Saving Ireland from ‘the revisionists’, or firefighting the truth?
If you think northerners are bad at rucking over history, try this controversy over one documentary programme about Richard and Abraham Pearson, two Protestant brothers were killed by the IRA back in June 1921, at their home in Offaly has fanned some very large flames on an RTE phone-in programme. Ann Marie Hourihane in today’s Irish Times picks up the story:
Irish history is so fragile to some, and so sacred, that they confidently assert that the Pearson brothers must have been British spies, members of the Royal Irish Constabulary, not pacifists at all but given to taking pot shots at IRA men, arrogant towards their Catholic neighbours – in other words, asking for it.It appears impossible for these people, standing guard over Irish history, even to countenance the possibility that the Pearsons were innocent men.
And so we had the strange sound of Joe Duffy speculating on the question of whether you can have a court martial without the defendants (that would be the Pearson brothers) being present, and whether members of the Cooneyite sect – to which the Pearsons belonged – would have even owned a shotgun, considering that the Cooneyites were widely believed to have been pacifist.
All this on a radio programme going out live on a busy weekday in November 2007. This group of people – which seems to be quite small – seems happy to talk and argue tirelessly on the most minor details of the Pearson killings in their efforts to justify them.
The trigger was an RTE documentary called Hidden Histories, which explored the case of the Pearson brothers in some depth, charting the eventual hounding of the family into emigration after the killing. Several have joined in with the counter blast, not least Pat Muldowney at the Village, who argues the documentary ignored the findings of a British Military Court of Inquiry. Hourihane again:
Thousands of us enjoyed the Hidden History television documentary about the Pearson killings simply because we had never heard about them before.
It aroused the suspicion in us that there are other stories like it – and we have no way of knowing how many, or how few, there might be – burning underground, stories that live on in the families of those who suffered, passed on in the deep privacy of family life so that, as one man told me last week: “It’s as if it would be disloyal to talk about it.”
He meant that it was as if it would be disloyal to talk about it in public. Within his family such matters were not discussed routinely, but only when he and his father were feeling particularly close to each other.
They became a family secret, in a country too full of family secrets. And so these stories, these whispers, are lost to the larger, Catholic population – perhaps forever.
It might be time now for the larger, Catholic population to ask itself: are we happy about this? Would we like to look at this small slice of our history, not in order to condemn men and women long dead, but because it is interesting and true?
See also: Indymedia and Niall Meehan in Counterpunch and the Offaly Historical and Archeological Society all of which argue that this is all as a revisionist attempt to re-write history.
The Penguin
“No you need to revise yours. It’s no accident that the great majority of northern heroes of the UI campaign were Protestant (not just Presbyterian, by the way).
While some Catholics were defending the town hall in Ballymena against the UI the Scots Presbyterian parts of the town were involved in hand to hand fighting with, of all things, a Scottish regiment sent to quell the rebellion. Same thing was happening all over the north.”
Yes while at the same many protestants were beating the heads off the papishes at other locations in the north. You can’t ignore it anymore than you can ignore sectarian atrocities in the south – revisionism required.
You have a point, but only up to a point.
Prods and Catholics were getting the heads beaten off them by both Prods and Catholics, and sometimes the British Army. But not because of their religion.
Religion for that short time was very much secondary to whether people were with the UI or not.
Those for and against were right across the religions.
Hence you had the strange situation of some members of a minister’s congregation plotting to mudrder him because he was anti-UI.
And the opposite situation where pro-UI ministers sometimes helped plot the killings of some of their own congregations.
It is wholly wrong to try and suggest that, during that period, Catholics were being picked on solely because of their religion. Prods and Catholics suffered because of their support or otherwise for the UI.
But all of this, like the Bomber Harris stuff, distracts from the issue under discussion, the murders of the Pearson brothers.
Incidentally, do people not realise that by introducing the likes of the Bomber Harris stuff into this discussion, they are displaying their own sense on inadequacy by always measuring themselves or their own against Britain?
“The British did it so it’s all right for us to do it”.
“It is wholly wrong to try and suggest that, during that period, Catholics were being picked on solely because of their religion. Prods and Catholics suffered because of their support or otherwise for the UI”
It isn’t wholly wrong, it’s wholly right. At that time, in certain locations, protestants were beating the heads off papishes simply because they were papishes.
You are simply ignoring the intense sectarian bigotry of the time and focusing only on the enlightened political philosophy – you need to revise your historical perspective.
“At that time, in certain locations, protestants were beating the heads off papishes simply because they were papishes.”
Where?
You have mentioned this incessantly but have noticably failed to name even one location.
Let’s see what you really know about 1798 in the north, but be warned, I know a lot.
And, don’t forget, it is during the time of the Uprising that we’re talking about because that is what your original intervention specified.
And well done, you’ve managed to take the whole thing away from the Pearson family.
Penguin,
Regrettably your postings indicate the extend to which the Hidden History misinformation is becoming accepted truth. I suggest you read this Indymedia link from start to finish (will take about one hour) and you will see all of your points answered :
http://www.indymedia.ie/article/84547
One important point out of many – the Pearsons shot at and seriously wounded a member of an IRA squad mounting a roadblock. The IRA *of the time* were then acting under the authority of the democratically elected first Dail.
“You have mentioned this incessantly but have noticably failed to name even one location.”
Would “Armagh” come as a big surprise to you? (Must be the elephant in the room).
“And well done, you’ve managed to take the whole thing away from the Pearson family”
There is denial about sectarian attacks in the south. I haven’t come accross a full impartial story of the Pearsons yet – what I’ve read so far looks to me like plain old sectarian murder.
“Would “Armagh†come as a big surprise to you?”
County or city or both, or is this an educated stab in the dark?
LMAO, actually. Has there ever been as much as a school sports day in Armagh that didn’t end up in a sectarian fight?
Seriously, my general point is valid, for that short time the fissure was not along straight sectarian lines but political.
Look at Betsy Grey, her brother and boyfriend murdered just outside Hillsborough on the Ballynahinch Road, all Presbyterians but killed by soldiers for wearing their green favours.
‘The British imperial state, and its successor, are like the Irish nationalist state. Both were founded on bloodletting and myths. Both have trouble admitting this ‘
Both ? Every State in existence has been found on bloodletting and myths . The Soviet totalitarians and Nazi States were the ‘cream of the crop’ in terms of the slaughter of innocents in the 20th century .
Wonder who will take the top spots in the 21st century ? Congo (est 4 million to date ) Zimbabwe ? Sudan ?
Among the larger States the USA has taken an early lead but there’s along way to go .
And of course there’s always a good reason and justification for those who push for war . Nothing at all hypocritical in a country exporting ‘democracy’ while at home less than half the electorate bother to exercise their vote ?
Never heard of the Pearson tragedy until now but then I also never heard of the ‘plight’ of the Irish nationalist minority in NI until as they say they ‘appeared’ on the TV screen !
Erasmus
Indymedia? Catch yourself on, that highly selective, twisted account. I know only too well the sort of clowns that put those points on there about this case.
I have looked at all of the papers of the time. I also know what was recorded and what wasn’t.
Even if it is true that they committed sectarian murders and drove people out of the country to get their land under the authority of the first Dail, does that make it right?
If you think it does, then congratulations, you have just pardoned every atrocity committed by Nazis in Germany who were also acting under the full authority of their duly elected government.
The Penguin
“..is this an educated stab in the dark”
Hardly, it’s out there, in the public domain, it’s a matter of public record.
“LMAO…Seriously, my general point is valid, for that short time the fissure was not along straight sectarian lines but political”
You may well laugh, but your point is invalid, the fissure was as solidly along sectarian lines in 1798 as it was in 1978.
Penguin,
On the contrary first prize for a ‘highly selective twisted account’ goes to the RTE documentary. Dr. Muldowney attempted to ‘unmuddy’ the waters in Indymedia and in stark contrast to Sammon and co based his arguments on extensive quotation from contemporary records. The Indymedia discussion thread is highly illuminating and includes contributions from all angles. Seeing both major Dublin dailies are feebly parrotting the Harris/Sammon line Indymedia stands as a tiny beacon of light.
Even if it is true that they committed sectarian murders and drove people out of the country to get their land under the authority of the first Dail
This is just classic Harrisist propaganda/confabulation. The only possible exception to this might be Frank Aiken’s Armagh
outfit when local time-honoured sectarian pressures were in operation.
Seeing we are into Godwin’s Law territory let us suppose French nationals fired on and seriously wounded resistance fighters on operative duty and were in turn seriously wounded in a botched execution attempt. Would there now be mendaciously self-flagellatory documentaries on French TV. Je crois que non.
BTW I have zero sympathy with any post-1921 IRA incarnation.
Ah yes, Dr. Muldowney the maths lecture. The selective quoter and selective purveyor of information. Such a reliable source.
You may not like it, but sectarian murder and driving people off their land is no more acceptable if sanctioned by the government of the day than if it isn’t. Mugabe, Stalin and Herr Hitler, to name but a few, relied on the immoral nonsense you are arguing.
“BTW I have zero sympathy with any post-1921 IRA incarnation.”
I’m glad to hear it, but you must learn to accept that some sectarian, criminal elements attached themselves and were at work in the IRA of the 20s. Coolacrease was one example of the actions of that sort.
Ulster McNulty
Give it up, you’re just plain wrong. Plainly, you know nothing of the 1798 rebellion in the north.
Penguin
You didnt engage with any of the points raised on indymedia – you just slagged off the authors – like you have done with Dr Muldowney. You were refering to Kevin Myers earlier in a positive way – are you seriously saying he is impartial.
Others:
Does Stanley say that the Pearsons shot at the IRA? – can we have the quote?
Also he seems to admit helping the crown forces? You dont seem to have any counter-argument but to say he MAY have exagerated.
Also regards your comments about Offaly IRA – if they were so ill-disciplined were there any (other)sectarian killings which can be attributed to them – does it follow a pattern?
I am comign late to this subject but it doesnt seem an open and shut case.
Here is just one example of the sort of basic error that the good Dr is prone to.
Talking about Coolacrease on the Joe Duffy show the other day, Pat Muldowney mentioned a report from an RIC “Chief Inspector”.
From its creation in 1836 until its disbandment in 1922 the RIC never had any such rank.
It only came into the RUC in 1970 when they adopted British Officer ranks in place of their original RIC ones.
I checked Muldowney’s work on-line and the same error is repeated there. So it was not just some slip of the tongue while live on air.
The commander of the RIC in Offaly was the COUNTY Inspector, the equivalent of a Garda Chief Supt.
Not very reassuring from one who professes to be such an expert in history – but then he is a lecturer in maths, not history.
andy
Go away.
If you haven’t read everything I’ve already said, then tough. If you have and still aren’t happy, then you must be stupid or very biased, or both.
In fact you’re probably just that other clown coming in under another name.
Whatever it is, don’t expect me to engage with your sectarian little mind.
Penguin
“andy
go away”
That is a fantastic argument – well marshalled and to the point. You’re really showing off your vast encyclopaedic knowledge there.
Where was the evidence of my sectarianism? You don’t know what religion, if any, I am.
You also failed to notice i asked the “others” ie your opponents here to produce the actual quote showing that stanley admitted to the shooting of the IRA men – I was hardly being one sided was I?
Also you completely failed to answer the specific question I asked – how can you rule as irrelevant, essentially, the fact there was an admission to helping the crown forces?
Also still waiting to hear any kind of evidence about the patterns of sectarianism/ ill discipline etc of the Offally IRA.
My questions were genuine.
“Britain did gas the Kurds. The RAF bombed them with mustard gas on Churchill’s orders.”
Even the article you cite claims it was only considered, although the author presents it in a dishonest fashion as to imply Churchill wasn’t talking about tear gas.
Barney, the first gas bombs dropped by aircraft was done so by the Italians against the Abyssinians.
Penguin,
This is just splitting hairs. He was a senior ranking RIC officer.His actual title is neither here nor there.
Mathematicians tend to have a precise logical view of things and will continue to insist that 2 and 2 = 4 irrespective of a cacaphony of noise from those insisting it is 5. No better man than Pat Muldowney.
‘but you must learn to accept that some sectarian, criminal elements attached themselves and were at work in the IRA of the 20s’
I already do – in relation to Armagh. The WOI IRA numbered some 2-3 thousand so on the law of averages there must have been some criminals and psychopaths in their ranks. But by the standard of underground movements of that sort and by the accepted rules of war their record was remarkably clean.
Penguin,
Are you not Jack Carter, the self styled “historian” who penned the foreword to Stanley’s dreadful book? You are known as the village idiot in certain part of Laois, are you not?
The Penguin
“Ulster McNulty
Give it up, you’re just plain wrong. Plainly, you know nothing of the 1798 rebellion in the north.”
Your claim that sectarian violence didn’t occur in the north around the time of the United irishmen and the rebellion is simply preposterous – discussion with yourself is plainly a waste of time.
Ulster McNulty,
Do not give up so easily on The Penguin, he is inching towards his favourite hobby horse: What The Landlords Did For Us. For “Us” read “You Ungrateful Paddys”. It’s always good for a laugh, you won’t be disapointed.
‘The IRA *of the time* were then acting under the authority of the democratically elected first Dail’
The majority of votes cast in the 1919 election, despite a campaign of IRA intimidation, were for parties that did not stand for a separate and sovereign irish nation. Independence should have had majority support, with other options exhausted, before a campaign of murder and mayhem was launched to secure it. Eamonn Devalera’s vainglorious ranting was a divisive cruel fraud and the civil war a squalid indulgence.
Sinn Fein and the IRA were engaged in an illegal and violent putsch, guided by luminaries such as Devalera, who rejected the constitutional route to independence taken by statelets such as Canada, and thereby fractured the nation on a sectarian basis.
Any citizen witnessing these insurrectionists in action had a duty to hinder them. Their subversion of democracy, their treaty breaking, their economic self-harm, and above all their murderous self-regard, should have been quietly dropped and secretly buried long ago.
Instead we had Charley Haughey Omar Gadaffi Ian Paisley and a cast of extras help conjure the ghouls to life again.
Night of the living dead, on a street near you.
Aquifer,
SF walked the 1918 election. The only reason there was no majority of votes was because so overwhelming was opinion in nearly one in four seats that no rivals bothered to stand against them. This minority of votes argument is the biggest proof of lies, damned lies and statistics ever.
40 years of massive Home Rule majorities had acheived precisely nothing concrete. A promise of home rule after the end of the war, which was swiftly broken with promises to unionism to exclude certain counties.
After the 1918 election, what arrangements did the London government make to leave as the British electoral system had given SF a massive majority? None.
Perhaps when we discuss the the 19160-21 period we might take account of such factors.
As for 1798 in the north, there was a great deal of brutal suppression of suspected rebels. Many of these were Presbyterian. Many were not. Whether the repression was carried out with sectarian motives or not depended to a great extent as to who was doing the repressing and who to.
My understanding is that their father admitted in 1927, when applying for compensation from the British govt, that he had always ‘assisted the forces of the Crown in Ireland’. I wonder what that could mean? The reality is this: during the US War of Independence, American Loyalists collaborating with the enemy were executed and had their property seized. I am opposed to the death-penalty – even in war. But back then people favoured it. The reality is that according to the Old IRA in the area at the time, these men had opened fire on the local IRA. In that context they committed treason against the govt elected in 1918 which the British govt was trying to suppress. SF won 73 out of 108 seats in Ireland in the Westminster elections of 1918. The British refusal to accept this, including banning the party and arresting most of their MPs, was the trigger that started the IRA campaign. That is the inescapable reality and the context in which what happened afterwards must be judged. The people had elected SF on a mandate to abstain from Westminster and form an independent govt. It was the British who brought violence into the equation, and therefore it is largely their moral responsibility for what happened later. I have contempt for those who flaunted their allegiance to the British army to the extent of joining in attacks on the army of the elected Irish SF govt. I can accept neutrality, but not collaboration.