Nelson's Pillar - 46th anniversary

golfwallah

46 years ago today, on 8th March 1966, we woke up to the news that Nelson’s Pillar had been blown up.

Hated by some but a familiar meeting place for many – is the spire that eventually replaced it any better as a city centre landmark?

1966 was the 50th anniversary of the Easter Rising and the subject of a school project I worked on, with a few classmates. Ireland was a much different place then.

The 100th anniversary isn’t too far away – hopefully, we will see moves to commemorate the event in a positive light that will be of lasting benefit to all on this island North and South plus the UK.

For Wikipedia link see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nelson's_Pillar.

MarchDub

golfwallah wrote: »

46 years ago today, on 8th March 1966, we woke up to the news that Nelson’s Pillar had been blown up.

Hated by some but a familiar meeting place for many – is the spire that eventually replaced it any better as a city centre landmark?

1966 was the 50th anniversary of the Easter Rising and the subject of a school project I worked on, with a few classmates. Ireland was a much different place then.

The 100th anniversary isn’t too far away – hopefully, we will see moves to commemorate the event in a positive light that will be of lasting benefit to all on this island North and South plus the UK.

For Wikipedia link see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nelson's_Pillar.

Thanks for the reminder. I may be one of the few on here who remembers the day very well. I was in O'Connell St within a half hour of hearing the news on the morning radio. The whole of Dublin was abuzz with it.

Even going in on the bus it was the main topic - 'did you hear the pillar was blown up' etc. The area in O'Connell St was cordoned off as far as the old Irish Press building - now a fast food restaurant. The GPO was shut. I then walked up North Earl Street to get a better/closer look. The pillar was cut in half by the blast and the rubble was strewn all over the place and the army and gardai were standing guard around.

There was a sense of caution in the air by the 'security' personnel but average citizens just thought it all funny and I can remember people standing near the site just laughing. Nelson got blown off his perch etc. Jokes became common. The Half Nelson in O'Connell st. etc

Within days the general feeling amongst the average person that I remember was that it ought to be re-built with a Irish patriot put on top instead of Nelson. Never happened. The other half was blown up by the army - the space left vacant for years - and, seeing as how you asked the question, now we have IMO the ugliest edifice that could possibly be placed there. But heck maybe the spire reflects our times, a meaningless, vacuous 'symbol' of a people without any strong cultural identity.

jonniebgood1

I remember my Father telling me about the demolition. His main point was that when the Irish army undertook the demolition of what remained of the pillar that they used to much explosives and caused more damage to surrounding properties than the IRA bomb had done. The pillar would have been an impressive monument if it still stood, it would have been 200 years old recently. Before the 1950's the main criticism of it seems to have been either for its aesthetics or its disruption of traffic as opposed to what it represented.

I studied the design of the pillar previously (in a comparison with the spire). It was revised by the Architect Francis Johnston so that it fitted in with his scale of structures on O'Connell street (then Sackville) such as the GPO.

Ellis Dee

jonniebgood1 wrote: »

I remember my Father telling me about the demolition. His main point was that when the Irish army undertook the demolition of what remained of the pillar that they used to much explosives and caused more damage to surrounding properties than the IRA bomb had done. The pillar would have been an impressive monument if it still stood, it would have been 200 years old recently. Before the 1950's the main criticism of it seems to have been either for its aesthetics or its disruption of traffic as opposed to what it represented.

I studied the design of the pillar previously (in a comparison with the spire). It was revised by the Architect Francis Johnston so that it fitted in with his scale of structures on O'Connell street (then Sackville) such as the GPO.

Your father was right. The damage done when the Army blew up the stump was far greater than caused in the original explosion. I wonder how many of those lads went on to claim compo for deafness.:) The windows that had been shattered in the first explosion and almost immediately repaired, plus a good few more, were wrecked again.:cool:

I was on top of the pillar many times. What used to grate on me a bit was that it was some kind of ex-British Army servicemen's group that ran it and collected the proceeds. I found that offensive in the middle of the capital city of a supposedly sovereign state; the Brits should look after their own ex-military, including mercenaries who come from abroad and I wonder how the Brits would feel if they had a massive monument to some foreign military man in the middle of London.:eek:

I was in a place called Balingen, Germany the day the explosion happened. I was delighted that someone had finally gotten rid of it before we celebrated the 50th anniversary of the Easter Rising.

The Dubliners wrote and performed a wonderfully witty song about it, sung by the incomparable Ronnie Drew. It beats me how there are still many members of the national cringe brigade who would want to have statues of British royalty and military people all over the place, when we still don't have one of Ronnie Drew, Luke Kelly and others like that who deserve them a lot more than Nelson ever did.

Here's a link to the Dubliners' wonderful song about the Pillar. Sorry, I don't know how to embed YouTube clips, but click on the link and -- enjoy:

"50 pounds of gelig-i-nite it sped him on his way
and that lad that laid the charge we're in debt to him today."

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IKpIO8jFHPo

MarchDub

I'm trying to find photos of it all. The demolition actually took a few stages with an initial army blast removing the entire top stem/stairway that had been left - then the army had to use further blast to remove the base, and this is when the real damage was done to the surroundings.




Somewhere in that crowd I may be - they moved the crowd back gradually as more people came.




This was the initial scaffolding that was put up.




Then they were left with the base - it was the removal of this that caused a ton of damage to Clerys windows and much of the surrounding area.

LordSutch

golfwallah wrote: »

46 years ago today, on 8th March 1966, we woke up to the news that Nelson’s Pillar had been blown up.

Hated by some (and loved by many) but a familiar meeting place for many – is the spire that eventually replaced it any better as a city centre landmark?

Sorry, I just had to include that in bold, and indeed it was loved by many, my parents born beside the Pheonix park being some of those who mourned its loss to Dublin City. It was of course a massive tourist attraction for the City, it was a meeting point too, I often think that if some people hated Nelson soo much then they should have replaced him with somebody else on the top > no need to ruin the pillar for everybody!

golfwallah wrote: »

The 100th anniversary isn’t too far away – hopefully, we will see moves to commemorate the event in a positive light that will be of lasting benefit to all on this island North and South plus the UK Britain.

Adjusted that for you. The 100th anniversary of the Easter Rising will be fervently welcomed by Irish Republicans, embraced by Nationalist patriots, tolerated by others, avoided by many others, and blanked out by Unionists. I will make sure that myself and the family are abroad that week.

MarchDub

LordSutch wrote: »

Sorry, I just had to include that in bold, and indeed it was loved by many, my parents born beside the Pheonix park being some of those who mourned its loss to Dublin City. It was of course a massive tourist attraction for the City, it was a meeting point too, I often think that if some people hated Nelson soo much then they should have replaced him with somebody else on the top > no need to ruin the pillar for everybody!

Yes, I agree - the Pillar was beloved by most people that I knew in Dublin at the time. And there was a sense of loss when the authorities decided to demolish it and take it all away. Far better to restore the top and put someone else up there was a widespread feeling at the time.

Being the 50th Anniversary of the Rising many thought that it should have been restored with something commemorating 1916 to replace Nelson.

jos28

I was living in England when Nelson's pillar was blown up, no idea how but one of our neighbours brought back a piece which I still have.

golfwallah

LordSutch wrote: »

It was of course a massive tourist attraction for the City, it was a meeting point too, I often think that if some people hated Nelson soo much then they should have replaced him with somebody else on the top > no need to ruin the pillar for everybody!

Have to agree with you on that.

LordSutch wrote: »

The 100th anniversary of the Easter Rising will be fervently welcomed by Irish Republicans, embraced by Nationalist patriots, tolerated by others, avoided by many others, and blanked out by Unionists. I will make sure that myself and the family are abroad that week.

Wouldn't agree with you there - I think the peace process and Queen's visit are marking an end to old animosities and a new mutual respect for one another's cultural backgrounds.

This gives us all the opportunity to look at the positives for the 100th anniversary of 1916.

Not only does the anniversary present the opportunity for cultural activities (including cross-border ones), it also presents business opportunities for both North and South.

One example is "1916 The Musical" (a musical with a cross cultural love story set against the events of the 1916 rising): http://www.1916themusical.com/

Einhard

MarchDub wrote: »

But heck maybe the spire reflects our times, a meaningless, vacuous 'symbol' of a people without any strong cultural identity.

I quite like the spire. It may mean nothing to you, but it does to others, even if that meaning is purely aesthetic (or not as the case may be). When you describe it in such terms as you have, you implicitly denigrate those who just happen to have a different perspective on the thing.

MarchDub

Einhard wrote: »

I quite like the spire. It may mean nothing to you, but it does to others, even if that meaning is purely aesthetic (or not as the case may be). When you describe it in such terms as you have, you implicitly denigrate those who just happen to have a different perspective on the thing.

The OP asked what we thought - and I gave my personal opinion which I stand by. I pass the ugly thing frequently and it isn't even wearing well IMO so aesthetically to me, it's ugly - most especially when compared to what it replaced. I have no problem with what you may think of its aesthetics. Your interpretation or response to what I said sounds to me like denigration of my opinion and little else.

golfwallah

Everyone is entitled to an opinion - the more the merrier, I say.

And wouldn't the world be a boring place if everyone thought the same way!

So, let's cool it guys and demonstrate that we can live with different opinions - whether they be about the Pillar, the Spire or different cultural / political views, North & South.:)

jonniebgood1

Opinion on the spire is subjective IMO. Different aspects of it will appeal to different people. With regard to the criticisms its design receives it has similarities with Nelsons pillar which was seen as being 'ugly' in an 1879 attempt to have it removed. It got much criticism for its aesthetics.

MarchDub

Oscar Wilde. The Critic as Artist...


"Aesthetics are higher than ethics. They belong to a more spiritual sphere." :cool:

pedroeibar1

MarchDub wrote: »

Oscar Wilde. The Critic as Artist...


"Aesthetics are higher than ethics. They belong to a more spiritual sphere." :cool:

Aaaah, so that explains the ethics of why the banks gave Sean Dunne almost €400 million to buy a site to built an aesthetic glass tower.:D

Sad to see some of the usual urban myth Pillar rubbish coming up again in the earlier posts. The IRA tried to demolish the Pillar and failed miserably – they blew a gap which caused the top to fall off. That left a considerably weakened structure, which was a nightmare for anyone to tackle. All commercial explosive experts would – then as now - have run a mile; the Army did a good job considering the size and mass of the stump.

Before it was initially blown up there was a growing movement to replace ‘it’ or rather replace the statue of Nelson with one of Mary; thankfully that did not happen. Trafalgar was a huge victory in its day, very popular in Ireland because a considerable number of the RN sailors were Irish and that is why the public subscription was completed so quickly – the Dublin Pillar was one of the first to be erected, long before the one in Trafalgar Sq in London.

As kids we used to buy bangers in Moore St. before Halloween , light them and drop them from the top – it used to cost 6d to go up. Great to see the people below looking about to see where the bang came from.

Personally, I like the ballad ascribed to Brendan Behan on another statue – the Gough Memorial – and the pathetic effort by the ‘Patriots’

There are strange things done from twelve to one
In the Hollow at Phaynix Park,
There's maidens mobbed and gentlemen robbed
In the bushes after dark;
But the strangest of all within human recall
Concerns the statue of Gough,
'Twas a terrible fact, and a most wicked act,
For his bollix they tried to blow off!
'Neath the horse's big prick a dynamite stick
Some gallant 'hayro' did place,
For the cause of our land, with a match in his hand
Bravely the foe he did face;
Then without showing fear - and standing well clear –
He expected to blow up the pair
But he nearly went crackers, all he got was the knackers
And he made the poor stallion a mare!
For his tactics were wrong, and the prick was too long
(the horse being more than a foal)
It would answer him better, this dynamite setter,
The stick to shove up his own hole!
For this is the way our 'haroes' today
Are challenging England's might,
With a stab in the back and a midnight attack
On a statue that can't even ****e!

golfwallah

pedroeibar1 wrote: »

The IRA tried to demolish the Pillar and failed miserably – they blew a gap which caused the top to fall off. That left a considerably weakened structure, which was a nightmare for anyone to tackle. All commercial explosive experts would – then as now - have run a mile; the Army did a good job considering the size and mass of the stump.

Before it was initially blown up there was a growing movement to replace ‘it’ or rather replace the statue of Nelson with one of Mary; thankfully that did not happen. Trafalgar was a huge victory in its day, very popular in Ireland because a considerable number of the RN sailors were Irish and that is why the public subscription was completed so quickly – the Dublin Pillar was one of the first to be erected, long before the one in Trafalgar Sq in London.

Very informative .... thanks for that!:)

MarchDub

Found this newspaper report from the Indo - as can be seen from one report 'souvenir' hunters were early on the scene - someone is reported as making off with the sword - and of course Nelson's head went missing for a time. I seem to remember students stole it.






And interesting to see the headline from the Evening Press -

thecommietommy

jonniebgood1 wrote: »

I remember my Father telling me about the demolition. His main point was that when the Irish army undertook the demolition of what remained of the pillar that they used to much explosives and caused more damage to surrounding properties than the IRA bomb had done. The pillar would have been an impressive monument if it still stood, it would have been 200 years old recently. Before the 1950's the main criticism of it seems to have been either for its aesthetics or its disruption of traffic as opposed to what it represented.

I studied the design of the pillar previously (in a comparison with the spire). It was revised by the Architect Francis Johnston so that it fitted in with his scale of structures on O'Connell street (then Sackville) such as the GPO.

Not trying to be smart with you, but when the IRA's bomb blew up the Nelson statue at the top, the force dissipated into the surrounding empty air. However, when the army had to blow up the rest at the base, the force had to dissipate into the surrounding area which included the nearby buildings.

The surviving head of Nelson's statue can be seen in the upstairs library on Pearse St, Dublin.

jonniebgood1

thecommietommy wrote: »

when the IRA's bomb blew up the Nelson statue at the top, the force dissipated into the surrounding empty air. However, when the army had to blow up the rest at the base, the force had to dissipate into the surrounding area which included the nearby buildings.

Could you clarify this point- I don't fully see what you are saying? Did the IRA bomb cause more damage?

thecommietommy

pedroeibar1 wrote: »

Sad to see some of the usual urban myth Pillar rubbish coming up again in the earlier posts. The IRA tried to demolish the Pillar and failed miserably – they blew a gap which caused the top to fall off. That left a considerably weakened structure, which was a nightmare for anyone to tackle. All commercial explosive experts would – then as now - have run a mile; the Army did a good job considering the size and mass of the stump.

If the IRA wanted to demolish the whole tower with a single explosion they would have placed the explosives at the base, not the top. Whether you agree or disagree with it, they made their point and the pillar had to be demoished as a consequnce, therefore a totally successful operation for the IRA.

Before it was initially blown up there was a growing movement to replace ‘it’ or rather replace the statue of Nelson with one of Mary; thankfully that did not happen.

Never heard that and I listened to a documentary on radio about it and read a few articles down the years, link please

Trafalgar was a huge victory in its day, very popular in Ireland because a considerable number of the RN sailors were Irish and that is why the public subscription was completed so quickly – the Dublin Pillar was one of the first to be erected, long before the one in Trafalgar Sq in London.

I'd very much doubt if any British victory was popular with the vast majority of the ordinary decent of people in Ireland as it was in 1805 just 7 years after the 1798 rebellion when approx 30,000 Irish people were murdered by British forces. Country's don't celebrate those who murder their own people - except collaborators etc

As for a large number of RN sailors been from Ireland, I'm sure quite a lot of them were press ganged and the others due to the ecnomic extortion imposed by the British on Ireland were sadly economic conscripts. It's one of the consequences of occupation and the economic extortion that goes with it, that the victims often have to serve the state to survive, whether it be the Romans, Nazi's or British.

Personally, I like the ballad ascribed to Brendan Behan on another statue – the Gough Memorial – and the pathetic effort by the ‘Patriots’

Gough was a unionist mouthpiece and one of the leaders of the Curragh Mutiny in 1914, pity someone didn't blow him up instead.

MarchDub

thecommietommy wrote: »

Gough was a unionist mouthpiece and one of the leaders of the Curragh Mutiny in 1914,

Yes, Brigadier General Hubert Gough was a great favourite of the Unionists and was in the forefront of the Curragh Mutiny.

MarchDub

pedroeibar1 wrote: »

.

Personally, I like the ballad ascribed to Brendan Behan on another statue – the Gough Memorial – and the pathetic effort by the ‘Patriots’

Never heard of it being 'ascribed' to Behan before - who regarded himself as being a patriot and a nationalist. Behan was a close and lifelong friend of Cathal Goulding Commander in Chief of the IRA -

In fact the composer/writer of the quoted ballad is Vinny Caprini,a lightweight composer of what are usually referred to as 'rowdy rhymes'.

pedroeibar1

thecommietommy wrote: »

Never heard that and I listened to a documentary on radio about it and read a few articles down the years, link please

The main promoters for putting Mary up there were the fanatics in the Irish League of Decency, headed by JB Murray and Mary Kennedy. However, long before them there were several other attempts. (Years later - 1978 - Murray had a heart attack while on the phone to de papers complaining about RTE’s first televised nude scene in ‘The Spike’ .) Also:-

Dublin Corporation frequently discussed the removal of Nelson from the top of the Pillar, with unimplemented plans announced in 1876, 1881, 1891, 1923 and 1928. Thomas Bodkin, a former director of the National Gallery was invited in the 1950s by the government to give a lecture on the Pillar. He was critical of the idea of replacing Nelson with a statue of the Virgin Mary: ‘I can’t help thinking that she would not like to take charge of a column that was subscribed for and erected to the memory of someone else.’ Yvonne Whelan, Reinventing Modern Dublin (Dublin, 2003), p.204.

thecommietommy wrote: »

I'd very much doubt if any British victory was popular with the vast majority of the ordinary decent of people in Ireland as it was in 1805 just 7 years after the 1798 rebellion when approx 30,000 Irish people were murdered by British forces. Country's don't celebrate those who murder their own people - except collaborators etc
As for a large number of RN sailors been from Ireland, I'm sure quite a lot of them were press ganged and the others due to the ecnomic extortion imposed by the British on Ireland were sadly economic conscripts. It's one of the consequences of occupation and the economic extortion that goes with it, that the victims often have to serve the state to survive, whether it be the Romans, Nazi's or British.

You are entitled to your views - however emotive and bigotted. The facts speak from themselve, the subscription was filled extremely quickly and the Pillar was arguably the second one erected - the first was in Scotland. The RN pressed sailors everywhere, including out of American ships (read up on HMS Leopard) which was one of the factors that fuelled the start of the British American war. You might also consider researching the economic merits of the RN to the poorer population of Munster (victualling, butter markets) and the bases in Queenstown and Berehaven, or even the horse trade from Ireland during the Napoleonic wars.

thecommietommy wrote: »

Gough was a unionist mouthpiece and one of the leaders of the Curragh Mutiny in 1914, pity someone didn't blow him up instead.

You obviously don't know your history - you have your Goughs confused:rolleyes:

MarchDub

thecommietommy wrote: »

If the IRA wanted to demolish the whole tower with a single explosion they would have placed the explosives at the base, not the top. Whether you agree or disagree with it, they made their point and the pillar had to be demoished as a consequnce, therefore a totally successful operation for the IRA.

My recollection of the time was just what you say - that the issue was the statue not the pillar - so the explosive was placed purposely so as to blow up the statue of Nelson. That was why only the top was touched.

pedroeibar1

MarchDub wrote: »

Never heard of it being 'ascribed' to Behan before - who regarded himself as being a patriot and a nationalist. Behan was a close and lifelong friend of Cathal Goulding Commander in Chief of the IRA -

In fact the composer/writer of the quoted ballad is Vinny Caprini,a lightweight composer of what are usually referred to as 'rowdy rhymes'.

Ulick O'Connor maintained that Behan wrote it; Behan never denied or affirmed it, according to O'Connor because he did not want to cause offence to his IRA friends. Caprani is another possible source that is often mentioned. I'm open....
P.
PS what's wrong with my 'ascribed' ? = credited or attributed;):p

pedroeibar1

MarchDub wrote: »

My recollection of the time was just what you say - that the issue was the statue not the pillar - so the explosive was placed purposely so as to blow up the statue of Nelson. That was why only the top was touched.

No, the explosion was about half way up; the IRA used a necklace charge, which would have caused the weight of the upper part to fall down 'vertically' - that can be seen by the way in which the rubbles was spread around the sides. They wanted to destroy the pillar, not just the statue.

MarchDub

pedroeibar1 wrote: »

Ulick O'Connor maintained that Behan wrote it; Behan never denied or affirmed it, according to O'Connor because he did not want to cause offence to his IRA friends. Caprani is another possible source that is often mentioned. I'm open....

TBH I think that O'Connor may have been just stirring it up a bit - as he likes to do but not getting into that. The controversy over Behan between O'Connor and Goulding went into the courts AFAIK.

Wicklowrider

jonniebgood1 wrote: »

I remember my Father telling me about the demolition. His main point was that when the Irish army undertook the demolition of what remained of the pillar that they used to much explosives and caused more damage to surrounding properties than the IRA bomb had done.

<<-SNIP->>. The reality was because the remains of the pillar was below the level of the surrounding building the explosion was going to be somewhat contained. Several international demolition companies looked at the job and declined because they knew it couldn't be done in one go without damaging the surrounding buildings. Some of the damage claims submitted were believed to have happened as far back in the shelling in 1916 (some cracks were found to have moss growing in them). Several of the buildings owners did not comply with basic instructions such as leaving windows open etc.

Men present that day went on to distinguish themselves throughout the troubles and abroad. They were the forerunners of today's elite EOD teams that make safe viable devices on your streets weekly. <<-SNIP->>

golfwallah

Some good informative posts and interesting pics, but reading the tetchy ones, it would seem that a little knowledge is a dangerous thing – especially on an internet forum. Don’t believe people would behave like this if they met in person.

I’m not interested in being controversial - just looking for memories and, perhaps, a few ideas for the future. Remember we are in a recession, need to learn a bit from the past and move forward with solutions to problems, especially for young people, who are the future of this little country of ours.

If history teaches us anything it is the importance of toleration and respect for views that are different from our own.

So, guys, can we please get away from the blame game and all the negativity. Let's focus on the positives – how can we all make something good come from the lessons of the past – particularly the 100th anniversary of 1916 – and in an inclusive way, for people from all shades of political opinion.

Brings to mind the quote that “those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it”.

dubhthach

Wicklowrider wrote: »

<<-SNIP->>. The reality was because the remains of the pillar was below the level of the surrounding building the explosion was going to be somewhat contained. Several international demolition companies looked at the job and declined because they knew it couldn't be done in one go without damaging the surrounding buildings. Some of the damage claims submitted were believed to have happened as far back in the shelling in 1916 (some cracks were found to have moss growing in them). Several of the buildings owners did not comply with basic instructions such as leaving windows open etc.

Men present that day went on to distinguish themselves throughout the troubles and abroad. They were the forerunners of today's elite EOD teams that make safe viable devices on your streets weekly. <<-SNIP->>

Mod
Insulting other users, or in this case their father is against the spirt of this board. Infraction given. If you persist in such behaviour I will issue a ban

CDfm

Wicklowrider wrote: »

Men present that day went on to distinguish themselves throughout the troubles and abroad. They were the forerunners of today's elite EOD teams that make safe viable devices on your streets weekly.

Couldn't you just edit your thread.

I know the phrase,which I have omitted, is a colloquialism but it takes away rather than adds to what is otherwise a decent post.

thecommietommy

pedroeibar1 wrote: »

The main promoters for putting Mary up there were the fanatics in the Irish League of Decency, headed by JB Murray and Mary Kennedy. However, long before them there were several other attempts. (Years later - 1978 - Murray had a heart attack while on the phone to de papers complaining about RTE’s first televised nude scene in ‘The Spike’ .) Also:-

Dublin Corporation frequently discussed the removal of Nelson from the top of the Pillar, with unimplemented plans announced in 1876, 1881, 1891, 1923 and 1928. Thomas Bodkin, a former director of the National Gallery was invited in the 1950s by the government to give a lecture on the Pillar. He was critical of the idea of replacing Nelson with a statue of the Virgin Mary: ‘I can’t help thinking that she would not like to take charge of a column that was subscribed for and erected to the memory of someone else.’ Yvonne Whelan, Reinventing Modern Dublin (Dublin, 2003), p.204.

Thank you for the information, Murray sounds like Mary Whitehouse in England so beloved by the Monty Python crew etc in the 70's

You are entitled to your views - however emotive and bigotted. The facts speak from themselve, the subscription was filled extremely quickly and the Pillar was arguably the second one erected - the first was in Scotland. The RN pressed sailors everywhere, including out of American ships (read up on HMS Leopard) which was one of the factors that fuelled the start of the British American war. You might also consider researching the economic merits of the RN to the poorer population of Munster (victualling, butter markets) and the bases in Queenstown and Berehaven, or even the horse trade from Ireland during the Napoleonic wars.

Well your entitled to your views, you may see my views as "emotive and bigotted" but I don't happen to warm to the distorted views which try and portray British occupation of Ireland or anywhere else as some sort of benevolent patronage and something to be admired. As for the economic merits of the RN to the poorer population, they mightn't have been so poor if the British weren't extorting the country in the first place and under any occupation their has to be some economic activity of some kind even if it has secondary unintended consequences that may benefit a small number.

And as for the funding to the pillar, the majority of the money would have come form the establishment parasites with the money and normally spent it on yachts, mansions, parties, expensive art etc Like I stated previously, it would be logical to assume that the ordinary person was more concerned with feeding and clothing their children than give money or any admiration for the British military just 7 years after the 1798 rebellion when approx 30,000 Irish people were murdered by British forces.

You obviously don't know your history - you have your Goughs confused:rolleyes:

Well we’re getting a bit off topic but in my humble opinion to give the knob his full title, General Sir Hubert de la Poer Gough GCB, GCMG, KCVO would have sprung to my mind as the most signifcant Gough regarding Ireland and erecting a statue to this unionist bigot would be par for the course when it came to unionist bigots.

CDfm

The main promoters for putting Mary up there were the fanatics in the Irish League of Decency, headed by JB Murray and Mary Kennedy. However, long before them there were several other attempts

I dunno about the Mary idea, would it not have been looking out over Monto.

pedroeibar1

thecommietommy wrote: »

And as for the funding to the pillar, the majority of the money would have come form the establishment parasites with the money and normally spent it on yachts, mansions, parties, expensive art etc Like I stated previously, it would be logical to assume that the ordinary person was more concerned with feeding and clothing their children than give money or any admiration for the British military just 7 years after the 1798 rebellion when approx 30,000 Irish people were murdered by British forces.

Well we’re getting a bit off topic but in my humble opinion to give the knob his full title, General Sir Hubert de la Poer Gough GCB, GCMG, KCVO would have sprung to my mind as the most signifcant Gough regarding Ireland and erecting a statue to this unionist bigot would be par for the course when it came to unionist bigots.

You still have not got it right. The statue we have been discussing is that of Field Marshal Viscount Sir Hugh Gough, KP, PC, GCB, GCSI (who was born in 1779) seated on his horse. He was not a ‘knob’ as you describe him; he was a brave man with an impressive record but an unimaginative leader, of the frontal assault variety. Nelson was of the same school, telling his captains ''Never mind manoeuvres, always go at them'' although he did show the occasional flash of brilliance.

Your figure of 30,000 'murders' is not accurate - firstly, the total death toll for 1798 is believed to be in the region of about 10,000 (Bartlett). Secondly most deaths were not 'murder' as they were between combatants. And before you start on atrocities, yes there were, but they took place on both sides.

Clearly your use of emotive language and boards name show you have an agenda rather than an interest in historical fact – as the above examples show. Also, your comment ‘establishment parasites with the money and normally spent it on yachts’ is inaccurate as yachts and pleasure sailing did not become generally popular until a decade or so after Nelson’s death, although there were a few around in Ireland at that time.

thecommietommy

pedroeibar1 wrote: »

You still have not got it right. The statue we have been discussing is that of Field Marshal Viscount Sir Hugh Gough, KP, PC, GCB, GCSI (who was born in 1779) seated on his horse. He was not a ‘knob’ as you describe him; he was a brave man with an impressive record but an unimaginative leader, of the frontal assault variety. Nelson was of the same school, telling his captains ''Never mind manoeuvres, always go at them'' although he did show the occasional flash of brilliance.

Your figure of 30,000 'murders' is not accurate - firstly, the total death toll for 1798 is believed to be in the region of about 10,000 (Bartlett). Secondly most deaths were not 'murder' as they were between combatants. And before you start on atrocities, yes there were, but they took place on both sides.

Clearly your use of emotive language and boards name show you have an agenda rather than an interest in historical fact – as the above examples show. Also, your comment ‘establishment parasites with the money and normally spent it on yachts’ is inaccurate as yachts and pleasure sailing did not become generally popular until a decade or so after Nelson’s death, although there were a few around in Ireland at that time.

Fine, maybe if you had been more specific in the first place the mix up wouldn't have happened with the other unionist knob invovled in the Curragh mutiny General Sir Hubert de la Poer Gough GCB, GCMG, KCVO.

As for the rest, we are getting off topic.

annieoburns

My memories of the pillar...

Was it sixpence to go up the top? once was enough for me.

I recall the embarrassement of having to try and explain Irish politics to a perplexed German family that I stayed with that summer as an exchange student.

In 1978, I was interested to find a pile of the salvaged stones from the pillar all carefully numbered and stored in the stable block of Kilkenny Design Studios in Kilkenny town. On a recent visit to Kilkenny, I see a selection of these has been incorporated into a feature of the nearby garden of the Butler house. DSCF0121.JPG

Wicklowrider

Anyone interested in the facts can of course do what I did.
Go to the national archives.
Note the names and nationalities of the companies invited to tender for the job. Note they declined to tender. Check the lists of claims and check how few were actually paid. Its very interesting to note the mostly paltry payouts ( which were never challenged in court) and its obvious they constituted mainly nuisance money. Of the legitimate claims, most were for glass that couldn't easily be removed and stood a "fair chance" of survival. Some window sashes were replaced but it was noted on some of these claims that they had been damaged by gunfire (1916 presumably).

Its also interesting to note that not a single qualified opinion ( civil engineer, military engineer, demolition expert...) is on record suggesting that the army behaved in anything other than a professional manner that day.

A piece of propaganda circulated at the time became an urban myth.I think its disgraceful that people today continue to slur the names of the soldiers on duty that day. Those soldiers names and the officers' Engineering credentials are also a matter of public record. I know that two of the soldiers survive today and are obviously old men.Its highly disappointing to see that their reputations are not at least considered equal to those of anonymous people posting hearsay on this thread.

MarchDub

annieoburns wrote: »

I recall the embarrassement of having to try and explain Irish politics to a perplexed German family that I stayed with that summer as an exchange student.

You were embarrassed talking Irish politics in the 1960s with GERMANS?

How did their own political talk go then? Don't mention the war?

CDfm

annieoburns wrote: »

My memories of the pillar...

Was it sixpence to go up the top? once was enough for me.

My mother climbed up it too and is fairly nationalist but she has always thought it a shame that it was blown up as it was an amenity and of its time.

I kind of agree with her, and unless anyone want's to burn down the Vice Regal Lodge or demolish Dublin Castle they do too.

Wicklowrider wrote: »

Anyone interested in the facts can of course do what I did.
Go to the national archives.
Note the names and nationalities of the companies invited to tender for the job. Note they declined to tender. Check the lists of claims and check how few were actually paid. Its very interesting to note the mostly paltry payouts ( which were never challenged in court) and its obvious they constituted mainly nuisance money. Of the legitimate claims, most were for glass that couldn't easily be removed and stood a "fair chance" of survival. Some window sashes were replaced but it was noted on some of these claims that they had been damaged by gunfire (1916 presumably).

Its also interesting to note that not a single qualified opinion ( civil engineer, military engineer, demolition expert...) is on record suggesting that the army behaved in anything other than a professional manner that day.

A piece of propaganda circulated at the time became an urban myth.I think its disgraceful that people today continue to slur the names of the soldiers on duty that day. Those soldiers names and the officers' Engineering credentials are also a matter of public record. I know that two of the soldiers survive today and are obviously old men.Its highly disappointing to see that their reputations are not at least considered equal to those of anonymous people posting hearsay on this thread.

I agree with you that the Army did a splendid job and it is great that you care enough to bring it to our attention. The IRA had no right to do what they did.

The IRA action was reckless and it was pure luck that no-one was either killed or injured.

If that had been the case , the events would have been remembered differently and I have always thought that the idea behind the Dublin bombings of 1974 originated with that. I am not saying it did but to me the idea's are not mutually exclusive.

The armies job was to make things safe so that people could go about their daily lives , shops could open etc.

jonniebgood1

Wicklowrider wrote: »

A piece of propaganda circulated at the time became an urban myth.I think its disgraceful that people today continue to slur the names of the soldiers on duty that day.

Who circulated this 'propaganda' and what was their purpose, i.e. who were they trying to influence and why?

Pike in the Thatch

The IRA did not blow up the pillar.

This seems to be a common myth, but republicans, some of whom may have previously been in the IRA, blew it up off their own bat.

It's a shame that the authorities would still chase people for this, as it's a fascinating story. I know lots of "rumours" about the pillar and the people who did it, some of which are fairly reliable, but the history forum is probably not the place for them.

Personally I think that it was a disgrace that a statue of a British imperialist warmonger lasted for so long in the center of Dublin. The accounts I've heard from Dubliners who were present are similar to marchdubs. My father tells of the great joy that young people had at the time, with people rushing to see it and to grab some rubble. Generally people had a good laugh about it.

It had large public support, the year was 1966, 50 years after the declaration of the republic. An example of this support is the fact that the following song was number one in charts for a number of weeks:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=__3v0eKHB_s

Personally I think it was a good way to mark the anniversary as well as a poignant metaphor that reminded people that while it may have been fifty years since the rising but the job wasn't done, remnants of British imperialism (i.e the occupation in the North) still needed to be removed. Thats what I suspect was the motivation the individuals involved had.

It being done in the dead of night, there was little risk to the public. Fair play to the individuals involved I say.

Pike in the Thatch

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7pZK121lOhc

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ty3UdFd3hlI

CDfm

Pike in the Thatch wrote: »

Personally I think that it was a disgrace that a statue of a British imperialist warmonger lasted for so long in the center of Dublin. The accounts I've heard from Dubliners who were present are similar to marchdubs. My father tells of the great joy that young people had at the time, with people rushing to see it and to grab some rubble. Generally people had a good laugh about it.

It had large public support, the year was 1966, 50 years after the declaration of the republic. An example of this support is the fact that the following song was number one in charts for a number of weeks:

It being done in the dead of night, there was little risk to the public. Fair play to the individuals involved I say.

But it still wasn't their decision to make and, whatever your personal position , nobody elected them.

I don't know if Nelson ever set foot in Dublin or Ireland for that matter. Wellington is commemorated with an obelisk in the Phoenix Park and no-one seems offended.

Jellybaby1

Pike in the Thatch wrote: »

The accounts I've heard from Dubliners who were present are similar to marchdubs. My father tells of the great joy that young people had at the time, with people rushing to see it and to grab some rubble. Generally people had a good laugh about it.

It had large public support, the year was 1966, 50 years after the declaration of the republic. An example of this support is the fact that the following song was number one in charts for a number of weeks:

It being done in the dead of night, there was little risk to the public. Fair play to the individuals involved I say.

Among the accounts you heard from Dubliners, were not the accounts of all Dubliners. Sounds like you were not living in Dublin at the time so. I was. I lived 10 minutes from the pillar. At 14 years of age I had to walk past it that morning, and from what I remember, there was no laughter when I stood in front of it. When I stood there, there was silence, shock, and nervousness mainly because we wondered what else these people were capable of, and what more was coming, and there was a chill in the air. They frightened us and our neighbours. Yes, I did step forward and took a small piece of the stone and I still have it. I wish the pillar was back in O'Connell Street. The street is nothing to be proud of. It has never looked right since. I liked the pillar being there and I am sorry that I never got a chance to climb it. These are my opinions, I do not apologise for them, and I have every right to have them. That is all I will say.

dubhthach

CDfm wrote: »

But it still wasn't their decision to make and, whatever your personal position , nobody elected them.

I don't know if Nelson ever set foot in Dublin or Ireland for that matter. Wellington is commemorated with an obelisk in the Phoenix Park and no-one seems offended.

Wellington was at least born in Dublin (in what is now the "Merrion Hotel") of course an obelisk in itself is a more abstract concept then a statue. As a result perhaps it was too cerebral a monument to blow up. Either that or just too big for anyone to think it economical to do so!

thecommietommy

Jellybaby1 wrote: »

Among the accounts you heard from Dubliners, were not the accounts of all Dubliners. Sounds like you were not living in Dublin at the time so. I was. I lived 10 minutes from the pillar. At 14 years of age I had to walk past it that morning, and from what I remember, there was no laughter when I stood in front of it. When I stood there, there was silence, shock, and nervousness mainly because we wondered what else these people were capable of, and what more was coming, and there was a chill in the air. They frightened us and our neighbours. Yes, I did step forward and took a small piece of the stone and I still have it. I wish the pillar was back in O'Connell Street. The street is nothing to be proud of. It has never looked right since. I liked the pillar being there and I am sorry that I never got a chance to climb it. These are my opinions, I do not apologise for them, and I have every right to have them. That is all I will say.

Well I am not from Dublin and would have been too young at the time to take in what was happening but from what I can gather from documentary's and talking to old Dubliners, I would have to agree with Pike in the Thatch, that in general the whole thing was greeted with a bit of mirth Why else would the song Up Went Nelson have gone to number 1 for several weeks and was sung in pubs etc around the country.

Personally I glad that this symbol of a British imperialism is gone off the main street of Dublin, the Spire is now in the place where the pillar was and O'Connell street looks the very much better for it.

Wicklowrider

jonniebgood1 wrote: »

Who circulated this 'propaganda' and what was their purpose, i.e. who were they trying to influence and why?

Subversive supporters were the first people that I heard it from.
People who did not believe in democracy and believed it was OK to explode bombs among innocent people. They were trying to influence the ordinary person. They succeeded to a minor extent, mainly through people incapable of thinking for themselves . As for why? to subvert democracy and its legal servants.

When these people are asked "How much explosive did the army use?"
They look confused and cannot answer, despite claiming the army used "too much".
When they are asked "what explosive should have been used " they look confused and cannot answer.
When they are asked what qualifications they hold that qualifies them to assess a job of this nature they don't answer.
In fact, ask them any question relevant to the army's operation that day and they can't answer. Mostly this is simply because they've never given it any thought.
When they are invited to visit the former site and point out which buildings they believe the army damaged they refuse point blank. When they are invited to view the documents in the national archive they refuse. Its pointless trying to engage logically with these people - their minds are shut to anything other than what they want to believe. I'm sure there were days when the army did make mistakes. This wasn't one of them.

CDfm

thecommietommy wrote: »

Well I am not from Dublin and would have been too young at the time to take in what was happening but from what I can gather from documentary's and talking to old Dubliners,

But don't you think that there is a certain amount of editorial bias and when people post here anonymously the reaction is not as anti-pillar.

I would have to agree with Pike in the Thatch, that in general the whole thing was greeted with a bit of mirth Why else would the song Up Went Nelson have gone to number 1 for several weeks and was sung in pubs etc around the country.

The Dubliners were known for their comedic folk songs including "7 drunken nights" & " Monto" so because a song is topical etc does not mean people agree with it.

How extremist politicians did in the elections would probably be a better measure of support.

I am not particularly pro having a monument to Nelson but a debate was underway to recycle the pillar and there is a part of Dublin's population whose heritage is "British" and a certain level of sensitivity has to be given to them.

MarchDub

CDfm wrote: »

The Dubliners were known for their comedic folk songs including "7 drunken nights" & " Monto" so because a song is topical etc does not mean people agree with it.

Actually it wasn't the Dubliners who made that recording in 1966 of "UP Went Nelson" - it was the Go Lucky Four and the song was really popular - we sang and danced to it. It stayed on top of the charts for ages. I can still get a chuckle out of the memories of this.

What I remember most though is the jokes - it was the first time that I learned what a Half Nelson was. But it must be remembered that all this joviality was before NI became embroiled in violence - that was the real shock of the 1960s. So there was little sense around in 1966 in Dublin of any potential danger when the Pillar was blown up, as I remember it.

I didn't know anyone who thought that Nelson's statue belonged in O'Connell St - but the Pillar did. But the debate about who to replace him with went on for too long, IMO. And the rest is history....

MarchDub

Wicklowrider wrote: »

Subversive supporters were the first people that I heard it from.
People who did not believe in democracy and believed it was OK to explode bombs among innocent people. They were trying to influence the ordinary person. They succeeded to a minor extent, mainly through people incapable of thinking for themselves . As for why? to subvert democracy and its legal servants.

When these people are asked "How much explosive did the army use?"
They look confused and cannot answer, despite claiming the army used "too much".
When they are asked "what explosive should have been used " they look confused and cannot answer.
When they are asked what qualifications they hold that qualifies them to assess a job of this nature they don't answer.
In fact, ask them any question relevant to the army's operation that day and they can't answer. Mostly this is simply because they've never given it any thought.
When they are invited to visit the former site and point out which buildings they believe the army damaged they refuse point blank. When they are invited to view the documents in the national archive they refuse. Its pointless trying to engage logically with these people - their minds are shut to anything other than what they want to believe. I'm sure there were days when the army did make mistakes. This wasn't one of them.

I don't for a moment doubt what you are saying about the nature of explosives - I know nothing at all about this subject. But I worked on O'Connell St at the time and the army blast did shatter more widows than the original blast. There may be GOOD REASONS for this, and you have outlined it all here. But the fact that this happened is what mostly led to the narrative that emerged from it all.

Wicklowrider

MarchDub wrote: »

the army blast did shatter more widows than the original blast. There may be GOOD REASONS for this, and you have outlined it all here. But the fact that this happened is what mostly led to the narrative that emerged from it all.

I agree.

As I said earlier some owner's of premises didn't leave windows open ( I'd guess this was an effort to cut down on dust?) Some glass was left in place as it would be as economical to replace it as to remove it and some just got broken no matter what care was taken.

Why didn't this glass get broken in the Inital explosion? Because explosives normally expand in the direction of least resistance and when the bomb was placed it was higher than this glass.