Was the Irish Civil War the counter-revolution? Reconciliation and the Irish Civil War – Part III

Revolution – 
Advanced Class
Did either side in the Irish Civil War escape manipulation into the course which most profited the British Empire? Ireland’s struggles, triumphs, and tragedies hold unique, invaluable and particularly vivid lessons for every nation

(Also see linked posts:
“Reconciliation and the Irish Civil War” Pt I & Pt II )

In the Revolutionary Decade 1913-1923, the Irish Civil War was a few months: one cataclysm, which accomplished what the British were powerless to do, with all the king’s horses and all the king’s men: it stopped the revolution in its tracks, and wiped out much of its top leadership, who’d made it all possible.

For what chance ever have the brave left captainless – what fate
but to be trampled down by the fools and cowards?
– Standish O’Grady “The Gael” 1903

The Treaty talks of 1921 were the first between Ireland and England since the 1690s. Decades of negotiation, thankfully, followed. No one today would be called a traitor for not bringing back a 32-county republic, on their first trip to London. Nor on their tenth. Even in the most radical circles, everyone knows that would be wildly unrealistic.

We have the experience of 1922 to learn from. But the amazing achievements of Ireland’s Revolutionary Decade were won by people who had never seen a functioning democracy (as we think of it.) They wanted a republic; but had never actually done democracy. (Some might argue that the world has yet to see true democracy still.)

 

Michael Collins

While it was perfectly justifiable for any body of Irishmen, however small, to rise up
… against [Ireland’s] enemy… it is not justifiable for a minority to oppose
..the majority of their own countrymen, except by constitutional means.
– Michael Collins

It’s safe to say that no one expected the kind of success that Ireland won, when London sought a Truce in 1921. So no one prepared for it. Or could think out in advance how to handle it.

Cumann na mBan (Irish Volunteers women’s organization)

We didn’t think we were going to win,
and we didn’t think we were going to lose.
We just wanted to have a go.
– Vinne Byrne of The Squad
The Squad

These diverse Volunteers, ordinary men and women of all ages and backgrounds, who’d held together so valiantly in the teeth of the enemy, then fell apart at the touch of a bit of success. They let an imperfect success spoil it all. They let the enemy divide them, and were conquered. They fell to squabbling in the presence of the enemy. That dismayed Ireland, but delighted British imperialists.

 

These men, who nobly and successfully strove against
sea, storm, and disease, all forces beyond their control, were
ultimately overwhelmed by forces they could have,
but failed to control: their [passions].
– Captain Bligh and the Mutiny on the Bounty

Thus, in the wake of their unexpected victory, in forcing the British to the negotiating table, Ireland’s heroic insurgents tragically failed their first test as a democracy. Anti-Treaty partisans, when voted down in the June 1922 Pact Elections, refused to lay down their arms, submit to the will of the majority, and participate in the new Dublin establishment as a minority opposition, as agreed in advance, in the Collins-DeValera Pact agreement.

Would they have done so, if not for the unexpected Assassination of Sir Henry Wilson  and ensuing bombardment of the Four Courts?  History will never know. By then, too many risks had already been taken with Ireland’s unity. The powder keg and fuse were in place, so that any spark could set it off; even as the two sides were perhaps on their way to defuse it.

Was it entirely their fault? Collins didn’t even blame them. He knew this could happen. It’s a headly atmosphere, with no rule book. Who among us could have done better, with the same tools, knowledge, in the same time and place?

Nothing really worthwhile can be achieved in just one generation. – Thomas Cahill
“How the Irish Saved Civilisation”

It may be said that revolution, like other quixotic ventures, requires immersing oneself in a kind of unreality. For seven hundred years, Ireland had upheld the tradition of a rising in each generation. What did it take: to keep nationhood alive, through hopeless centuries of forced vassalge to a violent foreign occupation force? Through ages of famine and slavery?

Two kinds of courage enabled the nation to struggle out of bondage – the patient, enduring courage that willed survival in the long years of defeat; and the flashing, buoyant courage that struck manfully, challenging fortune.
– Florence O’Donoghue

IRA 1922 Macroom, County Cork

Know your Enemy: the far right, far left, and revolutionary failures
For the shopkeepers and farmers and clerks who made up the Irish Volunteers, this was new territory. But British Imperialists learned it all as boys, in their old-school-ties. One need only read “The Twelve Caesers” to get a clue of the arsenal of political chicanery at their command. They were the inheritors of a thousand years‘ practice in putting down popular revolts; and eliminating great popular leaders.

Likewise, the pages of revolutionary history around the world, repeatedly record the downfall of revolution arising from factions furthest to the left. Extremists, mouthing the most violently more-radical-than-thou ideology, have often enough overturned revolution, as the far right tried, but could only dream of doing.

Many in the discussion of this history might be familiar with postures today, leaning furthest to the left, and clinging to the anti-Treaty side. Some to the extent of continued rejection of any Dublin government subsequent to the Second Dail, of a hundred years ago.

Proponents of that outlook may consider themselves (not without some justice) more republican, more incisively sophisticated in their penetrating critique of British imperial policy toward Ireland, than those who accept the “official story” version of Irish history, favored by the FF-FG Dublin establishment.

At the same time, those with practical experience of anything like revolutionary struggle, (the two being not always synonymous,) may realize… that leftists with powerful opponents cannot afford to engage in loud, ugly, public quarrells among themselves. Such altercations create prime opportunities for assailants to shoot them down (figuratively or literally); and set up comrades to take the blame (if not actual bullets.)

A leader must not be unmindful of the implications of his words,
especially when speaking to people just emerging
from a great national struggle, with their outlook
and their emotions not in a normal state.
Michael Collins, 1922 – “Free St or Chaos”
“Free State or Chaos” – Michael Collins on the Treaty

A small nation, which has just victoriously beaten all odds, in an uneven struggle against vastly superior forces of a world-class imperialist war machine… cannot maintain its success by splitting in two, and taking arms against comrades; with the battle for independence only half-won.

Remember that a …fluke of politics… may fling the enthusiast Into the bosom
of the opposite party to the one which he has served all his life.
– Stendahl

British cavalry leaving Dublin 1922

The Treaty was not the disaster. The way comrades treated each other over it was the disaster.

I’d rather have one Tom Hales with me, than twelve other men.  –   Michael Collins
(Praising Hales, who later led the ambush where Collins died.)

It is an injustice to the memory of revolutionary Ireland’s astounding unity, in the teeth of the world’s biggest empire, that any of their descendants should immortalize their worst error: by remaining frozen in it.

The Civil War had only begun when initiatives started to bring it to an end.
– Liam Deasy, Officer Commanding, anti-Treaty Southern Division

Surely they never intended that their most questionable decisions, in their weakest moment, should be extolled as some kind of inviolable gospel, for a hundred years after! What could more break their hearts, than to see future generations rigidly adhere to the single most disastrous error, in all their stunning achievements for Ireland?

Don’t let your past dictate your future.

“A conflict of comrades.. would leave Ireland broken for generations…”
When he fell, Michael Collins was touring the country, engaging in direct, secret talks with IRA units in every region; with the express purpose of pulling the Irish Volunteers back together again. Treaty or no Treaty.

His death ended those efforts. His erstwhile comrades on the anti-Treaty side, who had been persuaded to reject the leadership which had brought them so far; who’d decided that they could do as well without him… found that they were wrong.

In 1919, Ireland’s abstention from Westminster laid the foundation for independence. But anti-Treaty abstention from Irish government, from 1922, deprived their adherents of a voice in Dublin institutions for decades after. In this, had they no part in allowing the country to be dominated, throughout its crucial formative decades, by elements who took no action to recover the partitioned North; won not a single millimeter of Irish soil from British control; sunk Ireland in one hundred years of economic and moral morass and corruption? Becoming, over the dead bodies of Michael Collins, Arthur Griffith, and so many others, everything the anti-Treaty side said they were.

In short, proving James Connolly’s prophecy too true, that taking down the Union Jack and raising the Tricolor, in itself, solved none of Ireland’s problems. Dublin’s dominant political establishment has earned characterization as belonging to “those who did well out of the famine, and were determined to do even better out of the Republic.” (- J J Lee)

At the same time, credit where credit is due must be accorded the 26 county Republic of Ireland: for 100 years of massive development in flourishing, unique Irish culture, industry, education, freedoms, which would have been impossible under British rule. Dublin’s role in negotiations that ultimately brought about the Good Friday Agreement, opened the road to a more just society in all Ireland’s 32 counties; including the chance to address the unfinished business of Irish independence.

 

It seems easier to get the Republic from a government
working in Ireland by Irishmen than from
an Ireland under British rule.
– Jenny Wyse Power, 1922

Neither side is just black or white. It’s time to end the Civil War, as its combattants would surely have wished us to do by now. Praise the accomplishments and critique the wrongs on all sides, past, present, and in future; free from inhibition by any my-side-right-or-wrong mentality of armed camps. So that Ireland can more freely explore who we are, where we are, and where we could go from here.

R E A D    M O R E
on Irish History / Irish Civil War:
“The Assassination of Michael Collins:
What Happened At Béal na mBláth?” by S M Sigerson
Paperback or Kindle edition here:
www.amazon.com/dp/1493784714

All other e-reader formats:
www.smashwords.com/books/view/433954

Read reviews:
http://www.rabidreaders.com/2014/12/03/assassination-michael-collins-s-m-sigerson-2/

OR ASK AT YOUR LOCAL BOOK SHOP

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Will the Real Revolution Please Stand Up? Reconciliation and the Irish Civil War – Part II

1921 Battle of Dublin

(Also see linked posts:
“Reconciliation and the Irish Civil War” Pt I & Pt III  on this blog site.)

It’s been seen how even the most seemingly reasonable outlook, (such as “..there were wrongs on both sides,”) can be twisted into travesty, where unjustly applied.  Yet it must be said now that reconciliation over the Irish Civil War requires circumspection, and willingness to admit errors, in the proponents of both Free State (FS) and anti-Treaty (AT, ATI (/ AT IRA) views.

Among those who continue to support AT views, often the most frequent complaint is, “They (FS) turned the guns on comrades!” Yet the anti-Treaty faction was itself unquestionably the first to “turn guns on comrades“: away from British targets, toward fellow Irish. By the same token, the partition of the North remains a big issue on that table, and justly so. Yet with willful blindness to the fact that the joint pro- & anti-Treaty 1922 Northern Campaign, to reclaim the six counties on all fronts: diplomatic, political, and military, was ended expressly because of Civil War between comrades. Lest we forget, IRA units in the partitioned six counties did not take up arms against the Dublin government. It was crystal clear to them that such a policy, or any split in nationalist forces, would leave them at the mercy of the new, murderous, unionist regime at Stormont. And that’s precisely what happened.

In the Free State’s Civil War campaign “the rate of executions and imprisonment superseded that of the earlier struggle for independence.” (Prof Siobhra Aiken, Queen’s University Belfast) Spiritual Wounds: Trauma, Testimony, and the Irish Civil War   post on this site] That is to say, exceeded British violence in Ireland over a comparable time span. Dublin’s summary executions without trial violated international conventions on war and human rights, then and now. Yet the inheritors of the FS establishment applaud their founders without exception as saviours of the country from bloody anarchy. Or was the FS government itself a form of bloody anarchy?

All of this was avoidable. By June 1922, Ireland, contrary to the conventional wisdom of hindsight, was bidding fair to avoid civil war entirely; much to the displeasure of the London regime, particularly Churchill. (May 1922: Leaders Strive to Prevent Civil War  post this site]

Pro- and anti-Treaty representatives at 1922 Pact Elections meeting. Michael Collins, Arthur Griffith, Eamonn DeValera front row

The June 1922 “Pact Elections” proved a majority of the Irish public war-weary, and more than willing to accept, for now, the measure of independence won at the 1921 London negotiations. This result was freely admitted on all sides.

Just days after the poll was decided, two events overturned all laudable peace efforts, and hurled the country into full-scale civil conflict: the assassination of Sir Henry Wilson (post, this site) and the resulting shelling of the anti-Treaty garrison at Four Courts. ( Four Courts Bombardment – Who Gave the Order? post this site)

According to the [Four Courts garrison], they were loading their arms onto lorries and would have evacuated the Four Courts by 8AM in the morning. Had the shelling not started at 4AM, they say, there would have been no Civil War.
– John M Feehan

Four Courts siege 1922

Michael Collins has unjustly been scapegoated as having ordered both disastrous actions; despite marked lack of substantial evidence that he did so. ( Sir Henry Wilson Assassination 1922 post, this site) Both may be said to have led directly to his own killing, just weeks later. Hazy, contradictory details in the chain of command in those actions echo the mystery surrounding Collins’ suspicious death; as well as that of Arthur Griffith, Harry Boland, and Liam Lynch.

Certainly blaming the victim is ever an all too convenient cop out. But Collins did not survive years on the most wanted list, captain Ireland’s most successful assault on foreign occupation yet, all the way to the negotiating table, winning unprecedented liberties which voided the nefarious Treaty of Limerick and Act of Union… by being known for such monumentally suicidal blunders.

…There is as yet no adequate study available dealing with the role of the British secret service in the Civil War. No one really knows how far their promptings were responsible for starting the Civil War or indeed for the subsequent shooting without trial of so many republican prisoners.
– Feehan

Who was a traitor?
It’s necessary for commentators of all persuations to acknowledge that many well-meaning patriots supported FS and AT alike. Even as well-intentioned voters in Ireland today might vote for Sinn Fein, Fine Gael, Fianna Fail, the Labour Party, the Green Party, People Before Profit… as it may seem to them might best serve the country’s needs.

I disagreed with MIchael Collins about the Treaty. But he was no traitor.
– Kathleen Clarke

Kathleen Clarke

 

At the same time, Feehan’s call (above) for greater scrutiny of the role of clandestine British operations in the Civil War has remained a voice crying in the wilderness. While spies and “moles” (those who joined nationalist forces as operatives for the British) are freely discussed in histories of the Anglo-Irish War 1919-1921 (aka War of Independence / Tan War,) the topic with regard to the Civil War seems almost taboo. No one wants to admit that such operatives could have been active on their side.

Even as sincerity was in plentiful supply on both sides, it’s necessary to recognize that neither was either free from opportunists, even in the leadership of both sides: willing enough to exacerbate the situation, without regard to Ireland’s welfare; but rather with a view to their own subsequent post-war career. As history shows, some did very well for themselves by it.

Soul-searching among leaders of today would not be remiss: is there not reluctance to critique one’s own political forebears / founders of one’s own party? Certainly, in practical terms, every politician’s number one job is to raise a cheering section: to drum up support for their party. Whatever their programs, their sole means of pursuing them, is to gain power; which is to say, to gain popularity.

Who can blame them, if history may often be with them largely a tool for realizing such goals? How can they see a too-unsparing moral inventory of their founders as in any way related to that job?

Yet surely, any party which advertises itself as offering government for all, must move past a partisan position on the Civil War; and ought to do better than commemorating 1922 with a statement that “the shelling of the Four Courts started the Civil War.” As if no events preceded and led up to that turning point; as if members of the ATI garrison at Four Courts had no part in picking up the gun against their own countrymen, but were merely sitting on the quay, smelling a flower! As if both pro-and anti-Treaty leaders did not first carry on months of painstaking negotiations to avoid conflict.

“When choosing someone for a mission in which courage and judgement are equally required, I’d rather send a clever coward than a stupid hero.”
– Michael Collins

Michael Collins speaking in favor of the Treaty Clonakilty 1922

Perhaps the greatest service to Ireland possible, with regard to Civil War commemoration, might be for today’s prominent political representatives to cop on, and be an example of the good old democratic principle of criticism/self-criticism. To admit that, for all their sincere patriotic intentions, it was the ATI who first “turned guns on comrades“; and that their doing so never won a single further millimeter of Irish soil from British control. That however politically correct anyone might esteem them, their military strategy was a failure.

Let’s see the present Fianna Fail / Fine Gael (FF/FG) establishment issue a condemnation of the wanton executions, imprisonment, and torture practiced against the ATI under their successive governments; as well as their like failure to address or improve upon Ireland’s most imperfect independence, for the past 100 years.

Let’s be revolutionary. Let’s revolutionize the way we think of the Civil War; the way we deal with each other, and with that past.

R E A D    M O R E
on Irish History / Irish Civil War:
“The Assassination of Michael Collins:
What Happened At Béal na mBláth?”

by S M Sigerson
Paperback or Kindle edition here:
www.amazon.com/dp/1493784714

All other e-reader formats:
www.smashwords.com/books/view/433954

Read reviews:
http://www.rabidreaders.com/2014/12/03/assassination-michael-collins-s-m-sigerson-2/

OR ASK AT YOUR LOCAL BOOK SHOP

 

 

 

 

Sir Henry Wilson Assassination 1922: A Great Black Op?

Ronan McGreevy’s book draws attention to a most important case: to which an entire chapter is devoted in The Assassination of Michael Collins: What Happened at Béal na mBláth? by S M Sigerson. But in  McGreevy’s excellent research, is there a glaring omission of the most shocking theory of all? Or could his editors be to blame?

It’s most welcome to see a writer of McGreevy’s calibre take by the horns this long-neglected mystery of history: so deeply entwined in the tragedy of Ireland’s Civil War (1922-23). It’s quite debatable whether that fratricidal conflict might have been averted, but for the shooting of Sir Henry Wilson on 22 June 1922. Despite critical unanswered questions, the case has been shamefully neglected by historians. The Assassination of Sir Henry Wilson (2014 post – this blog)

This writer’s first instinct, on learning details of the Wilson case was, “…Did the British have a motive?” Having found that a first instinct in these things often proves the right one… Just scratching the surface, Wilson’s British enemies with motive, means, & opportunity become evident.

The principle of Cui Bono? / Who Gains? thoroughly supports the possibility that the British elements may have been behind Wilson’s killing: It was a disaster for Ireland. It got the (unionist) British everything they wanted. Ultimately, it achieved the removal of Michael Collins, and put DeValera over the Irish indefinitely.

Wilson had unquestionably come to be seen by some as a political liability. Is it possible that Lloyd George, Churchill and their cabal came to the conclusion that, in realizing their scheme for Ireland, Wilson would be worth a great deal more to them dead than alive?          
                            – S M Sigerson

The hypothesis known to readers of The Assassination of Michael Collins is as follows: if DeValera were the real turncoat serving British interest (as history seems to support,) a slight shuffling/confusion of official IRA orders could easily have been arranged. Resulting in an assassination plan, slated before the Truce, suddenly being re-activated; with devastating consequences.

Reggie Dunne

This would entirely account for Collins’ reported fury and confusion on hearing that the shooting of Wilson had been carried out by his own men in the London IRA.

No war ever begins for just one reason. All the factors [at work in Ireland in 1922] may be seen as a powder keg: the explosive elements which placed the country in danger of war breaking out. In that sense, the siege of the Four Courts was the fuse, and the assassination of Sir Henry Wilson the spark, which together set off the conflagration; which cost so many lives, and broke out afresh in the northern Troubles of the 1970s -1990s.

McGreevy eschews any mention of Sigerson’s investigation into the Wilson case, which he certainly has drawn upon; even borrowing its very language (quoted above): “Without a fuse and a spark, there can be no conflagration.”

It’s difficult to understand how the author can make so much of the theory that somehow the IRB (Irish Republican Brotherhood) shot Wilson; despite the IRB’s unequivocal denial of responsibility, on behalf of both the organization and Collins personally, by Sean McGarry of the Supreme Council at the time:

“I reject any suggestion that the IRB or Michael Collins, as Head Centre of our organization, had anything to do with Wilson’s death.”

This important book thus wanders into danger of becoming a long elaborate exercise in pinning Wilson’s death on Michael Collins (again,) on no more than hearsay.  Yet, in fairness, McGreevy does air evidence to the contrary as well.

Nor does he omit mention of fierce enmity between Wilson & Lloyd George’s government. But all evidently on the presumption that of course proper British authorities could never do anything like that. At the same time laudably chronicling London’s loyalist darlings’ contemporaneous daily indiscriminate slaughter of the Irish of the northeast.  Of whom Sir Henry Wilson was one.

Still, despite any flaws, A Great Hatred: The Assassination of Field Marshall Sir Henry Wilson MP by Ronan McGreevy remains a most worthwhile study of this critical-yet-long-neglected case. It will definitely inspire more inquiry & debate; which is one of the best things that any book about it can do.

Methodical, disinterested study of this period has really only begun. While the Bureau of Military History’s ongoing publication of thousands of detailed first-hand personal narratives by the revolutionaries themselves, long held secret and confidential during the testators’ lifetimes, opens up new vistas for research. Their full ramifications for what we think we know about that largely secret war can hardly be fully explored in one lifetime.

In his book, McGreevy makes full use of these narratives to great effect. This means that much testimony about Wilson’s shooting is now available with definite verifiable provenance as to precisely who said what, who they were, what was their exact role in the Volunteers, and how their evidence was recorded, for the first time.

R E A D    M O R E:
“The Assassination of Michael Collins:
What Happened At Béal na mBláth?” by S M Sigerson
Paperback or Kindle edition here:
www.amazon.com/dp/1493784714

All other e-reader formats:
www.smashwords.com/books/view/433954

Read reviews:
http://www.rabidreaders.com/2014/12/03/assassination-michael-collins-s-m-sigerson-2/

OR ASK AT YOUR LOCAL BOOK SHOP

 

 

 

 

 

RECONCILIATION and The Irish Civil War Centenary 1922-2022

 

We will never tell anyone who we are until we know who we are.
We will never get anywhere until we know where we are.
– Malcolm X

The Civil War Centenary can hardly be a celebratory commemoration; yet neither dare we forget. Nor is it enough to repeat by rote time-worn rhetoric handed down from that day to this; depending on which side our forebears embraced; or on the political expedience of the moment.

(Also see linked posts: “Reconciliation and the Irish Civil War” Part II and Part III on this blog site.).

Like the Centenary of the Easter Rising, this is a priceless opportunity for deepening our understanding of who we are, where we’ve come from, and where we might go from here. A chance to re-examine the meaning of independence, patriotism, history; the meaning of Ireland itself.

It is offered that there can be no better means to commemorate that generation’s achievements & hardships, than a fearless moral inventory, and unsparing scrutiny of the Civil War in all its aspects, on all sides.

How could anyone more substantially express respect for their good intentions, reverence for their sacrifices, gratitude for the very same combattants’ immense achievements in the Tan War / War of Independence of 1919-1921?

The Civil War divide
As in any country which has suffered the tragedy of civil war, personal feelings or factional outlook may color Irish views. Bitter recriminations continue to resound over it, to this day.

At the same time, reconciliation has become a cornerstone of astounding achievements in Ireland wp.me/p43KWx-9z It’s been at the core of policies & dialogue which, in our lifetime, helped free Northern Ireland from the violent Troubles, which once seemed eternal & insoluble.

Courgeous people do not fear forgiving for the sake of peace.
– Nelson Mandela

Yet for all the amazing work done on reconciliation between Catholics & Protestants, between Nationalists & Unionists… never has anything been heard about reconciliation within Ireland, over the Civil War split, now a hundred years old.

There can be no reconciliation where there is no open warfare.
– M E Braddon

There remain those in Ireland for whom the clock stopped with the Second Dail (1922): who still refuse to accept the legitimacy of any subsequent Dublin government. On the opposite extreme are those who abhor the memory of any war with Britain, who objected to the commemoration of the Easter Rising, & even would seem to sigh for a return to the British Crown!

It’s said that truth is the first casualty of war. Truth recovery must therefore be both the first step and ultimate goal in any responsible remembrance: the alpha and the omega.

For the Civil War Centenary, this will require partisans of both sides to acknowledge not only what our side says happened: but also to listen to what patriots on the other side say happened. Not only to celebrate those whom we look on as the heroes of the day, not only to lament the wrongs they sustained; but also to hear heartfelt tributes and greviances from the other persuasion.

To hear that heroes of the independence struggle were shot by former comrades; others shot by former British soldiers in green uniforms, some by firing squads, and some by secret service assassins. Some were beaten and died in Free State custody. Some fell to anti-Treaty mines. Yes, and to hear that some elements in leadership, as history has taught us to expect, perhaps sold out the popular victory for a piece of London’s pie.

Now two Russias will be facing each other.
Those who were sent to prison. And those who sent them there.
– Anna Akhmatova

The Republic and the republican movement today have suffered from these flaws in their foundations. A lot of politics and policy have been based on fallout from the Civil War.

Yet, as Michael Collins’ story itself demonstrates, that period remains so controversial, that there is still a great deal of confusion about what in fact actually did happen. wp.me/p43KWx-7o That child-bed of the nation was so recent, so chaotic and volatile, that public discussion and public record about it has been distorted: both in flawed institutions of the south, in republican rhetoric of the north... and, dare we add, in British versions (so as not to say “coverups”.)

Eighty years of institutionalized inhibition of historical research often left the public with little but oral traditions to judge by. Without access to reliable, scholarly analysis, it has been all but impossible to make an accurate assessment of that era, or of its meaning for subsequent generations.

This has sometimes allowed mistaken analysis, misfired arguments, rumour, or open wounds to stand in the place of history. Such errors have in some quarters been carried on and enshrined like some sacred scroll; as Ireland wandered through the wilderness of the 20th century. Since the 1970s, new generations, wrestling with these legacies, have brought new hope, new conflicts, tragedies, and victories.

We are only beginning to unravel that story now. Perhaps the first lesson here is that the lessons of the Civil War have not yet been fully learned.  

Margaret Skinnider fought in the Easter Rising and served the anti-Treaty side in the Civil War

 

Our debt to the past
To those who lived through that crucible of fire, because it was the only path they could see to Ireland’s independence… we owe a great debt. We owe it to them to ferret out the painful truths of that crippling wound in the national psyche; or we’ll never get beyond it. Or their suffering would truly have been in vain.

Certainly such reassessment will not be possible without constructive, realistic criticism of the actors in those events.

I admired the men and the women [engaged in the Easter Rising]… I admire Connolly… Tom Clarke & [Sean] MacDiarmada… They have died nobly at the hands of the firing squads.

But at the same time… the actions of the leaders should not pass without comment… On the whole I think the Rising was bungled terribly, costing many a good life. It seemed at first to be well organised, but afterwards became subjected to panic decisions and a great lack of very essential organisation and cooperation.
– Michael Collins (private letter)

Can this generation well afford to do less by the Civil War, which continues to haunt, and even control, so many aspects of national life, than Collins did here for the Easter Rising? Is it not the duty of the survivors to learn all that can be learned, not only from the successes but also from the failures of those who went before?

Were there really any heroes in the Civil War? Certainly none who are universally revered. One side’s patriotic martyrs may still be regarded by descendants of the other persuasion as enemies of Irish freedom.

Whatever heroism there may have been in that hell paved with the good intentions of some of Ireland’s best and brightest… the Civil War certainly had no winners.

Is it time for all persuasions to openly acknowledge that this was a failed strategy, for both sides? Could this be a fertile occasion for facing up to its catastrophic consequences, which Ireland is still living with today? To candidly discuss who we are, where we’ve been, and where we might go from here, together.

May your choices reflect your hopes not your fears
– Nelson Mandela

This post includes excerpts from:
“The Assassination of Michael Collins:
What Happened At Béal na mBláth?” by S M Sigerson
Paperback or Kindle edition here:
www.amazon.com/dp/1493784714

All other e-reader formats:
www.smashwords.com/books/view/433954

Read reviews:
http://www.rabidreaders.com/2014/12/03/assassination-michael-collins-s-m-sigerson-2/

OR ASK AT YOUR LOCAL BOOK SHOP

 

The assassination of General Sean Hales, TD

General Sean Hales was the ranking Free State officer in the district encompassing Béal na mBláth. He was also a close friend of Michael Collins, since their youth in West Cork. His suspicious death followed closely upon that of Collins, and was directly linked with it. The story of his murder is routinely glossed over, even when cited as the pretext for subsequent killings of other great War of Independence heroes; his erstwhile brothers in arms, such a short time before.

(The following is an excerpt from “The Assassination of Michael Collins: What Happened at Beal na mBlath?”  www.amazon.com/dp/1493784714)

Hales immediately set about trying to organize an official investigation into the shooting of Commander-in-Chief Collins: seeking to have all members of the convoy returned to Bandon, so that a court of inquiry could be held. To obtain the necessary authorizations, he made several trips to Dublin, where he met with representatives of the Cabinet and army headquarters. They refused to cooperate.

He would not be dissuaded, but travelled to Dublin again to press his suit for a full investigation. His driver and constant companion Jim Woulfe told Feehan that Hales never accepted Dalton’s story. A letter from Woulfe to Feehan states, ” … His chief topic of conversation was Michael Collins. He told me that he would leave no stone unturned until he got an inquiry or inquest held on Michael’s death. … At this time he was about three times in Dublin but all to no avail. The ‘big brass’ in Dublin would not listen to him. He told me so himself.”

Hales took his appeal to the highest Free State civil and military authorities. This means that the lack of inquiry was no oversight, but was defended in the teeth of continued demand. It also directly implicates WT Cosgrave, Richard Mulcahy, Kevin O’Higgins and other key figures. Certainly these are the people Hales would have been speaking to.

Sean Hales statue Bandon, County Cork

Travelling again on this matter, Hales went to Portobello Barracks, where, as a general of the army, he normally stayed while in the capital. On his arrival, he was informed that the Barracks had no accommodation for him. This forced him to move to a hotel: on the doorstop of which he was assassinated the next day.

Witnesses saw two British soldiers at the scene, with their guns drawn. These same soldiers testified that Hales was shot by two unidentified assailants, whom no one else had seen. The British soldiers’ version became the official story, accepted at the inquest.

The IRA have consistently denied responsibility. Notably Moss Twomey, one of the top anti-Treaty commanders for Dublin at the time, “always maintained that no orders whatever were given to shoot Hales and it was not the IRA’s doing.” 

Hales’ death was seized upon by the Free State’s new Cosgrave-Blyth government (created upon the sudden deaths in quick succession of Arthur Griffith and Michael Collins): as a pretext for a wave of shocking summary executions. The men condemned by these newly-elevated functionaries were heroes of the War of Independence: Liam Mellows a leading socialist tactician, Rory O’Connor a prominent regional commander, later spokesman for the Four Courts Anti-Treaty garrison, Joe McKelvey, and Richard Barrett. The very revolutionaries responsible for the creation of the new, Dublin government; here proved so quick to put them to death without a hearing.

Liam Mellowes, Rory OConnor, Joe McKelvey, & Richard Barrett

Who can read this record, without wondering whom indeed did that particular Government really represent? 

In some circles, voices are sometimes still head to blame Collins for these atrocities; which in fact took place over his dead body. Few (including apparently few historians) read this fine print of history, inextricably .linking their deaths with his, and with that of General Sean Hales.

Read more
“The Assassination of Michael Collins:
What Happened At Béal na mBláth?”

by S M Sigerson
Paperback or Kindle edition here:
www.amazon.com/dp/1493784714
All other e-reader formats:
www.smashwords.com/books/view/433954
Read reviews:
http://www.rabidreaders.com/2014/12/03/assassination-michael-collins-s-m-sigerson-2/
Or ask at your local book shop

 

 

 

 

Liam Lynch and the Slide into Civil War 1922 – an article by Éireann Ascendant

IRA men in Grafton Street Dublin – courtesy Eireann Ascendant

Readers of this blog are sure to find this article of great interest indeed:
https://erinascendantwordpress.wordpress.com/2017/11/30/the-chains-of-trust-liam-lynch-and-the-slide-into-civil-war-1922-part-ii/

A brilliant Irish history blog, Éireann Ascendant, here presents fascinating details of negotiations, politics, personalities, and passions which so nearly averted civil war in Ireland. (As discussed on this blog below:  “May 1922: Leaders Strive to Prevent Civil War in Ireland”
https://collinsassassination.wordpress.com/2018/05/05/may-1922-leaders-strive-to-prevent-civil-war-in-ireland/ )

 

The bombardment of Four Courts: Who gave the order?

The bombardment of Four Courts, June 1922

There clearly seems to be a need for a definitive study on the
actual commencement of hostilities [in the Civil War ]. 

– John M Feehan

Did Michael Collins give the order to begin the bombardment of Four Courts?  Historians have presumed so; but no more.  The evidence casts considerable doubt as to whether the order ever came from Collins himself…  There is no record as to precisely who gave it.

(Excerpts from the book
“The Assassination of Michael Collins: What Happened at Béal na mBlath?“:)

“…a conflict of comrades … would be the greatest calamity in Irish history, and would leave Ireland broken for generations…”

– “The Army Document” signed by Michael Collins, along with an equal
number of prominent pro- & anti-Treaty officers, May 1922
May 1922 – Leaders Strive to Prevent Civil War in Ireland

The hindsight of history demonstrates that he was among the leaders who clearly foresaw just how terrible a disaster these hostilities would bring. Amidst all the trigger-happy factions, baying for blood at that juncture, in London, in the Free State government, and in anti-Treaty camps, Collins by far most strenuously and continually resisted giving battle…

As subsequent events proved, his judgement on this was excellent. It was that explosion of the Four Courts, which he was so keen to avoid, that set off the chain of events which, ultimately, took his own life … he outlived the first shells to hit Inns Quay, by only fifty-five days.

In this sense, the mysteries surrounding the bombardment of Four Courts are directly related to the death of Collins: who may with justice be called one of its first casualties.

This came at a moment when pro- and anti-Treaty throughout Ireland had reached agreement to avoid civil war. Inextricably linked with the assassination of Sir Henry Wilson, the shelling of Four Courts shattered the fragile peace, commencing the Irish Civil War… and setting the stage for Collins’ own death.

Who was responsible?

Read more
“The Assassination of Michael Collins:
What Happened At Béal na mBláth?”
www.amazon.com/dp/1493784714
by S M Sigerson
Paperback or Kindle edition here:
All other e-reader formats:
www.smashwords.com/books/view/433954

Read reviews:
http://www.rabidreaders.com/2014/12/03/assassination-michael-collins-s-m-sigerson-2/

Or ask at your local book shop

 

 

Cén fáth Agus Conas Mar a Thosaigh An Cogadh Cathartha?

 

Forghabháil na gCeithre Chúirt 1922

Sliocht as an leabhar (sa Gaeilge):

“Le linn an tsosa cogaidh agus na gcainteanna faoin chonradh lorg na páirtiseáin, a bhain Cogadh na Saoirse, ceannaireacht pholaitiúil ón Dáil. Ní raibh a scoilt i bhfaicsin faoi airm ann roimh bhogadh ar bith ó na baill thofa ach ina dhiaidh sin.

… Is ionann na fachtóirí atá … na heilimintí a chuir an tír I gcontúirt an chogaidh. Mar sin is ionann ionsaí na gCeithre Chúirt agus an fiús, feallmharú Henry Wilson an splanc agus chuir an dá fhachtóir seo an lasair sa bharrach, a mharaigh an oiread sin daoine agus a bhris amach arís ó thuaidh ó 1970í go 1990í.

I measc uaireanta ar fad na cinniúna in Éirinn san 20ú haois is iad an dá chasadh seo is lú a bhfuil staidéar déanta orthu. Ag am scríofa an leabhair seo tá siad go fóill mistéireach, conspóideach.”

Léigh seo níos mó:   
“The Assassination of Michael Collins:
What Happened At Béal na mBláth?”
le S M Sigerson

Bogchlúdach nó Kindle anseo:
www.amazon.com/dp/1493784714

Uile eile formáidí r–leabhar:
www.smashwords.com/books/view/433954

Leabhair eile a bhfuil leas:

Cogadh na gCarad
le Diarmuid Ó Tuama
http://www.coisceim.ie/cogadh.html

Shopaí leabhar:
http://www.coisceim.ie/Siopai.html

Nó déan iarratas ar siopa leabhar in aice leat!