In a relatively brief, not very lethal, but meticulously documented guerrilla war in Ireland there is an opportunity to reflect on who historians choose to listen to when writing about violence. Across 1920–21 thousands of inquests captured the voices of the men, women and sometimes children who were the first to describe and define the act of killing in this conflict, but who very quickly fell out of the historical record after that point. This article considers the contribution these bystanders can make to a history of violence, and some of the challenges their evidence presents. By witnessing death were they an integral part of how killing was meant to be understood? Are they fundamental to an understanding of how terror worked, and did they, by their presence, by the way they spoke of what they saw, contribute to why so few deaths were needed for the message to be understood in the Irish context? Ultimately, these witnesses also raise questions about the reactions they prompted then as well as now. Is it easier to hear of killing from a combatant than from a child, and are there consequences for the history of violence in the making of that choice?

中文翻译：

---

档案中的死亡：见证爱尔兰的战争，1919-1921

在一段相对简短、不是很致命但经过细致记录的爱尔兰游击战中，我们有机会反思历史学家在撰写有关暴力的文章时选择听谁的意见。在 1920-21 年间，成千上万的调查捕捉到了男人、女人和儿童的声音，他们是第一个描述和定义这场冲突中杀戮行为的人，但在那之后他们很快就从历史记录中消失了。本文考虑了这些旁观者对暴力历史的贡献，以及他们的证据提出的一些挑战。通过目睹死亡，他们是如何理解杀戮的一个组成部分吗？它们是理解恐怖如何运作的基础吗？通过它们的存在，通过它们谈论所见所闻的方式，它们是否具有重要意义？有助于为什么在爱尔兰语境中理解该信息所需的死亡人数如此之少？最终，这些证人还对他们当时和现在引起的反应提出了疑问。从战斗人员那里听到杀戮是否比从儿童那里更容易听到？在做出这种选择时，暴力历史是否会产生后果？