heritage history 1920

8/9/2019 Heritage History 1920

1/14

Heritage

at PlayPolitics on the Playing Field:Gaelic Games & Irish Nationalism through 1920

a brief historyby Zachary McCune


2/14

he history o Irish Nationalism has been closely coupled with the revival andplaying o gaelic games. Historicized as an activity at least 2,000 years old inIreland, hurling has been the most recognizable o these games, and was con-nected to the nationalist movement by Irish Republicans in the 19th Century to

bridge ancient Irish history and mythology with their contemporary independence move-ment. At the ounding o the Gaelic Athletic Association (GAA) in 1884, there were at leasttwo members o the Irish Republican Brotherhood (Fenians) who saw a political oppor-tunity in the institutional revival o gaelic games. Tese men hoped to use the burgeoningsports league as a way to create a political network o teams across the country o Ireland.Te degree o their success in politicizing the GAA has been a subject o long debate. Butregardless o its actual success, the percieved politicization o Gaelic Games made them atarget or British reprisals during the Anglo-Irish War o 1919 1921. During that interim,gaelic games were requently the subject o political debates, and on November 21, 1920 agaelic ootball game was the site o a British reprisal that killed 12 people including one othe players.

Tere is evidence that as early as the Statutes o Kilkenny in 1367, oreign powershad connected indigenous Irish games with political instability. At that time, the EnglishKing orbid the playing o hurling because it was considered an incitement to violence anduprising among his Norman-Irish vassals [1]. In a letter rom 1667, a British Lord com-plained that Irish Papist Rebels had been meeting under the pretence o a match at hurl-ing [2]. In a letter to the editor o Te Freemens Journal dated August 23, 1769, a readercontended At [hurling matches] all associations and midnight revels are hatched; andpositively hurling matches were the rst beginnings o the deluded and unthinking people

called White Boys, who are now rising again in a neighbouring County, in open Deance othe laws... [3]. Each o these documents draws a connection between hurling, a gaelic game,

early history

2

[1] O Maolfabhail, Art. Caman: Two Thousand Years of Hurling in

Ireland. Dundalk, Dundalgan Press. 1973. 40.

[2] O Maolfabhail, 40.

[3] O Maolfabhail, 43.


3/14

and the organization o political insurrection. But, in a ambiguity that will visible through-out the history o gaelic games, it is unclear whether the games are merely a pretence orpolitics or are an impassioned activity that actually incites political ervor. Te latter conclu-sion is oered by both the Statutes o Kilkenny and the 1769 letter to the editor, which bothsuggest that there is something political in the very play o hurling. Te ormer pretenceargument suggests that hurling is important as a gathering unction and excuse to assembly,

but that there is nothing political per se in the play o the game.A third consideration in the politicality o gaelic games lies in the dual utility oa hurley or hurling stick. raditionally constructed rom a single piece o ash wood, hur-leys measure between 20 and 40 inches in length, and open rom a thin handle into broadpaddle. Popular histories o gaelic games, such as Ian Priors illustrated childrens book TeHistory o Gaelic Games, oen claim that or hurleys (or hurls) were abstracted rom weap-ons. Te game o hurling in this history is considered an ancient substitute or open wararewith the wooden hurleys were preerred to metal weapons because they bruised were bronzeand steel bled opponents [4] . Tough these origins are largely based on legend, histori-cal documents do point to examples o the hurley being (re)made into a weapon. In 1829,

or example, during a rebellion against Church o Ireland tithe-collecting in the southerncounties, a group o hurlers attacked a squad o Crown orces. Teir only weapons were thehurleys they carried.

It was then that an agile boy came lightooted with a caman [Irish or hurley] inhis hand, and he mounted the ditch so that he was on a leel with him, and he gaehis two hands to the caman and struck with the end o it the nearest horsemen belowthe cap. [5]

Te hurley and hurling thus gain a third political/rebellious dimension beyond the

arguments or the game as an incitement to violence and the game as a pretence or politi-cal gathering. Once one sees the hurley as itsel a weapon, hurling matches become oppor-

3

[4] Prior, Ian. The History of Gaelic Games. Belfast, Appletree Press.

1997. 17.

[5] O Maolfabhail 45.


4/14

tunities or military training and even military action. Te games violence spills out rom it,threatening to re-make the political landscape as a hurling pitch on which the hurlers mayengage political enemies as though they were opposing team members. For British authori-ties, hurling thus became not just a symbolic act o resistance, a game to oster nationalistsentiment, or allow Irish citizens to meet against British authorities, but quite literally anopportunity or military action. Te ability o the hurley to operate as both a game tool and

a weapon, bound into its very history as a piece o sporting equipment, suggests the gamesown duality as both sport and military exercise.

In just past two decades two high prole Irish lms,Michael Collins (1996) andTe Wind Tat Shakes the Barley (2006), have oered cinematic proo that the military/sport duality o hurling is a recognized popular historical coupling. Te Wind Tat Shakesthe Barley, a winner o the coveted Palme dOr at Cannes or its perceived historic/politicpotency, actually opens in the midst o a hurling match, with the violence o two brothers

at play oreshadowing the violence o the Anglo-Irish War and the eventual Irish Civil War.Aer leaving the eld, the hurlers walk home with their hurleys were they are accosted bya unit o British Auxiliaries or Black and ans . Never letting go o their wooden hurleys,despite the threats o the Black and ans, the Irish men suggest that their hurleys are morethan sporting equipment. Indeed the hurleys seem to represent the pride and republican in-clinations o the Irish men, equipping them at all times with a weapon o protection as wellas a historic symbol o their belies. Later in the lm, the same Irish men use hurleys in placeo ries while going through military training. Te reason or this substitution is that thethe Irish men do not have real weapons, but the visual represents that the hurley has alwaysbeen the Irish mans rst weapon. Tis cinematic choice, which also depicts the Irish as the

impoverished, heroic resistance against an imperially over-equipped enemy, perpetuates thehistory o the hurley as a symbol o military power and resistance, and consequently suggests

4

in cinematic memory


5/14

the interchangeability between the playing o gaelic games and the practicing o warare.InMichael Collins, the hurley is again ound as a convenient weapon o Irish re-

sistance. While Michael Collins (played by Liam Neeson) rallies a crowd o Irish men ina non-specic Irish village, they all slowly reveal that they are carrying hurleys. When theRoyal Irish Constabulary arrives with billy clubs, the purpose o the hurleys is made clear:these gentlemen have not reshly arrived o the hurling pitch, but have been expecting a

conrontation with the RIC, and have armed themselves with hurleys. In the chaos o thesubsequent battle/brawl, the hurley proves a cinematically convenient way o separating thegood guys rom the bad guys. Where the round paddle o the hurley rises and alls, theviewer knows s/he is watching an Irish attack. Te hurley thus becomes visually synonmouswith the Irish resistance and in this moment, with civil justice. Into the hurley, a whole his-tory, heritage, and hope or an autonomous Irish state is incorporated. Te hurley becomesan embodiment o Irish desire and Irish dedication to their cause. It should be noted, that inbothMichael Collins and Te Wind Shakes the Barley the hurley cannot be returned to itsnatural place in a game o hurling once Anglo-Irish tensions have reached a ever pitch. Atthis critical juncture, the stick becomes a weapon only, as the time or play been consumed

by war. Tis is the inversion o the popular history o hurling, which hoped to prevent warby playing gaelic games. But the British do not play hurling, and the Irish are not willing tosimply play out their rustrations.

wenty ve years beore the Anglo-Irish War, the Gaelic Athletic Association wasormed to institutionally revive the playing o gaelic games such as hurling, and to bring theadministration o Irish sports in general under a single Irish authority. Conceived o by Mi-chael Cusack, an Irish nationalist and Celtic revivalist, the GAA was imagined o as a paral-lel movement to Parnells land reorm (which sought to return land to the Irish peoplewho worked it) and the Gaelic League (which hoped to revive the use o the Irish language

5

a national movement


6/14

and gaelic culture). Beore ormally ounding the GAA, Cusack published a newspapercalled the Celtic imes, which he used to present maniesto-like rationalizations or orm-ing a such an organization.

No movement haing or its object the social and political adancement o a nationom the tyranny o imported and enorced customs and manners, can be regardedas perect, i it has not made adequate provision or the preseration and cultiationo the national pastimes o the people. Voluntary neglect o such times is a sure sign o

National decay and approaching dissolution. [6]

With his no movement sentence, Cusack clearly makes an appeal to the broadercurrents o Irish Nationalism. He generalizes the goals o both the Land League and theGaelic League as against the tyranny o imported and enorced customs and manners sug-gesting that attempting to ght this tyranny in just one domain (language, land law, etc.)will not be enough to ully deeat the system that perpetuates these customs and manners.Tis is to say that or Cusack, Irish independence would have to be achieved in every eld o

culture, labor, and law, not in any one place that would thus ree all o the others. Interest-ingly, this passage never uses the term British or makes mention o the King, England,or the British Commonwealth. Instead, Cusack speaks only o the movement and thepeople suggesting that it is in within the power o the Irish themselves to make the socio-political changes that will overthrow tyranny. So this passage calls on the Irish themselvesto preserv[e] and cultivat[e] the national pastimes o the people. In doing so, the Irishwill reverse the neglect, National decay and approaching dissolution, which Cusackleaves or the reader to imagine.

Cusacks editorial continues by attacking the status quo o athletics in his contemporary Ireland, which according to his analysis excluded large populations o the people in a-

vor o the wealthy and the pro-British. Moreover, the current athletic authorities in Irelandwere attempting to popular oreign games, which were almost all British in origin. Cusack

6[6] Michael Cusack, Celtic Times, quoted from Scally, John. The GAA:

An Oral History. Mainstream Publishing. Edinburgh and London. 2009.

16.


7/14

was incredibly critical o these games, calling them garrison games or what he viewed astheir Irish origins- military outposts around Ireland [7]. Te term garrison game is incred-ibly interesting, because it suggests a closeness between British sports like rugby, cricket,and ootball, and the military occupation o Ireland by British troops. As gaelic games areconnected in Irish history with political processes and military actions, so too does Cusackbelieve that British games are indicative o British martial training and exercise. Te danger

it would seem or Cusack is that in playing these oreign games, one takes on the traditionso military power associated with them, joining British orces so to speak. I rugby, cricket,and ootball are garrison games then playing them makes one a part o the British garrison.

Cusacks hopes were that a gaelic athletic organization would guratively (but per-haps also literally) combat the popularity o British games by reviving oppressed Irish ones.At the conclusion o his editorial, Cusack makes a connection between nationalism, therevival o Irish athletics, and the strength o the Irish as a people (race).

Te ast majority o the best athletes in Ireland are Nationalists. Tese gentlemen

should take the matter in hand at once, and draf laws or the guidance o promoterso meetings in Ireland next year It is only by such an arrangement that pure Irishathletics will be reied and that the incomparable strength and physique o our racewill be presered. [8]

Athletes and athletics in this passage are clearly more than just gied players ogames and enjoyable activities. Tere is something powerully political at stake in Cusacksclaim that the vast majority o the best athletes in Ireland are Nationalists. First, this likelya jab at the act that known Nationalists were generally disqualied rom pro-British compe-titions, and thereore orced out o Irish athletics. Second, Cusacks suggestion is that being

a Nationalist is oen a sign/consequence/cause o being a good athlete. Intertwining suc-cessul athletes with politics allows or the consideration that Irish Nationalism is as strong,

7[7] Scally 16.

[8] Michael Cusack, Celtic Times, quoted from Scally 16.

[9] de Burca, Marcus. The GAA: A History. Gill & Macmillan Ltd. Dub-

lin, Ireland. 1980. Revised 1999. 10.


8/14

victorious, and energetic as the athletes who subscribe to its missions and belies.Cuscak also makes the claim in this passage that it is only through pure Irish athlet-

ics that the incomparable strength and physique o our race will be preserved. Which is tosuggest that the Irish peoples vitality, as both individuals and as a collective nation, is direct-ly tied to its maintenance o pure Irish athletics. While these athletics are not enumerat-ed or listed, one can gather that they are gaelic games by the act that at the establishment

o the GAA, Cusack advocated or the codication o hurling and gaelic ootball as inher-ently Irish pursuits. And by the act that while writing this piece, Cusack was consciouslyattempting to bring rural, then un-codied hurling into Dublin with the ounding o theDublin Hurley Club in 1882 [9]. Against garrison games, Cusacks pure Irish athleticsare suggested to be the pathway to a strong and united Irish race. Tis strength, called in-comparable by Cusack, also reects the need or strength in possible armed conict againstthose who garrison games, making gaelic games even at their rst stirrings o institutionalrevival, a matter o martial prowess.

Members o the Irish Republican Brotherhood, better known as the Fenians, didnot miss the relationships between sport and politics, and sport and military power thatCusacks editorials suggested. Writing requently on the subject o Irish athletics and theneed or an Irish sports authority, Cusack managed to spread his message outside o hishome in Dublin through National newspapers like United Irelandand Te Irishman [10].Both o these papers had high circulation among Fenians, so when Cusack published anannouncement in several papers that he would be meeting at Turles in the center o Irelandon November 1, 1884 he cannot have been surprised that IRB leaders turned up [11]. Teattendance at this rst now celebrated meeting was incredibly low. A report published in

the Cork Examiner put the number o attendees at just seven [12]. Nevertheless, the indi-viduals in attendance were men o inuence and power . Among them was Maurice Davin, a

the GAA & the IRB

8[10] de Burca 13.

[11] de Burca 13 -14 .

[12] Scally 17.

[13] de Burca 7.


9/14

world-record holder in the hammer, who wrote the rst ofcial rules or gaelic ootball andhurling. Also in attendance was John Bracken, a tradesman with extensive ties to the Fenianmovement. Brackens attendance was representative o the IRBs broader interest in the goalso the edgling GAA.

Although it is the patronage o Archbishop Croke that the GAA decided to honorwith the naming o its largest park in Dublin, the IRBs Michael Davitt was at least as

inuential o a patron in the GAAs ormative years. Like many Fenians, Davitt came intopolitics through the Land Reorm movement o the late 19th century. It was there that thepolitical value o sports became clear. For Michael Davitt, along with celebrated IRB athletePat Nally, politics and sports were inseparable. For some years, Fenianism and the causeo the small tenant-armer had been closely allied in Connacht; hense [sic] Nally became abitter opponent o Landlordism, the class then patronising rural athletics [13]. Cusackseditorials had made similar jabs at the landlordism o Irish athletics, so when Davitt learnedo Cusacks movement, he pledged his support. Tough he did not attend the rst ounda-tional meeting, Bracken was sent along to represent the Fenians, and within a ew months,two urther IRB members had joined the ranks o the organizations leadership [14] . Si-

multaneously, the more conservative and Pro-British elements o the GAAs leadership le.Tough Tomas St. George McCarthy o the Royal Irish Constabulary had been presentat the ounding o the GAA, he was soon pressured to leave [15]. Michael Cusack too wasorced out o the organization, but not or political purposes. His stubborn personality andinability to cooperate with the developing Athletic Association rustrated his co-workersand angered Archbishop Croke. With Cusacks resignation, the IRB took a central role inthe early ormation o GAA Clubs and Athletic events. What had begun with a nationalistleaning had now become rmly nationalistic.

o suggest that the GAA was ounded by the IRB would be misleading. Moreover,to suggest that the GAA was completely controlled by the IRB during its ormative years

would likewise be untrue. Yet there can be no denying that the organization was directlyinuenced and assisted by the Fenian movement in its early years. In a 1990 history o the

9[14] Scally 19.

[15] Prior 33.


10/14

GAA and Irish Nationalist Politics, historian W.F. Mandle systematically documents theinltration and manipulation o the GAA by the Irish Republican Brotherhood [16]. Hisprimary resources are contemporary police reports, which though no doubt exaggerated bypaid inormers, nonetheless document the British policemens continuous interest in theGAA as something other than an athletic league. According to Mandles research, the actualgaelic games o the GAA were o entirely secondary interest to British political observers.

Instead, Crown orces remained interested in the GAA as an organizing body politic. Here,we have a return o the pretence argument that Lord Orrey complained o in 1667. Ten,as in the late 19th and early 20th century, gaelic games were read as mere covers or politicalorganization.

Part o the British authorities ears o gaelic games and the GAA came rom theleagues rapid and widespread growth. Te GAA was modeled on the parish organizationthat Daniel OConnell had taken advantage o in 1829, and had been used by the RomanCatholic Church or centuries [17]. Consequently, the GAA spread like prairie re toquote Michael Cusack, and soon had a rm network o clubs around Ireland. GAA eventsincreased in popularity, bringing larger and larger groups o people together or its con-

tests. By 1918, the imes o London reported that over 30,000 people had attended theAll-Ireland hurling Final in Dublin that year, even without public transportation provided[18]. Because o the IRBs inltration and involvement with the GAA, this growth was aconsiderable worry or British authorities who could not be sure whom among the GAAwas a Fenian, and whom was merely nationalistic. GAA events o the sports eld urthercomplicated this distinction, as a February 1, 1888 parade brought young GAA men cladin jerseys bearing their camans on their shoulders marched along under the banners o theirrespective branches [19]. Te militarism o this display is impossible to ignore. With theirhurleys on their shoulders, clad in uniorms, and under the banners o their clubs, the GAAmen surely looked like a disciplined military, with their hurleys again cast as ries/weapons.

Te Freemens Journal calls this display the nest section o a parade given in honor o twovisiting politicians. But or British authorities, the impression was likely ar more problem-

10

[16] Fitzpatrick, David. Review: The Gaelic Athletic Association and Irish

Nationalist Politics, 1884-1924 The English Historical Review,Vol. 105,

No. 414 (Jan 1990). 240.

[17] Scally 17.

[18] The Times,Tuesday, Nov 04, 1919; pg. 48; Issue 42248; col B. Gael-

ic Games. Hurling And Gaelic Football. (FROM A CORRESPONDENT.)

[19]Freemens Journal,Feb 1, 1888; quoted by O Maolfabhail 52


11/14

atic. Te GAA reused to just play their gaelic games. Like Cusack had imagined, the revital-ized Irish men o gaelic games were now incomparable in martial discipline and proud toshow it.

It is in light o the proto-militarism o the GAA, and the close coupling o gaelicgames and Irish nationalism that the Croke Park massacre o November 21, 1920 appearsmore rational. Not that the actions o Royal Irish Constabulary and British Auxiliaries onthat original Bloody Sunday can ever be rationalized away, but rom a British perspectivethe close identication o politics, militarism, Fenianism and Irish Nationalism with gaelicgames makes gaelic games into a veritable target or British war reprisals. On that Sundayin November, a gaelic ootball match was being contested between Dublin and ipperary.Earlier in the day, 14 British agents had been attacked and killed by IRA operatives on theorders o Michael Collins. According to later published explanations, Royal Irish Constabu-lary and British Auxiliary orces were sent to Croke Park, where the game was being played,

to shut it down, and search the attendees or weapons. Te implication o this logic is thatIRA agents would be the kind o people who attend GAA events and thus British authori-ties would be able to nd those guilty o the days early ambush at this gathering. Instead,spectators panicked at the arrival o the armed auxiliaries and in the conusion, the policeopened re, not stopping or 90 seconds.

Te Croke Park massacre can also be understood as the moment at which gaelicgames were nally taken on as participant/combatant/victim in the Anglo-Irish War. Forthe dispersal o spectators at that November 21st game was not just an opportunity to seekIRA agents, but also to intervene in an Irish cultural activity that was considered by the Brit-ish authorities in Ireland as part and parcel o Irish resistance. Tis, aer all, had been the

traditional understanding o the game by British authorities or almost six hundred years.Moreover, the growing popularity o GAA events certainly suggested that gaelic games and

11

the Croke Park Massacre


12/14

the radicalism they had been connected to were re-entering vogue among the Irish citizenry.So attacking/interrupting this gathering was certainly a symbolic gesture o British authori-ties desire to intervene in the political radicalization o the Irish people.

Yet, or whatever reason, the politicality o the GAA and gaelic games more broadlywas not made clear to a general British audience outside o Ireland. In the November 4,1919 imes o London, not one but two dierent articles were written about the Irish

and their love o sports. Both articles paid special attention to hurling and gaelic ootball,acknowledging the massive groundswell o support among the Irish or the revival o theirnational pastimes but without mention o the games as political activities [20] . In act,while the imes was willing to write on gaelic games as a positive cultural orce outside ocenturies o turmoil and political strie, [21] it reused to cover the Croke Park killings justone year later [22]. Part o the cause or this sel-censorship may lie in the imes concernor international attention to British action in Ireland. At the time o the Croke Park massa-cre, international opinion elt that the British action was entirely unjust because the activityin question was a public sporting event with women, children, and unarmed civilians [23].Perhaps unable to succinctly convey the political history o gaelic games, the imes cover-

age tried to ocus attention away rom the sporting massacre towards the killing o its owncrown orces.

Meanwhile, within Ireland, even Unionist and allegedly neutral newspapers ac-knowledged the Croke Park attacks as inherently political [24]. In act, an Irish Indepen-dent editorial pleaded with the British to recognize the problem in Ireland, evidenced bythe attacking o the GAA, as a political issue.

Te real cause o all the terrible happenings to which we hae alluded [iolence othe past year] is incapacity or deliberate reusal on the part o the British Government to perceie that the disease is political [25]

Te GAA, in its commissioning o its own history in 1980, asked author Marcus de Burca

12

[20] The Times, Gaelic Games.

[21] The Times, Tuesday, Nov 04, 1919; pg. 47; Issue 42248; col A. Irish

Enthusiasm. Love Of Racing And Hunting., Football And Hurling.

[22] Kenneally, Ian. The Paper Wall: Newspapers and Propaganda in

Ireland 1919-1921. The Collins Press, Cork. 2008. 158.

[23] Kenneally 158. [24] Ibid. 113.

[25]Irish Independent, November 23, 1920 quoted by Kenneally, 113.


13/14

to pay special attention to its inuence on the national movement o the pre-1922 Irelandsuggesting that it rom its perspective, albeit with the gi o hindsight, the GAA was indeeda political actor in the Anglo-Irish War [26] . Although, it is somewhat ironic that given allo the violence associated with gaelic games, and all o the military symbolism attached tothe hurley and the training o hurling players, the most signicant achievement o the GAAmay well be the martyrdom o its players and ans on Bloody Sunday.

A true history o Irish nationalism and gaelic games would need to be ar more exhaustivethan this cursory overview. For in addition to the eventual independence o the Irish FreeState, and the changes that this necessitated or the GAA and or gaelic games broadly, thereis certainly more depth to interrogate even within the small part o the story that has beenexamined here. Interestingly, the GAA continues to manage a 32-county athletic league de-spite the act that these 32 counties are split between the Republic o Ireland (26 counties)and Northern Ireland (6 counties). Imagining the whole Ireland hoped or Republicans,

the GAA thus represents the continuation o ideas or an integrated Ireland. Which is notwithout its own problems or open political difculties.

Te relationship between gaelic games and Irish politics has also not completelysubsided. A May 6, 2010 Belast elegraph article documents a controversy in NorthernIreland over a charity event that includes the logos o both the GAA and the PSNI (PoliceService o Northern Ireland) [27]. Te GAA long banned members o British military andPolice services rom entering GAA competition under rule 21 and only abolished the banin 2001 [28]. But the political strie between the PSNI and Irish nationalists in NorthernIreland has not subsided as easily. Caught between the GAA o Irish Nationalism and thesymbolic British authoritarianism o PSNI, ormerly the Royal Ulster Constabulary, gaelic

games remain politicized even in the 21st century.

13

[26] de BurcaPreface.

[27] McNeilly, Claire.Belfast Telegraph. May, 6 2010. police widow

Kate Carroll in tears after GAA symbol row hits fundraiser.

[28]RTE News. September, 24 2005. GAA Sanctions rule 21 Aboli-

tion.

politics in play today


14/14

Heritage

at Playis forthcoming a documentary

by Colleen Brogan& Zachary McCune

cover photograph from The Wind That Shakes the

Barley (2006) a flm by Ken Loach

document design

by Zachary McCune

contact [email protected]

heritage history 1920

Documents