Crimean war and the significant Irish role.

jonniebgood1

War correspondents are a part of everyday life nowadays and through the 20th century. This was not always the case.
Credited as the first of these was an Irishman William Howard Russell. He followed the Crimean war-

His reports revealled the sufferings of the British Army during the winter of 1854-1855. These accounts upset Queen Victoria who described them as these "infamous attacks against the army which have disgraced our newspapers". Prince Albert, who took a keen interest in military matters, commented that "the pen and ink of one miserable scribbler is despoiling the country." Lord Raglan complained that Russell had revealed military information potentially useful to the enemy.

Russell reported that British soldiers began going down with cholera and malaria. Within a few weeks an estimated 8,000 men were suffering from these two diseases. When Mary Seacole heard about the cholera epidemic she travelled to London to offer her services to the British Army. There was considerable prejudice against women's involvement in medicine and her offer was rejected. When Russell publicised the fact that a large number of soldiers were dying of cholera there was a public outcry, and the government was forced to change its mind. Florence Nightingale volunteered her services and was eventually given permission to take a group of thirty-eight nurses to Turkey.

Russell's reports led to attacks on the government by the the Liberal M.P. John Roebuck. He claimed that the British contingent had 23,000 men unfit for duty due to ill health and only 9,000 fit for duty. When Roebuck proposal for an inquiry into the condition of the British Army, the government was passed by 305 to 148. As a result the Earl of Aberdeen, resigned in January 1855. The Duke of Newcastle told Russell " It was you who turned out the government".

When he arrived back in England he was treated like a national hero. In 1856 Trinity College awarded him an honorary degree. On the advice of Charles Dickens he went on a very financially successful lecture tour on the Crimean War. http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/Jrussell.htm

Seems an interesting life but what was reation to him. He must have been a pain to the establishment?
On a wider view the Crimean war is credited as being influential. Russell had part in this but how else did it influence future European diplomacy. And what was the Irish participation rate given the proximity of the famine?

Fuinseog

jonniebgood1 wrote: »

War correspondents are a part of everyday life nowadays and through the 20th century. This was not always the case.
Credited as the first of these was an Irishman William Howard Russell. He followed the Crimean war-


Seems an interesting life but what was reation to him. He must have been a pain to the establishment?
On a wider view the Crimean war is credited as being influential. Russell had part in this but how else did it influence future European diplomacy. And what was the Irish participation rate given the proximity of the famine?

Tennyson wrote his famous poem basing it on Russells account. I think something like a third of the British army in the Crimea were Irish.

it was the first war where photos were taken, telegrammes used and decent hospitals were set up.
the wikipedia entry on the Crimea war has something about how it influenced Europe.

jonniebgood1

He coined the expression 'the thin red line' which was drawn from this passage-

The silence was oppressive; between the cannon bursts one could hear the champing of bits and the clink of sabres in the valley below. The Russians on their left drew breath for a moment, and then in one grand line charged in towards Balaklava. The ground flew beneath their horses' feet , gathering speed at every stride, they dashed on towards that thin red streak tipped with a line of steel. The Turks fired a volley at eight hundred yards and ran. As the Russians came within six hundred yards, down went that line of steel in front, and out rang a rolling volley of Minie musketry. The distance was too great; the Russians were not checked, but still swept onwards through the smoke, with the whole force of horse and man, here and there knocked over by the shot of our batteries above. With breathless suspense every one awaited the bursting of the wave upon the line of Gaelic rock; but ere they came within two hundred and fifty yards, another deadly volley flashed from the levelled rifle, and carried terror among the Russians. They wheeled about, opened files right and left, and fled faster than they came. "Bravo, Highlanders! well done!" shouted the excited spectators. But events thickened; the Highlanders and their splendid front were soon forgotten—men scarcely had a moment to think of this fact, that the 93rd never altered their formation to receive that tide of horsemen. "No," said Sir Colin Campbell, "I did not think it worth while to form them even four deep I" The ordinary British line, two deep, was quite sufficient to repel the attack of these Muscovite cavaliers.

source - http://books.google.ie/books?id=OYZBAAAAcAAJ&pg=PA187&dq=that+thin+red+streak+tipped+with+a+line+of+steel&hl=en&sa=X&ei=5o_8T8WFC9KEhQeOyZXPCg&ved=0CE0QuwUwBA#v=onepage&q=that%20thin%20red%20streak%20tipped%20with%20a%20line%20of%20steel&f=false

Here is a piece from the telegraph on the aniversary of his death in 2007 http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/culture/christopherhowse/3647251/First_and_greatest_war_correspondent/

Russell was a member of the Church of Ireland, but both his wives were Catholic. His first, Mary Burrowes, an Irishwoman, died in 1867. His second, Countess Antoinette Mathilde Pia Alexandra Malvezzi Titi to him was an Italian and survived him, living until 1918.

jonniebgood1

With the Crimean war coming so soon after the famine in Ireland, the reaction to the war is interesting.

What was the impact of this European war on Ireland? One could well imagine that Ireland, just a few years after the Famine and the failed Young Ireland rebellion of 1848, would regard the war with a sense of sullen disinterest. Newspaper accounts of the period, however, suggest the contrary. In the early months of 1854 Ireland was gripped by a kind of war fever as regiments departed and young men rushed to join up to fight in a war which, it was assumed, would be over in a few months. Indeed, in scenes that mirrored later events in 1914, public enthusiasm bordered on hysteria as the troops left for the east. http://www.historyireland.com/volumes/volume11/issue1/features/?id=275

The army was a stable job for Irishmen who had not many options if they were not the eldest son of a farmer. After the famine the policy of dividing farms up amongst sons was changed as this subdivision had been blamed for some of the problems of the famine. So the Irish were overly represented in the British army of the time.

Irish soldiers made up around 30–35 per cent of the British army in 1854, and it is estimated that over 30,000 Irish soldiers served in the Crimea.

History Ireland sees the conflict as an important part of Irish history.

Usually just remembered for events such as the charge of the Light Brigade and the work of Florence Nightingale, the war was, without doubt, one of the major episodes in Irish history in the mid-nineteenth century. Not only was there a high level of Irish involvement, but the work of the Irish-born correspondents ensured that the public was fully informed of events in the Crimea.

......

Irish names feature prominently on the casualty lists, and the Irish public must have come to realise that most of these deaths could have been avoided. Towards the end of the war newspaper reports in Ireland began to sound more war-weary, and it became increasingly obvious that thousands of Irishmen had paid for the army’s lack of organisation with their lives.
http://www.historyireland.com/volumes/volume11/issue1/features/?id=275

Reekwind

jonniebgood1 wrote: »

Irish soldiers made up around 30–35 per cent of the British army in 1854, and it is estimated that over 30,000 Irish soldiers served in the Crimea

It's worth noting in passing that another 30-35 percentage of the British Army during the period was combined Scottish/Welsh. During the 19th C Englishmen were a distinct minority and heavily under-represented (outside of the officer class) in the army until WWI and conscription

Irritatingly, I can't recall my source for that :mad:

History Ireland sees the conflict as an important part of Irish history

I don't think I'd agree with that. There was large Irish participation, via a British institution, but I don't see any meaningful impact at home. That's not a question of popularity but rather the long-term effects it had on Ireland. I'd struggle to identify any of note