'Conflicted' characters? - The Black and Tans

by Harry Fri Jul 14, 2006 11:55

Nick Folly's point above is a good one. If we are expected to commemorate those fighting Britain’s wars in Britain's uniform (including in Ireland), why are the Brits not asked to commemorate those who fought to free Ireland from the imperial grasp – after all, they were, as Folly points out, ‘officially’ British citizens.

Did we not play a role in establishing democracy and ending empire – or do the Brits (and west-Brits) have a problem with the concept?

by a yank Mon Jul 17, 2006 09:48

The auxillary force to the RIC was composed of men who had been officers during the war. They were the ones who were paid a pound a day. They were also the ones ambushed at Kilmichael, which is sort of re-enacted in the film. As Tom Barry said in his book the Auxies had been rampaging throughout the area since August 1920 and had established a reputation as invincible fighters who couldn't be beaten. The whole purpose of the ambush was to prove that they could be beaten, and that they were not invincible. He succeeded completely. The first two Auxies killed were in Dublin on Bloody Sunday 1920, a week before the Kilmichael ambush. The ones in Cork were based in Macroom Castle.
What are generally referred to as the Black and Tans were British recruits for the RIC (ex-servicemen, convicts, etc) who were sent to replace the original RIC who had been shot or resigned, and also to expand the force. They were paid less than a pound a day, but the exact amount escapes me. They got their name from the odd mixture of surplus uniforms they wore at first. The auxillary force officially had a different uniform, but I believe they also had some uniform shortages when first formed. They along with the British army units became known as Black and Tans or Tans for short, because they all engaged in acts of brutality against the Irish civilians and Republicans alike.

by Aine Griffin Mon Jul 17, 2006 16:49 aineneebarry at hotmail dot com

Let there be no doubt about the terror caused by the Black and Tans and Auxillaries who were little more than disaffected soldiers who had failed to recover from the atrocites of the trenches in WW1and inflicted their Post Traumatic Stress Disorders uncontrolled and unabated on innocent irish Civilians and Prisioners of War.

True first hand accounts of the treachery of the Back and Tans and the impact of their barbaic acts are to be found in the Dublin's ,Rebel Cork's ,Limerick's, and Kerry's Fighting Stories published in the 1940's by the Kerryman.Stories written by the Freedom Fighters themselves,Ernie o Malley,Joe Reynolds, Sean MacGarry, Piaras Beaslai,John McCann, John Brennan, Thomas Ashe ,Con Casey,Tom Barry, Patrick Lynch and many more.Most people remember Bloody Sunday but our first Bloody Sunday was in Croak Park when the Auxillaries Opened fire on crowds supporting Dublin and Tipperary footy killing 14 spectators and wounding 60.
They tortured our people and executed our Prisioners of War including the 18 year old Kevin Barry.

Their legacy has been felt for generations and is deeply imbedded in the Irish Psychie

by Frank Mon Jul 17, 2006 23:35

While I enjoyed the film, it was unfortunate that the director didn't try to better understand the situation faced by tans in Ireland at the time or the reason for their introduction. Loach conveniently forgets that Collins' merry band of brothers were busily killing Irish policemen for well over a year before the tans arrived, causing mass resignations and replacements couldn't be found in Ireland due to the dirty boycotting campaign practised by the Shinners on their fellow Irishmen in the ranks of the RIC. New research that will soon be published suggests that drink, poor training and supervision, regular barracks attacks and frequent ambushes all serve to explain the behaviour of the tans. According to this analysis, the tans were essentially ordinary men who responded to the tense situation in which they found themselves. Perhaps the brutal conditions of trench warfare, as mentioned by the officer in the film, could also be added. There are undoubtedly examples of good behaviour by the tans but it would not serve republican propaganda well to mention this fact. Also, it should be pointed out that hair clipping of women was not practised solely by the British. IRA men also carried out this dreadful act on Irishwomen found 'guilty' of collaborating with the enemy. It's interesting to note that the British soldiers who assaulted railway personnel at the start of the film are later referred to as tans. Finally, no distinction was drawn in the film between the Auxies and the tans that both feature in various episodes. For the record, both Tom Barry and Ernest Blythe stated that the Auxies (ex-officers) were far worse than the tans (ex-soldiers).

by Nick - None Sat Jul 22, 2006 03:06

In the early days (eg, 1917, 1918) attacks on the RIC mainly consisted of a hiding or a few punches when the Volunteers went to capture weapons, and even later, when armed, the Volunteers rarely shot RIC. The shooting of RIC began mainly in 1919, with Soloheadbeg being the first obvious incident. The Irish Volunteers (and later when they became the IRA) have come in for a lot of flak for attacking the RIC, on the grounds that the RIC were 'fellow Irishmen'. By this stage, the IRA had entered in a definite war phase with the British Establishment and all its agents, be they English or Irish by birth. The RIC was no ordinary police force. First of all it was well armed (apart from the DMP), unlike its counterpart in England, and not at all afraid to shoot back with lethal effect when attacked. This fact of being armed in itself says a lot about the real role of the RIC as a political police force, married to the need to keep a populace subjugated. The RIC were the 'muscle' for many of the evictions during the land wars etc., of the 19th century, and had few compunctions about turning their 'fellow Irishmen' out on the roadside for the benefit of greedy landlords. By 1915 things had settled down a bit and their role was far more domestic (licences, fines all the run-of-the-mill stuff). 1916 changed all that, and once again their British masters wheeled them out as a political tool to supress nascent independence movement. The RIC were to the forefront of arrests of Volunteers etc., and these arrests (right up into the war of independence) would largely have been impossible to effect without the assiatance of the RIC. Many IRA Volunteers described them as 'the eyes and ears' of the British Administration, and it was clear that if the indepenence movement was to succeed, the RIC would have to go. Whether or not there were individual 'conflicted characters' in the RIC, the organisation as a whole would have been the kiss of death to any independence movement. As noted above this was initally achieved through boycotts (nothing intrinsically 'dirty' about a boycott in itself - the goals are the important issue) and later thorugh physical attacks and shootings for those RIC unconvinced by other methods. The IRA achieved a fair degree of success here in that they largely achieved their aim of eliminating or rendering useless, the RIC. Being 'fellow Irishmen' did not seem to bother some RIC when arresting Volunteers or shooting at them. Those that were bothered by it, or questioned their role, resigned, and did so in large numbers. These are the real patriots among the RIC. It often strikes me as odd how people can describe the RIC as Irishmen doing their 'patriotic duty'. Patriotic to whom? Arresting Volunteers, occasionally shooting them, supressing independence movements, assisting in supressing gaelic games, hanging around hurling pitches taking down the names of all attendees - this hardly seems patriotic Irish behaviour. Patriotic to the English establishment perhaps. Recently I was watching 'Charlotte Gray' a movie about a woman in Occupied France who helps some Jewish kids hide from the Nazis. The local Vichy officials harass her and her friends to help the Nazis track them down. Without the local knowledge and help of these Vichy officials - who are clearly not intended to be the goodies in the film - the Nazis would have found their task much more difficult. The Vichy official, in one of the most succintly ironic moments of the movie, explains to the heroine how he can 'think of no more patriotic duty than collaboration'. I suppose someday French historians trying to make a name for themselves will explain with facts and figures how the Vichy collaborators were the real patriots while the French Resistance were a bunch of cowardly murdering thugs.

by Everyman Sun Jul 23, 2006 16:54

"Commemoration
by Harry Fri Jul 14, 2006 10:55
........ If we are expected to commemorate those fighting Britain’s wars in Britain's uniform (including in Ireland), why are the Brits not asked to commemorate those who fought to free Ireland from the imperial grasp – after all, they were, as Folly points out, ‘officially’ British citizens. Did we not play a role in establishing democracy and ending empire – or do the Brits (and west-Brits) have a problem with the concept?"

Nobody is asking Harry or any other whinging moaners to commemorate those Irishmen who volunteered to fight in WW1 and WW11. WW1 and WW11 were not merely Britain's wars and the numbers of Irishmen involved (significantly more than that ever attracted to the IRA) were fighting for principles which those of Harry's narrow mindset will never understand. In so far as the Irish state commemorates those Irishmen, it does so on the basis that it now cherishes all the children of the nation equally (and that includes West Brits - see the Sinn Fein policy of equality and parity of esteem). Clearly it is a case of the Irish (minus Harry and people of his ilk) commemorating their own. The Brits, to use Harry's loaded term, can commemorate whom they want as is their sovereign right. It is our sovereign right as a free and independent nation to commemmorate our own. The days when ignorant and bitter republicans dictate what is considered patriotism are thankfully gone. If Harry can not live with Ireland's new pluralist traditions, perhaps he should emigate to Mr. Mugabe's Zimbabwe where I am sure his Brit bashing tendencies will enjoy greater appreciation..

by Sharon - Individual Sun Jul 23, 2006 17:02

" It is our sovereign right as a free and independent nation to commemmorate our own."

Are there only 26 counties in this 'Nation' you speak of ?

Sharon .

by Dazed 7 confused Sun Jul 23, 2006 22:24

Frank, I weep briny tears for the poor Tans, separated from their parents at a tender age and thrown bewildered into a land of half-savages. For you, I will also rip out all my reason and dance upon the grave of facts. Oh, and forget where I read all your guff before, in British propaganda tracts, then and now. Who is carrying out the "research" you talk of? The Home Office?

I won't talk of my sympathy for the British soldiers in Malaya who were photographed with the trophies of their beheading of children. This was part of Britain's psywar campaign - "hearts and minds" and all that - to terrorise the population. But it wasn't policy - no, just the gut reaction of terrified soldiers.

Lies, lies, lies.

by Solas Nua Mon Jul 24, 2006 02:22

Free" , "Independent" ?
by Sharon - Individual Sun Jul 23, 2006 16:02
" It is our sovereign right as a free and independent nation to commemmorate our own."

Are there only 26 counties in this 'Nation' you speak of ?

No, Sharon, I'm speaking of the 32 county Nation with its 1million Protestant citizens and its 4 million Catholic citizens, many of whom can claim to have had relatives in British uniform during WW1 and WW11. Time for you Sharon to leave behind the shackles of your own narrow mind and liberate yourself!

by Sharon - Individual Mon Jul 24, 2006 09:20

'Solas Nua/Everyman' -

You have described this island as a ".....32 county Nation .....(which is)......... free and independent.... " .
I would suggest your best move now is to pick a third 'sign-in' name and proceed as if you have not made a fool of yourself . And have a fourth 'sign-in' name ready . You will probably need it sooner than you think .

Sharon .

by Nick - None Tue Jul 25, 2006 02:01

Everyman / Solas Nua writes: "Nobody is asking Harry or any other whinging moaners to commemorate those Irishmen who volunteered to fight in WW1 and WW11. WW1 and WW11 were not merely Britain's wars and the numbers of Irishmen involved (significantly more than that ever attracted to the IRA) were fighting for principles which those of Harry's narrow mindset will never understand"

Erm, what principles were they fighting for, exactly? And if 'those of narrow mindset will never understand' what's the point of going online to try and 'convert / correct' them? Sounds overly fatalistic to me.

by trevor rankin - none Thu Dec 11, 2008 04:07 spadge1964 at yahoo dot com 0876903309

Yes its true that the black and tans were a terrifying mob.My grandmother told me she was often kicked and abused by them as a 16yr old going to work in the early hours in clonmel co. tipperary.Strange thing is that her 2 brothers were fighting in the trenches in belgium at the same time.Both were killed and never saw home again.Suppose we should be glad of the peace we have today.

by Historian (not) Thu Dec 11, 2008 21:23

World War 1 was long over in March 1920 by the time the Tans arrived in Ireland!

by Sean O'Cathasiagh Sun Dec 06, 2009 02:19

The despotism of the Black and Tans in Galway needs no introduction, the facts are there. The night of murders in Galway city, the conflict at the dance hall which involved the notorious Major William Lorraine ''TIny'' King during the truce and the murder of the Loughnane brothers, the sack of Tuam stand out among many. Duff himself wrote in 'Sword for Hire' (his life as a paid mercenary) of his time in the Maam valley, and whitewashed himself and the tans as game lads. Duff wrote around fifteen books about his 'adventures' as a gun for hire, and Ireland gets a mention in most of them. He brags about nearly arresting Michael Collins with a colleague on the outskirts of Dublin. It woudl seem to himself a tleast that the Tans only fired when fired upon. There is no record in his books of wrongdoing. However he went on to form and be a leader of first the Palsetine Gendarmerie and then the Palestine police. I am working on a paper on events in Galway, for historical interest only. Perhaps he was among those who fired at my own Grandfather Martin O'Cathasaigh from Ballydoolough, after they tied him up to a tree, and for several hours, then a 16 years old boy, who was involved in the ambush of Tourmakeady, an erxcellent book of hich has been compose by Capt Donal Buckley (Irish Army retd)
This is what Duff got up to in Palestine, according to the Jerusalem Quarterly. At first I belived Duff may have been truthful about events, he was after all only 18.

“Going Beserk”: Duff and the Black and Tans at the Wailing Wall
Duff carried an Irish blackthorn baton or club (called a shillelagh) which he occasionally used to whack Palestinians over the head, leaving them unconscious. He carried a Colt 045 pistol on his hip and a Turkish styled whip. He generally bullied his way about, enforcing immediately and spontaneously his ideas of justice or at least whatever measure it would take to maintain order and get a job done. In combination with the standard issue Stetson, the image this man cuts is an Indiana Jones who had turned from virtue to vice. When there was an earthquake that left two “important” female tourists buried in a collapsed hotel in Jericho, he used his whip to coerce local Bedouins to dig them out. When one of the Bedouins attempted to leave before they found the bodies, Duff “hit him with a beautiful left uppercut to his bearded face and sank a right-cross to his heart.” The Bedouin collapsed. Duff ordered him to be wrapped in woven-wire and whipped; the other Bedouin kept digging.'' Obviously this throws a whole new light on things and makes Duff a very unreliable witness
to the events of 1920.

Inspector Duff seems to have played a dubious role at the outset of the Western Wall Incident of 1928. The Wailing Wall, or Western Wall of the Haram al-Sharif in Jerusalem, is sacred to both Muslims and Jews. In the 1920s, tensions mounted between Palestinian Muslims and Zionists over ownership, control, and access to the Wall. The Western Wall incident of September 1928 sparked rivalry and violence that spread across Palestine. By the end of the following year, the violence left 133 Jews and 116 Arabs dead.

Many of Duffs Black and Tans were sent to Jerusalem to make up the second Battn of the PAlestine Gendarmerie after being made redundant by the onset of the Republic. Apparently in their number was an ex doctor who had allegedly raped a patient, and several defrocked clergymen, an odd batch anyone would agree. How ironic that the Menachem Begin chose the codename Michael, in honour of Michael Collins, albeit probably with a wry sense of humour,but certainly in honour of General Collinc Incidentally Duff had been a trainee clergyman, before he went to Scotland YAad to enlist in the tans. (Not Auxiliary he was too young and not a Great War veteran) )

by Commonsman - none Tue Nov 13, 2012 13:59

You speak of how it was vital to win both the first and second WWs for liberty. I contend the outcome of both wars were failures. First of all the freedom of little Catholic Belgium was regarded as almost paramount in WW 1, yet 'little Catholic Belgium' had a shocking record of brutality in the Belgian Congo and almost certainly deserved to have the tender mercies of the Kaiser visited on them. That war was supposed to 'be the war to end all wars' yet the mean spirited conditions placed on defeated Germany afterwards almost ensured the occurence of WW 2. As regards the latter War GB initally entered this conflict because Poland had been invaded by Germany. Were Poland free at wars end? Certainly not. Speaking to some Polish friends they assure me that bad and all as their German occupiers were, Britains friends the Russians were ten times biggar savages