in equal measure his memory is a curse (I fall into this catagory) - who the hell did he think he was anyway? Complicated character was Cromwell, and it certainly wasnt black and white when it cam to his time In Ireland, he came here to make war with the Royalists didn't he? The Irish being in the line of fire? < questionmark?

Colmustard · 11-08-2012 11:31AM

Wibbs wrote: »

They could each be as bad as the other. At that time the Protestant churches were killing way more "witches" and heretics than the inquisition(the italian inquisition couldn't even hand down death sentences). They had swivel eyed loony witch finders paid to round up and frame people for witchcraft. Puritans, just one of the mad number of post reformation sects(they were damn near coming up with a new one every week in England) were... well puritanical. Restrictive, joyless fcukers*. The phrase "he/she has catholic tastes" meaning they have a wide range of tastes illustrates the differences. Corruption and power struggles were just as rife.

That Borgia pope while being OTT in some respects was also one of the few popes to not be a towering anti semite. He gave sanctuary to thousands from the rest of Europe and let them keep practicing their faith. That Borgias show while entertaining is about as historically accurate as the Tudors. The real Borgia pope was a short tubby Spaniard with a big nose. Jeremy Irons he was not.

Heel of the hunt, Prod or Cath they could be as equally good or as equally batshít crazy and evil as each other.

*they didn't wear black either as believe it or not black was considered ostentatious because it was expensive to get a colourfast black dye. They wore muted browns.

LOL
To say the least about that show, but like the Tuders (another camp show) it is entertaining and Henry the 8th was no jonathan rhys meyers.

But my central point is you cannot judge history or its players using modern sentiments or values. Religion was real to them, as was the fires of hell, democracy and the rights of man was a fledgling idea, one which ironically was started with Cromwell's regicide.

Although his revolution largely failed and led to the restoration. Parliament was never to be weakened again and from that it grew into modern democracy. Modern Democracy was not Cromwell purpose. it was very far from it. But his revolution did germinate it.

hooradiation · 11-08-2012 11:32AM

Colmustard wrote: »

I'm more an East Brit.

More of a South Brit myself - it's pretty sweet deal, we get the most of the days sun for a start.

Kotek Besar · 11-08-2012 11:34AM

Guys why do you all hate Oliver Cromwell so much? I'm English and I remember being in year 5 in primary school, learning history, and we were all taught that Oliver Cromwell was great. What are they teaching you all in Irish schools??

Colmustard · 11-08-2012 11:34AM

later12 wrote: »

He means a unionist as in Scotland, England, Wales, Northern Ireland (act of union etc)

Duckworth_Luas · 11-08-2012 11:35AM

Kotek Besar wrote: »

Guys why do you all hate Oliver Cromwell so much? I'm English and I remember being in year 5 in primary school, learning history, and we were all taught that Oliver Cromwell was great. What are they teaching you all in Irish schools??

The history of Ireland!

golden lane · 11-08-2012 11:37AM

history is not made......it just happens.....

LordSutch · 11-08-2012 11:37AM

Duckworth_Luas wrote: »

The history of Ireland!

But is the history of Cromwell properly taught here???

later12 · 11-08-2012 11:40AM

Kotek Besar wrote: »

Guys why do you all hate Oliver Cromwell so much? I'm English and I remember being in year 5 in primary school, learning history, and we were all taught that Oliver Cromwell was great. What are they teaching you all in Irish schools??

Ah come off it.

Well sure you know yourself, the same really. Great fella. Said his prayers & kissed his mother & went to bed, quiet chap, Cromwell.

Colmustard wrote: »

He means a unionist as in Scotland, England, Wales, Northern Ireland (act of union etc)

No British Unionism is similar to British Nationalism, but Nationalism is a wider movement encompassing more issues as opposed to the maintenance of the Union.

Kotek Besar · 11-08-2012 11:42AM

LordSutch wrote: »

But is the history of Cromwell properly taught here???

I'd question whether history of anything is taught properly in Ireland. A while back my friend's 10 year old son was chatting to me about his day in school here in Waterford. He told me that they were learning history. The teacher was reading and encouraged the pupils that every time she mentioned the word "English" that they should boo.

Colmustard · 11-08-2012 11:46AM

Kotek Besar wrote: »

Guys why do you all hate Oliver Cromwell so much? I'm English and I remember being in year 5 in primary school, learning history, and we were all taught that Oliver Cromwell was great. What are they teaching you all in Irish schools??

We were thought he was the big big boogey man and if we were bold he would take us away in our sleep. I kid you not.

I don't think the Catholic church ever forgave him and in general they were the ones that set the curriculum in this country.

I don't know what the curriculum is like now but in my time if you liked history you were better off studying it yourself.

Duckworth_Luas · 11-08-2012 11:47AM

Kotek Besar wrote: »

I'd question whether history of anything is taught properly in Ireland. A while back my friend's 10 year old son was chatting to me about his day in school here in Waterford. He told me that they were learning history. The teacher was reading and encouraged the pupils that every time she mentioned the word "English" that they should boo.

Was she reading the Irish Press report about the 1987 Munster Hurling Semi Final? Nicky was good that day but to be still booing him today in Waterford is a bit much!

Cú Giobach · 11-08-2012 11:57AM

Colmustard wrote: »

We were thought he was the big big boogey man and if we were bold he would take us away in our sleep. I kid you not.

Why should that be so hard to believe, since societies all over the planet have used similar "boogey men" based on real historical figures to scare children, and people have done so for millennia.

Colmustard · 11-08-2012 11:57AM

History what is the point. Is history significant, is it for nations to create their own myths, their own identities, their own claims to territory.

Which is true “ if we don’t learn from history we are doomed to repeat it” or “ if history teaches us one thing we are doomed to repeat it”.

Wibbs · 11-08-2012 11:57AM

gutenberg wrote: »

Bolded bit: I can assure that they did.

Apologies G. Brainfart. They had the power but rarely used it. One was far less likely to be executed in front of an Inquisition court than in front of a Protestant court(if it even got that far) or a secular court at the time. The Roman Inquisition stats show less than 2% of cases ended in death. In a secular court in England and elsewhere at the time you could be hanged for stealing a side of lamb and few Protestant "courts" were not show trials whipped up on ignorant religious frenzy with a verdict and sentence decided well in advance.

The image of thousands being tortured for confessions by the Inquisition is also highly spurious. Torture was only allowed in certain specific heresy cases so was quite rare and could only be applied the once and if the person recanted a confession gained under torture that confession was considered null and void(there are a few places in the world today where that's not the case). They had far more rules and regulations in it's application than the secular courts. The secular courts could hand down torture as a punishment, which was considered beyond the Pale by the inquisition. Even the images of the Auto de fe procedure are bogus.

Oh sure the inquisitions had their batshít crazy evil moments(particularly regarding Jews), but the vast majority of the images we associate with the inquisitions in Europe are tall tale invention and propaganda to raise the ire of their readers by hard liner Protestant commentators.

Colmustard · 11-08-2012 12:05PM

Cú Giobach wrote: »

Why should that be so hard to believe, since societies all over the planet have used similar "boogey men" based on real historical figures to scare children, and people have done so for millennia.

I don't disagree, but historical players and figures were human, humans have their own motivations, failings and virtues. Hitler was by all means one great cntu, but he thought he was giving the German people a 1000 year reich and ending the Jewish problem once and for all. He thought he was doing Germany a great favour.

Cromwell also thought he was on the side of right, "warts and all". I would rather be thought the truest history available and form my own judgement. Not the Catholic churches version.

Curly Judge · 11-08-2012 12:08PM

Could I suggest that people who are interested in a more rounded view than "He was just an Irish hating, English bastard",take up the task of reading this book:
http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/137552.Cromwellhttp:

By a famous Irishwoman.

Duggys Housemate · 11-08-2012 12:11PM

LordSutch wrote: »

Duckworth_Luas wrote: »

The history of Ireland!

But is the history of Cromwell properly taught here???

Yes. It is incorrectly taught in Britain. If at all.

mathepac · 11-08-2012 12:12PM

MadsL wrote: »

Now who is being racist? ..

The term Brit is racist? You really need to stay in more as it's been used constantly all week by the Olympic commentators employed by the British Broadcasting Corporation.

Cú Giobach · 11-08-2012 12:23PM

Colmustard wrote: »

I don't disagree, but historical players and figures were human, humans have their own motivations, failings and virtues. Hitler was by all means one great cntu, but he thought he was giving the German people a 1000 year reich and ending the Jewish problem once and for all. He thought he was doing Germany a great favour.

Cromwell also thought he was on the side of right, "warts and all". I would rather be thought the truest history available and form my own judgement. Not the Catholic churches version.

Any one in their right mind wants to know the reality of history, but I find your "Hitler" comments and comment about the Catholic Church having never forgiven* Cromwell a bit odd.
Though the reasons for those peoples actions is fascinating from a historical point of view and are well worth investigating and learning about, when it comes to forgiveness or even acceptance of the actions, most people (and most particularly the Jewish population) couldn't give a fuck about AH's motives and he shall never be forgiven for them.
The same for Cromwell from an Irish perspective.

*Ignoring "turn the other cheek" and all that stuff for the moment.

Duggys Housemate · 11-08-2012 12:29PM

Its all very well being a revisionist Irish man, but in fact people are "educated" more by their surrounding environments and culture - now Anglo-American in Ireland - than school. The discourse on Ireland, or Catholicism, is therefore based on English speaking ideologies. And to the English, and most English speakers, he was OK.

A good example of English speaking ideologies dominating the discourse is the rants about the Iquisition. As Wibbs continutally points out it has been massively overestimated. But it will be referenced time and time and time again in Atheist forums, as much here as there. It is in the mother's milk of English speakers - unlike, say, the far more recent 30,000 killed in the Mau Mau rebellion. Far more people. Far more recent. Far more forgotten.

And we hear about the crusades, the nasty crusaders - English/Norman more than Irish, as it happens - taking over Jerusalem and killing thousands. This is an anti-Catholic story.

Here is a story about the bombardment and invasion of Alexandria in 1882 - another thing that has dropped down the memory hole. The city, one of the the ancient world's most amazing, was levelled. Just one example.

So, too with Cromwell. He did in fact have a plan for the ethnic cleansing in Ireland, and he did in fact try and implement it. Had it worked we would be as numerous in Ireland as the Native Americans in Chicago. Why forget? English speaking hegememony.

Oliver Cromwell: Son Of A Bitch

Comments