Talk:Portadown massacre

Untitled

Is the John Temple referred to in the last section - John Temple (politician)? If so, is the date for publication correct? He would have to have been 14 or younger when he wrote it. Yozzer66 (talk) 13:31, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Good point, I may have got the first name wrong. I'll look it up when I get a chance to look at the Ulster 1641 book again. Inchiquin (talk) 05:44, 7 September 2008 (UTC)

Ghosts / Massacre Itself

==The Portadown Ghosts== The depositions record numerous reports of ghost sightings after the massacre: For example, a woman called Elizabeth Price claimed to have seen at the spot of the massacre a spirit in the shape of a woman: 'her eyes seemed to twinkle in her head and her skin as white as snow...divulged and then repeated the word ''Revenge, Revenge, Revenge'''. It continued to appear for some time and only disappeared when the settler force reached the town. The message within such stories is apparent. Over two hundred years later, in 1886, the historian Robert Dunlop argued that the presence of these ghost stories in the depositions meant that they were 'worthless' as evidence. <ref>Ulster 1641 pg 185</ref> Modern historians generally accept that there were a number of major atrocities in Ulster in 1641, but disregard the idea of a wholesale massacre of Protestants in the province.

Is this worth having in the article?

And can lots of people get over here to discuss the article, it keeps conflicting itself.--Theosony (talk) 11:14, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

The general assumption that the majority of modern historians that the death of over 12,000 Protestants is somehow not a wholesale massacre is just someone's opinion - there is no such consensus among historians. HammerFilmFan (talk) 09:17, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

Arguments etc.

When I wrote the original article I was aware that it may be seen as controversial by some and so I attempted to make it as neutral as is possible. A number of subsequent edits may give a contrary impression: In general I do not like to challenge changes made to articles I started as it is not a good look. And I'd rather not engage in edit wars anyway.

That said, there is plenty of evidence to suggest that there was in fact a massacre at Portadown in 1641. Although British propaganda works of the 1640s inflated the number of civilians killed at the event, MacCuarta's Ulster 1641 book presents a pretty convincing argument that around 100 mostly English Protestants were killed at Portadown in 1641.

Inchiquin (talk) 11:38, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

I definitely agree, from the evidence and sources you provided, I'd say there probably was a massacre there in Portadown, but at the moment, due to equal references, it seems as though it's a bit of a conspiracy/legend, but you created a brilliant article. I've bought one of the books on Amazon which I'll look through, the book itself seemed very interesting as well!--Theosony (talk) 15:47, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Reverts

Brough87, the article contained an assertion that Ulster Protestant and Scottish forces also committed massacres in 1641-42. You asked that citations be provided. When they were you reverted the edit.

The mutually destructive conduct of the war in Ulster in 1641-42 on both sides is well documented. If you require further sources they can be provided. If you have further problems with the current wording please discuss here before reverting again. I'm sure we can come to agreement. Regards, Jdorney (talk) 18:00, 15 May 2013 (UTC).