It is a truth universally acknowledged ,( isn’t it? ), that British rule was so popular in Ireland at Easter 1916, that, had British troops handed their rifles and bayonets to Irish civilians, those civilians would have massacred the disarmed “rebels” and saved General Maxwell’s firing squads having to getting out of bed in the morning.
Slightly less widely acknowledged is the anger of prospective Irish jurors at being denied the opportunity to bring in “Guilty” verdicts on rebels charged with capital offences.
Could the apparent unanimity of scholars and commentators be, just possibly, ill-judged and even have its roots in their pride, in their prejudice, or a combination of both?
Imagine yourself a Dubliner with strong national sympathies in the aftermath of the 1916 Rising. The insurgents have laid down their arms, and are being escorted through the streets by British soldiers carrying loaded rifles with bayonets attached. The wrecked buildings bear witness to the effectiveness of high explosive and incendiary shells expended by the British and the whole country is under Martial law. You may not realise that men suspected of republican sympathies are being rounded up all over Ireland for deportation and internment. But the thought might have crossed your mind.
Would you shout yourself hoarse in praise of the insurgents? St Peter himself denied Christ, not once, but three times, when Christ was a prisoner. Would you argue, if you were a Christian at Easter 1916, that the failure of citizens in their thousands to shout “Up the Rebels, Long Live the Republic”, in that context, was a fair barometer of public opinion?
It took no courage whatever to curse, spit on, and otherwise abuse disarmed prisoners, in Dublin under British, or Jerusalem under Roman, Imperial rule. Nor does it take courage today, or brains, to accept without question, universally agreed assertions.
Comments are closed.