• It has come to our attention that some users may have been "banned" when they tried to change their passwords after the site was hacked due to a glitch in the old vBulletin software. This would have occurred around the end of February and does not apply after the site was converted to Xenforo. If you believe you were affected by this, please contact a staff member or use the Contact us link at the bottom of any forum page.

Easter 1916 and Partition.


Cruimh

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 30, 2010
Messages
85,704
Greatly enjoying Dublin 1916 The French Connection, by W.J. McCormack

He makes an excellent case for the argument that through Easter 1916 the IRB "effectively conceded" partition.

Planning and execution:

The first in the scale of unmentionable implications for the future was the strength, including the military strength, of Ulster Unionism. In planning the Easter events, the IRB effectively conceded the partition of Ireland; there was to be no action in Belfast (Connolly knew how promptly civil war would engulf the city’s proletariat); the Belfast man Denis McCullough (1883-1968), who headed up the IRB’s Supreme Council, was therefore kept in the dark about the Dublin plans: as notional President of the Republic he was deceived about its declaration.
and

Four important and highly active men, each sidelined by the signatories and their Proclamation, hailed from Ulster – Bulmer Hobson, Roger Casement, Denis McCullough and Eoin MacNeill. In practice, the North would not begin or join in.
Separated in their final action from the United Irish traditions of Antrim and Down, the signatories tilled the ground for a partition rapidly installed in 1920-22. The IRB’s kidnapping of Hobson just before the Insurrection had no local sectarian basis – Hobson came from a Quaker family – and it can hardly have been done to impress the Pope.4 But it inevitably draws attention to the apparent Catholic monopoly among the leaders of 1916. Fenians though most of them were in strict and sworn fidelity or by intimate association, all these men – including Thomas Ceannt (executed in Cork), and Roger Casement (executed in London) – were Catholics, in stark contrast to the roll-call in Yeats’s ‘September 1913’ – Emmet, Fitzgerald and Wolfe Tone.
Pages 48-49, my emphases in bold.

The pretence of a geographically determined single nation opposed to the Union was demonstrated to the world as being false - the planning and execution of the rising was partitionist. Any attempt to reach a compromise was seriously undermined and the de-facto acknowledgement by those involved in what McCormack describes as "a brilliant entry-ist coup" that there were two Irelands paved the way for a settlement in which Catholic Ireland could create a state without the serious problem of a large number of hostile Protestants within its borders.
 

Ulster-Lad

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 26, 2006
Messages
10,092
One West Brit acclaims another. Well I never. His alias is Hugh Maxton BTW.

How about some of his other books??

Waking: An Irish Protestant Upbringing
 

MacCoise2

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 20, 2009
Messages
2,849
You would say that, wouldn't you petunia

So - the Northern leaders were not excluded and it wasn't a southern rising?
I would be very surprised if tom Clarke considered himself anything but a Tyrone man, Eoin Mac Neill wasn't in the IRB and Roger Casement was in a British jail making it a bit hard for him to sign.

It was a Dublin Rising (its the capital and biggest city and seat of Brit rule), Galway was excluded too you know
 

statsman

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 25, 2011
Messages
56,230
One West Brit acclaims another. Well I never. His alias is Hugh Maxton BTW.

How about some of his other books??

Waking: An Irish Protestant Upbringing
Excellent poet. Do facts become less factual when uttered by a Protestant?
 

Aindriu

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 28, 2007
Messages
8,702
I would be very surprised if tom Clarke considered himself anything but a Tyrone man, Eoin Mac Neill wasn't in the IRB and Roger Casement was in a British jail making it a bit hard for him to sign.

It was a Dublin Rising (its the capital and biggest city and seat of Brit rule), Galway was excluded too you know
It was never meant to be exclusive to Dublin though. The countermanding order published in the press effectively stopped any chance of the rest of the country from rising. Until that order they had been prepared and were ready to rise with the rest. To call it a Dublin rising is rather disingenuous.
 

Ulster-Lad

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 26, 2006
Messages
10,092
Excellent poet. Do facts become less factual when uttered by a Protestant?
I see some opinions highlighted by Crumbs. When did opinions become fact??
 

edifice.

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 24, 2005
Messages
8,407
So if there was no individuals, say, from Clare, participating in the Rising it de facto meant that Clare was to be excluded from the new Republic?
 

MacCoise2

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 20, 2009
Messages
2,849
It was never meant to be exclusive to Dublin though. The countermanding order published in the press effectively stopped any chance of the rest of the country from rising. Until that order they had been prepared and were ready to rise with the rest. To call it a Dublin rising is rather disingenuous.
Well the final decision was to gp ahead in Dublin. You're right of course, Belfast and Tyrone were to link up....
 

Cruimh

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 30, 2010
Messages
85,704
I would be very surprised if tom Clarke considered himself anything but a Tyrone man, Eoin Mac Neill wasn't in the IRB and Roger Casement was in a British jail making a bit hard for him to sign.

It was a Dublin Rising (its the capital and biggest city and seat of Brit rule), Galway was excluded too you know
A poor response. Even Ulster men in the IRB were excluded from the plans for the rising. Including the head of the IRB, Denis McCullough. So pointing out that Casement was in Jail at the time of the rising does not in any way address that he was excluded from the planning. And the rising was planned - dishonestly - using mainly MacNeill's forces - The Irish Volunteers.
 

JohnD66

Well-known member
Joined
May 20, 2010
Messages
3,316
Seems dubious. There was a plan for a northern rising but it fell apart at the Volunteers' meeting place in Tyrone - due mainly to McCullough's indecision. Now admittedly the plan was for them to march out of Ulster to rebels in the west, but still.

Are you saying they should have risked provoking sectarian war in Belfast? That would have been madness and they knew it. People like not only Connolly but also McDermott knew the city intimately. As for the absence of northerners. Ernest Blythe did not take part only because he was under house arrest at the time.

Now that said, there may be something to the point that it was unconsciously or implicitly southern oriented - as in they wanted to ignore the problems that Ulster presented and provoke the latent separatism of southern nationalists.

IRB thinking especially was that partition was absolutely unacceptable. But that the sectarianism of IPP and Ancient Order of Hibernians was partly to blame. Irish Freedom had an article, 'Ireland must not be divided, Ulster must not be coerced'. It wasn't that they didn't care about Ulster but they were confident that undermining unionism's hold over Protestant workers (and they were starting to use that language) would be relatively easy. They were wrong about that of course.
 

Cruimh

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 30, 2010
Messages
85,704
Seems dubious. There was a plan for a northern rising but it fell apart at the Volunteers' meeting place in Tyrone - due mainly to McCullough's indecision. Now admittedly the plan was for them to march out of Ulster to rebels in the west, but still.

Are you saying they should have risked provoking sectarian war in Belfast? That would have been madness and they knew it. People like not only Connolly but also McDermott knew the city intimately. As for the absence of northerners. Ernest Blythe did not take part only because he was under house arrest at the time.

Now that said, there may be something to the point that it was unconsciously or implicitly southern oriented - as in they wanted to ignore the problems that Ulster presented and provoke the latent separatism of southern nationalists.

IRB thinking especially was that partition was absolutely unacceptable. But that the sectarianism of IPP and Ancient Order of Hibernians was partly to blame. Irish Freedom had an article, 'Ireland must not be divided, Ulster must not be coerced'. It wasn't that they didn't care about Ulster but they were confident that undermining unionism's hold over Protestant workers (and they were starting to use that language) would be relatively easy. They were wrong about that of course.
I'm not for a moment suggesting they should have rebelled in Ulster.The point is that in their planning they were partitionist and that their rebellion showed the world that there was not a single geographically determined Irish Nation.
 

statsman

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 25, 2011
Messages
56,230
Waking: An Irish Protestant Upbringing

That is a book written by the author cited in the OP.
He has written lots of books. You highlighted the one with the word Protestant in the title. If your intention wasn't sectarian, what was it?
 
Top