Ireland: The People's History of Ireland, Volume 1 (of 2)Finerty, John F. (John Frederick)
History
Ireland: The People's History of Ireland, Volume 1 (of 2)
Finerty, John F. (John Frederick)
Ireland -- History
Three days later the reverend chronicler tells us that “the breach was
widened at least forty paces, and, floats being prepared, there were
great debates amongst the chief officers whether it should be attempted
by storm.... Though indeed we could not do the enemy a greater pleasure,
nor ourselves a greater prejudice, in all probability, than in seeking
to carry the town by a breach, before those within [the Irish, to wit]
were more humbled, either by sword or sickness.” No finer tribute than
this, coming from such a source, could be paid to Irish constancy and
courage, after such treasons and disasters as marked the capture of
Athlone and the loss of Aughrim.
Thoroughly convinced that he could not hope to carry Limerick by direct
assault, De Ginkel now resolved to test the never-failing weapon of
treachery and surprise on this stubborn foe. He had information that
there was a strong peace-at-any-price party within the town, and that,
could he but land a strong force on the Clare bank of the Shannon, the
city would speedily capitulate. He, therefore, determined to construct,
in all secrecy, a pontoon bridge across the river above St. Thomas
Island, near a place called Annaghbeg, where Brigadier Robert Clifford
commanded a strong body of Irish dragoons and infantry, quite
sufficient, if only properly directed, to foil any hostile movement. On
the night of the 15th of September, the bridge was laid—the most
favorable point having been revealed by some fishermen, who, the
historian O’Callaghan relates, were bribed to betray their country. It
is much more probable, however, that they were forced to turn traitors
under threat of death. However, on the morning of the 16th the bridge
was completed and a formidable English force of horse and foot, under
Generals Talmash and Scravenmore, succeeded in crossing. Apparently
taken by surprise—although distinctly charged with treason by numerous
Irish historians—General Clifford, at this important juncture, displayed
neither zeal, courage, nor capacity. He brought his men up in a state of
unreadiness and in detachments, instead of in a solid formation, and, of
course, was easily put to rout. To show the criminal carelessness, to
say no worse, of this commander, his cavalry horses were “out at grass”
two miles from his camp, when the English attack was made! Such
“generalship” would have demoralized an army of Spartans, and the Irish
rank and file can hardly be blamed if, on this occasion, they did not
manifest their customary intrepidity. Europe never beheld in the field a
braver body of men than King James’s Irish army, and the world never
furnished a more incompetent staff of general officers, whether French
or Irish, than that which commanded and, finally, wrecked it. We wish to
except St. Ruth and Sarsfield and Boisseleau, who were able and gallant
soldiers, thoroughly devoted to the cause in which they had embarked. De
Ginkel’s bold movement resulted in the partial turning of Thomond
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account