I accept.
May I had that in addition, she’s a horse-faced old sow. That’s my position and I shall not budge.
The Silver Cross? It’s our regular meeting place for Londopes and would be a nice co-incidence.
So we’re agreed then, Farter- Bowels isn’t worth a swift one of the wrist 
off you fool off
As a descendant of men who fought in the American Revolution, may I say how glad I am that my ancestors had the good sense to get rid of the monarchy.
And for anybody who admires Cromwell and the New Model Army (good 80s band, though), may I offer one word: Drogheda.
Which with a small modification will undoubtedly be the name of the techno-trash dance remix which will quickly follow.
Please read my first posting about Cromwell and The New Model Army before offering thinly disguised criticisms. I am fully aware of Drogheda, I am also aware of Andersonville so don’t presume you are talking to an uneducated lout without knowledge of history, mine and yours.
As for getting rid of the monarchy I believe the crown of America was offered to George Washington who had the good sense to decline: but of course you meant The British Monarchy.
First off apologies for any historical inaccuracies herein - please point them out to me. Unfortunately i’m at work which means that my history books are, sadly, not to hand and that i am working from memory.
The events at Drogheda were a tragedy. No doubt about it. People died when people didn’t need to die.
But they are not a reason to condemn Cromwell to history as a mass murderer or uber-villain.
Drogheda is, and always will be, difficult to look at objectively. It’s one of those historical events that has accumulated so much legend and propaganda (on both sides) that it has exerted a disproportionate impact on history.
-
It is a fact that Cromwell’s troops stormed the town.
-
It is a fact that Cromwell ordered that all defending troops who had retreated into Millmount (approximately 250 including Garrison commander Sir Arthur Aston) be killed.
-
It is a fact that he ordered that the Steeple at St Peters be set on fire (where other members of the garrison were hiding).
-
It is also almost certainly a fact that a number of Civilians died during the fighting.
On top of these facts, however, has grown up a myth that has probably done Cromwell far more damage than he deserved.
The Defending Soldiers
Yep. He ordered that no quarter be given to the defenders on Millmount. No question about that. Similarly he wasn’t exactly nice to the guys in St Peters.
But, callous and heartless as it sounds, you have to look at the wider picture.
Firstly Cromwell had offered Aston and his whole garrison of approximately 3000 the chance to surrender. They failed to come to terms. By the rules of warfare at the time (and for quite a long time afterwards - look at the behaviour of Wellington’s men in the Peninsular War) Drogheda was now fair game. The lives of the defenders were forfeit.
Does that make Cromwell right for ordering the deaths of a chunk of that garrison? No. Of course not.
What it does mean however is that his actions, whilst morally abhorent to us today, were perfectly acceptable - decidedly mild if you look at some of the things that happened during the thirty years war - and at the very least expected.
Cromwell was, like all of us, a man of his time. If we are going to judge Cromwell by the standards of our times then why don’t we do it with everybody - how many of the great American (and British) heroes and figures owned slaves, for example?
The Civilians
For a start it seems that Cromwell had been pretty clear in ordering that Civilians be spared and there are a distinct lack of eye witness accounts of civilian casualties. There is little evidence to suggest that the large amount of townspeople that were subsequently reported as being killed in the assault were killed at Cromwell’s orders (if they were killed at all).
That obviously doesn’t mean that innocent people didn’t die. They did. This was a siege of a town, not a military structure. It also doesn’t mean that the attackers didn’t deliberately kill civilians. They almost certainly did - again, thats what happens during sieges. The behaviour of the New Model Army was no worse or better than was expected at the time or for a long time after.
Cromwell is responsible for those deaths. There is no question in that. He was the Senior Commander on the scene and therefore the buck stops (or probably “stopeth”) at him. But this doesn’t and shouldn’t be used as evidence that he was a “Monster.” If so, then so is pretty much every other General both “Good” and “Bad” who has ever led an assault that has resulted in the death of an innocent.
I guess at the end of the day i’m not saying that Cromwell was some squeaky clean super perfect heroic guy. He wasn’t. Nobody is. And, i accept that from my English perspective he may be a Great Man and Leader whilst, to Irish eyes, he isn’t.
Hell - if my mum hadn’t upped sticks and moved here from Ireland then maybe i’d be saying the exact opposite to what i’m saying here.
What i am saying though is that your “one word,” Drogheda, shouldn’t - and indeed can’t be used to condemn Cromwell or the New Model Army. The Legend of Drogheda may do - but the reality does not.
G
Gee GARIUS and I thought I was smart, you sure have a way of putting it across.
And therein is a microcosm of most of the problems in the world…
Yes, Egbert was declared Bretwalda. But then succeeding Anglo-Saxon rulers had tussles among themselves, and let the Danes have a chunk of the “kingdom” under the Danelaw (with Danish kings ruling the lot from 1014-1042). It’s slightly neater, historically, to start off from 1066. Doesn’t really matter – there’s been kings (and queens) ruling the island nation for a long, long time, whichever way you look at it.
This thread has been hijacked to the point where it is incomprehensible to the original poster! Back to the main topic!
Wouldn’t it be adorable to see modern Englishmen, eating their Pret et Mange and shopping at Tower Records, breaking their necks to praise the Queen out of fear of decapitation?
If I may hi-jack the hi-jack, can any of you smart folks recommend a good book about Cromwell? Good meaning accurate, more enjoyable to read than a textbook, and somewhat easily found. Thanks in advance, and thanks for the history lesson.
Sorry to intrude, carry on…
Your OP title, ** pizzabrat**, doesn’t say whether you meant constitutional monarchy (as there now is) or absolute monarchy (which I think you’re hankering for.)
Thinking of putting in the job application, by any chance?
Funnily enough, traditionalist though I am, I don’t think an absolute monarchy would be a good thing at all …
Anyway, it’s not an English tradition. The closest we’ve ever come to absolute monarchy was probably under the Tudors, and even they had plenty of religious schisms and political factionalism to cope with … And who was the last King of England to take the “divine right of kings” seriously, and try to rule on an absolute rather than a constitutional basis? None other than Charles I, of course. And everyone in this thread knows what happened to him …
The Big Book usually mentioned is by Fraser Antonia and called, are you sitting down . . ‘Cromwell’. Amazon does that thing with lots of short and long reviews, ’people who bought this also’, etc. so that would be the place to contrast and compare possible options - I just thought, I think Fraser is an English Catholic so she might be a good choice . .
Isn’t Antonia Fraser the daughter of Lord and Lady Longford?
Jjimm - spot on, mon ami, spot on.
Lightingtool - check out the works of Richard Holmes (you can do a search on Amazon). He’s the Historian who did the bit on Cromwell for the BBC “Great Britons” series.
I’ll admit that i’m a bit biaised towards him because he’s a Cromwell and Wellington guy like myself, but his books are generally a good read and not too heavy. You’d probably enjoy them.
Speaking as an Englishman - no not particularly. I quite like my head where it is! 
<Axel Foley Voice>
Well i wasn’t always a Web Developer…
</Axel Foley Voice>
and to be honest i’m with Steve. I’ve got nothing against her Maj and quite like the whole constitutional monarchy thing.
And he’s right about the absolute monarchy thing too - i think one of the “nice” things about the history of the monarchy in this country is that its never been too absolute.
I’m actually re-reading her “Cromwell - Our Chief of Men” at the moment - its one of my favourite books.
Highly recommend it.
I have no idea of her family. She’s married to Pinter still, I believe, and has big feet (you know what they say about women with big feet . . ). Beyond that, I can’t help much . .