BS: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916

Subject: RE: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 18 Apr 16 - 02:08 PM

"So care to tell me why you are calling it a "Mutiny" when it wasn't?"
It is generally known as a mutiny - it was mutinous in its intent and it was an open attempt to interfere in Government policy - the question as to whether it succeeded in changing Governmenyt policy has never been resolved.
Would you mind telling me why you are claiming that what the officers did was not wrong - by both military and civilian law?
Why are you defending Military interference in in Government actions.
I repeat, if it had taken place a few months later, whether it was successful or not, it would have been a treasonable act subject to the death penalty.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: Teribus
Date: 18 Apr 16 - 01:37 PM

From the link dealing with the incident Jom we read this:

The 57 officers were not actually guilty of 'mutiny'; they had not disobeyed direct orders of any kind.

So care to tell me why you are calling it a "Mutiny" when it wasn't?

Subject: RE: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 18 Apr 16 - 01:17 PM

BBC AGAIN
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 18 Apr 16 - 01:14 PM

"There was no mutiny, no laws were broken,)
'Course here wasn't - it was all a dreadful mistake and the ones that resigned just needed a couple of weeks off!!
Try answering the specific points rather than the old usual denial with a little sprinkle of bullshit.
The Officers informed the Government that they would have no part fighting the Unionists if ordered to doi so - Bad hair day, schoolboy petulance - or what exactly.
It was a case of leading officers refusing to do what they were paid to do for political reasons, simple as that - if not, what exactly was it (or did we all dream it.
Of course, it never got beyond a threat because the occasion did not arise, but it remains what it was, the military attempting to intervene in Government policy - if not an actual mutiny a threatened one for political purposes - hair-splitting - the difference between industrial action and threatened industrial action.
You'll be scrabbling round for typos next.
BBC
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: Teribus
Date: 18 Apr 16 - 12:53 PM

Jim Carroll - 18 Apr 16 - 08:02 AM

Lots of "IFs" in all of that Jim - Unfortunately examining the ifs does not reflect either the times or the events - as relevant as the old saying "IF my Aunt had balls She'd be my Uncle".

There was no mutiny, no laws were broken, no offences committed - yet to Mr Carroll it was an act of military aggression for which people should have been tried and executed - his only rational for justifying this is to apply his IFs and present those as if they represented the situation and conditions that prevailed in March 1914.

Still he's back to calling it the Curragh Mutiny so no progress made at all. No point in entering into any "discussion" with Carroll at all.

As for putting up "facts" and backing them up Thompson (Who doesn't think that there ever was an actual "mutiny" at The Curragh) seems to have gone very quiet when his facts are challenged.

Subject: RE: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 18 Apr 16 - 12:19 PM

"Irishmen did not and would not volunteer to expand the British Empire."
Nope - they went out because they were offered jobs, an easy war and meals every day, which many of them did not have at home.
Expalin the sudden U-turn - from support for Britain to a War of Independence that drove Britain out of Ireland in a matter of months.
Ireland had everey reason to hate Britain in teh shape of a deliberately manipulated Famine ("God's punishment for indolence" according to Sir Charlie") and mass enforced (sail or starve) immigration.
As with every nation, the Irish have their flaws, but they would have to be a nation of masochists to support a nation which did that to them.
The war provided work and wages, as it did for many in Britain - it turned out to be not as easy as they had been led to believe.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: The Sandman
Date: 18 Apr 16 - 12:16 PM

most of the infra structure here was built by the British.
the IRISH Reduced the rail network about the same time as Beeching,the European union has done very little towards improving the rail network, they have provided some road funding, but some of that was ill advised, they would have done better to have spent it on the rail network, they have contributed to destroying a heritage site, read this letter

Madam, - I read in a recent article here in Germany that the M3 motorway being built through the Tara valley will be partly financed by European Union subsidies.
It is a condition for EU member-states which receive subsidies that they undertake not to destroy any heritage in the course of using EU funding. Yet if the M3 motorway proceeds on its planned route it will destroy the recently discovered archaeological site at Lismullin.
This matter was raised in the European Parliament in May by the Irish MEP Proinsias De Rossa, and also by the British MEP Roger Helmer. I believe the issue will also be raised in the future by German MEPs.
During my studies I lived for a period in Ireland, and came to deeply appreciate Irish culture and heritage. I find it so hard to believe that the Irish Government would seek to build a motorway through what has rightly been called the heart of Irish culture. Irish heritage is part of European heritage. Surely European Union money must not be used to destroy what all European visitors to Ireland know is something unique and precious. - Yours, etc,
CHRISTA SPANNBAUER, Holzkirchen, Germany.
Raggytash, your comment is an example of someone who makes occasional visits, but does not really understand what has happened in this country.
I have a lot of criticsms of Europe and their inept petty Imperalistic bureaucracy but I am in favour of staying in, better the devil you know than the deep blue sea that you do not.

Subject: RE: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 18 Apr 16 - 11:31 AM

It was a war over world domination

Not for Britain.
It was just about the invasion, and the war aims were just to halt the invader and push him back to his own borders, freeing the conquered and enslaved peoples.

No domination.
No territorial gain.
Irishmen did not and would not volunteer to expand the British Empire.
They volunteered to fight against a threat to civilisation and democracy including that of Britain and Ireland.

Subject: RE: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: GUEST,Raggytash
Date: 18 Apr 16 - 10:51 AM

Having said that Dick Ireland has done very well out of Europe. Look at your infrastructure for a start.

Subject: RE: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: The Sandman
Date: 18 Apr 16 - 10:33 AM

Part of the geographical island of Ireland gained independence.
however they sold their independence to Europe and now appeared to be ruled by Brussels.

Subject: RE: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 18 Apr 16 - 09:02 AM

"Jim, the word "imperial" was appropriate because it was not just a British fight"
You've claimed this once before without evidence - you provide none now
It was a war over world domination - doesn't matter who started it - it was Empire defending Empire plain and simple and its excesses led to the eventual collapes of the Imperial system - after how many centuries?
Finished with this.
On to why Britain was all agog to give Ireland independence but never quite got round to it.
To repeat - Icidents such as the constant defeat of Home Rule bills and the Curragh mutiny proved beyond doubt that Ireland would never get Independence without forcibly seizing it - even when it succeeded, the partition that was forced on them led to ongoing oppression, violence and eventually open warfare.
Easter Week was the frst major step towards Independence
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: GUEST,Raggytash
Date: 18 Apr 16 - 08:43 AM

Question: Just how much territory did Britain acquire post WW1 that pre WW1 had been German or Ottoman territory.

Subject: RE: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 18 Apr 16 - 08:25 AM

Rag your Wiki page gives the original name as The National War Museum.
I recalled it as The British War Museum.
Sorry for the slight but irrelevant error.

Jim, the word "imperial" was appropriate because it was not just a British fight. The whole Empire was involved.
Britain was not fighting an "imperial war" as you claim, but was fighting to defend Britain and Europe from an aggressive invader.

Britain was not fighting for territory, only defending.

Subject: RE: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 18 Apr 16 - 08:02 AM

"The Curragh Mutiny is now acknowledged as not being a mutiny at all and is more accurately described historically as the Curragh incident,"
Not true - it was an attempt by a number of high ranking officers to influence British policy by refusing to act should they be ordered to do so - mutiny by threat and if it had come to it, mutiny by action tantamount to a military coup on behalf of the Ulster Unionists.
If it had happened during wartime it would have been treasonable and subject to trial and execution if those concerned had been found guilty.
It was described by the Government as "a misunderstanding and largely ignored, which was confirmation, if any were needed, that Home Rule could never be arrived at by peaceful means.
That there was no intention of ratifying the Home Rule Bill, (which was re-introduced and rejected by the Irish Parliamentarians in 1916) was confirmed by the fact that, by the end of 1919 no moves were made to introduce independence, instead, yet more thuggish violence on Britain's part by sending in the Black and Tans and Auxies to beat the Irish into submission.
Any violence that took place subsequently was in reaction to that instigated and carried out by Britain and the Ulster Protestant State, culminating in the viciousness towards the Civil Rights Protests, which led to open warfare.
"The Imperial War Cabinet" was the British Empire's wartime coordinating body. The Imperial War Conferences of 1917 and 1918 were a series of meetings held concurrent with the Imperial War Cabinet to co-ordinate governance of the British Empire during the war and prepare for the post-war situation."
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: GUEST,Raggytash
Date: 18 Apr 16 - 06:58 AM

"It was originally called the British War Museum."

Any chance of an acknowledgement that you were mistaken.

Subject: RE: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 18 Apr 16 - 06:45 AM

Thanks.
The original name was "The National War Memorial" and not quite as I recalled.
It is a fact that the name "Imperial War Museum" was chosen to acknowledge the contribution of the Empire, and Jim was wrong to claim it as evidence of an imperial war.

The museum's name was changed in November 1917 at the request of the India and Dominions Sub-Committee, who wanted a name that ensured 'India and the Dominions would feel that their part in the War would be permanently commemorated in the centre of the Empire'.

Subject: RE: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: Raggytash
Date: 18 Apr 16 - 05:26 AM

The Imperial War Museum was opened in 1920 and was called the Imperial War Museum from 1917.

Facts

Subject: RE: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 18 Apr 16 - 04:47 AM

You accuse me of "out of context quotes."
I have only quoted one historian, and I provided a link so that it could be seen in its original full context, exactly as quoted.

You have failed to challenge a single point that I have made.
Many of yours have been shown to be wrong.

Subject: RE: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 18 Apr 16 - 04:05 AM

Jim,
- I have the facts of the civil war and the war of Independence - you have out-of-context quotes again

Facts like the bill not having been passed?
You were wrong about that.

It is true that I read what historians say about history.
They do the research and write the books.
You are deluded if you believe that you know better.

You were wrong about the naming of the Imperial War Museum.
It was originally called the British War Museum.
The name was changed to acknowledge that much of the fighting was done by Empire not British fighters.

Subject: RE: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: Teribus
Date: 18 Apr 16 - 02:37 AM

Further progress in as much as the Curragh Incident originally described as being the first military aggression has now been downgraded to military action, which of course is also incorrect as no military action took place at all, what was proposed was no action at all by way of massed resignations from the army.

Joe Offer - Date: 17 Apr 16 - 10:29 PM

Well said Joe, in general that has been needed saying for some time now, I hope heed is taken of it.

Subject: RE: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: Teribus
Date: 18 Apr 16 - 02:08 AM

Well at least we are getting some progress albeit slight.

The Curragh Mutiny is now acknowledged as not being a mutiny at all and is more accurately described historically as the Curragh incident, an incident in which no law (Civil, Military or Criminal) was broken, hence no trials, or executions.

The resignations mentioned were forced resignations from the high offices held not resignations from the Army.

Thompson where does this figure of 1,200,000 Arabs fighting for the British Army come from? I think I remember you bringing this up on another thread in which you also claimed that 500,000 of them were killed. Like your figure of 30,000 British troops being deployed in Ireland to counter the Easter Rising your information is just plain wrong and your figures are fanciful myth.

On India I would direct you towards Niall Ferguson on the subject

Subject: RE: Easter Rising - April 24-29, 1916
From: Joe Offer
Date: 17 Apr 16 - 10:29 PM

Fergie says: Keith you know next to nothing about Irish history, so stop trying to pretend that you do. Your statements are widely inaccurate and you are parroting an interpretation of history that has being cobbled together and peddled by establishment apologists and revisionists since the end of WW1.

I know you can do better than that, Fergie. Please provide historical facts to support what you have to say. Address issues, not posters. Many of us have a lot to learn about this subject. All I know, is what I read in the Leon Uris books. Well, a bit more - but not much.

-Joe-

Subject: RE: Easter Rising
From: keberoxu
Date: 17 Apr 16 - 05:00 PM

Earlier posts have remarked on a connection between Irish nationalism, and Germany. This connection is a complex one with multiple layers. I am thinking of the sad ending to the career of Dr. Kuno Meyer.

The layer in question here is language, linguistics, literature, lyrics.

Dr. Kuno Meyer was a German born and bred, and ultimately he would die there. But his career took him elsewhere. His studies of languages led him to Dr. Ernst Windisch, a 19th-century German specialist in Middle Irish. I don't know nearly enough about Windisch, nor about Zeuss whose first name I can't recall right now, Zeuss specialized in Old Irish actually. This earlier generation of German scholars became deeply devoted to Gaelic literature. These are the professors who went and looked for the manuscripts scribed in the monasteries by Irish monks, and copied down the Gaelic quatrains in the margins, or the longer poems that filled up larger spaces such as the beloved "Messe ocus Pangur Bán."

These were the authorities in place when a relatively young Douglas Hyde pleaded the case for Gaelic as a language in its own right; he called upon them for support, and their opinions and research overcame the opposition, at least in that particular contest.

Kuno Meyer had a solid career teaching this language and literature in Dublin, and he was branching out to North America as a lecturer, when the Great War began. Because Meyer, somewhat automatically, sided with his native Germany, his career collapsed like a house of cards, because the countries in which his career was based were all opposed to the aggression of the Germans. Suddenly he could no longer teach in Dublin, and Harvard University changed its mind and decided that he did not belong on their faculty.

By the time the Easter Rising took place, Meyer was more or less persona non grata in Ireland and Englsnd. He found himself in North America, lecturing, and hanging on to the remnants of his career in linguistics. After a brief marriage to an American woman, he made his way back to the Continent; while the Ireland that he loved made its destiny without him, he returned to Germany and died in 1917.

Meyer was a scholar of such stature that an entire generation of Irish or Anglo-Irish linguists learned their craft from him, and owed their very educations and careers to professors like him.

Subject: RE: BS: Easter Rising Ireland 1916
From: Fergie
Date: 17 Apr 16 - 04:10 PM

Keith you know next to nothing about Irish history, so stop trying to pretend that you do. Your statements are widely inaccurate and you are parroting an interpretation of history that has being cobbled together and peddled by establishment apologists and revisionists since the end of WW1.

Subject: RE: Easter Rising
From: Joe Offer
Date: 17 Apr 16 - 04:10 PM

As the music editor, I am going to overrule the decision to close this thread, and I will move the messages from the BS thread here. This will no doubt be a controversial discussion. Please stick to the subject and refrain from personal remarks or attacks. If you disagree with a point of view, refute it with facts and logic - not namecalling. Be aware that an opposing opinion gives your side an opportunity to present its case and provide information that may be of value to us all. This topic is of folkloric value, and forms the context for many important songs. Mods, leave it alone.

Subject: RE: BS: Easter Rising Ireland 1916
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 17 Apr 16 - 02:32 PM

"May we continue the non-music discussion here please?"
No we can't Keith - not as far as I'm concerned.
Once again you have scurried behind historians you haven't read and totally ignored the facts as seen and now being widely stated on our media by those who were involved in the form of documentary evidence they have left behind - not historians, but actual participants.
You many stick your Little Britain mind games - I have the facts of the civil war and the war of Independence - you have out-of-context quotes again - you cannot turn on the television here or open a newspaper without being bombarded by it.
Answer the points made - I have no intention of being part of closing yet another thread as you and your historian have just done
Jim Carroll

Subject: BS: Easter Rising Ireland 1916
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 17 Apr 16 - 02:11 PM

May we continue the non-music discussion here please?

Jim said,
And immediately changed their minds following the uprising.

Not true. They continued to serve loyally.

Incidentally, far from a Home Rule Bill being agreed, there was the question of partition to be decided.

The bill had been passed by parliament. The question of partition was unresolved, but the Dublin bloodbath hardly helped deal with that!

There was no agreement for Home Rule

Yes there was. The bill had passed.

Even if there had been agreement Civil War would have been inevitable - only the Unionists wanted partition

The civil war was not about the partition.

There was never support for the war in Ireland and the government was aware of that otherwise they would have introduced compulsory conscription as they did throughout the rest of the British Isles -

Yes there was support. Over 200,000 volunteers!
No need for conscription.

Subject: RE: Easter Rising
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 17 Apr 16 - 11:40 AM

"They did. They volunteered in their thousands. 200 000 from a tiny population."
And immediately changed their minds following the uprising.
It was an Imperial war for both Britain and Ireland - Britain even named the war "The Great Imperial War" and still call their museum "The Imperial War Museum" - it was a war between Empires.
Incidentally, far from a Home Rule Bill being agreed, there was the question of partition to be decided.
Originally Asquith proposed a "temporary" partitioning of Ulster later adapted to only six counties - the period had not been decided.
In 1916, following the uprising, he reintroduced the bill without the "temporary" proviso - all the Irish parliamentarians turned it down.
Although Parliament supported the bill, The House of Lords still opposed it by a large majority.
There was no agreement for Home Rule - there never had been and when it did come with the signing of the treaty in 1922 it led to Civil War - s.f.a. to to with The Easter Rising.
Even if there had been agreement Civil War would have been inevitable - only the Unionists wanted partition and the Government went along with that following the Curragh attempted military coup (which was what it was in essence)
There was never support for the war in Ireland and the government was aware of that otherwise they would have introduced compulsory conscription as they did throughout the rest of the British Isles - when they tried, they failed miserably.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Easter Rising
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 17 Apr 16 - 11:38 AM

" A series of retrospective myths have built up that suggest ordinary British and Irish people backed the war because they were deluded, brainwashed and naïvely duped into supporting the conflict. My research shows that this was simply not the case."

"Once the decision to go to war was made on 4th August, the public rallied around what was perceived as a just cause. Their support was very often carefully considered, well-informed, reasoned, and only made once all other options were exhausted. People supported the war, but only because they felt it was the right thing to do in light of the circumstances."
Dr. Catriona Pennel

http://www.exeter.ac.uk/news/featurednews/title_219199_en.html

Subject: RE: Easter Rising
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 17 Apr 16 - 11:33 AM

Any "support" for it was, as in Britain, an alternative to mass poverty and unemployment and a promise of a short, easy war, pretty uniform and regular meals -

Complete rubbish.
In peace time some joined for those reasons.
This mass enlistment was prompted by the German invasion of Belgium and France and the atrocities they committed.

The greatest numbers joined during and after the retreat from Mons when there was no longer any hope of a quick victory, but a real threat of utter defeat.

Subject: RE: Easter Rising
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 17 Apr 16 - 11:25 AM

Irish youth would have suffered the same fate as British youth on the killing fields of Europe

They did. They volunteered in their thousands. 200 000 from a tiny population.

It was not an "imperial war" for Britain and Ireland.
It was to defend Europe and ourselves from an aggressive invader bringing tyranny and slavery.

Subject: RE: Easter Rising
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 17 Apr 16 - 09:05 AM

The Curragh incident was the first military action in connection with the Home Rule Bill - both that and the Government reaction to it showed that Ireland would never get Home Rule without meeting military resistance - from the top level.
Had the "betrayal" not taken place Irish youth would have suffered the same fate as British youth on the killing fields of Europe leaving the country devoid of a viable population.
WW! was an Imperial War fought in defence of the same Empire Ireland had spent centuries attempting to free itself from.
Any "support" for it was, as in Britain, an alternative to mass poverty and unemployment and a promise of a short, easy war, pretty uniform and regular meals - those who opposed the rebels did so because they adopted the attitude that the sooner it was over the better - when the facts became known they did a complete about turn - within a couple of months and participated in a War of Independence of their own.
They are all the facts, not just selected ones.
WW1 was never Irish otherwise Britain would have introduced compulsory conscription, as it had in the rest of Britain.
The Church had a massive influence on those who joined up - The Bishop of Dublin led a campaign to support 'Gallant Little Belgium' (I actually saw one of his posters last year in The National Library in Dublin).
As I said, the same con both sides of the Irish Sea.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Easter Rising
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 17 Apr 16 - 08:15 AM

If you read your history, you will find the the Home Rule Bill was defeated yet again and in Jully, 1914,

It is you who needs more reading Jim.
The Government of Ireland Act 1914 (4 & 5 Geo. 5 c. 90), also known as the Home Rule Act, and before enactment as the Third Home Rule Bill, was an Act passed by the Parliament of the United Kingdom intended to provide home rule (self-government within the United Kingdom) for Ireland. It was the third such bill introduced by a Liberal government in a 28-year period in response to the Irish Home Rule movement.

The implementation was only postponed because Britain, including Ireland, were embroiled in a desperate war for their very survival and losing.

Compared to your 1500 rebels, over 200 000 Irishmen volunteered for the British Army to fight WW1.
Betrayed and stabbed in the back with weapons supplied by the enemy.

Subject: RE: Easter Rising
From: Thompson
Date: 17 Apr 16 - 07:27 AM

To clarify: the Curragh Incident wasn't a mutiny - it was a rebellion - the officers were saying that they would not defend their government from an attack by the Unionists.

Further on the dismantling of the British Empire: of course the deaths of huge numbers of the British ruling class and even huger numbers of its citizens (not to mention its subjects in the colonies; for instance, 1.2 million Arabs fought in the British Army) was part of the reason that the empire ceased to be, but the Rising began a great resistance in its colonies. Not to mention that several of those involved in the Indian revolution, including President VV Giri, were taught by Thomas MacDonagh in University College Dublin, and were influenced by him and by James Connolly and PH Pearse.

Subject: RE: Easter Rising
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 17 Apr 16 - 07:24 AM

"I'd still prefer to read the politics in BS."
It was the choice of them in charge to put it in this section, but even so, the logic of your argument is that we can never discus the political aspects of political songs in this section (I see there's another thread active on the subject at present).
I suggest you make a list of all the songs you will never be able to discuss on the music section - hundreds of contemporary songs, songs about strikes past and present,, Jacobite songs, eviction, transportation for poaching rising from the enclosures, songs of mutinies like The Sea Martyrs, Death of Parker, Machine Breakers.....
the list is endless.
If this forum had no BS section, all these hundreds of songs would be no-go areas.
The first earliest songs in the English language are political and are to be found in Thomas Wright's 'The Political Songs of England - from John to Edward II (in English and Latin)
"three pretty senior scalps there Jom."
"J.E.B. Seely"
As General Jack Seely, he led one of the last great cavalry charges in history at the Battle of Moreuil Wood on his war horse Warrior in March 1918
"Spencer Ewart"
He was appointed General Officer Commanding Scottish Command in 1914, a post he held until 1918: he retired in 1920.
"General John French"
We are all aware that he was deptived of taking part in WW1 - what a great loss to the war effort eh?
How sad to have ruined such promising military careers.
Give us a break Terrytoon – I meant real, forced resignations for acts of mutiny, not crowd-pleasing phoney ones.
The Government of the day put the Curragh Mutiny down to "a misunderstanding"
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Easter Rising
From: Thompson
Date: 17 Apr 16 - 06:51 AM

Here's a piece about the Curragh Incident. Basically, the officer class of the British Army in Ireland said they would resign rather than fire on Unionists if those Unionists took military action when Home Rule was brought in.

The 30,000 British troops included those rushed in during the Rising, rather than only those present in Ireland at its start. And yes, Teribus you're right about the artillery being needed in France (if, of course, you think that the killing in France was right); Asquith's Liberal government fell in 1915 in a scandal over the lack of artillery shells available in France (the 'Shell Crisis') and he was left heading a cobbled-together coalition dominated by Ulster Unionists. So there was anger in Britain as well as in Ireland over the artillery used to destroy Dublin, though for different reasons.

Subject: RE: Easter Rising
From: FreddyHeadey
Date: 17 Apr 16 - 06:30 AM

" "This should just be about the music."
JC "THis thread is entitled "The Easter Rising" - it was a political and historical event and those of us who wish to are quite entitled to discuss it in those terms" "

I was going to argue with JC but I reread the OP. It doesn't mention music.
"Apart from Ireland will there any other countries that will be holding commemoration ceremonies for the '16 Rising?"

I'd still prefer to read the politics in BS.

Subject: RE: Easter Rising
From: Teribus
Date: 17 Apr 16 - 06:25 AM

the first act of military aggression against Home Rule took place at The Curragh Camp in Kildare on 20 March 1914, in sopport of the Northern Ireland Unionists, instigted by Sir Edward Carson - no arrests, no courts martials, no resignations and certainly no executions.

What military aggression?

As far as I am aware Army Officers submitting their resignations is not nor ever has been illegal so why should there have been any executions? What would the charge have been?

As for there being no resignations the Secretary of State for War J.E.B. Seely and the CIGS (professional head of the Army) Sir John French were forced to resign as was the Adjutant-General Spencer Ewart - three pretty senior scalps there Jom.

No idea where Thompson gets his figure of 30,000 British troops from, the actual number was 16,000 and at the start in Dublin if his figure of 1,500 volunteers is correct, then they outnumbered the forces available to the crown at the start by about 300 men, and vast bulk of the weaponry available to the greatest empire on earth in 1916 was directed elsewhere. Also Thompson it was the crushing cost of fighting the First World War that sounded the death knell of the British Empire and it was the cost of fighting the Second World War that hammered the nails into the coffin - in both those conflicts the Irish Nationalists sided with Germany (Understandable during WWI, unconscionably during WWII).

Subject: RE: Easter Rising
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 17 Apr 16 - 05:46 AM

It's quite often forgotten the first act of military aggression against Home Rule took place at The Curragh Camp in Kildare on 20 March 1914, in sopport of the Northern Ireland Unionists, instigted by Sir Edward Carson - no arrests, no courts martials, no resignations and certainly no executions.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Easter Rising
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 17 Apr 16 - 05:06 AM

"Home Rule had already been agreed."
No it had not - it was nowhere near agreed in the period after the war ended.
If you read your history, you will find the the Home Rule Bill was defeated yet again and in Jully, 1914, King George took it on himself to call a meeting of all the Irish Parliamentarians at Buckingham Palace to see if an alternative should be reached - There was no guarantee that the conclusions would be adhered to.
No attempts were made to push through the Home Rule Bill following the end of the War and the brutality shown by the British both towards the rebels and in letting loose the Black and Tan and Auxie thugs on the Irish people as a whole led to the War of Independence which eventually brought about a treaty of sorts.
The greatest advance to Independence was probably inadvertently the result of Britain's violent response to Irish opposition.
That violence was continued in newly formed Northern Ireland by the new Protestant Government, this time aimed at the Catholic minority.
It continued right up to the 1960s, when it brought about a backlash - leading to the troubles.
You need to listen to what is being said here at present, even by those who weren't fully in support of the Rising - forget Michael Portaloo.
"This should just be about the music."
THis thread is entitled @The Easter Rising" - it was a political and historical event and those of us who wish to are quite entitled to discuss it in those terms
You were quite happy to be part of a political discussion until you painted yourself into a corner.
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Easter Rising
From: Thompson
Date: 17 Apr 16 - 04:59 AM

Home Rule wasn't about independence. The Home Rule Act 1914 allowed Ireland to have a kind of playtime parliament (while still sending a few MPs to the British parliament), but every decision could be overruled by the Lord Lieutenant.

There's been a vigorous attempt to conflate Home Rule with independence, but they were not at all the same thing.

Subject: RE: Easter Rising
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 17 Apr 16 - 03:40 AM

Home Rule had already been agreed.
All tht killing did not advance it by a single day.
There would have been a peaceful transition, and no civil war saving thousands more Irish lives.

This should just be about the music.
Make your political points below where they can be answered properly

Subject: RE: Easter Rising
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 16 Apr 16 - 02:18 PM

Home rule had already been agreed.
It was not brought forward by one day.
The killing was all for nothing. There could have been a peaceful transition and no civil war.
The fools, the fools.

Subject: RE: Easter Rising
From: Jim Carroll
Date: 16 Apr 16 - 12:48 PM

Exactly as Thomson just said.
The opposition to the uprising melted away immediately the British began to execute the leaders in their usually brutish manner.
In 1918, Britain attempted to introduce compulsory conscription in Ireland and totally failed to do so because of the opposition that had built up - had they been successful, the Irish population would have been decimated, leaving the country untenable.
"did they damage the cause and condemn the island to a history of violence?"
Meant to respond to this point earlier.
Any violence that took place following Easter Week and independence can be laid at the door of the British forcing through partition, the deliberate creation of a Protestant State in the North in which the Catholic third minority were second class citizens, politically and economically - the regular Anti-Catholic riots bore witness to who actually caused the violence.
The typically brutal response to peaceful Civil Rights Protests set into motion 'The Troubles' that we all saw and in some cases experienced in the following years.
Britain has never come to terms with their own role in Ireland
Jim Carroll

Subject: RE: Easter Rising
From: Thompson
Date: 16 Apr 16 - 12:11 PM

How many rose in Dublin: around 1,500 armed with Franco-Prussian War era Mausers and some shotguns and handguns and a few homemade grenades, versus 30,000 British soldiers with Enfield rifles, machine guns, artillery and all the weaponry of the largest empire of the time.
Dubliners - some Dubliners - spat on them at the time; less than a month later Dublin had utterly reversed its attitude.
How many Dubliners died because of them: most of the civilians who died were killed by British sniper fire and artillery.
Any of the leaders ever seek an actual vote: James Connolly stood for the council (he was the first, and probably the only person to use election posters in Yiddish. Most of the leaders would not have stood for election to a British parliament; why should they?
However, two years after the Rising, the party that grew out of it swept all other parties away in the 1918 election.
The purpose of the Rising was to hold the city in arms for a week - even three days, on the precedent of the last war, would legally gain those seeking Irish independence a place at the Peace Conference that followed the European war.
The result of the Rising was to pull on a thread that unravelled the British Empire, the largest, most powerful empire that ever existed, which at that time covered one-fifth of the world and ruled over a quarter of the world's people.
One of the leaders of the Rising taught and three of the leaders of the Rising radicalised some of the great revolutionaries of India, who would take their example and free their country from colonisation.

Subject: RE: Easter Rising
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 16 Apr 16 - 10:54 AM

One of the few places outside of Dublin who rose at Easter 1916,

How many rose in Dublin?
Dubliners spat on them.
How many Dubliners died because of them?
Any of the leaders ever seek an actual vote?
Only one did. Stood once as a councillor and came last.

Subject: RE: Easter Rising
From: FreddyHeadey
Date: 16 Apr 16 - 10:41 AM

Pat deVerse" a few video clips from last night's 1916 Song Project "

Would those be private or do you have a www link ?

Subject: Easter Rising (1916 Song Project)
From: Pat deVerse
Date: 16 Apr 16 - 08:34 AM

Just finished watching a few video clips from last night's 1916 Song Project Concert at NLI, Dublin. Excellent songs. I loved Aileen Lambert's song...very moving. Also impressed by Paul O'Reilly's marching ballad. Good old Wexford, they never let us down. One of the few places outside of Dublin who rose at Easter 1916, and the 'Flame of '98' still sparks!

Unfortunately, I couldn't make it last ev. But am looking forward to the next night at Lexicon Dún Laoghaire on April 22.

Subject: RE: Easter Rising
From: AmyLove
Date: 15 Apr 16 - 10:28 PM

A link to the Clare songs from the Carroll Mackenzie Collection (lyrics and recordings, among other things) which Jim Carroll mentioned:

Singers and Songs of County Clare from the Carroll Mackenzie Collection

Subject: New Compositions on the 1916 Easter Rising
From: GUEST,Pat 'de Verse' Burke
Date: 15 Apr 16 - 03:39 PM

I've written one myself, 'The Murder of Skeffy', on the killing of pacifist Francis Sheehy Skeffington by Capt. Bowen Colthurst during the Rising. I should be singing it at the 1916 Song Project Concert at Lexicon Library Dún Laoghaire on Fri 22 April. I wasn't one of the original singer/song writers chosen, but I'm privileged and honoured to perform it in my home town of Dún Laoghaire. All the 1916 Song Project nights should be great occasions, so get to one if you can!