British military presence in Ireland 1906

ledgebag1 · 12-05-2014 8:12pm #1

Hi guys as the title says I am looking for some info on this?

Such as where they present?
To what extent?
Where were they present?

Any links info or help on this would be great

Thanks

johnny_doyle · 12-05-2014 11:03pm

no details of units or number of men but the attached map might be of some use re your query

ledgebag1 · 13-05-2014 9:02am

Yeah that helps, I suppose I am looking for confirmation really of a British Military presence in the South of Ireland.

For instance in 1906 were the British army visible on the streets of Dublin, its not for research purposes more of a verification.

I hope this makes some sense ?

thanks again

Santa Cruz · 13-05-2014 9:38am

I would be of the opinion that there was a significant military presence but in an administration way rather than threatening type way. It mightn't be popular to say but there was a fair acceptance of them and many British soldiers were native Irish. There were several military barracks around the country from which recruitment to the various Irish regiments were organised. The British Empire had a lot of countries where they supplied military to. Maybe the Census of 1901 would be of use in establishing numbers

ledgebag1 · 13-05-2014 9:40am

yeah that could be a route, maybe its my search methods but I am hitting a wall on line to articles or links on the subject

thanks Santa Cruz

Maphisto · 13-05-2014 9:48am

Hi OP

Came across this book on a search "British Democracy and Irish Nationism 1876-1906"

Catchy title I know but extracts at least are on Google here:

http://books.google.ie/books?id=iOgbSv9boCkC&pg=PA167&lpg=PA167&dq=british+army+in+ireland+1906&source=bl&ots=gdl7enEezm&sig=mfPqvFXm5jgXjZiIyUFPqyBuJbw&hl=en&sa=X&ei=xdJxU4n9COry7AbcpoEY&ved=0CEYQ6AEwAw#v=onepage&q=british%20army%20in%20ireland%201906&f=false

Might give you a lead in to something.

ledgebag1 · 13-05-2014 10:00am

cheers Maphisto, much appreciated

Owryan · 13-05-2014 10:17am

Have nothing for 1906 but I have a list of british army units and their stations in Ireland from 1904 .

Might give you an idea of what your after

ledgebag1 · 13-05-2014 11:25am

Yeah great, I suppose I am really trying to get an idea of their presence in Dublin at this time. Were they on the streets, visible, an ever presence?

Thanks for the help so far guys

Owryan · 13-05-2014 11:58am

Unit/Location
3rd Dragoon Guards Ballincollig
6th Dragoons Dublin
11th, 19th Hussars Curragh

Berkshire Regiment (49th-66th) 1st Bn Dublin
Connaught Rangers (88th-94th) 1st Bn Mullingar
Gordon Highlanders (75th-92nd) 1st Bn Cork
King's Own Scottish Borderers (25th) 1st Bn Belfast
Lancashire Fusiliers (20th) 2nd Bn Fermoy
Lancashire Fusiliers (20th) 4th Bn Tipperary
Loyal North Lancashire Regiment (47th-81st) 1st Bn Kinsale
Manchester Regiment (63rd-96th) 4th Bn Cork
Middlesex Regiment (57th-77th) 4th Bn Dublin
Northumberland Fusiliers (5th) 4th Bn Limerick
Queen's Own Cameron Highlanders (79th) 1st Bn Dublin
Royal Fusiliers (7th) 4th Bn Dublin
Royal Inniskilling Fusiliers (28th-108th) 1st Bn Enniskillen
Royal Irish Rifles (83rd-86th) 2nd Bn Dublin
Royal Warwickshire Regiment (6th) 4th Bn Curragh
South Staffordshire Regiment (38th-80th) 1st Bn Curragh
West Yorkshire Regiment (14th) 2nd Bn Belfast
Worcestershire Regiment (29th-26th) 1st Bn Templemore

Q Battery RHA, 38th, 61st Battery Newbridge
22nd Battery Limerick
27th, 36th, 60th Battery Athlone
48th Battery Waterford
71st Battery Kilkenny
125th Battery Cork
126th, 127th Battery Fermoy
131st 132nd, 138th, 139th Battery Kildare
134th, 135th, 136th Battery Dundalk
140th, 141st, 142nd Battery Cahir

As you can see the British Army had a large presence in Ireland, i ve left out the various service, support, admin and garrison units scattered around the country.

Not sure if they played a policing role in the country but they would 've been a constant visual presence coming and going from the various barracks as well as on manouvers. Pageantry would've also being a big visual presence.

ledgebag1 · 13-05-2014 12:04pm

Owryan is that from 1904 onwards? Until when?

Owryan · 13-05-2014 12:07pm

ledgebag1 wrote: »

Owryan is that from 1904 onwards? Until when?

That list is dated "November 1904". i just have lists for a given year. Records aren't complete and i can't find anything for 1906.

ledgebag1 · 13-05-2014 12:48pm

Thanks a million for your help with it your very good

Fratton Fred · 13-05-2014 3:51pm

ledgebag1 wrote: »

Yeah great, I suppose I am really trying to get an idea of their presence in Dublin at this time. Were they on the streets, visible, an ever presence?

Thanks for the help so far guys

Are you trying to establish if Ireland in 1906 was effectively like Belfast in 1989 with armed soldiers patrolling the streets?

ledgebag1 · 13-05-2014 4:51pm

No just to what extent they were present, were they visible on the streets, what activities they carried out if they were in dublin at this time

Owryan · 13-05-2014 5:08pm

Contrary to common belief in the early 20th century the British Army wasn't regarded by the majority of the population as an occupying force. In general they would've had much the same presence as our current DF. Most barracks/military posts were enclosed or in remote area's so there would've been limited interaction.

Also the units stationed in Ireland rotated through various stations so they might only be "in country" for a year or two. I haven't come across too many non biased source's which depicted the British army as acting like an occupation army prior to 1912 onwards.

As for what they did on a day to day basis, well it would probably have depended on the type of unit, its post and whether or not they were due for deployment to for example, Africa or India. For cavalry and artillery units caring for their horses was probably the biggest daily chore while infantry regiments might've focused on musketry and drill.

Fratton Fred · 13-05-2014 5:17pm

I will link to the article later.

In 1906, the British army stood at 392,000 or 980 per 100,000 population. This was a reduction from the 1901 peak of 540,000.

Today, the British army is at 180,000 or 298 per 100,000.

The current Irish army is around 8000 or 177 per 100,000.

There were effectively four times the number so it would have been more common to see mitary people knocking around. Ireland had a higher number of barracks, partly because it was a popular recruiting area, plus the history of rebellion. You would also see men in uniform off duty in pubs etc. so again, more visible.

Hopefully that helps put it in to context.

ledgebag1 · 13-05-2014 6:48pm

Yeah that is great appreciate it, if you could stick that link up I would be most grateful, and thanks again

riffmongous · 13-05-2014 8:01pm

Hm, maybe you could get some information on their off duty street presence and activities by doing a bit of research on the Monto.. :pac:

Fratton Fred · 13-05-2014 8:22pm

ledgebag1 wrote: »

Yeah that is great appreciate it, if you could stick that link up I would be most grateful, and thanks again

It's a Guardian article, but informative.

http://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2011/sep/01/military-service-personnel-total

The interpretation is my own.

Frank Lee Midere · 13-05-2014 8:28pm

Owryan wrote: »

Contrary to common belief in the early 20th century the British Army wasn't regarded by the majority of the population as an occupying force. In general they would've had much the same presence as our current DF. Most barracks/military posts were enclosed or in remote area's so there would've been limited interaction.

Also the units stationed in Ireland rotated through various stations so they might only be "in country" for a year or two. I haven't come across too many non biased source's which depicted the British army as acting like an occupation army prior to 1912 onwards.

As for what they did on a day to day basis, well it would probably have depended on the type of unit, its post and whether or not they were due for deployment to for example, Africa or India. For cavalry and artillery units caring for their horses was probably the biggest daily chore while infantry regiments might've focused on musketry and drill.

Contrary to revisionist belief they commonly were seen as an occupying force. As we can see most of the British army in Ireland was not Irish. The British army in England is mostly English. In India it was mostly Indian ( officer class being English/ Anglo Indian though).

As far as I know no regiments of the Irish army are descendants of the British.

Fratton Fred · 13-05-2014 8:56pm

Frank Lee Midere wrote: »

Contrary to revisionist belief they commonly were seen as an occupying force. As we can see most of the British army in Ireland was not Irish. The British army in England is mostly English. In India it was mostly Indian ( officer class being English/ Anglo Indian though).

As far as I know no regiments of the Irish army are descendants of the British.

Don't make the mistake of thinking that because a regiment is called the royal Berkshire regiment, all its recruits were from Berkshire.

People joined whatever regiment was in town at the time, a quick scan through wwi death records will show Irishmen who died fighting fir regiments from all over these islands. My own great grandfather fought in the second Boer war and in the Somme for the enniskillen fusiliers, but didn't step foot in Ireland until 13 years after he joined up. He spent much of his time in India.

riffmongous · 13-05-2014 9:37pm

Frank Lee Midere wrote: »

As far as I know no regiments of the Irish army are descendants of the British.

I think a lot of the soldiers from the disbanded British-Irish regiments joined the Free State forces though, according to Wiki anyway, although I wonder if that distinguishes between the peacetime regiment strength and those who would have been recruited for WW1. Also I wonder how many would have remained in the army after the post-war downsizing, interesting all the same. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dublin_Fusiliers#Disbandment

Santa Cruz · 13-05-2014 9:38pm

riffmongous wrote: »

Hm, maybe you could get some information on their off duty street presence and activities by doing a bit of research on the Monto.. :pac:

Spot on. I heard that the Monto women went on day trips to the Curragh to "entertain" the troops

Owryan · 13-05-2014 10:06pm

Pre WWI roughly 10% of the British Army was "Irish" http://www.dublin-fusiliers.com/statistics.html. Between 190-200,000 Irish enlisted during the war, hardly a sign that the army was seen as an oppressive force.

At one stage, late 18th century it was estimated that upwards of a third of the British Army was recruited from Ireland http://belfastmediagroup.com/fascinating-insight-into-the-irish-who-joined-british-army/

ledgebag1 · 13-05-2014 10:13pm

This is great guys and galls much appreciated, yeah until monto mentioned I had not thought of it

jos28 · 14-05-2014 10:32pm

Just a couple of books that might be worth a look

Bartlett, T.,Jeffery, K. 1996. A Military History of Ireland. Cambridge

Dooley, T. 1995. Irishman or English Soldier, The Times and World of a Southern Irish Catholic Man. Liverpool.

tac foley · 15-05-2014 9:52am

The thing to remember here is that the many Irish regiments previously mentioned were ALSO part of the British Armed Forces of the day.

How offended do you think that Irish people were when they saw a parade of the Munster Fusiliers or the 5th Dragoon Guards in their town?

Without the Irish component - drawn from young men with a sense of adventure, or to 'get away', the ARMY [notice that I did not say the British Army - there was, in fact, no other] was a ticket to freedom.

It's no use saying that any Irishman was used as mere cannon fodder to pander to British military ambitions - no matter whether you cam from Tooting, Arbroath, Armagh or Bantry, it is still the British Army that you were in, and not any kind of foreign power - at THAT time. Every soldier takes the same risks on the battlefield.

tac

ledgebag1 · 15-05-2014 10:25am

jos28 wrote: »

Just a couple of books that might be worth a look

Bartlett, T.,Jeffery, K. 1996. A Military History of Ireland. Cambridge

Dooley, T. 1995. Irishman or English Soldier, The Times and World of a Southern Irish Catholic Man. Liverpool.

thanks for that, much appreciated

riffmongous · 15-05-2014 11:37am

tac foley wrote: »

It's no use saying that any Irishman was used as mere cannon fodder to pander to British military ambitions - no matter whether you cam from Tooting, Arbroath, Armagh or Bantry, it is still the British Army that you were in, and not any kind of foreign power - at THAT time. Every soldier takes the same risks on the battlefield.

tac

Perhaps on the battlefield, but off the battlefield they seemed to have been treated differently

Thirdly, Irish troops in the British Army appear to have been treated with particular harshness. They constituted just two per cent of the membership of the force, yet they were the recipients of eight per cent (271) of all death sentences imposed by its courts-martial.[27] Estimates on the number of executed ranging from 25 to 30 of the Irish war dead were victims of court martial executions.[28][29][30] Opposition to the war in Ireland, may have therefore been influenced by perceived discrimination by British High Command against Irish soldiers. On average one British soldier out of every 3,000 of their troops that died in the war did so due to being court martialed and executed by firing squad, compared to the much higher, one out of every 600 of the Irish troops that died.[28][31] Out of the total that were executed, 26 have since been retroactively pardoned.[32][3

wiki link

riffmongous · 15-05-2014 11:42am

Owryan wrote: »

Pre WWI roughly 10% of the British Army was "Irish" http://www.dublin-fusiliers.com/statistics.html. Between 190-200,000 Irish enlisted during the war, hardly a sign that the army was seen as an oppressive force.

At one stage, late 18th century it was estimated that upwards of a third of the British Army was recruited from Ireland http://belfastmediagroup.com/fascinating-insight-into-the-irish-who-joined-british-army/

But the recruitment rate was much lower in Ireland than in Britain, with the exception of Ulster. And a large proportion of those who originally joined up in the south came directly from Redmond's volunteers.

Jawgap · 16-05-2014 8:12am

riffmongous wrote: »

Perhaps on the battlefield, but off the battlefield they seemed to have been treated differently......

They constituted just two per cent of the membership of the force, yet they were the recipients of eight per cent (271) of all death sentences imposed by its courts-martial......

wiki link

......and 6% of the VCs awarded

Jawgap · 16-05-2014 8:18am

ledgebag1 wrote: »

Hi guys as the title says I am looking for some info on this?

Such as where they present?
To what extent?
Where were they present?

Any links info or help on this would be great

Thanks

OP, it's a while since I read it but Con Costello's book - "A most delightful station: The British army on the Curragh of Kildare, Ireland, 1855-1922" might have some more information on what you are after.

Fratton Fred · 16-05-2014 8:58am

riffmongous wrote: »

But the recruitment rate was much lower in Ireland than in Britain, with the exception of Ulster. And a large proportion of those who originally joined up in the south came directly from Redmond's volunteers.

In Britain, it was conscription.

ledgebag1 · 16-05-2014 9:32am

Jawgap wrote: »

OP, it's a while since I read it but Con Costello's book - "A most delightful station: The British army on the Curragh of Kildare, Ireland, 1855-1922" might have some more information on what you are after.

Magic, thanks a million

riffmongous · 16-05-2014 11:15am

Fratton Fred wrote: »

In Britain, it was conscription.

I'd assume the recruitment stats refer to the period before conscription, or only volunteers, I don't have access to the original numbers to check though. But including conscript numbers in recruitment figures wouldnt make much sense

riffmongous · 16-05-2014 11:20am

Jawgap wrote: »

......and 6% of the VCs awarded

That's also fairly noteworthy, I wonder if these any negative correlation between the regiments where the honours were awarded and those with the court martials..

tac foley · 16-05-2014 11:38am

Jawgap wrote: »

......and 6% of the VCs awarded

...and my maternal grandfather only got a military cross. He's still lying underneath it, in Templeux-le-Guérard cemetery on the Somme.

tac

Jawgap · 16-05-2014 1:23pm

riffmongous wrote: »

That's also fairly noteworthy, I wonder if these any negative correlation between the regiments where the honours were awarded and those with the court martials..

Btw - the statement "Estimates on the number of executed ranging from 25 to 30 of the Irish war dead were victims of court martial executions" - if that figure relates to FGCMs and GCMs - it probably includes the 1916 signatories.

The stats also show that your chances of getting shot depended more on what you were accused of, than where you were from......

Between 1914 and 1924, there were 3,342 death sentences passed by GCMs and FGCMs - leading to 438 (13%) executions. Over 2000 death sentences were handed down for desertion, but 'only' 14% were carried out; sleeping at post, 0.5% of the death sentences were carried out; sedition - 0%; cowardice 7%; rebellion (Ireland) - 16%; and murder 56%.

The Royal Artillery were obviously a troublesome lot they recorded 104 capital convictions (13% executed).

The Royal Inniskilling Fusiliers (who had a respectable number of VC recipients recorded 29 capital convictions with 5 (17%) carried out. The corresponding figures for the

Dublin Fusiliers - 22 & 3
Munster Fusiliers - 37 & 2
Connacht Rangers - 17 & 1 (the period would include the mutiny)
Royal Irish Rifles - 63 & 5

The figures, on a regiment-by-regiment basis do not suggest that Irish Regiments fared better or worse than any other regiment or Corps - nor do they suggest a higher level of sentences carried out.

Jawgap · 16-05-2014 1:29pm

Also better to be in the ranks.......

2,938 privates or equivalent were sentenced to death - 316 (11%) carried out.

NCOs - 134 sentenced - 24 carried out (18%)

2/Lt - 3 sentenced, 100% executed.

However, I'd suggest (but I've zero evidence to back this up) that officers, NCOs were perhaps less likely to have to face capital charges......

Fratton Fred · 16-05-2014 2:08pm

You do have to feel for the 2/Lt s, first to climb the ladder in to no man's land and face certain death, or don't go and get shot for cowardice.

CDfm · 16-05-2014 3:38pm

Fratton Fred wrote: »

You do have to feel for the 2/Lt s, first to climb the ladder in to no man's land and face certain death, or don't go and get shot for cowardice.

Or the 2/Lt's Worwsick and Lucas and the two civilians executed in Guinness Brewery in 1916.

http://www.chch.ox.ac.uk/cathedral/memorials/WW1/Basil-Worswick&print=true

The police in Ireland weren't so much British Bobby's but were more like a militia.

Lets not forget Private James Crozier who was too drunk to stand when executed by someone who thought it was ok to execute sentries who had fallen asleep and German prisoners.

http://spartacus-educational.com/FWWcrozierF.htm

Judgement Day · 16-05-2014 4:00pm

^^^^ Welcome back!!

CDfm · 16-05-2014 6:10pm

Santa Cruz wrote: »

Spot on. I heard that the Monto women went on day trips to the Curragh to "entertain" the troops

I don't know if this is true. The story of the Wrens of the Curragh , camp followers and girlfriends living in deplorable conditions under the furze on the Curragh is widely known.

riffmongous wrote: »

I think a lot of the soldiers from the disbanded British-Irish regiments joined the Free State forces though, according to Wiki anyway, although I wonder if that distinguishes between the peacetime regiment strength and those who would have been recruited for WW1. Also I wonder how many would have remained in the army after the post-war downsizing, interesting all the same. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dublin_Fusiliers#Disbandment

There was no prohibition but more than likely you had pro treaty WWI veterans and unemployed young men sign up together with pro treaty veterans from the civil war.

Redmond had led a recruitment drive during the Great War and there was no shortage of trained military personnel.

CDfm · 16-05-2014 7:25pm

Judgement Day wrote: »

^^^^ Welcome back!!

Thank you.

I can't remember last time I was here.

CDfm · 16-05-2014 8:23pm

riffmongous wrote: »

But the recruitment rate was much lower in Ireland than in Britain, with the exception of Ulster. And a large proportion of those who originally joined up in the south came directly from Redmond's volunteers.

Do you have a source for that ?

Some , like Tom Kettle, were genuine in their opposition to the German invasion of Belgium.

Francis Ledwege , the poet went for adventure.

The likes of James Connolly and some trade unionists and the more extreme nationalist's , small in number, were opposed to joining up.

Unemployment and emigration were still high and the army pay was twice what an unskilled worker earned,

riffmongous · 16-05-2014 8:55pm

CDfm wrote: »

Do you have a source for that ?

Some , like Tom Kettle, were genuine in their opposition to the German invasion of Belgium.

Francis Ledwege , the poet went for adventure.

The likes of James Connolly and some trade unionists and the more extreme nationalist's , small in number, were opposed to joining up.

Unemployment and emigration were still high and the army pay was twice what an unskilled worker earned,

A military history of Ireland, by Bartlett

police estimates suggest that the Irish Volunteers eventually yielded at least 24,000 men to the army

CDfm · 17-05-2014 12:45am

http://www.independent.ie/lifestyle/world-war-1/ireland-during-world-war-1-the-facts-figures-30249108.html

Well some 210,000 irish served. 49,,000 died.

Some accounts of the 1916 discuss how irish officers were undermined in preventing excesses. The attitude of the Army to the southern irish was certainly different.

It goes some way in explaining the how the Home Rule Party votes collapsed in the post war election.

There is nothing wrong with recounting how the army behaved in Ireland and how that fed into the politics of what was going on. Put the Curragh Mutiny into the mix and it shows how the military related to Ireland.

1906 also was mid the Gaelic Revival and the last of the land acts , so context is very important.

riffmongous · 17-05-2014 9:52am

But of that number 60,000 were already enlisted

25,000 were UVF

Since the Catholic:protestant recruitment rate was at least 1:1, In the north, another 25000 must have come from the north.

So redmond's volunteers would have accounted for at least 25% of those who signed up in the south

CDfm · 17-05-2014 10:31am

riffmongous wrote: »

So redmond's volunteers would have accounted for at least 25% of those who signed up in the south

They weren't Redmond's Volunteers as Redmond had made a play for political control, nonetheless their origin were with the Gaelic revival movement.

So their is a political interpretation part to this.

My impression is that a lot of the volunteers were thrre for economic reasons. It was well paid.

The royal visits to Dublin had been popular and the population of west cork volunteers might have had different motivations for signing up.

ledgebag1 · 17-05-2014 10:30pm

Lads and lassies get back to helpin me, come on

British military presence in Ireland 1906

Comments