|
Ireland and the Great War
Keith Jeffery
Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press, 2000
ISBN 0521773237
Reviewed by: Dr
Virginia Crossman
Staffordshire University
The historical significance of the First World War
is taken for granted in most European countries. In Ireland, however,
as Charles Townshend has noted, 'the memory of the war was for a long
time marginalised. A kind of collective amnesia discarded it as a British
experience, dwarfed by an event that was, in physical comparison with
the titanic battles on the western and eastern fronts, tiny.'1
It was the Easter Rising, not the Great War, that was seen as the watershed
in Irish history, responsible for rousing nationalist public opinion from
its apparent torpor and revitalising separatist republicanism. This view
of Irish history has undergone a series of challenges in recent years
and few academic historians would now dispute the importance of the War
in Irish history. It is this 'historiographical revolution' that Keith
Jeffery seeks both to synthesise and to build upon his book, Ireland
and the Great War. This is the first single-authored, academic study
of the impact of the Great War on Ireland, and it performs this pioneering
role admirably. It provides an essential introduction to the subject and
suggests avenues for further study. It is no criticism of the author to
say that he raises far more questions than he answers.
The book, which originated as a series of four lectures,
does not attempt to provide a comprehensive history of the Great War.
Anyone coming to it seeking a sustained analysis of the impact of the
war on Irish politics, or on Anglo-Irish relations, will be disappointed.
Rather it provides a discursive treatment of some of the ways in which
the war impacted on Ireland, and on individual Irish men and women. Indeed,
it is in the use of telling examples and quotations that Jeffery is at
his strongest. The book is divided into four chapters. These examine recruitment
and enlistment, military experience during the war, cultural responses
to the war, and finally the commemoration of the war. A brief bibliographical
essay closes the work. This structure dictates a somewhat fractured and
fragmentary approach. There are, however, a number of themes running through
the different sections that help to bind them together. One of these is
the author's belief that the Great War was 'the single most central experience
of twentieth-century Ireland, not just, nor least, for what happened at
the time, but in its longer-term legacy'. (p. 2) This is a large claim
(more central than partition?) but it does provide a framework whereby
the political divisions and divergent experiences of the war years can
be integrated into one story. By this process the history of this period
becomes the history of all the people of the island, not just one part
of it.
One effect of the outbreak of war in 1914 was to
wrench Irish politics off-course, though whether that course was heading
towards a compromise agreement or civil war is open to dispute. The Home
Rule Bill received royal assent on 18 September 1914 but its implementation
was held over until the end of the war, the Unionist leader, Edward Carson,
having received an assurance that provision would be made for Ulster before
the Act came into force. The conflict between nationalists and unionists
over the position of Ulster was thus suspended but not settled. Both sides
had gone partway towards achieving their objectives, but neither had obtained
their ultimate goal. It was against this background that Carson and John
Redmond, the leader of the constitutional nationalism, called on their
respective supporters to enlist. Both leaders saw political advantages
to be gained from assisting the war effort. Thus while the war appeared
to offer an opportunity for the two communities to unite in a common cause,
it also provided for the advancement of their own, divergent interests.
The early stages of the war saw a massive mobilisation
in Ireland. 50,000 men joined up in the first six months, and while recruitment
declined from 1916 (not picking up again until 1918) it did so at a broadly
comparable rate to that in Great Britain. Ireland contributed over 200,000
men in total, of whom about sixty percent were Catholic. Mutual hostility
and suspicion were not, however, easily overcome, either within Ireland
or between Ireland and Britain. The contrast in the official attitude
adopted towards the 36th (Ulster) division created out of members of the
Ulster Volunteer Force, and the two 'Irish' divisions formed to accommodate
Redmond's Irish Volunteers along with other Catholic recruits, reflected
the perception of the two communities within the British establishment.
Whereas the Ulster division incorporated the UVF command structure, the
10th and 16th 'Irish' divisions were officered predominantly by Protestants.
The survival of the 'old enmity' was also evident amongst Irish prisoners
of war, causing men from the 16th division, for example, to sleep outdoors
rather than share the quarters with men from the 36th division. (p. 64)
Analysing the reasons for enlistment (there was no
conscription in Ireland) Jeffery rejects monocausal explanations and considers
a wide range of motivations: moral, political, economic, social, and psychological.
He concludes that a similar range of motivations were present among those
who enlisted in the British army and those who chose to join the Irish
Volunteers to fight for the establishment of an Irish republic. This might
not seem surprising, but it is a comparison that would have been firmly
rejected in Ireland, north or south, until relatively recently. One of
Jeffery's central arguments is that issues such as enlistment, mobilisation
and fighting, 'actually constitute a series of "parallel texts" in which
the similarities might be more significant than the differences'. (p.
2) It is only by recognising these similarities, Jeffery suggests that
Irish people will be able to live in peace with their neighbours. This
is in many ways a very personal work and Jeffrey is refreshingly open
about his personal and political agenda. He draws upon his own family
history, citing in his discussion of recruitment the case of his great-uncles,
William and Robert Hackett, who enlisted in Canada having emigrated from
Dublin some years previously. William was killed in France in November
1918. Robert survived the war and returned to Canada where he remained
for the rest of his life. (pp 35-36) Both men took the opportunity while
on leave in 1917 to revisit their family in Dublin; the war reunited Irish
families as well as separating them.
By the time the war was over, the political scene
in Ireland had been altered beyond recognition. Constitutional nationalism
in the form of the Irish Party had been replaced as the dominant force
in Irish politics by the republicanism of the reconstituted Sinn Féin.
Divisions within Ireland between nationalists and unionists were even
deeper than they had been prior to the war. Having so conspicuously demonstrated
their loyalty to King and country, Ulster Unionists were in a stronger
position to resist their inclusion in a settlement which would hand power
to the very people who had not only refused to support the war effort,
but had sought assistance from Britain's enemies. These developments are
perceptively discussed in this book. But if politics within Ireland were
transformed, so too were international relations and in ways that had
important ramifications for the Irish situation. Before the war the concept
of a balance of power in Europe had dominated the thinking of the great
powers. Linked to this concept was the assumption that Europe should be
made up of a small number of large states. Even before the war ended,
the balance of power idea had been largely superseded by self-determination
as a guiding principle. This had implications for both nationalists and
unionists since the principle of self-determination could clearly be applied
to both groups.2
Jeffery has nothing to say about these issues and there is no attempt
to locate Irish experience within a larger international or European context.
I wondered, for example, how far 'the common factors and impulses' (p.
2) that motivated Irish people, nationalist and unionist, during the war
years, were common to all those involved in the war, not just to those
in Ireland.
Perhaps the most original chapters in the book are
those on imagination and commemoration. These provide a wide-ranging discussion
of literary and visual representations of and responses to the war. Both
contemporary and modern works are examined, and care is taken to place
each work and each artist in their social, political and artistic context.
This provides some fascinating insights and illuminates many of the themes
highlighted in the previous chapters. Thus the theme of collective amnesia
about the war is neatly illustrated by the fate of Mainie Jellett's prize-winning
painting of 1920. The picture, which depicts the painter's two sisters
together with two other young women relaxing on a beach, was originally
exhibited under the title Peace, but was subsequently renamed The
Bathers' Pool. In retrospect, the clouds shown bubbling up on the
horizon provide a prophetic signal of the uncertain future of Jellett's
family and class. 'Jellett's painting', Jeffery, observes, 'encapsulates
the last peaceful summer of Ascendancy Ireland: a unionist (and female)
vision of tranquillity'. (pp 72-73)
The author's comments are generally instructive but
there are some odd throwaway remarks which, while they might provide light
relief in a lecture, require further elucidation in print. Referring to
Sir John Lavery's triptych, The Madonna of the Lakes, Jeffery notes
that with this work, 'Lavery, though he was no bigot, clearly identified
himself with Irish Catholicism'. (p. 77) Are we to assume that the adoption
of Catholic religious imagery and Celtic motifs inevitably invoke the
spectre of bigotry? Similarly, in the midst of a discussion of William
Orpen's painting, Armistice Night, Amiens, we are reassured that
Orpen was 'no prude or misogynist, far from it'. (p. 81) Amiens functioned
as a 'rest and recreation' centre, the most popular forms of recreation
being drink and sex. Orpen regarded both as dangerous to the health of
soldiers. His description of officers and men being preyed on by 'strange
women - the riffraff from Paris, the expelled from Rouen, in fact the
badly diseased from all parts of France', (p. 81) reflected a common middle-class
anxiety regarding the link between prostitution and disease. Prostitutes
were widely believed to pose a threat to men, and particularly to soldiers,
as carriers of disease, polluting not only their clients but also society.
That the reverse might also be true was rarely considered, and clearly
had not occurred to Orpen however free he may have been from prudery or
misogyny.
Jeffery's account of the building of the Irish national
war memorial, eventually sited at Islandbridge, across the River Liffey
from Phoenix Park, is particularly moving and poignant. The project was
delayed for so many years that plans for an opening ceremony in 1939,
to be attended by representatives from both parts of Ireland, were abandoned
on account of the 'tenseness of the international situation' and the 'consequent
ferment' in Ireland. (p. 123) The tortuous history of the memorial provides
ample evidence of the reluctance of Free State ministers to adopt wholeheartedly
the 'policy of appeasement and reconciliation' urged upon them by those
like William Archer Redmond, son of John, whose political and personal
loyalties lay with the dead. Public acknowledgement was nevertheless given
to the sacrifice and patriotic motives of those who had served in the
British Army during the war. To expect the Free State to have done more
is to ignore the circumstances in which it came into being. For, as Kevin
O'Higgins pointed out in a Dail debate on the national war memorial in
1927, while no-one denied the sacrifice of those who had fought in the
war, it was not 'on their sacrifice that this State is built'. (p. 114)
That some official ambivalence should be displayed towards the commemoration
of Ireland's Great War dead was perhaps inevitable; more surprising is
the slow and partial progress made towards commemorating those who died
in the fight for the Irish republic. A Celtic cross was erected on the
lawn of the Irish parliament building (Leinster House) in 1923 as a memorial
to Arthur Griffith and Michael Collins, but this was only a temporary
structure and was removed ten years later. It was eventually replaced
in 1947 by an obelisk, whose 'discreet height' and 'position behind an
elaborate railing make it almost invisible'. Thus, as Jeffery tellingly
observes, 'in a curious way, this national monument reflects the public
invisibility of Lutyens's garden in distant Islandbridge'. (p. 125)
As previously suggested, this is a largely inward-looking
study. It examines the Great War in the context of Irish history past
and present, and does so with great skill, but it rarely looks beyond
Ireland. It would clearly be unfair to expect too much from one short
study, but it is difficult not to be disappointed with the narrowness
of the author's focus. There is, for example, no sense of engagement with
some of the key conceptual questions presently exercising historians of
the Great War. This is particularly striking in relation to the current
debate over the impact of the war on gender relations. In Britain the
initial impact of the war had the effect of emphasising and reinforcing
gender divisions. Men actively supported the war effort by joining up
and going off to fight. Women were required to wait passively behind.
Their primary means of supporting the war was to urge their male relatives
to enlist. But as the war continued and women became more actively involved
both at the front as nurses and VADs, and at home as war workers, there
were increasing signs of gender confusion. While some men were emasculated
by their experiences in the trenches, some women were empowered by the
experience of taking over male occupations and responsibilities.
It is to Jeffery's credit that he does not ignore
women - he discusses women's war-related employment for example (pp 28-30,
32-33) - but he makes no attempt to use Irish evidence to engage in the
broader debate over gender relations. For women throughout Europe the
war saw both an expansion of opportunities, in terms of employment, education
and national service, and the reinforcement of gender roles and perceptions.
Women's primary role was still perceived to be that of motherhood. In
countries such as Britain, France and Germany, this role acquired increasing
importance as public attention focused on the need to replace those lost
during the war.3
Women's participation in the war effort was seen as essential but also
as potentially damaging to the fabric of society. Working mothers might
neglect their children. Young female workers living apart from their families
might become promiscuous. Such concerns are reflected in the efforts of
the various states to police female behaviour. Similar efforts are evident
in Ireland. Women's patrols were established in Dublin and Belfast, for
example, in order to monitor women's night-time activities. In Ireland,
however, the political context in which such measures were undertaken
was very different from that in Britain (or elsewhere). In Britain public
hostility to separation women (dependants of British soldiers) was linked
to their perceived immorality. In Ireland it was their perceived lack
of nationality that caused most outrage. Attitudes to motherhood were
also different. Maintaining the Irish birth-rate was not a matter of concern
to the British government. It was a matter of concern to the nationalist
movement. Within nationalist ideology motherhood occupied a central and
iconic role. Irish women found it very difficult to operate outside established
gender roles, and the majority of female political activists, whether
nationalist or unionist, found themselves restricted to supporting their
male colleagues largely by means of such traditional tasks as cooking
and nursing. Although he refers to the 'conventional allocation of gender
roles' (p. 28) within nationalist organisations such as Cumann na mBan
(the female auxiliary of the Irish Volunteers), Jeffery neither explains
why this was, nor discusses the broader, ideological context. An exploration
of gender relations in Ireland during the period the Great War is long
overdue. While Jeffery may not have been in a position to undertake such
an exploration himself, it would have been helpful to have outlined the
terms and parameters of the current debate and to have located Ireland
within them. A book that claims to assess the impact of the war 'across
the broadest range of experience' (jacket blurb), can reasonably be expected
to address the role of women and of gender issues more generally.
It would be wrong to end on a negative note. This
is an immensely valuable book that is certain to become a standard text.
It is engagingly written, well illustrated and will be of benefit to,
and enjoyed by, anyone interested in Irish history. Reflecting on the
central theme of the work, the shared experience of enlistment, fighting,
destruction and loss, I increasingly came to feel that the real lesson
of the War may be less one of similarities previously overlooked and unacknowledged,
but of the acceptance of difference. Reconciliation in Ireland surely
depends not on seeing the experiences of different sections of Irish people
as essentially the same, but on acknowledging the ways in which their
experiences did differ, and respecting the different perspectives from
which these experiences were and are viewed.
October 2001
1.
Charles Townshend, Ireland: The 20th Century (London, Arnold: 1999),
p.68.
2.
Seamus Dunn and T.G. Fraser (eds.), Europe and Ethnicity: World War
I and Contemporary Ethnic Conflict (London, Routledge: 1996).
3.
For a recent analysis of these issues see Susan R. Grayzel, Women's
Identities at War: Gender, Motherhood, and Politics in Britain and France
during the First World War (University of North Carolina Press, Chapel
Hill: 1999).
Author's Response |