While there was much violence in the 1600’s – which …show more content…
Some might call it a Rebellion as it is historically referred to as. Others might call it a massacre of civilians. Darcy put it as the following, “What began on 23rd October 1641? Was it a rebellion? An uprising? A nationalist rising? A catholic plot? A pre-meditated massacre?” Regardless of what the actual events are called, it is without a doubt, a very violent event which resulted in many deaths. From the murder of Protestants by the Old English to the torturing of English owned animals, many vile, violent acts have been described by Darcy in his book. Phelim O’Neill (Catholic, Irish leader) ordered the murders of one of the survivor’s brother. “The Old English also partook in this violence and killed ‘British Protestants’. O’Neill ordered the execution of Maxwell’s brother and sister-in-law, while other soldiers tortured English animals and killed prominent members of settler society, such as the local school teacher and several landowners. The killings spread as settlers from the lower social orders were attacked. Such was the scale of death and destruction that corpses were left unburied in ditches and on the streets.” The sadistic nature of the 1641 rebellion is hard to comprehend in modern Irish context, but, it is clear that such violence would become the norm for early modern Ireland. Douglas Besharov also backs up the violent streak that the rebellion held. In his book, he wrote, “The Clergy were prime targets of violence because many had ready cash from church fines.” This view is very interesting because it adds a new narrative of violence as a result of greed, rather than as a result of the native Catholics wanting to rid the land of Protestants as other sources claimed. Padraig Lenihan was one such historian who claimed that ‘reconciling religious and political allegiance’ was one of the key reasons why the natives wanted a