CROMWELL’S MASSACRE OF WOMEN AT WEXFORD

New Zealand Tablet, 4 March 1920, Page 11

CROMWELL’S MASSACRE OF WOMEN AT WEXFORD

In the Times Literary Supplement for September 25 last, there appeared a lengthy letter by ‘“Historian,” impeaching S. R. Gardiner’s “‘historical method.” Incidentally, the writer disproved Gardiner’s assertion that the story of Cromwell’s butchery of the women at the market cross of Wexford, in 1649, was a “legend” that “first appeared in a volume, published in 1763” that is, in the third volume of the Abbe Macgeogehan’s H istoire d’lrlande. Gardiner’s argument was as follows: —“It is to no purpose to say that the story is confirmed by local tradition, unless it can be shown that the tradition existed before the story was in print.” And, on the assumption that this argument as well founded and that Gardiner’s major premiss, to the effect that the tale was first printed in 1763, was true, the latest historian of Ireland, Mr. Bagwell, in his Ireland Under the Stuarts and During the Interregnum, summarily dismisses the story. It will be of interest, therefore, to all students of Irish history to follow up “Historian’s” facts and set them out at length. Fourteen years after the massacre of Wexford and during the lifetime of many of those who took part in it, James Heath, in 1663, published the “second edition, enlarged” of- his Flagellum ; or, the Life and Death, Birth and Burial of Oliver Cromwell . Such criticisms of Heath as have appeared in modern times have been mainly due to Carlyle. One such criticism is disproved in the current number of the Nineteenth Century and After, by the Rev. Canon Douglas Maclaine, entitled Oliver Cromwell’s Wild Oats, Others (the present writer is aware) will share the same fate. Heath, therefore, is a contemporary whose evidence can be by no means ignored, and on page 83 of his book he tells the story of Cromwell at Wexford: “Most abominably and barbarously cruel he was in, this place [Wexford], for near 200 of the better sort and the beautifuflest women of the city having (upon the town being entered) fled to the Crosse, and with the command of their charming eyes and these melting teares prevailed upon the souldiers for quarter, now at his coming hither and after a laughing jeering enquiry what they did there and other mocking insultations, were commanded to be knock’d on the head: which those that promised them life nobly refusing, he commanded another regiment to encompass them and there most horribly massacred them all.” Other editions of Heath’s book were published in 1665 and 1672. In 1682, Thomas May, of Rawmere, Mid Lavant, Sussex; who afterwards became member of Parliament for Chichester in James ll.’s first Parliament, and eventually was knighted by William 111., published, anonymously, a small illustrated book, entitled Arbitrary Government Displayed to the Life, etc. In this May states that after the taking of Drogheda: “The next place after Drogheda was Wexford, a considerable town by the sea, South West of Dublin, which was betray’d to him [Cromwell] and where he after a barbarous manner put to the sword two thousand more, and among the rest, two hundred of the chiefest women of the place fled to the market cross for shelter, and there put to the sword by his command, tho’ several of his own soldiers who had before given them quarter refused to obey his bloody commands.” The British Museum does not contain a copy of the second edition of this book, but possesses one of the third edition, printed in 1690. This contains some additions, has an altered title, commencing “An Epitomy of English History,” etc., and is signed by May. In 1715 there appeared a third book, whose author has yet to be discovered. This was entitled, The Rise and Growth of Fanaticism; or, a View of the Principles, Plots, and Pernicious Practices of the Dissenters, for Upwards of 150 Years. The British Museum contains the first, second, and sixth (undated) copies of this work. On page 33 is the following passage ; “Before I take a view of their [the Dissenters] plots arid practices in the reign of King Charles 11., I shall beg leave to mention a notorious and barbarous piece of cruelty, perpetrated by that meek and spotless lamb, Oliver Cromwell. When the usurper entered the town of Wex- . ford, in Ireland, three hundred women of the best rank and fashion fled to the Cross. Oliver, to manifest himself a thorough pac’d bloodhound, encompassed them with his merciless dragoons and, having no regard to their sex or innocency caus’d them .all to be butchered, not one being suffer’d to escape. This done, the presumptuous wretch draws up his regiment, and began to pray and

preach, giving thanks, perhaps, for such a glorious and honorable victory.” It is thus clear that the story appeared in print at least twelve times before the Abbe Macgeogehan set pen to paper. No one ever attempted to deny it. . ’lt would not be right to terminate this discussion of Cromwell’s deeds at Wexford without pointing out a serious misrepresentation by S. R. Gardiner of another document. The “surviving inhabitants” of Wexford petitioned Charles 11. for relief after the Restoration, and their petition was read in May, 1661. The original petition is at the Record Office ( State Papers, Irish Senes, Car. ii., vol. 307, No. 65), and an inaccurately punctuated version of it was printed in Gale’s Inquiry Info the Ancient Corporate System, of Ireland. S. R. Gardiner cites this petition as follows: “After asserting that Cromwell put ‘ man, woman, and child, to a very few, to the sword,’ the petitioners estimate the loss of life of ‘ the soldiers and inhabitants ’ at 1500. It is obvious that if this figure is correct, the whole population ‘man woman and child cannot have been killed.” ' But the inhabitants do not estimate the loss of life of the soldiers, with whom the petition is not concerned. Gardiner has most unjustifiably syncopated his quotation, for the second phrase cited by him runs as follows —the stroke indicating the end of a line: “Among the rest the said Governor lost his life and other of the soldiers / and inhabitants to the number of fifteen hundred persons.” On September 6, 1902, tho librarian of the Royal Irish Academy endeavored to prove that the tradition of the slaughter of the women at the market cross was without evidencein fact that it had never existed. “Historian” has now carried the story outside the range of tradition, and has proved that it is a contemporary statement of fact, made as early as 1663. In the correspondence which followed the librarian’s letter, his contention was effectually disproved by a reference to “Arbitrary Government,” published in 1682. The author of this book has since been proved to have been Sir Thomas May, who (like Heath) was an Englishman and a Protestant, and the first and third editions of May’s work will now be found, catalogued under his name, in the British Museum Library.