English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

We have been told that the war of 1914 prevented an early Irish revolution but have to find out why, there is little on the net or in my text book, anyone got any ideas?

2007-06-09 00:58:38 · 11 answers · asked by Ali 1 in Arts & Humanities History

11 answers

Ali , i don't know where you are in the world But if you can grab yourself a copy of Les Carlyon's THE GREAT WAR, you will find your answer in there .. ( i am in the process of reading the book.. BUT it's a bloody thick book and the section on where he talks about the Irish ( and the way ww1 stopped a BIGGER and more successful uprising) is a way way back .. ...and It's late here so my brain is sludge

know it did have a great deal to to with the irish troops already fighting and several other issues....( think there was one battle in particular that really cut into the Irish serving and many Irish who had at one point saw germany as a potential ally against the brits .. changed their mind when that took place,,, I'll have to re-read for you when I hit the hay)


EDIT: ok after the late night waffle i wrote..here's what the book said... Many of the Irish realised that what the Kaiser was attempting to do to places such as Belgium was exactly the same as what the English had been doing to the Irish ...so they joined up to be with their fellow country men in the war against the Germans.......HOWEVER.. BY 1916 ..the loss of life and the way non-english troops appeared to be being sent out as cannon fodder, helped incite the 1916 uprising ...SO initially the war kind of prevented an uprising of an earlier time.. YOUR QUESTION IS VALID.

I

2007-06-09 02:32:00 · answer #1 · answered by ll_jenny_ll here AND I'M BAC 7 · 0 0

Actually, it didn't prevent a revolution in Ireland, as the Easter Rising took place in 1916, and while this revolution wasn't the success the Irish Republicans hoped it would be, it changed everything. While De Valera was in Frongoch, Michael Collins took control of the IRB and they devised guerilla tactics to fight the English administration in Ireland, and brought it to its knees, so that when De Valera got out a few years later, he found that Collins had got the attention of the English at last.

Then De Valera showed his true colours and also his jealousy of Collins, who was a very dynamic man. Collins' power lay in the fact that the English authorities in Ireland did not know what he looked like, so they didn't know what type of man they were looking for. Churchill offered the Treaty which meant that Northern Ireland would be partitioned and remain under British rule, and De Valera ordered Collins to go to England and negotiate this. Collins was forced to accept the partition, and he did feel that it was a starting point in real dialogue with England, now that the English authorities were prepared to talk with them. But seeing as Collins hadn't been able to get what De Valera wanted, De Valera decided that Collins was no good and this was the start of the Irish Civil War.

It has never been proven, but it is believed that De Valera ordered Collins execution in County Cork in 1921, which effectively ended the Irish Civil War. However, the partition the Collins negotiated for is still in effect. And Collins is often referred to as 'Ireland's lost leader'. I think that things would have been very different if he had not been killed in 1921. De Valera died sometime in the 1970s, I think.

2007-06-09 10:17:51 · answer #2 · answered by Orla C 7 · 0 0

Hello,

As mentioned there was that Easter uprising attempt in 1916 that ulitmately failed. Many Irish were fighting in the war for the British. This was always a contentious issue amongst the Irish some of whom thought it would be better to turn their guns and energies on the Brits than help them keep their empire by taking the saxon shilling. Anyway it is felt too many Irish were gone to fight in the great war which took many people's interest away with regards to rebellion.

Here are two musical ballads that some this up:

The Foggy Dew
http://www.contemplator.com/ireland/fogydew.html

The Saxon Shilling

http://home.swipnet.se/lato/ballads/saxonshi.html

Michael Kelly

2007-06-09 08:13:02 · answer #3 · answered by Michael Kelly 5 · 0 0

There could have been an uprising at any stage, however it would have been destroyed very quickly as the hold of Southern Ireland was quite firm. One reason, was the negotiations into Home Rule where at the forefront of political discussion and a deal could have been made in 1915.
The reason the British kept power after World War 1 was the Easter Uprising and the influx of smuggled German wepons into the country.

2007-06-09 10:23:05 · answer #4 · answered by Kevan M 6 · 0 0

A large number of young Irish men opted to join the British army because it offered better chances than the poverty most lived in at the time. At the end of the war, the Black and Tans were moved in to Ireland to keep order. These were British mercenaries, ex-soldiers with experience from the trenches, who saw a tour in Ireland as an opportunity to enrich themselves financially.

2007-06-09 01:42:00 · answer #5 · answered by Norman W 3 · 0 0

basics ,a lot of the southern Irish were fighting for Britain during the unrest in the south of Ireland and ended up fighting
their own people most still felt allegiance to friends and family who where at the front fighting the Germans
although some who went home on leave from the trenches did desert

2007-06-09 01:12:30 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Hmm, strange question, since there was an unsuccessful Irish rebellion in 1916 in the midst of WWI (brutally repressed by the English).

2007-06-09 01:15:49 · answer #7 · answered by Ammianus 3 · 1 1

Read: The Strange Death of Liberal England by George Dangerfield

2007-06-09 05:27:38 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

human beings do no longer want a revolution, we are too unquestionably entertained with issues including drugs, intercourse, alcohol, violence, issues we see on television widely used... do you think of people who take a seat widely used after paintings glued to the television set might prefer to start a revolution... i think of no longer... i think of that a revolution in a militia sense isn't the respond, yet we can awaken one yet another, unite and vote... we can protest many stuff... like wrongful invasions of international locations, abolishment of our civil liberties, and the continual political rule of the yankee elite... as a manner to renounce super brother we would desire to continually use our freedoms...

2016-10-07 04:06:32 · answer #9 · answered by carol 4 · 0 0

The Easter uprising of 1916 would invalidate your question for there was an attempt at revolution that was put down.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Easter_Rising

2007-06-09 02:12:53 · answer #10 · answered by DeSaxe 6 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers