That's an excellent history & personal view on things Paul - far more than I'd find in the local library etc. You should put all this on a web site - or I could "cut n' paste" it all and put up a separate web page in my own site with credit to you perhpas?
from Paul (Me)
[email] [homepage]
|
Hi Paul:
Thanks, you’re welcome, but for nothing really. And I apologize, I must have been typing the second while you were typing your response to the first.
My post really is awfully rambling. For clarity, since in my rambling I believe that I wrote badly and somewhat confusingly, Captain Jack White and his father were Irish Protestants from the province of Ulster. As mentioned, general officers from Ulster were quite common in the British army. Irish Catholic general officers from the south were not.
Captain Jack White came to mind even more due to his activism in radical politics in Ireland, and elsewhere, 1913 through the 1940s. An “Irish Protestant” Ulsterman, political anarchist married to an Irish Catholic woman is anything but typical of the period. The ICA doesn’t always get a lot of attention, but a good many notables from Ireland at the time were involved with it, including playwright Sean O’Casey, himself a distinctly anti-Clerical Irishman.
Captain Jack White is an interesting fellow in his own right, I believe, and only one more among the many romantics, political radicals, and nationalists, and ideologues of so many kinds that comprised the all but uniform intellectuals, activists and leaders in the many anti-British, and anti-Unionist separatist movements in Ireland in the teens and twenties, before during and after the Anglo-Irish war and the Irish Civil War that followed it.
Being a political anarchist, then it’s not surprising to me that White hated the Catholic Church with a passion and flung a mean polemic against it and the Pope, as he did against the Communist Parties and such as Joseph Stalin, Leon Trotsky, et al., and their ideologue cousin European Fascist parities, in later years, nor that he was all the more passionate in his antipathy and polemic toward and against the Orange Order and the Unionist movement in northern Ireland, which he hurled an even meaner polemic at: Anti-Catholic, anti-Communist, anti-British Imperialism and anti-Orange Order and anti-Unionist movement speeches . . . and those delivered from the inside of post-partition Ireland Orange Lodges in Ulster no less!
Yep. There's plenty to ponder and to consider further, including that the majority opinion among Americans of both Catholic Irish and Protestant Scots-Irish decent in the U.S.A., 1899-1902, was, I believe unsurprisingly, pro-Boer and anti-British, but that wraps up the Irish and the Anglo-Boer War rambling from me for the moment :)
from Paul
[email] [homepage]
|
Well - I guess that about wraps it up for the Irish and the Boer Wars!....or does it Paul? :)
from Paul
[email] [homepage]
|
Well, I’ll add something further, where the Brits and Boers are concerned: Where the Anglo-Boer war is concerned, then the Britsh population was worked by the misinformation propagandized through the press, and even through some of the (at the time) new forms of media, including a motion picture (misleading portrayed as actual footage of 'Boer atrocities' in a Red Cross tent) . . .
A few years after the Anglo-Boer War, the Times in London spoke a bit more honestly regarding the conduct of the members of the Boer Commandos, and the chivalry of the Boer guerillas during the war:
“In the moment of their triumph the Boers behaved with the same unaffected kindheartedness ... which they displayed after most of their victories. Although exultant they were not insulting. They fetched water and blankets for the wounded and treated prisoners with every consideration.”
And one need only look at the commentary by Boer commanders at the time regarding the consequences of British tactics of re-concentration and scorched-earth total war waged against the entire populace of both Republics to see that the tactics amazed and appalled the Boers and were recognized by them as barbaric and immoral. And one should keep in mind that over 27,000 Boer women and children died in the camps from disease and malnourishment. The number wouldn’t have been known at the time, but the magnitude of what was happening would certainly have been more than obvious to them.
And thanks to the personal efforts of Miss Emily Hobhouse in getting details to the British population, then the common Brits at home did react, and the reaction forced some changes in the conditions in the camps by the British government. An example of some of that “common feeling, common prudence, and common sense” remarked upon by Sydney Smith that the English, Scots, Welsh and Irish certainly possess, came to bear.
At any rate, the Boers proved themselves expert and highly skilled guerilla fighters, but they did not sink to the level of the barbaric tactics waged against them by the British Army. In the end they surrendered and allowed the Republics to be annexed by Great Britain. I only mention it since I pointed out that the variety of Calvinism practiced by the Boers was virtually identical in doctrine to that of the Ulster Presbyterians, and meant that only as an observation, and the comparison and contrasts I believe are further interesting aspects. I don't blame the doctrines of Ulster Presbyterians for the strife in northern Ireland, and I don't believe it's a sole or principle cause.
As to the Boers, then I believe that the Boers of the two South African Republics proved themselves, 1899-1902, not only determined people, but also mostly decent people. Demonstrated before the war, and demonstrated all the more by the fact that the majority reatained their humanity in the midst of extreme circumstances, as somewhat demonstrated by the commentary on their chivalry by the excerpt from the Times above, written a few years after the war.
Personally, and for the fact of the Anglo-Boer War having been an act of naked, unprovoked, aggression on the part of the British government, brutally and barbarically conducted, then I believe that the wrong side won. I also have strong doubts that South Africa would have developed as it had over the course of the 20th cenntury if instead those two Republics had survived and remained independent.
Paul
from Paul
[email] [homepage]
|
Paul - what a reply - thank you! (For those who don't know what this is about, go to my home page, the link at the top "Best Blogs", and find IRA2. OR go here:
http://www.blogstudio.com/woodgnome/Angloirish.html)
from Paul (Me)
[email] [homepage]
|
"Anglo-Irish Interaction" is an interesting piece. You are correct that "There's a lot more to Anglo-Irish relations than meets the eye. Isn't history interesting?"
Equally interesting is how truly diverse the anti-British movements and individuals (and their motivations and principles) in Ireland in the teens and 20s.
If you didn't come upon him when you were looking up the role of Irishmen in the Anglo-Boer War, then Captain Jack White is an interesting fellow where the Anglo-Irish War is concerned.
White was the son of Field Marshal Sir George White. While there was absolutely nothing unusual about Irish General Officers in the British Army in the 19th century (they were EXTREMELY common). However, typically, the Irish general officers were men from Ulster. Sir George White was a unique in that his lineage was indigenous southern Irish Catholic. Of course, the steady stream of Irish Catholics from Ireland to enlist in the British Army over the course of the 19th century is a major reason that the British Army was All Volunteer.
There were a lot of Irishmen fighting in the Anglo-Boer War, far more in the British Army, and not just in the “Irish Regiments.” Irish Protestants served under Irish Protestant Officers in Irish Protestant Regiments (and even the Ulster Division formed of the members of the UVF in the first world war). There was no such counterpart in the British Army where Irish Catholics were concerned. It was specifically forbidden to form such units.
At any rate, during the Boer War, Captain Jack White served with the 1st Gordon Highlanders, was a defender of Ladysmith, and was awarded a DSO in the course of his service in South Africa. When writing his father from South Africa, White noted that “I feel odd” serving in the British Army and asked his father’s advice on the matter. The Field Marshal replied, “My dear boy. . . I should be a little less odd, if I were you, and get on with your work.” Personally, I believe that it was a very good reply, given the location and situation that his son was in at the time, and given the time (c 1899-1902) itself.
Anyway, White is of interest, because years later, after his father’s death, White resigned his commission. He became increasingly interested in Irish nationalist issues and quite active as an anarchist activist. Hence Jack White becoming the military trainer for James Larkin’s Irish Citizen Army (ICA), one of the very many private armies rising in Ireland, circa 1913-1914, most of them, but not all, in response to the 1912 arming of the large Ulster Volunteer Force (UVF). The ICA was Marxist / Socialist. Rather than being formed for the purpose of ensuring Home Rule would be defended, if need be, against a militant and armed UVF, the ICA was formed “to defend the interest of workers from the violence of the employers.”
But, as Marxist Socialist organizer / activist John Connolly demonstrated, through his service in the IVF, and secret execution by the Brits in May 1916 for his part occupation of the General Post Office in Easter 1916, Marxist Socialists were quite capable of turning nationalist at particular points in time. In White’s case, he didn’t. But as a dogmatic anarchist and Marxist-Socialist friendly, all the more so after the Bolshevik Revolution in Russia, the cause of anti-British Imperialism was more than sufficient cause to be anti-British, Home Rule in Ireland, or no. In fact, White was serving in the ambulance corps in France in Easter 1916. A good friend of James Connolly, he returned to Ireland after learning the news and hearing of Connolly’s being arrested and activated against Connolly’s execution (White was obviously no fool – The courts martials and executions were all secret and carried out within weeks).
I concede that this is rather long and rambling. However, your mention of MacBride and the Anglo-Boer War brought this to mind. MacBride fought with the Boers against the Brits 1899-1900 and then in 1916 was secretly executed by a British firing squad for his role Easter 1916. White served in the British army fighting the Boers, 1899-1902, and then in 1913-14 trained some of the men who took part in the Easter 1916 rising and was a close friend to many of the leaders, particularly Marxist Socialist John Connolly, also secretly executed like MacBride.
It’s a lot more complex mix of movements and individuals at turn of the century Ireland than merely the IRB or the Gaelic League. It is more interesting than the simplistic propagandistic variations on a Leon Uris Trinity novel theme that still largely dominate, although probably mainly because it’s such a sharp contrast to them.
And contrary to the nonsense of northern Ireland being a “religious war” of Catholics against Protestants, in the context of a “religious war” over doctrinal issues. The fact is that predominantly where the separatist anti-British element, or IRA, is concerned, then there’s no religion involved in it whatsoever from a Catholic perspective. Just like their predecessors in anti-British Irish Republicanism throughout the 19th and early 20th centuries, the majority of the individuals involved in the many different movements all tend to be like Captain White was, strongly to vehemently anti-clerical. If they began life as Catholics, then it’s irrelevant at this point in their “careers” since the best they can usually be called are fallen away Catholics who are usually themselves very anti-Catholic.
That it is and since the 19th century, has been far more a matter of anti-British occupation of Ireland than of “Catholic anti-Protestantism” where the Republican movements are concerned, is very plainly demonstrated by the Irish Brigade in the Anglo-Boer War. Think about it. They were fighting with staunchly Calvinist Boers in two South African Republics that were resisting the British attempt to forcefully annex them into the British Empire: The Transvaal Republic and the Orange Free State Republic. Now, in 1899-1902, then outside these two republics and a few VERY small portions of the U.S.A. and Scotland, about the only place that Calvinistic sects that followed a like doctrine, with equivalent sincerity and intensity of belief in that form of Calvinism, would have been found in the province of Ulster, in Ireland: specifically among the Ulster Presbyterian Protestants. So the Irish brigades in South Africa fighting with the Boers are indeed an interesting and pertinent example from history.
There is most certainly a religious aspect to the issue in northern Ireland, however, it’s also always been, become, and becoming all the more, primarily an economic and civil rights issue. At this point in time, Catholics in Ireland are abandoning the Faith by the millions annually, or reducing it to meaninglessness, and thereby “resolving” any religious objections, and underscoring it all the more. But even in 1899-1902, the majority of the population was pro-Boer and anti-British where the Boer was concerned, even when the majority of the Irish were staunch Catholics for whom the Faith was Real and an integral part of who and what they were, and the majority was NOT vehemently Republican or radical in their politics (as even the Dublin crowds reaction against those who took part in the Easter 1916 rising when it was over, demonstrate – It was the Brits and the actions of the British government that did more for the separatist cause than any of rabble rouser or activist ever did). Given the reports of the concentration camps of the Brits’ emulation of the Spanish anti-insurgent tactic of re-concentration and the scorched earthy policies being implement, then the fact that the majority of Irish were staunch believing Catholics and non-radicals, it is perfectly understandable that the majority of the population was anti-British and pro-Boer while the majority of Ulster Presbyterians (whose Calvinism was almost identical to that of the Boers) were jingoistic pro-British and anti-Boer.
The history is interesting in a great many ways and from a great many perspectives; including the religious aspects. The myth of 800 years of an oil-water mix is mostly garbage as well. You do date it just about right. The real intensity of division in Irish-English relations has been since the late 16th / early 17th century. The government cut loose on the Irish with the colonization and Cromwell’s invasion and slaughters.
After that, where the breakdown and division among the general English population is concerned, then one should look closely at the changes that occur, particularly, mid to late 17th century through the 18th. There’s a fascinating trend. The more that “tolerance” and new term (at the time) “common sense” is preached in Britain, especially after its formulated as a pseudo-dogma by John Locke in his Treatise on Tolerance, then more vehement the anti-Irish Catholic attitude becomes among the general population of English and Scots whenever “the Irish question,” or any question regarding Ireland and the indigenous Irish, arises.
Becoming so ubiquitous and so intense by the early 19th century, that Sydney Smith could rightly observe that “The moment the name of Ireland is mentioned, the English seem to bid adieu to common feeling, common prudence, and common sense, and to act with the barbarity of tyrants, and the fatuity of idiots.”
No question where the “religious aspect” came from where John Locke himself is concerned. Asked how he could write what he did in his Treatise on Tolerance but still support the new penal laws just enacted against Catholics (a few years after he’d written it), as he did, then Locke’s reply was that he viewed it as just to suppress Catholicism and Catholics because Catholicism is a dogmatic, and therefore, “intolerant” religion. A man “ahead of his time,” as they say. An 18th century “I hate, hate” variety of “sensitive” individual.. . . Personally, I strongly doubt that the widespread apostasy among the Irish, and Catholics in general, for that matter, will truly be an improvement.
And on that statement, I’ll end my rambling screed.
from Paul
[email] [homepage]
|
Well done Paul,are you sure you didn't sneek a couple of Matthew in there
from phil
[email] [homepage]
|
Cheers Paul. I expected no less. Good you I expected no more as well. Pity you can't make the party but that just cos you're a ....(wot's that word that Derek and Clive used to use? It escapes me.)
If I don't see you all on the 8th, catch you at the next Games Weekend. It's the 21st this year. It's come of age.
from The Fifty Year Old Himself
[email] [homepage]
|
Interesting that they tend to stop in your early 20s. What happened next I want to know. What about all those who made and shaped you after that? You are a product of not just the first 20 years input my man..... Well done on getting there Joe... Bernard
from Bernard
[email] [homepage]
|
older guestbook entries: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35
Back to Blogging With Dr P...
|