1916 and IRA Volunteers

greenketchup

Hi,

I’ve been reading a lot of the witness statements on the Military Archives website, one thing I noticed was that a lot of the statements cover either the periods from 1919 – 1922 or 1913 – 1916, am I correct in saying that there was a lot of volunteers that from Easter week that didn’t continue in the volunteers/IRA? Obviously the major figures of the 1919 war (Collins, Dev, Boland, Brugha etc) were involved in both, but I’m wondering about the normal Joe Soap? I know I had a relative that in the GPO that stayed in London for the War of Independence and took no part.

I’m assuming the localised fighting in Dublin on Easter week has something to do with it, but from reports I read there was approx. 1,600 volunteers that participated in 1916 in Dublin, the IRA post the conscription crisis has an estimated fighting strength nationwide 3,000, so it seems to me that there wasn’t a large crossover of people of the 2 events?

Does anyone have any opinions/facts about this, maybe I’m mistaken, I just thought it would be interesting to get people’s opinions on this?

Thanks

Tramps Like Us

You have the numbers wrong, probably over 15,000 people fought for the IRA (many more were members and didn't fight) during the tan war. Around 3000 were active at any one time, I think thats what got you confused.

There was a large crossover of people who fought in 1916 and the tan war, everyone didn't necessarily fight

Balaclava1991

I strongly suspect most people who got an IRA pension probably didn't deserve it and many who did deserve one did not want one because they took the Republican side during the Civil War or else left the country subsequently.
I think when the pension statements are released we will come across scores of people who claimed they were involved in the same ambush and shot the same RIC constable or British Army soldier.

kabakuyu

Balaclava1991 wrote: »

I strongly suspect most people who got an IRA pension probably didn't deserve it and many who did deserve one did not want one because they took the Republican side during the Civil War or else left the country subsequently.
I think when the pension statements are released we will come across scores of people who claimed they were involved in the same ambush and shot the same RIC constable or British Army soldier.

In the meantime,do you have any reputable source for your assertions?

Jim2007

Balaclava1991 wrote: »

I strongly suspect most people who got an IRA pension probably didn't deserve it and many who did deserve one did not want one because they took the Republican side during the Civil War or else left the country subsequently.
I think when the pension statements are released we will come across scores of people who claimed they were involved in the same ambush and shot the same RIC constable or British Army soldier.

Have you actually every read some of those claim statements or gone through the process required to get such a pension???

It was not just a case of making a statement, OCs were usually required sign off on such statements (even if they were Republican) or failing that several collaboration statements…

I know of one case where someone had an lot of trouble trying to get his pension, where his OC (Republican) actively tried prevent him from getting pension and if it was not for two other officers confirming his statement he wouldn't have got it.

So I think you are seriously of base with your statements and do those men and women an injustice with you statements.

Santa Cruz

Jim2007 wrote: »

Have you actually every read some of those claim statements or gone through the process required to get such a pension???

It was not just a case of making a statement, OCs were usually required sign off on such statements (even if they were Republican) or failing that several collaboration statements…

I know of one case where someone had an lot of trouble trying to get his pension, where his OC (Republican) actively tried prevent him from getting pension and if it was not for two other officers confirming his statement he wouldn't have got it.

So I think you are seriously of base with your statements and do those men and women an injustice with you statements.

Jim 2007 is correct. Pensions were not just handed out like sweets. Applications had to be confirmed by officers in charge of battalions/brigades.
Some of the anti treaty officers would not cooperate with the process because they saw it as buying off opposition to the Free State.
I have read a lot of the Bureau statements and they not only apply to actual military confrontations but to the initial recruitment, training and other aspects of organisation