The Resister wrote:Only if you admit when YOUR sources are laden with errors.
Let me know if you find any.
Your source starts with the following paragraph:
After the Battle of Kinsale 1601, the English had captured some 30,000 military prisoners, and thus created an official policy of banishment, or transportation. James II encouraged selling the Irish as slaves to planters and settlers in the New World colonies. The first recorded sale of Irish slaves was to a settlement on the Amazon River, in 1612.
James II crowned king in 1685. He was not born until 1633, which is 21 years after the first Irish slaves were sold. It is logical to assume that the author intended to write James I, who became king in 1603, shortly after the siege of Kinsale.
James I (or more correctly VI&I) did not seem to harbour any ill will to Irish people in general, nor could I find any historical sources that corroborate this claim of 30,000 prisoners. It seems highly unlikely that they were
military prisoners, since there were only 6,000 Irish soldiers in that battle. Other sources claim about 3,400 Irish soldiers were captured.
As far as I can tell, there was no policy of banishment or transportation. It seems a bunch of Irish earls used this period to escape to Spain, and their lands got confiscated. It is very possible that the peasants who worked this land were then sold by the English lords who took these lands over, but it seems they could have also just worked then in Ireland.
Finally, slavery had existed in Ireland for centuries prior to this, so the. first recorded sale of Irish slaves probably happened whenever the Gaelic people achieved numeracy, whenever that was. The latest it would have conceivably happened was during the Roman invasions, since the Romans would have brought numeracy with them.
Should we look at the second paragraph?