Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-fbnjt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-17T03:23:00.042Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Francis Stuart’s broadcasts from Germany, 1942—4: some new evidence

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 March 2016

Andreas Roth
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The poet and novelist Francis Stuart’s sojourn in Germany during the Second World War and his broadcasting activities for the Nazis remain a cnámh spairne among historians and journalists alike. Assessments of his radio talks range from that of his biographer J.H. Natterstad, who described them as being of ‘a literary or semi-literary’ character, to that of Kevin Myers, who equated the broadcasts with ‘voluntary siding with the most bestial régime in the history of civilisation’. In October 1997 a television documentary during which Stuart was quoted as saying that ‘the Jew was always the worm that got into the rose and sickened it’ triggered off a long-running controversy in the letters pages of the Irish Times. Some prominent intellectuals rushed to Stuart’s defence, arguing, for example, that the worm metaphor was indeed a positive one, representing the ‘hidden, unheroic and critical’. On the other hand, leaving aside the question whether or not Stuart was an antisemite, two German emigrants to Ireland argued that anyone, including Stuart, ‘who lived in Germany at that time, any person working for the Ministry of Propaganda had to be an active Nazi sympathiser’. From a more scholarly perspective, David O’Donoghue has recorded that in his radio talks Stuart was neither anti-Jewish nor anti-Russian, while Dermot Keogh suggested that Stuart’s broadcasts from Germany in fact mirrored the content of antisemitic publications in Ireland at the time. Stuart himself denied ever having backed the Nazis, and rejected the charge of antisemitism in the R.T.É. interview broadcast in January 1998: ‘I never supported that régime.’

Type
Research Article
Information
Irish Historical Studies , Volume 32 , Issue 127 , May 2001 , pp. 408 - 422
Copyright
Copyright © Irish Historical Studies Publications Ltd 2001

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Natterstad, Jerry H., Francis Stuart (London, 1974), p. 64Google Scholar. Seán Cronin also played down Stuart’s involvement: ‘He [Stuart] occasionally broadcast on the German Irish service about cultural matters’ (Cronin, Seán, Frank Ryan: the search for the Republic (Dublin, 1980), p. 197Google Scholar). This statement could be regarded as an indication of a tendency among Republicans to gloss over the close personal and organisational ties between their movement and the Nazis. Charles McGuinness, a flamboyant figure who had been involved in gun-running from Hamburg to Ireland in the early 1920s, undertook to offer his services to the German legation during the emergency: ‘Personally I am desirous of getting across [to the Continent] to aid in any manner in the war against Britain — even broadcasting’ (McGuinness to ‘Peterson’ [Karl-Heinz Petersen, press attaché of the German legation], n.d. (N.A.I., DFA, Secretary’s Office, A8, misc. correspondence with Col. Archer and Col. Bryan, 4/1940-6/1942)).

2 Irish Times, 10 Oct. 1996.

3 Ibid., 17 Dec. 1997.

4 Stuart himself, in Black List Section H, quoted by Paul Durcan in Irish Times, 31 Oct. 1997.

5 Christabel Bielenberg and Charlotte O’Connell, née von der Schulenburg, ibid., 10 Dec. 1997.

6 O’Donoghue, David, Hitler’s Irish voices: the story of German radio’s wartime Irish service (Belfast, 1998), pp 43, 80-81,99-101Google Scholar.

7 Keogh, Dermot, Jews in twentieth-century Ireland: refugees, anti-semitism and the Holocaust (Cork, 1998), p. 170Google Scholar.

8 Irish Times, 12 Jan. 1998.

9 Stephan, Enno, Spies in Ireland (London, 1963)Google Scholar.

10 O’Donoghue (in Hitler’s Irish voices) provided a vivid account of German broadcasting to Ireland in general, but did not systematically examine Stuart’s radio talks, which deserve closer scrutiny. Naturally, neither did he examine all German archival files concerning Stuart.

11 Clissman, who died in November 1997, returned to Germany later in 1939 and began to work for Admiral Canaris’s counter-intelligence agency, Abwehr. Although Stuart paid a visit to the Abwehr headquarters at Tirpitzufer in Berlin on 4 February 1940, he had no further dealings with them. See Stephan, Spies in Ireland, p. 80.

12 German broadcasts (Irish Military Archives, Cathal Brugha Barracks, G2/x/0127). In order to minimise the number of footnotes, all quotes from Stuart’s broadcasts, unless otherwise stated, are from this source and will therefore not be referenced individually. Their respective dates, however, if not explicitly mentioned in the text, will be placed in parentheses. Since the present article was prepared for publication this material has been published in The wartime broadcasts of Francis Stuart, 1942-1944, ed. Barrington, Brendan (Dublin, 2000)Google Scholar. I am very grateful to Mr Barrington for his valuable comments on a draft of this article.

13 This trait is reflected to some extent also in Stuart’s own depiction of a writer: ‘The novelist or poet however is not notable for being a contented, prosperous citizen, nor does he often share the general attitudes and assumptions of his time or society. He is apt to feel himself on the fringe of, if not right outside, the communal fold’ (Stuart, Francis, ‘Politics and the modern Irish writer’ in Études Irlandaises, no. 3 (Dec. 1978), p. 42Google Scholar).

14 Francis Stuart, ‘Extracts from a Berlin diary’ in Irish Times, 29 Jan. 1976.

15 Elborn, Geoffrey, Francis Stuart: a life (Dublin, 1990), p. 122Google Scholar.

16 Microfiche no. 463, 20 Dec. 1939 (Politisches Archiv des Auswärtigen Amts, Bonn [henceforth P.A., Bonn], Büro Staatssekretär (Irland).

17 Ibid., microfiche no. 464.

18 N.A.I., DFA, Secretary’s Office, P12/3, Berlin Legation 1940-5.

19 Ibid., ll Nov.l940.

20 Weiland, Ruth (ed.), Irische Freiheitskämpfer— Biographische Skizzen (Berlin, 1940)Google Scholar.

21 Ibid., p. 107.

22 Ibid., p.l09.

23 Ibid., p. 114.

24 Ibid., p.ll7.

25 Stuart, Francis, Der Fall Casement: das Leben Sir Roger Casements und der Verleumdungsfeldzug des Secret Service (Hamburg, 1940)Google Scholar.

26 For the Organisation of German radio propaganda see the introduction to the Findbuch Rundfunkpolitische Abteilung / Kult R 1939-1945 (P.A., Bonn).

27 Dickel, Horst, Die deutsche Aussenpolitik und die irische Frage von 1932 bis 1944 (Wiesbaden, 1983), p. 172Google Scholar.

28 See Hempel to Walshe, 25 Nov., 9 Dec. 1939 (N.A.I., DFA 233/80,81).

29 For a copy of the memorandum see Sturm, Hubert, Hakenkreuz und Kleeblatt: Irland, die Alliierten und das Dritte Reich, 1933-1945 (2 vols, Frankfurt-am-Main, 1984), i, A60Google Scholar.

30 Stuart, ‘Extracts from a Berlin diary’ (18 Feb. 1940); see also Elborn, Stuart, p. 124. Stuart’s biographer Natterstad has named a ‘Dr Schobert’ as the person who asked Stuart to work for German radio, and mistakenly predated the start of Stuart’s work to April 1940 (Natterstad, Stuart, pp 58-9).

31 ‘a lively, vigorous little man ... his eyes twinkling and full of humour behind his rimless spectacles’ (Mheara-Vinard, Róisín Ní, Cé hí seo amuigh? (Dublin, 1984), p. 138Google Scholar).

32 Stuart, ‘Extracts from a Berlin diary’ (18 Feb. 1940).

33 Carter, Carolle J., The shamrock and the swastika: German espionage in Ireland in World War II (Palo Alto, 1977), p. 108Google Scholar.

34 Dickel, Die deutsche Aussenpolitik & die irische Frage, p. 185.

35 Sendemitschriften, vol. iii, 9 Feb. 1942 (P.A., Bonn, Rundfunkpolitische Abteilung / Kult R 1939-1945, Referat II: England, Sonderreferat Ha: Irland, Deutsche Rundfunkpropaganda nach Irland). This radio talk was apparently missed by G2 and is not recorded in the Irish archives. O’Donoghue, whose bibliography does not include the above-mentioned German file, claimed that Stuart first went on air on St Patrick’s Day 1942 (O’Donoghue, Hitler’s Irish voices, p. 82).

36 German broadcasts to Ireland (N.A.I., DFA 205/108).

37 Stuart, ‘Extracts from a Berlin diary’.

38 Sturm, Hakenkreuz & Kleeblatt, ii, 292.

39 Fisk, Robert, In time of war: Ireland, Ulster and the price of neutrality, 1939-45 (London, 1985 ed.), p. 407Google Scholar.

40 N.A.I., DFA, Secretary’s Office, P12/3, Berlin Legation 1940-5,14 May 1943.The letter had been forwarded to External Affairs by the Taoiseach’s private secretary on 17 May 1943.

41 Francis Stuart, letters to the editor, Irish Times, 13, 19 Dec. 1938.

42 Burke, Raymond P., ‘The representation of Jews and “Jewishness” in the novels of Francis Stuart’ (unpublished M.A. thesis, University College, Galway, 1989), p. 48Google Scholar.

43 Sendemitschriften, vol. iii, 9 Feb. 1942 (P.A., Bonn, Rundfunkpolitische Abteilung / Kult R 1939-1945, Referat II: England, Sonderreferat IIa: Irland, Deutsche Rundfunkpropaganda nach Irland).

44 Bell, J.Bowyer, The secret army: a history of the I.R.A., 1916-1970 (London, 1972 ed.), p. 272Google Scholar. McAteer and three others managed to escape from Crumlin Road Prison on 15 January 1943. On the same day Frank Ryan, another prominent Irishman who spent most of the war years in Germany, suffered a stroke. Stuart subsequently told his friend Ryan about McAteer’s absconding to cheer up the staunch Republican (Stuart, Francis, ‘Frank Ryan in Germany’ in The Bell, Nov. 1950, pp 40–41Google Scholar).

45 German broadcasts to Ireland (N. A.I., DFA 205/108).

46 Sendemitschriften, vol. iii, 9 Feb. 1942 (P.A., Bonn, Rundfunkpolitische Abteilung / Kult R 1939-1945, Referat II: England, Sonderreferat Ha: Irland, Deutsche Rundfunkpropaganda nach Irland).

47 Mackay, Herbert O. (ed.), The crime against Europe: the writings and poetry of Roger Casement (Dublin, 1958)Google Scholar.

48 In later years Stuart came to the conclusion that ‘there can normally be no alliance or meaningful cooperation between governments and individual artists’ (Stuart, ‘Politics & the modern Irish writer’, p. 44).

49 After listening to it [the B.B.C.] for a long period I am forced to the conclusion that there is freedom in it for almost everything except the simple truth’ (4 Sept. 1943).

50 ‘There is not the slightest chance for anyone to speak anywhere today with the least freedom excepting here in Germany’ (7 Sept. 1943).

51 Stuart, ‘Extracts from a Berlin diary’ (2 May 1944).

52 In the light of all the evidence, it appears misleadingly apologetic to state that Stuart was ‘uncompromisingly neutral’ in his stance and that he ‘didn’t accept the Nazi megalomania’ (Harry T. Moore, ‘Postcript’ to Francis Stuart, Black List Section H (Carbondale & Edwardsville, III., 1971), pp 436, 438).

53 In an interview in 1981 Stuart said: ‘The content of my speeches was never explicitly pro-German.’ Quite rightly, however, he pointed out in the same interview that his ‘whole feeling about the broadcasts was that I was entitled to say what I liked’ (Irish Times, 21 Feb. 1981 (weekend supplement)).

54 Memorandum, 1 Apr. 1943 (Irish Military Archives, German broadcasts, G2/X/0127).

55 N.A.L. DFA, Secretary’s Office, P12/3, Berlin Legation 1940-5.

56 Ibid.

57 Memorandum submitted by the Irish legation at Berlin, 31 May 1943, microfiche no. 475 (P.A., Bonn, Büro Staatssekretär (Irland).

58 Ibid. Evidence from the actual election broadcasts and the wording of the subsequent Irish protest, as well as that of the German reaction to it, undermines Natterstad’s statement that Stuart ‘advised against supporting Eamon de Valera’ (Natterstad, Stuart, p. 65).

59 This aside was obviously directed against James Dillon, who had been forced to resign from Fine Gael in 1942 for his anti-neutrality stance.

60 The evidence from Stuart’s broadcasts makes it seem very unlikely that Stuart changed his positive opinion of Hitler in the aftermath of his lecture tour of Germany in 1939, as was alleged by Natterstad (Natterstad, Stuart, p. 56).

61 The above quotations from Stuart’s broadcasts appear to refute Robert Fisk’s verdict (in Irish Times, 10 Oct. 1996) that Stuart ‘didn’t say that Hitler was a great fellow’.

62 Even Stuart’s otherwise apologetic biographer Natterstad admitted that ‘his collaboration with the Nazi régime had genuine propaganda value for the Germans’ (Natterstad, Jerry H., ‘Locke’s swoon: Francis Stuart and the politics of despair’ in Éire-Ireland, xxvi, no. 4 (winter 1991), p. 61 )Google Scholar.