A problem with
Desmond Greaves’s well-known biography of James Connolly is the reliability of
some of his quotes.
For example Greaves ascribed to Connolly a ‘stages’ theory
of revolution in which the national democratic revolution is “the first stage
of revolution” and this “recalls the approach of Lenin” in Two Tactics (C.Desmond Greaves (1961), The Life and Times of James Connolly, London: Lawrence &
Wishart, 425).
To substantiate his
claim, Greaves quotes an article from Connolly entitled ‘Economic Conscription’
published in the Workers’ Republic of
15 January 1916, where he argues that as the “propertied classes have so
shamelessly sold themselves to the enemy, the economic conscription of their
property will cause few qualms to whomsoever shall administer the Irish
government in the first stage of
freedom” (Ibid, 384). Greaves stresses this phrase - but it isn’t there;
what Connolly wrote was in fact “whomsoever will administer the Irish
government in the first days of freedom” (cfr. the second volume
of the Connolly (mistitled) Collected
Works p.127). This fact was pointed out by John Hoffman, a Connolly
Association member, in 1978 but as late as 1985 Greaves was still repeating
this claim (ie. page 223 of his essay in the Britain, Fascism and the Popular Front collection edited by Jim
Fyrth and published by Lawrence and Wishart).
It is also worth
examining another crucial quotation that appears in Greaves’ account that has
been since accepted as one of the keys to understanding Connolly’s attitude in
1916. According to Greaves, shortly before the Easter Rising, Connolly
addressed the Irish Citizen Army and told them:
The odds are a thousand to one against us. If we win, we'll be great heroes; but if we lose we'll be the greatest scoundrels the country ever produced. In the event of victory, hold on to your rifles, as those with whom we are fighting may stop before our goal is reached. We are out for economic as well as political liberty” (C.D. Greaves, op.cit, 403).
It should be noted that "those with whom we are
fighting" could at this time refer to MacNeill etc. It would be mistaken
to read an attitude to Pearse and Clarke, with whom Connolly was in collusion.
But as John
Newsinger points out:
The trouble with this quotation, which is routinely reproduced in numerous books and articles, is that it has no reliable provenance, that there is no contemporary evidence that he actually said it. Moreover, it is starkly contradicted by just about everything we know for certain he did say and write…The weight of evidence is overwhelming. (John Newsinger (2004), Rebel City: Larkin, Connolly and the Dublin Labour Movement, London: Merlin Press,131-132).
Things are further
complicated by the fact that a slightly
different version of this alledged Connolly quote exists:
The odds against are a thousand to one. But if we should win, hold on to your rifles because the Volunteers may have a different goal: Remember we're outnot only for political liberty but economic liberty as well. So hold on to your rifles. (Max Cauldfield (1964), Easter Rebellion, London: Frederick Muller, 45)
No source for this
quote is given. But it seemed to have been authentic enough to be quoted by Roy
Foster. (Roy Foster (1988), Modern
Ireland 1600-1972, London: Allen Lane, 478)
That it has no
reliable source is backed up by the fact that the major memoir of the Irish
Citizen Army makes no reference to such a speech (Frank Robbins (1978), Under the Starry Plough: Recollections of
the Irish Citizen Army, Dublin: The Academy Press, 68-69). Nor is it
mentioned in either Sean O’Casey’s 1919 Story
of the Irish Citizen Army or Jack White’s 1930 Misfit memoir; and R. M. Fox’s 1943 History of the Irish Citizen Army gives no indication that such an
order was given. A search through the Bureau of Military History online did not
bring any more information about this alleged quote.
Was it another
Greaves invention? This writer had serious doubts regarding the authenticity of
this quote attributed to Connolly until directed by D.R. O’Connor Lysaght to an
article which appeared thirty years prior to the Greaves book: John O’Keefe’s
‘Citizen Army Veteran’s Memories of 1913-1916 and Connolly’ originally
published in Workers’ Voice, 14 May
1932 and subsequently republished in 1916
Easter Week 1966 issued by the Irish
Socialist on the occasion of the Golden Jubilee Anniversary of the 1916
Easter Uprising.
In the penultimate
paragraph of his article John O’Keefe states:
“Connolly’s address
to the Citizen Army a couple of days before the Rising should never be
forgotten by the Irish workers. ‘Being the lesser party’, he said , ‘we join in
this fight with our comrades of the Irish Volunteers. But hold your arms. If we
succeed, those who are our comrades today we may be compelled to fight
tomorrow.’ And when one of our number raised the question of our strength came
the reply: ‘The people will help.’”
It is not exactly
the same quote as that given by Greaves, but indicates that something along
those lines might have been said by Connolly. The same quote appears on pages
89-90 of Brian O’Neill’s 1936 book Easter
Week published in London by Lawrence & Wishart. Interestingly, O’Neill
adds: “Here were clearly foreshadowed the stages of the struggle.” No source is
given for the quote but given O’Neill’s Communist Party background it is highly
likely he got it from O’Keefe.
The reader should
note that D.R.O'Connor Lysaght demolished the myth of the 'Labour must wait'
quote alleged by George Gilmore. (D.R.O'Connor Lysaght (2001), 'Labour Must
Wait': The Making of a Myth, Saothar,
vol.26, 61-65)
Another remark attributed
to Connolly in 1916 is that he allegedly gave the order that "not one
shot" was to be fired in Ulster because he was afraid of sparking
sectarian tensions and consequently to be a true follower of Connolly today
means to refuse firing one shot in the north and supporting the Peace People.
(George Gilmore (1978), The Irish
Republican Congress, Cork: the Cork Workers' Club, iv, vi-vii) It is not
C.D. Greaves who made that claim but George Gilmore, and he never gave a source
for it. The source for “not one shot" was to be fired in Ulster could only have been Denis
McCullough, President of the Supreme Council of the Irish Republican
Brotherhood, whose Witness Statement to the Bureau of Military History in 1953
recalled the following:
I was summoned to Dublin. . . There Pearse made the following arrangements. When the date for the Rising was decided, we were to receive a code message, the date given in which was to be read as seven days earlier, as the date set for the Rising. I was to mobilise my men, with all arms and ammunition and equipment available, to convey them to Tyrone, join the Tyrone men mobilised there and ‘proceed with all possible haste, to join Mellows in Connaught and act under his command there’… I pointed out the length of the journey we had to take (from Belfast), the type of country and population we had to pass through and how sparsely armed my men were for such an undertaking. I suggested we would have to attack the R.I.C. barracks on our way through, to secure the arms we required. Connolly got quite cross at this suggestion and almost shouted at me. ‘You will fire no shot in Ulster: you will proceed with all possible speed to join Mellows in Connaught, and’, he added, ‘if we win through, we will then deal with Ulster’. He added further. . . ‘You will observe that as an order and obey it strictly’. I looked at Pearse, to ascertain if he agreed with this and he nodded assent, with some remark like ‘Yes, that’s an order’. That interview is perfectly clear in my mind, and was exactly as I set it down. (Bureau of Military History, Denis McCullough Witness Statement 915, December 1953).
The meaning of this
‘you will fire no shot in Ulster’ order is thus different from that ascribed to
it by Gilmore. Given the importance that the “hold on to your rifles” and “you
will fire no shot in Ulster” remarks took in subsequent debates, it is
important to trace their origin as accurately as possible.
PS
The author would
like to thank Stephen Coyle for providing the relevant parts of the John O’Keefe
article and Manus O’Riordan for providing the Denis McCullough statement.
Why has there never been a true complete works of Connolly published
ReplyDeleteI believe I once saw a twelve volume set of Connolly's works in Queens university bookshop. I spoke to my pal two years ago as we occasionally brought up the story of how his mum threw out all his personal belongings including the set and also separately some records I gave him. We rarely speak but always bring that story up.
ReplyDeleteThe set cost £100 or £120 twenty odd years ago and were cloth hard backs. Grey if my memory is right.
The problem I have with this story is that I can find no record online to the set. Anywhere. I checked all the online catalogues and archives.
I am sure these existed. If I saw a record I'd have no doubt but I doubt myself because of the passage of time and lack of evidence apart from my and my friend's memory.
Perhaps it was a privately published collection someone did for research purposes? Maybe I am imagining it and my friend is pulling my leg. I doubt it but can't explain it.
This was at a time very few people would have bought such things. Writings of the 1916 leaders were as rare as hens teeth in newly published books back then. You would have found pamphlets and poorly published paperbacks with flimsy covers. The type you'd find in Sinn Fein bookshop twenty five years ago.
I remember cursing myself for not buying the Connolly set but I couldn't afford it. I can also remember what shelf and in what part of the bookstore they were.
I know Donal Nevin who was also Connolly's biographer intended to publish a complete set but that was much later and unfortunately he never did it. I read that Nevin wanted to do it as it had never been done before.
That's the mystery. It annoys the hell out if me.
Talking of unreliable quotations Donal Nevin also had one of Connolly's whilst he lay injured in the GPO. He was asked how he felt and he replied, and I paraphrase, "I have a good book, a cigarette and there is a revolution. What could be better?"
ReplyDeleteToo lazy to check the exact quotation. I think Nevin described it "as being said" that it happened.
However, Lorcan Collins told me that he didn't include it in his biography of Connolly as he was unsure of the veracity of the quotation.
It's a great one whether true or not. ;)