Sir, – In his recently published book Vivid Faces: The Revolutionary Generation in Ireland 1890 – 1923, RF Foster writes that one inheritance of the traumatic split over the Treaty and the subsequent Civil War was a wide, if often unspoken, chasm between different interpretations of what the revolution had actually been about. This disagreement involved events from the Truce to the Treaty and thereafter, so the commemoration of the 1916 Rising was seen as a safer option, a cut-off point.
By early 1914 about 250,000 men, and quite a few women, in Ireland were enrolled in some kind of paramilitary organisation, according to Foster. Some 580 people (mostly civilians) were killed in 1916, while more than 4,000 died as a result of the Civil War in the South, and a further 500 died in communal violence in the North, not to mention the numbers who have died in the Troubles since. Would an all-Ireland civil war, or the threat of it, brought about by UVF opposition to Home Rule have been any worse? Did the 1916 Rising lance the boil or would such a civil war have brought people to their senses? Why was there subsequently a Civil War in the Free State? The “revolutionary generation” itself was influenced very powerfully by the “great memory-fest”, as Foster describes it, of the 1798 centenary in 1898.
The last thing Ireland needs is a 2016 rekindling of a partisan memory-fest that continues to foment traumatic splits or misinforms another generation. Would a form of truth commission on all that contributed to the 1916 Rising and its aftermath, including the role of the Ulster and Irish Volunteer Forces, the Citizens Army, the IRB, the British government and its forces, the Ulster Unionist Council, the Irish Parliamentary Party, Sinn Féin, and others, bring us a greater understanding? It should now be possible to have a rational national dialogue. The media could assist by commissioning insightful and truthful commentary well in advance of the centenary. In 1947 the Bureau of Military History was set up to take witness statements, so a body of work (made available in 2003) exists, though various prominent players have tried to colour the understanding of events. It is time for the unvarnished truth. If we face the truth together we will better face the future together. – Yours, etc,
GAY MITCHELL,
Dublin 6.
Sir, – Rumblings about our revolutionary past and the morality of commemorating the 1916 Easter Rising are gaining momentum. We have the Minister for Foreign Affairs Charlie Flanagan at the Fine Gael national conference in Castlebar warning us that we cannot allow the centenary commemorations to become a divisive issue and there have even been calls to have the ceremonies kept low key for fear of causing offence to those of different traditions on this island. In calling for the "shameless celebration" of the Easter Rising centenary whatever government is in power in 2016, Ronan Fanning said there must be a "recognition of historical reality" ("Easter Rising centenary should be 'shameless celebration', says UCD professor", February 21st).
I believe Prof Fanning’s expressed views on the issue are much more reflective of public opinion than the Government’s are. It is worth noting that no such calls are made when the Government is participating in Remembrance Day commemorations which honour those Irish who fought and died in both World Wars under the British flag. One can only conclude from this that we should only honour unconditionally those Irish who died in British uniform fighting in foreign wars, not those Irish who gave their lives in Ireland fighting for the establishment of an Irish independent nation. – Yours, etc,
TOM COOPER,
Templeogue, Dublin 6W.
Sir, – Prof Ronan Fanning calls for a “shameless celebration” of the Easter Rising centenary. The 1916 relatives would at this late stage settle for a mere celebration. We still await a State centenary programme that will remember and pay fitting tribute to the men and women who fought for the cause of Irish freedom. To date we have been assured that there will be a role for the military as is the case at every Easter and that restoration projects including the rededication of the GPO as the seat of the Rising will be delivered for the centenary. Relatives support these plans. We believe that a similar approach is urgently required regarding the last 1916 battleground and final HQ of the Provisional Government in Moore Street now under the financial control of Nama. But where is the celebratory element in the State plan? The leaders of the Rising were much more than mere military figures. They played a key role in the cultural rebirth of the nation as writers, poets, playwrights, musicians, teachers, lecturers and journalists. They deserve to be remembered, celebrated, honoured and introduced to a new generation in that light also. – Yours, etc,
JAMES
CONNOLLY HERON,
Dublin 6.
Sir, – Prof Ronan Fanning’s call for a “shameless celebration” of the 1916 Rising should be rejected as a dangerous incitement to tribal nationalism. He states that there must be a “recognition of historical reality”. The reality is that the 1916 Rising was a tragic mistake that transformed a peaceful transition to Home Rule and eventual independence into a violent bloodbath that has continued intermittently for 100 years. How is it possible to glorify the 1916 men of violence and condemn the present men of violence when both groups used violence to achieve the same end, that is to force one million Unionists into a united Ireland? The 1916 Rising should be commemorated with a sense of sadness and regret. – Yours, etc,
DICK KEANE,
Glenageary, Co Dublin.