To Hell or Barbados: The ethnic cleansing of Ireland

by Sean O'Callaghan

A vivid account of the Irish slave the previously untold story of over 50,000 Irish men, women and children who were transported to Barbados and Virginia.

Genres: History, Nonfiction, Ireland, Irish Literature, Historical, Politics, World History

240 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 2000

Reviews

[Craig Kelly · Rating 1 out of 5]

This b ook is a distortion of history...academics dismiss it and Brendan Behan said about the author...that he "“would not trouble [himself] with [O’Callaghan] one way or another”

Is often cited in racist neo-nazi websites..

[Yaaresse · Rating 2 out of 5]

This book took me a long time to get through, and I couldn't figure out why until I realized I didn't trust it. The scant bibliography and lack of citations (and cherry-picked feeling of what was there) were bothersome, but there was something else I just couldn't quite put my finger on. Ok, right, so the unsupported sensationalist statements were kind of a giant clue. But still...something else. An agenda maybe? A authorial bias that suggested someone was mightily pissed off that historians the world around were somehow conspiring to ignore some massive part of history to suggest white penal transport and indenture in the British colonies is not given its equal weight as the chattel slavery experienced by African slaves? Could be. This might explain why this book and others like this -- which I discovered only after starting this one -- are touted by sites and groups with definite white supremacist leanings while most serious historians dismiss and warn against them.

When the author says in the introduction that he is (was) not a historian, that may be the most unadorned and candid thing in the book. I didn't realize how strong his bias might be, however, until I looked up his biography. A former member of the IRA during The Troubles who later turned informant, he had a colorful past...and one about which the claims he made have been disputed by some. Maybe he just enjoyed sensationalizing things, or maybe he meant well but just didn't understand the difference between making history and researching history. Hard to say. The problem is that this book is the sort of thing that can easily be adopted by those who also have a hard time looking at history critically -- those who are attracted to what we now call (without irony, sadly) "alternative facts."

Unfortunately, I don't know enough about the specifics of the history of the Irish in the West Indies to pinpoint why I don't trust the author's arguments or his research. Few records exist, and of those that do exist, there is considerable doubt about their veracity. So, having a nagging feeling that what I was reading was, to be blunt, extrapolated bullshit, and not being sure why I was coming to that conclusion, I went looking for why that might be. I found quite a bit.
These two articles pretty much cover the major points. At the very least, they provide some points for asking valid questions.
Link to critical review of the book by a historian and
Link to Wiki article and lots of references concerning Irish Slave Myth and its use by racists, white supremacists, and other hate-mongering bigots asshats.

So, not a total waste of time since it was a good reminder to be skeptical about what we read and what authors claim are facts. As my dad used to say, "Paper will lie still and let you put anything on it."

[Marta · Rating 2 out of 5]

The subject matter was interesting, but the writing was dry and there were no footnotes - which is, uh, a problem when you're making an argument that ethnic cleansing occurred.

[MS Meagher · Rating 1 out of 5]

Very light on academic references, with a scant bibliography at the rear, and no footnotes. Considering he's setting out a quite significant and controversial academic argument (that the Irish were slaves, rather than indentured servants), he fails to sufficiently back up his argument. In the absence of evidence of how the Irish were treated, he extrapolates from evidence of the experience of Africans. In the absence of primary sources, he speculates and presents his speculation as fact. He evidences lack of academic rigour and bias, such as his assertion that "alcoholism and arrogance" were much in evidence during his interviews with the Red Legs of Barbados. Further reading elicits that the interviews comprised one actual interview with an ex-pimp who drank copiously, and an abbreviated unscheduled meeting with a young man at church, who didn't. The problematic treatment of the subject matter aside, this book not sufficiently reliable or rigorous for an academic book (even one which aims to critique the mainstream view), and falls between two stools, as it is probably a little too dry for a popular account.

[Christi McCallum · Rating 1 out of 5]

If you like history and want factual data, you will not enjoy this book. It is like reading a tabloid. It is poorly researched and full of factual inaccuracies. There are plenty of lurid details, but most of them come from the author's imagination.

The biggest problem is that O'Callaghan is conflating indentured servitude with chattel slavery. While both suffered in different ways, laws starting in the 1640s made distinctions between European 'servants' and African 'slaves'. This was further elaborated on in the Barbados slave codes of 1661. This ensured that slavery would be racially based with only Africans and their descendants being enslaved. Europeans, whether Irish or not, were distinguished as servants in this same code. Indentured servants labored hard and got little in return, but they did have a number of rights that slaves did not have. Indentured servants were freed after their service, indentures servants' status was not inherited by their children, and indentured servants could sue cruel masters and win. By contrast, an enslaved woman's children inherited their mother's status--even if their father was white.

O'Callaghan makes a number of wild speculations without any supporting facts. For example, when he suggests that "it is possible" that the Irish were stripped before being put on the "auction block," he has no citations or facts upon which to base this. The same is true for his claim that Irish women were bought to be "bred" with enslaved Africans, that Irish women were forced to strip by 'perverted' drivers, or that Irish children were bought by pedophiles. There is absolutely zero historical evidence that any of this ever happened.

There are plenty of ways that indentured servants suffered that he could have chosen to discuss without resorting to making stuff up. They lost a lot of freedoms as long as they were under indenture and their work was harsh and dangerous. There are other historians who have actually written academically about this topic and I would recommend checking out those books instead of this one. O'Callaghan should definitely write fiction instead--he clearly has the imagination for it.

[Jimbo55 · Rating 5 out of 5]

As an Irishman with an interest in history I couldn't put this down.
It is a short enough book and a very interesting read. The Irish were often persecuted in Ireland
throughout our long history but it seems to me there is very little knowledge among the average
Irish person about the experiences of our ancestors in the Carribbean.

This book was given to me by my father who has lived in Jamaica for ten years.
The Jamaican patois word for potatoe is 'Irish' apparently. Many Jamaicans have
Irish surnames also. Although this book is concerned with Barbados the above
points have always intrigued me. In reading this book you get a better understanding
of why these are the case especially considering Ireland was never a collonial power
and although a nation of immigrants we never willingly bade our farewells en-masse on boats
heading for the Carribean. We were in fact sent there in chains as human capital.

I simply had no idea that Irish people were traded as slaves In the sugar plantations and
this came as shock to me.

[Philip · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book is what it is. Its a text-book style historical account of the Ethnic Cleansing of Ireland during the time of Cromwell. It isn't a story book, it isn't historical fiction - its cold hard facts that are often difficult to read and stomach.
Every Irish man and woman needs to read this book to understand what really happened - you will be shocked and angered.

READ IT

[Michael · Rating 5 out of 5]

Powerful story of British genocide in Ireland. It's become fashionable is some circles to downplay the intensity of British oppression in Ireland to make some modern political point. This is disingenuous to history and the victims. Injustice is Injustice no matter where it occurs.

[Mary · Rating 3 out of 5]

THE AUTHOR IS NOT THE IRA GUY WITH THE SAME NAME.

Let's just clear that out of the way, since it's a terrible thing to accuse someone of, then turn off your comments.

This book has problems, starting with the use of "ethnic cleansing" in the title and leading right up to current American and international white supremacists using the history as a weapon.

It is VERY, VERY, VERY apparent to anyone with any sense that African people who were enslaved had the largest and most brutal sufferings from the colonisation of the Caribbean. Their story(/ies) are massive, lengthy and ongoing. O'Callaghan seems to have been a journalist in his time, also writing about slavery in Sudan. (I'm afraid to read beyond the introduction, but here you go https://www.greek-love.com/sub-sahara... )

The issue people mainly seem to have with this book is the unclear difference between slavery and indentured servitude. Taking the stories purely at their own contemporary times, both sound equally atrocious. Short, brutal and probably deadly. It's not untrue that Cromwell and the English were cruel and murderous in Ireland, and it's well known that they shipped thousands of Irish abroad as prisoners. To the minds of Cromwell & Co., I'm sure a large part of this really was what we'd call 'ethnic cleansing', but not on a par with what happened in, say Bosnia in recent history.

O'Callaghan doesn't particularly sound like someone I'd be interested in hanging around with, but he DID go to Barbados and get information from local books, historians and people. As we know, so much of Irish written history was destroyed during the Civil War in the 1920s, that it is very difficult to find records of not just the events (ships, prisoners, orders, etc.) in this book, but our own family histories. The lack of bibliography on that part is connected to that (which is connected to the eternal invasion of Ireland by England over the centuries, which is connected back to this book...)

The Irish WERE sent out all over the world, many of them illiterate, non-English speaking, poor and used to hardship. It is interesting to read about one section of the world to which they were sent. Some, of course, did well for themselves. Although being Irish wasn't something great, they had the benefit of being white, and we know how that story goes. Others didn't, same as the prisoners the colonisers brought from everywhere else.

I wouldn't particularly recommend this book. It's kind of boring, some of it is repetitive, and with all the negative discussion about it and the lack of background on the author, it doesn't feel terribly reliable. That said, the comments here on Goodreads are ENTIRELY unreliable.

The Irish transported to Barbados were a small section of a massive movement of humanity, and a drop in the ocean of the human suffering that took place in the world at that time (and is still having repercussions today). It is hard to read a short book written before 2000 that focuses just on some white Irish folk who may or may not have been 'slaves' (in the sense of the word that we understand today) without keeping the Africans and native islanders to the forefront of your mind. This book kind of does that, and even the language and terminology used is definitively offensive, particularly when used by a white male author.

It feels like an oversimplification to say this book is "of it's time", which it IS, but it is also just focused on this small piece of history in the Caribbean. Take it as it is, and keep your critical thinking cap on.

[E.c. · Rating 4 out of 5]

One of the hardest books to stomach. Not for the difficulty in understanding, but the utter pain I felt reading it. I am an avid reader and a genealogist. I am of Irish descent and knew of this before I read it. This history is all but absent in American history and make no mistake this is Americas history too. As opposed to the one review, I felt as a genealogist the HISTORICAL FACTS needed to be included and it did not deter from the story. This was not supposed to be a fictional riveting story, however gut wrenching it was, it was to shed light on something that history has all but forgotten. It is a small book, hard to put down but sometimes hard to even look at because of the disgusting acts committed to Slaves both white and black in the Americas.

[John · Rating 5 out of 5]

God Bless the Irish

[Linda · Rating 4 out of 5]

Well, this was a mind opener for me. I had never heard mentioned in any history classes, of the thousands of Irish slaves sent to the New World in the 16oo's by England. No wonder the Irish want the English out of their business! These were Not indentured servants, they were SLAVES...bought and sold, tortured and killed, used and abused by their owners. Irish ,esp., Catholics, were thought to be the lowesst of the low, and treated that way for millinium by England. This book is non-fiction and deals with the historical papers of the time for information. As the author writes, there is so little modern info, he had to turn to the sources. I am appalled that this time and situation has been so covered up for decades from the history of the USA.

[Susan · Rating 4 out of 5]

good grief, i never knew this sordid history. the first irish to come to the americas were not during the famine but rather in the early 1600's shipped in slave vessels to be sold to tobacco planters in barbados and virginia. those irish descendants that survive today in the caribbean are scorned for their rough breeding and manners. outcasts. truly interesting.......

[Catherine · Rating 3 out of 5]

A textbook account of 50,000 Irish people taken and sold to labour in Barbados and Virginia in the 1600s. Not pleasant to read but very interesting.

[Marc · Rating 2 out of 5]

Unfair? Of course. Inhumane? Sure. But ethnic cleansing it was not. This is not serious, considered, academic work.

[Bobby Daugherty · Rating 4 out of 5]

A book focused on the genocide and enslavement of the Irish by James I and Oliver Cromwell. It ends with the 20th century "redlegs". A good but depressing book.

[Jianna · Rating 2 out of 5]

I only read this book due to my American uncle (my auntie married him).

I found that this book was influenced by a lot of speculation and distortion of truth, not up to par with other pieces of academic work. Though, one argument could be that text relating to the transplantation and treatment of the Irish were removed from British libraries. However, the claims made by the author (who clearly stated at the beginning that he was not a historian) do not seem reliable and there is bias.

A common pattern I found with this book is how the author claims that the Irish were treated in the same extent as African slaves. The author uses text and citations that discusses evidence based on the African slave trade and applies it to the Irish. It uses assumption and speculation to indicate that the Irish underwent the same voyages and treatments, and while it could be probable, assumption does not translate to fact.

“As there is no record of how the Irish on the slave ships were treated (none ever returned), we have to assume that they were treated exactly as the African slaves were treated, for which there are many records.”

The Irish were subjected to indentured servitude, in which they worked under a determined time under contract to pay off debts or to earn money and land. In contrast, Africans were subjected to slavery. Slavery means individuals were branded as property, a commodity for trade, and often, this position is inherited by several of generations. Modern day and past definitions of the terms ‘slavery’ and ‘indentured servitude’ have changed constantly to bypass blame, therefore yes, it is likely the Irish faced the same brutalities and dehumanising treatments (this varied due to differing masters of indentured servants and slaves), BUT it is still a distortion to equate their conditions with Africans subjected to chattel slavery.

“60,000 was a drop in the ocean compared to the eleven million African slaves torn from their own countries and transported across thousands of miles to work on the sugar plantations of Barbados or the tobacco plantations of America, but a slave is a slave, no matter what the colour of the skin.”

It is right to bring awareness to the conditions the Irish faced as it something that is minimised by history, YET at the same time you cannot take away the scale, the scope and the horror of race-based slavery (it’s not a competition but you cannot compare them as exactly equal). By doing so, it blurs the lines between the different types of unfree labour and in a sense, it conceals that slavery was in fact made, controlled and operated by white Europeans.

[Niall Fitzpatrick · Rating 5 out of 5]

I've read a lot about the Cromwellian period in Ireland but until now I hadn't read anything on those deported into slavery and it was a huge eye opener. One of the most interesting new insights was the way the English civil war factions resident in Barbados were united in their genocidal treatment of their Irish slaves. I had known that during the English civil wars royalists had been exiled to Barbados but their treatment was on the opposite end of the scale to the Irish who also fought against Cromwell.

I can see why British academics would have problems with this book, their Barbados colony was a death camp for their Irish prisoners.

[Dani Dányi · Rating 5 out of 5]

Sean O'Callaghan: To Hell or Barbados
The Ethnic Cleansing of Ireland

Emlékszem egy társasjátékra, amivel kiskoromban legjobban szerettem játszani: kalózos játék, ahol kis hajócskákkal kellett tengerre szállni, lépkedni a végtelen óceánon át és kincset keresni, találni, mindenféle veszélyeket kerülve és legyűrve összegyűjteni. A győztesnél volt a legtöbb arany, kincs és rum. Gyönyörűek voltak a kis gyémánt, rubint és smaragd darabkák, mintha igazi csiszolt drágakövek volnának. A játékot úgy hívták, hogy Buccaneer. Egyáltalán nem voltak benne emberi szereplők.

A To Hell or Barbados nagyon kemény könyv. Nekilát a huszadik században fellelhető történelmi források és dokumentumok alapján összerakni egy európai népirtás történetét, szakszerűen, részletesen. A történet az 1600-as években játszódik, amikor az angol birodalom leigázta Írország zömében katolikus lakosságát, évtizedekig háborút vívott ellenük sikeresen. A lakosságnak nagyjából egyharmada pusztult el. Az Oliver Cromwell, majd később II. Charles uralkodása alatt működő angol hatóságok embertömegeket telepített ki otthonukból. Az ürügy általában az eretnek katolikus vallás, a vagyoni helyzet (ha volt elkobozni való birtok), valós vagy állítólagos ellenállás a hatósággal szemben, illetve az ellenállás támogatásának felmerülő gyanúja, mi utóbbinak elsődleges és nyilvánvaló körülménye, hogyha az illető ír.
A tizenhetedik század elején Angliában nagyon erős ír- és katolikusellenes propagandakampányt folytatott a kormány, elsősorban az Írországot leigázó háború terhének igazolása okán. A protestantizmus rezsimje alatt mai szemmel legalábbis egyáltalán nem volt szempont az állam és egyház szátválasztása, tehát az akkori meghatározó vallási vezetők teljes gőzzel nyomták az íreket démonizáló kormánypropagandát. A kampány abszolút hatásossága mérhető volt. nagyságrendileg 50,000 ír lakos, férfi, nő és gyerek, került kényszerűen rabszolgahajókra, mármint konkrétan ugyanazokra a rabszolgahajókra, amik máskor Bristolból indultak ki Afrika felé, hogy kényszermunkaerőt raboljanak az ültetvényekre.
Akkoriban az angol gyarmatok gazdasági zászlóshajója Barbados szigete volt, és az ültetvényezés elsősorban dohányt jelentett, bár ekkoriban lépésenként átálltak a cukornádra. Az ültetvényeken rabszolgák dolgoztak, és egyre inkább a nagy ültetvények felé fordult a gazdaság. Ezek fenntartásához egész ipar alakult ki, és óriási hasznot hozott a tulajdonosoknak, valamint a kormánynak. Talán legrosszabbul az önként vagy kényszerűen szerződtetett munkaerő járt: ők mind rabszolgasorba kerültek, ám a született rabszolgákkal ellentétben, mivel nekik elvileg volt hat-nyolc év után szabadulási joguk, lehetőleg még azelőtt agyondolgoztatták őket. Az önkéntesek toborzásánál ellenben virágzó gyarmatokról, és páratlan boldogulási lehetőségekről regéltek a nincsteleneknek, akik sorban jelentkeztek szép új életet kezdeni telepesként.*
A fekete rabszolgák mellett a fehér rabszolgák elsősorban azért voltak értékesebbek, mert a kereskedők kisebb utánajárással és afrikai kitérő nélkül juthattak hozzájuk, illetve nagyobb haszonnal adhatták el őket Barbadosban az európai ültetvényeseknek. A fehér rabszolgáért többet fizettek, hiszen gyakran magasan képzett munkaerőről volt szó, az ültetvényeken pedig a rabszolgahajcsáron kívül gyakorlatilag minden más hiányszakma volt. De főleg a fiatal, nemzőképes nőkért fizettek sokat, mivel már igencsak ráuntak a fekete és mulatt szexrabszolgákra, ezért a legkeresettebb áru a 12-14 éves fiatal nő volt. Ezen kívül a rabszolgák tenyésztésében is használtak fehér rabszolganőket. Nyilván mindenki más is gazdára talált, hiszen maximális anyagi haszon mellett halálra lehetett dolgoztatni. Nagyon nagy arányban haltak meg eleve a hajókon, mindenféle betegségben, majd a rabszolgatartás rutinos, módszeres kegyetlenségétől. Lényegében mindig bármiért korbácsverés járt, és bármilyen ellenállásért kínhalál, ami alapból lassú tüzet jelentett, de voltak kreatívabb és unalmasabb megvalósítások. A rabszolgaiparnak saját brutális logikája és múködése van, a kímélet nem bizonyult fenntartható vagy megtűrt megvalósításnak, mondhatjuk, hogy a hagyományt sikertelenül próbálták egyébként számosan humanizálni.
Sírhelyek nincsenek.
Aki pedig ellenállt, és túlélte, az megszökött, és sokszor kalózkodásra, bucanneerségre adta a fejét. A szabadon életveszélyes brutalitás még mindig messze jobb volt a halálos kényszermunkánál.
Nagyon tanulságos végigolvasni a rengeteg bonyodalmat a háttérben, ahogy ezekről a dolgokról rendelkeznek a döntéshozók, az érdekeltek, a vallási vezetők. És ahogy leírják, gyakran elrettenve, a pokoli körülményeket. Külön szó volt angolul erre a büntetésre, az embert „megbarbadózták” (to barbado'), és akit elvittek a hajókra, annak soha nem tért vissza a híre sem. Csekély emlékezete volt eddig a könyvig az írországi utókorban is, a történelmüknek épp erről a fejezetéről. Ma is él Barbados szigetén egy 3-400 fős büszke és feh��r közösség, a legnagyobb elképzelhető nyomorban, az úgynevezett "Red Legs"** emberek, akik az odahurcolt skót és ír kelta rabszolgák belterjesen fennmaradt utódai. Nem szívesen érintkeznek senkivel a külvilágból, gyakorlatilag mindenki alkoholista. A szerző két darab család nyomára bukkant, akik integrálódni tudtak a többségi társadalomba.
Nekem is sokkoló volt ez a könyv, annyira mai problémák ezek, máig élő traumák, máig alkalmazott módszerek, a rasszizmus és a még azon is túl emelkedő profitéhség. Ha létezik kétségbevonhatatlan kritikája a fejlett nyugatnak, akkor az ez. Egy csomó kényszermunka, halál, és égbekiáltó igazságtalan horror árán épültek meg a szép nyugati fővárosok. Konkrétan ezek a vagyonok alapozták meg a későbbi ipari forradalmat is. A szisztematikus elnyomás, terror és népességtelepítés módszerei sokszor visszaköszönnek még az európai államok hátralevő, akár egészen újkori történelmében, a tengeren innen és túl. Mindez teljesen törvényes volt, államilag kifejezetten szankcionált, és igen nagy fejlődést hozott a világgazdaságnak.

*A börtönből elszállított rabok és a toborzott önkéntesek mellett az Írországban és Angliában (!) kényszerűen elrabolt emberek, gyerekek is rabszolgaáruként kerültek a hajókra, százával, hatósági tudomásulvétellel.
**Állítólag a rabok amellett, hogy nem tudtak angolul, gyakran kilt-et vagyis szoknya-szerűséget viselve érkeztek meg a hajógyomorból a gyarmatokra, ahol rövid úton vörösre égett a lábukon a bőr.

[Randy · Rating 3 out of 5]

The book's topic is absolutely gut wrenching and worthy. I am not, by any means, devoid of historical knowledge but this facet of past Irish life had somehow nearly escaped me. I had some level of understanding but had not realized the extent of the human tragedy. Wow! Despite this riveting topic, I did find it to be a somewhat arduous read. The inclusion of numerous facts and figures somehow (unsure as to why) had the effect of reducing the sense of absolute personal despair that would have pervaded this period. As a result it was less evocative than it might have been. I would imagine that the author may have found it difficult to balance ' historical inclusion' and 'story' and anyway this may not have been the intent. Still, it is an eye opening topic and, I believe, well researched. As such it certainly is a worthwhile read.

[Andy Hart · Rating 1 out of 5]

This book is full of lurid descriptions of human horrors but is no more a credible history than any of the pulp you might find on the horror-fiction shelves. In this it is despicably dangerous since, despite admitting himself to be no historian, O'Callaghan's book is to be found on the history shelves. Sadly its impact on Ireland's popular understanding of the Cromwellian conquest has been out of all proportion to the credibility of the book and its author.

Discredited by every academic peer review I have seen, To Hell or Barbados is, at best, a grotesque distortion of a period of history that was sufficiently grim to require no exaggeration of its miseries. A litany of unsubstantiated sensationalism, it falls apart on its almost complete absence of direct and relevant evidence.

This is NOT history.

[Steve · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is a quick read on an interesting period in British/Irish history and what it meant to be 'Barbado'ed'. As the title suggests it is mainly focused on Cromwell's Irish campaign, the horrendous outcome of some of the sieges of that campaign, and the mass deportation of thousands of Irish to the West Indies. The descriptions of the lives---and deaths---of some of these people on Barbados is worth the price of the book. Very detailed in regards to the development of the whole 'plantation process'. You can watch various clips on Youtube about the descendants of some of the survivors, known as 'Redlegs'. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hDWAt...

[Kevin Burke · Rating 2 out of 5]

This is a book of two parts. The first, shorter, part looks at the Cromwellian invasion of Ireland and is reasonably well told. Cromwell comes across as the See You Next Tuesday we all know he was, and there's plenty of interesting primary sources. "Here is your argument", Cromwell writes in 1650. "The design is to extirpate the Catholic religion, but this is not to be done but by the massacring, banishing or otherwise destroying the Catholic inhabitants. Well, your words are 'Massacre, destroy and banish'. Good now. Give us an instance of one man since my coming into Ireland, not in arms, massacred, destroyed or banished." This is the mid-seventeenth century example of social media warriors saying "Proof please". It's also nice to have the reminder of just what Cromwell tried to achieve - to remove the entire Irish nation, except boys under 14 and girls under 12, to Connacht (or technically an area mostly, but not entirely, equivalent to Connacht, also including parts of Clare but not Sligo). Anyone who hadn't moved by 1st May 1654 would be hanged. Not for nothing is this listed among the earlier examples of ethnic cleansing in Europe. The scope was never fully achieved; many Irish were retained because "First, they were useful to the English as earth-tillers and herdsmen; secondly, deprived of their priests and gentry, it was hoped they would become Protestants; and thirdly, the gentry, without their aid, must work for themselves and their families and so, in time, turn into common peasants or die if they don't."

Even here though, there's hints that it's not entirely accurate. Maurice Roche, Viscount Roche, is one who lost his lands and was sent to Connacht where, O'Callaghan states, "he died soon after". But Google suggests Maurice Roche (also of Castletownroche) was Viscount Fermoy, not Viscount Roche, and lived for another 15 years, even having his title (but not his lands) restored. In the absence of any references throughout the book, it's hard to see reconcile this difference.

But the meat of the book is supposedly about what Cromwell did next - in particular, the transportation of Irish prisoners to the Caribbean. And the Irish influence in the Caribbean is still to be seen today, particularly in Montserrat - it has a harp on its flag, it's called the Emerald Isle, there's reports of Irish being spoken there up to the late 19th century, and it's the only other country in the world with St Patrick's Day as a national holiday. Was all this from Cromwell?

And this is where the book starts falling down. Cromwell did transport people to the Caribbean who were not indentured servants, but the records of what happened them are so sparse today that O'Callaghan takes to assumptions. "As there is no record of how the Irish on slave ships were treated (none ever returned), we have to assume they were treated exactly the same as the African slaves, for which there are many records". But - no. This isn't how history works. But O'Callaghan repeats this leap of faith. The Irish are sure to have led revolts on the transport ships because of their general feisty nature against the English. On arrival, he says "Like the African slaves, it is even possible they were stripped before being put on the auction block", before spending half a page on what happened African slaves with no evidence it happened to the Irish on arrival.

As it goes on, the book gets less and less relevant and becomes an irritating waste of time - in the a very similar manner to Gavin Menzies' much-derided book 1421: The Year China Discovered the World. Primary sources disappear, to be replaced by later sources which may or may not be correct. Of the idea that Caribbean governors wrote to Cromwell asking him to round up 1000 more Irish to be sent out, he quotes "a woman named Mary Gaunt [who] published a book [in 1922] about Jamaica entitled Where the Twain Shall Meet. In it she writes "To this boiling pot Cromwell sent 1000 Irish men and 1000 Irish women. I can find nothing but the care notification that they arrived". But who's Mary Gaunt when she's at home? What notification did she find? Was she also assuming things? We just don't know. It's not the only source from centuries later that's quoted with no real acknowledgement that the source can't be first-hand.

To be clear, to be taken by Cromwell and shipped off to the Caribbean to work the land for the English was not a nice thing. But this book makes no real inroads into what exactly it was that happened. About the only good thing the book achieves - apart from the reminder of the nature of Cromwell - is to encourage you to look up other sources on the topic. One good critique is Liam Hogan's here - https://limerick1914.medium.com/criti... - although it doesn't really address the issue of what did happen (that not being the point of the article of course). Or there's wiki - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irish_i.... One quote there is -

"Similarly, historian Nini Rodgers has written that Irish indentured servants "were not slaves", but nonetheless argues that the "difference must have seemed academic" to many of them."

Another is -

"According to Kevin Brady, Cromwellian exiles in Barbados held a position that was "between temporary bondage and permanent enslavement", stating that the main difference between the servants and slaves was that they were not sold as chattel. Brady states that they were often subject to "glaringly inhumane treatment by aristocrats of the planter class" and that they "were not given the material or monetary compensation" usually provided to indentured servants at the end of their term.  225–226  According to Simon P. Newman, Irish prisoners "were treated with singular brutality" by planters who "disdained them as illiterate Catholic savages.""

Most Irish who travelled to the Caribbean in the 17th century did so as legitimate indentured servants (voluntarily, broadly speaking) and theirs has to be a different experience to the Cromwell transportees. But Liam Hogan's article notes that any Irish in indentured servitude were pardoned by 1660 (noting a contradiction in O'Callaghan, who said the Irish were sold in perpetuity, but were all freed by 1680). This is, of course, a huge part of the story of the Irish in the Caribbean, but is only mentioned in briefest passing by O'Callaghan.

There's an interesting story from a pretty nasty part of Irish history in there - probably it can't be told any more as historical records are simply gone. It's no excuse for engaging in broad assumption and speculation though.

[Old-Barbarossa · Rating 2 out of 5]

Not keen on O'Callaghan's writing style, but an informative book.
No refs and no maps though.
Think he's wrong on a couple of points, eg: his (and he's not alone in this) take on the origin of the term "red-legs" being related to kilt wearing. Apart from the philibeg (or is if filibeg?) being a relatively recent invention, it's the last thing you'd want to wear anywhere warm (bitter voice of experience) never mind cutting sugar cane.

[John King · Rating 5 out of 5]

This book Pulls back the curtain on a part of Irish history that remains virtually unknow.
It shows how complex and multi layered Irish history is. Many of those sent to Barbados were old English planters many of who
were royalists and on the loosing side of the civil war ! A great piece of history !

[Aaron Kent · Rating 5 out of 5]

A little slice of the brutality that man has always visited upon his fellow man and seems to continue to do so somewhere in the world. A good bit of historical study if you are looking for a particular starting point on the colonization of the West Indies.

[Rushay Booysen · Rating 3 out of 5]

some historical facts on the enslavement of the Irish and what they endured under the English.When we think slavery we dont think of white enslavement.

[Patrick · Rating 4 out of 5]

Interesting story from the 1600s. Not a good time to live in Ireland. The attitude of rules towards their subjects was extemely cruel

[Sara Morcom · Rating 4 out of 5]

It was extremely informative and I learned a lot but it was almost too much just fact stating and not as much story telling.

[The Irregular Reader · Rating 4 out of 5]

A bit dry at times, but an absolutely stunning look into a dark time in Irish history. highly recommended for any history buffs, or any member of the Irish diaspora