ww1

Bob Z

when the easter rising happened was there any irish born british soldiers who heard about it and then deserted or tried to or refused to fight?

Peregrinus

No. A unit of the Connaught Rangers opted not to engage the Volunteers who had taken effective control of the town of Ennisocorthy, but I don't think this had anything to do with doubts about the loyalty or sympathies of the soldiers. Rather, it was a judgment - which proved to be correct - that the Volunteers could be cut off and contained in Enniscorthy, and a feeling that a direct engagement would lead to bloodshed and loss of life to no great purpose. The Volunteers effectively controlled Enniscorthy for about a week, and surrendered when they heard of the surrender in Dublin.

By the time most British units serving in France or further afield heard very much about the outbreak in Dublin, it was already over. At the time the Volunteers aims would have gained some sympathy and/or respect among the generality of the Irish people (including, presumably, Irishmen serving in the British forces) but their methods, particularly the Rebellion, not at all. A lot of people saw the Rebellion as a betrayal of Irish Nationalists who had joined the British forces in 1914, in part to prove to prove Ireland's fitness for self-government; presumably this feeling would have been particularly strong among Irishmen in the British forces. It was only after the suppression of the Rebellion that sympathies began to shift in the Revels' favour.

You'll be aware, presumably, of the Connaught Rangers Mutiny in India in 1920 in protest against the imposition of martial law in Ireland during the War of Independence. But that was several years later.

Bob Z

I came across a comment online from someone who said his grandfather fought in ww1 and of his fellow soldiers who were irish heard about it and deserted

tac foley

Deserting from the Front Lines whilst serving in France was not unheard of, but the death penalty on capture was a pretty firm reminder that that sort of thing was frowned upon.

Getting from France, having evaded capture [or betrayal] was something else, since travel was VERY restricted during times of war. Getting from France to England was hard enough - how hard do you think it would be to get over to Ireland?

I believe that there was an element of wishful thinking going on with these stories of desertion.

tac

Peregrinus

tac foley wrote: »

Deserting from the Front Lines whilst serving in France was not unheard of, but the death penalty on capture was a pretty firm reminder that that sort of thing was frowned upon . . .

Bob doesn't say that his grandfather was serving in France. But, still, your point is well made.

Deserters were liable to be shot though, in fact, relatively few were. Most executions were in fact for cowardice, a charge brought when someone deserted during, or immediately before, an offensive operation. And most who deserted in those circumstances did so out of sheer terror, and without any concrete plan about what to do afterwards since, as you point out, detection and arrest was pretty well inevitable.

This wasn't your typical desertion. Far more common was the case of someone behind the lines who gets drunk or is otherwise up to mischief, finds himself separated from his unit, and then endeavours to stay separated, mainly to avoid punishment, but no doubt also to avoid danger or just unpleasant duties. In this circumstances you might be charged as Absent Without Leave, or you might be charge with Desertion - the latter charge if your absence was prolonged, or came just before your unit was to be moved to the front line, or showed evidence of pre-planning. Execution in these circumstances was possible but unlikely.

As for desertion as protest? I haven't heard of any cases, though I can't say it never happened. But I could easily envisage a case in which dissatisfaction with what you have heard from home contributes to lack of morale, poor discipline, insubordination, and is a contributory factor in someone not presenting for duty when he should.

tac foley

Peregrinus wrote: »

Bob doesn't say that his grandfather was serving in France. But, still, your point is well made.

If he wasn't serving in France, then his attempts to join his 'revolting' buddies back home on the 'Ould Sod' from Gallipoli, Mesopotamia, East Africa or even West Africa, let alone the Arabian Pensinsular, would be equally lacking in success.

Deserters were liable to be shot though, in fact, relatively few were. Most executions were in fact for cowardice, a charge brought when someone deserted during, or immediately before, an offensive operation. And most who deserted in those circumstances did so out of sheer terror, and without any concrete plan about what to do afterwards since, as you point out, detection and arrest was pretty well inevitable.

This wasn't your typical desertion. Far more common was the case of someone behind the lines who gets drunk or is otherwise up to mischief, finds himself separated from his unit, and then endeavours to stay separated, mainly to avoid punishment, but no doubt also to avoid danger or just unpleasant duties. In this circumstances you might be charged as Absent Without Leave, or you might be charge with Desertion - the latter charge if your absence was prolonged, or came just before your unit was to be moved to the front line, or showed evidence of pre-planning. Execution in these circumstances was possible but unlikely.

As for desertion as protest? I haven't heard of any cases, though I can't say it never happened. But I could easily envisage a case in which dissatisfaction with what you have heard from home contributes to lack of morale, poor discipline, insubordination, and is a contributory factor in someone not presenting for duty when he should.

Thank you, I have actually read 'Shot at Dawn'.

I suppose that my REAL point was that nobody would actually have had the TIME to desert from wherever it was they deserted from, and gotten back to Ireland in time to join in The Rising.

tac

Peregrinus

tac foley wrote: »

Thank you, I have actually read 'Shot at Dawn'.

But others may not have.

tac foley wrote: »

I suppose that my REAL point was that nobody would actually have had the TIME to desert from wherever it was they deserted from, and gotten back to Ireland in time to join in The Rising.

tac

Bob doesn't suggest that that was the motivation for the supposed desertion and, to be honest, it never occurred to me that it might have been.

After all, the Connaught Rangers mutiny undoubtedly happened, and it had nothing to do with anybody expecting they could get back to Ireland. If there were desertions in 1916, they weren't necessarily an attempt to join the Rising; just a refusal to fight with the crown forces when other units of the crown forces were doing what they were doing in Dublin.

pedroeibar1

Bob Z wrote: »

I came across a comment online from someone who said his grandfather fought in ww1 and of his fellow soldiers who were irish heard about it and deserted

It is foolish to take seriously random information found online. That BS stuff is up there with the tales about U-boats refuelling on our west coast during WW2. One thing the Brits are good at is keeping records - had 1916-motivated desertions happened they would have been written about by the plethora of historians with access to the records.

Bob Z

pedroeibar1 wrote: »

It is foolish to take seriously random information found online. That BS stuff is up there with the tales about U-boats refuelling on our west coast during WW2. One thing the Brits are good at is keeping records - had 1916-motivated desertions happened they would have been written about by the plethora of historians with access to the records.

Yes I know but it was someone I was in conversation with

pedroeibar1

Bob Z wrote: »

Yes I know but it was someone I was in conversation with

I was going to respond in greater detail and then I remembered this.
Bye.