Historian Ann Matthews, author of “Renegades: Irish
Republican Women 1900-1922,” understands
intimately the kind of working-class background that helped fuel the republican
movement a century ago. Born in 1948, she grew up in Dublin’s North Strand, and
left school at 14, something not unusual in working-class families in Ireland before 1970. She went back to school decades later to earn several
degrees, including a Ph.D. in history.
Matthew’s
mother, Jane Byrne, was raised in a tenement in Marlborough Street, a few
blocks from the GPO, and married fisherman John Matthews, from Annagassan,
County Louth. It was her mother’s experience as a child that inspired Matthews
to look more closely at women in the seminal republican movement, and the
turmoil of that era. “She was 7 and had very vivid memories of [the Easter
Rising] because she thought she was going to die,” says Matthews. “I grew up
listening to my mother’s childhood memories of war from 1916 to 1923.”
Matthews,
a Kildare resident, teaches at NUI Maynooth. She spoke to The Wild Geese’s Gerry Regan about her new book,
“Dissidents: Irish Republican Women 1923-1941,“ and the experience of women
republicans in the first half of the 20th century. In these
companion titles, she says, she explores why women effectively disappeared from
Irish politics from 1941 till the 1970s.
The Wild Geese: I’m intrigued by what seems to be the women’s roles in the
Irish enterprise. You have the lofty ideals of gender equality in the
Proclamation during the Easter Rising, followed by the War of Independence and
the tragedy of the Civil War and then it seems women were thrust back into the
more repressed, traditional, stereotypical roles that the Church came to define
for women. What happened to the bold, assertive women who seemed to be sharing
the pinnacle of political power in 1916 to 1921, they seem to have receded back
into domesticity after this? Would that be a fair observation?
Ann Matthews (left): No, what happened was that these
women were socially conservative, they believed in the home, they believed in
domesticity for women, they had servants, they could go out and do the work.
The Catholic Church is sometimes blamed for things they didn’t do, just as de
Valera is sometimes blamed for pushing women out of politics, something he
didn’t do either. From 1916 the movement turned toward a spirituality that was
Catholic, this Catholic spirituality had been growing intensely from the late
1800s. These women came from a society where they absorbed Catholic social
teaching, mixed with the mores of the Victorian ethos of respectability, with
their mother’s milk. This is who these women were. They became involved with
the first Sinn Féin party, founded by
Arthur Griffith in 1905. This party was open to women, something very unusual
in its day, possibly the first party in these islands that allowed female
participation at an equal level. So from 1905 you have women becoming involved
in Sinn Féin as a political party,
then they become involved with the Volunteer movement by becoming involved with
Cumann na mBán, they become involved with the Irish Citizen Army, too. But they
still hold on to the essence of their Catholic culture that they have with them
from birth. It’s a complex picture, sometimes it’s represented as a black-and-white
picture, but it’s not.
The Wild Geese: I gather that Constance Markievicz was not very religious, but then perhaps she was not typical?
Matthews: No, Countess de Markievicz (below right), I always
call her de Markievicz, as that’s how she signed her name, her family were
Church of Ireland. She was exposed to Catholic spirituality in the College of
Surgeons because during 1916 -- one of the coping mechanisms used by the
insurgents to deal with their fear was to pray. They said the Rosary every day,
sometimes twice a day, or more. She was exposed to this in the College of
Surgeons, later she wrote a poem about it and converted to Catholicism, her
experience in the College of Surgeons was the basis of her conversion. But I
also think she did this to make herself appear more of an Irish nationalist.
There was no spiritual philosophy behind what she did.
The Wild Geese: During the Civil War, dividing comrade from comrade, many who
had fought together for the Irish Republic, did this kind of wrenching division
seize the women’s movement, too?
Matthews: Yes, the women’s movement was
splintered. What happened with the men’s movements is mirrored in the women’s.
The best way to explain it is to look at how [historian and IRA intelligence officer] Florence O’Donoghue described the IRA at the time
of the Civil War. There was a three-way split in the Irish Volunteers; there
were those who were for the Treaty, those who were against the Treaty, and
those who remained neutral. The biggest group of the three were the men who
remained neutral. Cumann na mBán split in exactly the same way. There were
those who were anti-Treaty; they were the rump. There were those who were
pro-Treaty; they formed another organization. And then there were the women who
were neutral, and they just walked away. So it went from thousands of women
being involved up to the truce of 1921, and then within eight months they were
down to a few hundred members.
The Wild
Geese: Tell
us about the new book – what can the reader expect to find in it?
Matthews: Well, the new book starts at the
Civil War. The first one [“Renegades”] ends just as they make decisions on
acceptance or non-acceptance of the Treaty, the last chapter of it discusses
the split in the IRA and Cumann na mBán. Book Two [“Dissidents”] picks up on
that and discusses it briefly in the first chapter to put in context for anyone
who has not read the first book. I don’t explain the Civil War in detail
because other historians have done that to great effect and that is not what my
work was about, but I do discuss the role of women in the Civil War and the
kind of activities they were involved in. There are three chapters on women in
internment -- the reason for this is that there were 645 women in internment,
to put that in context, over 16,000 men were interned. The 645 women who were
interned were not all held together, nor all interned at the same time. Some
were held for a day or two, some for a month or two, a handful were held for a
full year. As the numbers of women internees increased, the government was hard
pressed to find places to hold them, so they ended up using Mountjoy Prison very briefly; Kilmainham Gaol, which is now a museum; and they used a
place called the North Dublin Union. It had been an old workhouse, and in 1918
it was taken over by compulsory order by the British army because their Linen
Hall barracks had been lost to fire during 1916. They closed down the workhouse
and reopened it as a barracks. When the British left Ireland, they handed the
North Dublin Union buildings over to the Irish Department of Defence, so part
of this North Dublin Union building was then used as an internment camp to hold
about half of the 645 women. So, because it would otherwise be very confusing,
I have devoted three chapters to the women in internment by the prisons in
which they were interned. So, one chapter deals with the women in Mountjoy,
another on those in Kilmainham and the third on those in the North Dublin
Union.
The Wild
Geese:
After these chapters, where does the narrative go?
Matthews: After these chapters, the narrative
deals with the regrouping after the Civil War, how they tried to find their
feet to see where they could go from there. It also discusses something I call
the Republican Triad. There is a general idea that Sinn Féin were involved with the Civil War
-- the Sinn Féin party was not involved
in the Civil War. After the split due to the Treaty, Seán T. O’Kelly founded a
political party called Cumann na Poblachta. It became the political arm of the
anti-Treaty group. The IRA and Cumann na mBán were the military arm of that
anti-Treaty group. I call them the Republican Triad because it makes it easier
to discuss what they were doing. They were the people who were fighting against
the Free State.
The Wild Geese: After the Civil War, did
this ‘Republican Triad’ remain a viable presence on the political scene?
Matthews: Only for a short time. After the Civil War, it collapsed
because de Valera decided to take the Sinn Féin name and form a new party because
the Sinn Féin party had lapsed and
the pro-Treaty party had decided not to use the Sinn Féin name, so it was available for de
Valera to take it up.
The Wild Geese: Why did you stop the book at 1941? Was this a watershed date?
Matthews: Okay, I’ll leapfrog to that. What
happened was that after the Civil War, the republican movement constantly
fragmented. After Fianna Fáil was founded, it fragmented; there were multiples
of organizations, all claiming to be republican. So, by the time we come to the
1930s, Cumann na mBán is involved constantly in all these splits. By 1934, de
Valera is now in power and there is a division created in the IRA by those who
believed Ireland should become socialist and those who believed it shouldn’t.
Cumann na mBán was sucked into that argument. By 1937, when de Valera brought
in his Constitution, the women’s’ voice had dissipated to such a degree that
they had no united voice with which to stand up to de Valera and say ‘This is
what we don’t like about your Constitution’; the female voice was completely
lost. The whole thing fizzled out to an end by 1941. In 1941, the president of
Cumann na mBán, Eithne Coyle, who had been president since de Markievicz had
resigned in 1925, resigned. The numbers in the organization had become so small
that they even stopped holding executive meetings. My book also discusses the
development of the Easter lily as a republican symbol, and it discusses the
Flanders poppy and the whole process of conflict and commemoration in which the
republican women were deeply involved.
The Wild Geese: Would you think then, that the term ‘dissidents’ could be
rightfully applied to Cumann na mBán, because they were always outsiders in the
new Ireland?
Matthews: Yes, they put themselves on the
outside all the time, after the split with de Valera, Sinn Féin put themselves on the outside, so
the women of Sinn Féin put themselves on the
outside, too.
The Wild Geese: Do you follow a handful of women throughout the narrative?
Matthews: No, I look at a lot of women’s
stories and I weave them into the narrative at different points but there is no
one woman’s story I follow from beginning to end because there are so many
splits and divisions that to follow just one story line would have made the
narrative chaotic. My work will provide a foundation from which other historians
will be able to concentrate on the stories of individual women in the future, using
my work as the context. When I started my work this context was not available.
The Wild Geese: From all your research for your dissertation in these two
books, which woman did you find most admirable?
Matthews: Jennie Wyse Power. She started out
in 1881 [at age 23], she built up a business, she had leadership qualities. She
disappeared from history because she took the pro-Treaty side. She was
dismissed by women historians because a lot of Irish feminist history is
republican, as well. So, Jennie Wyse Power is not discussed after about 1922.
She went on to become a senator in Dáil Eireann, she was a manager of Dublin
City Corporation at one stage. She had been a guardian of the Poor Law Unions
before 1916. She was very active in Sinn Féin. She was the first president of
Cumann na mBán. She was on the executive of the first Sinn Féin party, the one founded by Arthur
Griffith. She was a co-founder of [Maud Gonne’s revolutionary party] Inghinidhe na hÉireann. [Gonne is seen above right.] A
member of the Gaelic League. She was totally immersed in all that and even
earlier in her career, she had been secretary of the Irish Land League. Her
life from 1881 to 1941 was dedicated to doing what she could for Ireland and
all the while keeping her family alive and educating them by running her own
business. She was something else.
The Wild Geese: Whom would you consider the most tragic figure of the women
you write about in your new book?
Matthews: I think the tragedy, is the
collective tragedy, of all the hope that was lost because of the splits after
the Civil War. It’s collective, there is no one woman who is tragic in this
whole story, but there is the tragedy of the loss of the female voice in Irish
politics. That is the tragedy.
The Wild Geese: Do you feel that the dissidents that you write about, did
they ultimately disappear?
Matthews: Yes, they disappeared in a welter of
rows, and they left the generations who came after them without a foothold
because women did not get a foothold in Irish politics until the ‘70s, and we
still suffer a deficit of women in politics in Ireland.
The Wild Geese: Do you think that when these women looked back on their lives
they would have seen them as nobly lived or did any of them go on record to
express regret for chances lost?
Matthews: Many of them went on to marry, many
did not marry. Many were disillusioned as the years went by, in the sense that
they would have looked back and asked ‘What was it all for’ because their lives
did not change at all, nothing changed for them. But then again, for most of
the population nothing changed. The only thing that changed in Ireland after
the years of revolution was a change in the elite. The rest of society didn’t
change. We had a new elite.
The Wild Geese: Elite in terms of wealth?
Matthews: A new political elite that,
incidentally, became wealthy as time went by but I’m not talking about wealth,
I’m not talking about a societal change, I mean a change in the political
elite, those who were in government. WG
No comments:
Post a Comment