User:RAYGWENT/sandbox

Historical interpretations of the Newport Rising, 1839
The causes and motives of the 'Newport Rising' of 1839 are open to significantly different historical interpretations. David Jones, in the introduction to his 1985 work, outlines the range of some of the views that emerged in the aftermath of 1839.

The historiography of the 'Rising' probably begins with R. G. Gammage. Writing in the 1850s, he has been described as being among the 'first generation of Chartist historians'. His conclusions, however, have been described by Jones as being too heavily reliant on newspaper reports. Robert Lowery described the insurrection as a 'mad and foolish affair', while the Fabians tended to be quite dismissive of the Chartists.

Julius West, writing in 1920, reduced the 'Rising' to a fairly innocuous gathering of 200 people."A definite and accurate statement of the total number of the armed Chartist rioters would be of great interest, were it obtainable.  The Times stated the figure at 8,000, The Morning Chronicle at 1,000, another account gives 20,000. [p.143-2]  It is very probable that the actual figure is much smaller than any of these.  Fear and darkness cause such statistics to multiply furiously.  The facts are that forty Chartists were taken prisoners, and that a smaller number, say twenty, were killed. (Only ten bodies were forthcoming when the inquest was held.)  We may assume that others, perhaps fifty, were wounded some of these would probably be included among those captured.  In view of the number of special constables and soldiers in Newport on the fatal night, we have a right to assume that an armed insurgent would stand a very good chance of being captured. The fight at the Westgate Hotel lasted at least twenty minutes, or time enough to allow of the assembly of all the upholders of law and order in the town. We must therefore conclude that the total number has been grossly exaggerated by all concerned, and that 200 would be a generous estimate of the number of rioters. The various accounts of the disorders speak of a body of unarmed Chartists outside the town, waiting on the hills for the news of their comrades’ victory; of an unarmed body of the same which entered Newport when it was too late; of an armed body which did likewise; of two bodies, one armed and the other unarmed, which did likewise. When these tales are arranged in an ascending order of magnitude, it seems fairly clear that they owe their origin to a common ancestor, and that this may well have originated by some citizen of Newport losing his way and coming upon a strange man or two in the darkness."G. D. H. Cole, in his study of 1941, set the tone for a number of post-war historians, ... it is very doubtful whether Frost was the real leader even of this local rising, and more than doubtful whether the Newport affair was part of any widely organised project of revolution. ... Such was the 'Newport Rising' - the nearest thing to an armed revolt that Chartism produced and, because it was the nearest thing, an episode magnified both by contemporaries and by subsequent historians.  How small it was can be judged not only from the numbers slain - even if we accept the largest estimate - but also from the fact that the total of the claims arising out of it for damage to property came to less than £100. ... I may yet be proved wrong; but the absence of any evidence makes me feel pretty sure that there was nothing that deserves to be called a plan, and that the 'Newport Rising' was as local in its inspiration, or nearly so, as it appears. G.D.H. Cole, Chartist Portraits, 1941 In his chapter for Chartist Studies in 1959, Professor David Williams reiterated his cautious opinion that the 'Rising' was without violent or revolutionary intent. The riot at Newport was of small proportions; its importance lies in the question whether it was part of a general plan of insurrection, and as such merits close attention. ... The Chartists elsewhere were, no doubt, threatening to rise, but there is no evidence that the Chartists even intended to 'seize' Newport. The three contingents could so easily have entered the town from three directions, and, if necessary, destroy the bridge to stop the mail, but they were at pains to join forces outside the town at the expense of bringing the Pontypool men considerably out of their way, and they entered the town on the other side. This would confirm the belief that their purpose was a mass demonstration; as a plan to capture the town it is patently absurd. Equally absurd is the theory that their purpose was to liberate Vincent. ... The only reasonable explanation of the Newport riot is that it was intended as a mass demonstration. David Williams, Chartism in Wales, in Chartist Studies (Chapter 7) ed. Asa Briggs, 1959

The 1980s saw the publication of two landmark studies, The Last Rising, produced by Jones in 1985 and South Wales and the Rising of 1839, written by Ivor Wilks in 1984. Jones comments that it was his purpose to re-examine the work of David Williams and to 'set the rising in the context of a unique industrial society'. The thesis provided by Wilks is more Marxist in tone, and argues that Welsh Chartism was the legacy of the Scotch Cattle. He claims that the Chartist movement in the Coalfield were being organised by Sections of Ten - that ten men, together with their captain, were making plans for an insurrection under the umbrella cover of the Chartist lodges. He makes the case that this organisation predates Chartism and that it was concerned less about the political demands of the People’s Charter, and more about the economic dimension of wages, working conditions and hours of employment.

Both use the evidence of contemporaries to establish the case that this was a rising and not a riot.

I went up to the road to them & spoke to a few of them on the folly of their conduct. ... They told me that it was useless for me to talk to them in that way, that they were kept out of their rights, & that they were determined to have the Charter. I then said, supposing that as you say your rights are withheld from you, this surely is not the way to obtain them. One of them, who appeared to be a kind of leader said in reply, it was by such means that the people obtained their rights in America and France.

John Lewis, a tin-plate manufacturer of Ty-du near Newport, from the Treasury Solicitor's Papers 11/500; cited in D.J.V. Jones, The Last Rising (1985)  pp.2-3

We have called that by the name of a riot which should have been styled ‘an insurrection’; for a riot is … some sudden outbreak of popular fury … this is no momentary outbreak, but a long-planned insurrection, deeply organised, managed and with a secrecy truly astonishing, and which has been defeated only by … Providence. The Times newspaper, 11th November 1839