Scotch-Irish-L Archives

Archiver > Scotch-Irish > 2005-07 > 1121158468


From: "Brian Orr" <>
Subject: Re: [Sc-Ir] Beatty
Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2005 09:54:33 +0100
References: <200507111838.j6BIcF56026014@mail.rootsweb.com> <42D311DE.41ED7B7A@xtra.co.nz>


Hi Charles, Edward

If you are into the Earl of Antrim the `standard work` I suggest is The MacDonnells of Antrim" by Rev George Hill (1873). An antiquarian volume nowadays but very well worth the read if you can lay hands on`t.

Edward mentions Jane Ohlmeyer. She with John Kenyon edited "The Civil Wars - a Military History of England, Scotland and Ireland 1633-1660 " Oxford Univ. Press 1998. ISBN 0-19-866222-x. An excellent work albeit detailed.

The Scottish end of the unending wars is well covered by "A Regimental History of the Covenanting Armies 1639-1651 " by Edward M Furgol, Edinburgh, John Donald Publishers, 1990. ISBN 0-85976-194-0. Goes into great detail but quite fascinating when tied in with the Marquis of Montrose and his brilliant campaigns obo Charles I.

Happy reading

Brian Orr

Author of "As God is my Witness - The Presbyterain Kirk, the Covenanters and the Ulster Scots2
and "A Laymans Guide to theScottish Reformation".
----- Original Message -----
From: Charles.Clark
To:
Sent: Tuesday, July 12, 2005 1:42 AM
Subject: Re: [Sc-Ir] Beatty


If we struggle to understand these events in retrospect, just think what it must
have been like to live through it all, with the intention of surviving its many
twists and turns. One person who was at the middle of a lot of it, and survived,
was Randal McDonnell, Marquis of Antrim.
A book that I have got, but have not yet got my teeth properly into, is
"Civil War and Restoration in the Three Stuart Kingdoms: TheCareer of Randal
MacDonnell, Marquis of Antrim", by Jane Ohlmeyer. One of these days I will get
to grips with it, I swear, but I've had it a few years now and it's still too
hard!

Note the description of those events as being civil war in the "Three Stuart
Kingdoms", rather than being the "English civil war"
Much like the internecine strife that tore Bosnia, Serbia, Croatia etc apart a
few years ago, all fighting each other and looking for advantage for themselves
Charlie

Edward Andrews wrote:

> I couldn't give you a reading list, for quite honestly I haven't kept up to
> speed on the English Civil War. I'd send you to C V Wedgewood and
> Christopher Hill, but they are ages old - kind of 40 years
> As far as the Scottish bit, I find Patterson A Land Afflicted Scotland and
> the Covenanter Ward 1638 - 1690: John Donald 1998 ISBN 0-85976-486-9 is as
> good as you need unless you are going into very local stuff. In any case
> there is a good Bibliography.
> On Ireland, Haven't a clue. There has been so much new writing about Irish
> History in the past 30 years that there is good stuff out there.
> For 1641 there is Ulster 1641 Aspects of the Rising: Ed MacCuarta Belfast
> 1993. ISBN 0-85389-591-0. This too has got a good Bibliography. No Idea
> about the Cromwellian conquest. Mind you from a Genealogical point of view
> that can be very important, but I haven't looked at it since about 1967.
> I wasn't really wanting to get into a session. I merely wanted to suggest
> that to understand the period you begin with a riot in Edinburgh rather than
> the philosophy of the relationships between King and the emerging middle
> class. No matter how you do it, things are difficult but you are beginning
> with real actions. 1641 means that you have to look at Stafford / Wentworth,
> but again his ties back to Scotland and the Irish Presbyterians who are so
> different from Scottish Presbyterians, and so it goes on.
> Edward Andrews
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: fredastewart [mailto:]
> Sent: Monday, July 11, 2005 6:51 PM
> To: Edward Andrews
> Subject: Re: [Sc-Ir] Beatty
>
> Hello Edward - In attempting to understand the basis of many of these wars,
> I also find much of the available information confusing. You are correct in
> saying it has an anglo slant to it, but being Scot-Ulster Scot I suppose I
> would naturally have that opinion. Would you consider citing some of your
> sources as I would appreciate being able to get a more evenly balanced
> viewpoint.
> Freda Stewart
> Calgary, Alberta
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Edward Andrews" <>
> To: <>
> Sent: Monday, July 11, 2005 7:54 AM
> Subject: RE: [Sc-Ir] Beatty
>
> > Hi Linda.
> > I would suggest that to understand the events between 1637 and 1660 you
> > don't call it the British Civil war.
> > Give it the generic named of the War of the Three Kingdoms.
> > It then breaks down into the Bishops War (Scotland vs. England.) The war
> > of
> > the Confederacy - (AKA the 1641 massacre), The English Civil War
> > (Cavaliers
> > vs. Roundheads with the Scots supporting the Roundheads and having their
> > own
> > wee internal war with Montrose). The War over the killing of the King
> > (Cromwell vs. Scots). The re-conquest of Ireland. (Cromwell vs. Irish).
> > While it is still complicated (and not wholly accurate for the question of
> > who the Irish were is important), at least you are able to put it into
> > sequence.
> > Having studies this period 3 times at University as Irish History, as
> > British (English) History and as Scottish History I am convinced that the
> > easiest is to begin in Scotland where the trouble really started.
> > The problem is that there is this Anglo-centric view of British History,
> > and while things have improved the books which most people will have
> > access
> > to tend to see things from an English point of view.
> > Edward Andrews
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Linda Merle [mailto:]
> > Sent: Monday, July 11, 2005 1:50 PM
> > To:
> > Subject: RE: [Sc-Ir] Beatty
> >
> > Hi John,
> >
> > I've never
> > read a history of the British Civil War that could REALLY make
> > sense of it though I've read lots who tried and most of them
> > admit at the start that they can't really understand it.
> > It was very, very, very complicated -- so I'll stop here before
> > I say something someone disagrees with. The experts
> > disagree on its causes so none of us here will agree <grin>.
> >
> > I got interested in it due to family involvement in England.
> > I also got a book on Cromwell in Ireland that's very interesting. And
> > there's the usual stuff you read on Cromwell
> > in Ireland. Recently an Irishman wrote a book debunking the
> > idea that he massacred civilians at Drogheda and other places.
> > There's apparently no contemporary evidence that he did.
> > (As I'm not a scholar and didn't do this research, I can't
> > argue about it -- I can just point people interested to the
> > book).
> >
> >
> >
> >


This thread: