Tuesday, 23 October, Keynote, 17:00-18:30 Emilie Pine (University College Dublin) ‘The Memory Marketplace: Gender, Witnessing and Performance’: This talk will focus on the recent upsurge in memory activism and the ways the social turn in commemoration culture enables us to answer perennial questions about how power and memory intersect – who owns memory, how is it traded, and how is it consumed. The Waking the Feminists movement, and emerging policies on speaking up and calling out inequality and harassment across the arts, demonstrate how the past can be mobilised in progressive ways, and how commemoration can serve as a moment in which communities reflect on the past in order to galvanise present and future action. Memory activism depends on different kinds of performance – from the initial energy of the first voice being raised to the effort of long-term collective campaigning. It also depends on the idea that as producers and audiences of commemoration culture we can take up agentic roles as witnesses. Witnessing is a fundamentally limited role as producers and audiences work within the framework of a larger and change-resistant marketplace infrastructure, as well as being impacted by the limits of their own subjectivity and the current dominance of both empathy and presentism as the leading modes of engagement with the past. However, activism offers us another perspective on the performance of witnessing – and hope for how we can overcome the limits of commemoration fatigue. Activism calls on memory actors to pivot away from the idea of suffering being ‘over there’ or in the past, and instead to work towards solidarity and change, to conceive of memory work as a performance of accountability, and to insist on the utopian possibilities of witnessing the past.
{"title":"Politics and Narrative in Ireland's Decade of Commemorations","authors":"Sara Dybris McQuaid, Fearghal McGarry","doi":"10.1353/eir.2022.0000","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1353/eir.2022.0000","url":null,"abstract":"Tuesday, 23 October, Keynote, 17:00-18:30 Emilie Pine (University College Dublin) ‘The Memory Marketplace: Gender, Witnessing and Performance’: This talk will focus on the recent upsurge in memory activism and the ways the social turn in commemoration culture enables us to answer perennial questions about how power and memory intersect – who owns memory, how is it traded, and how is it consumed. The Waking the Feminists movement, and emerging policies on speaking up and calling out inequality and harassment across the arts, demonstrate how the past can be mobilised in progressive ways, and how commemoration can serve as a moment in which communities reflect on the past in order to galvanise present and future action. Memory activism depends on different kinds of performance – from the initial energy of the first voice being raised to the effort of long-term collective campaigning. It also depends on the idea that as producers and audiences of commemoration culture we can take up agentic roles as witnesses. Witnessing is a fundamentally limited role as producers and audiences work within the framework of a larger and change-resistant marketplace infrastructure, as well as being impacted by the limits of their own subjectivity and the current dominance of both empathy and presentism as the leading modes of engagement with the past. However, activism offers us another perspective on the performance of witnessing – and hope for how we can overcome the limits of commemoration fatigue. Activism calls on memory actors to pivot away from the idea of suffering being ‘over there’ or in the past, and instead to work towards solidarity and change, to conceive of memory work as a performance of accountability, and to insist on the utopian possibilities of witnessing the past.","PeriodicalId":43507,"journal":{"name":"EIRE-IRELAND","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.6,"publicationDate":"2022-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48325683","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The original timeline proposed for the Decade of Commemorations (2012–22) omitted the latter half of the Irish Civil War. The June 2022 centenary of the burning of the Public Record Office during the battle of the Four Courts was considered as a possible “capstone to the decade of centenaries.”1 Following public criticism, however, the chronology of the “decade” was extended until 2023 to cover the final months of the Civil War. But this initial reluctance is highly revealing in terms of official attitudes toward the period of civil conflict. It speaks to a long-established tendency to shy away from the realities of Irish-on-Irish violence and particularly the contentious events of June 1922 to May 1923. The idea that the destruction of centuries of historical documents could offer a symbolic ending to the commemorations also reflects the long-standing characterization of the Irish Civil War as an absence within the historical narrative: memoirs mysteriously end with the truce of July 1921; statements in the Bureau of Military History (BMH) stop suddenly before the Civil War; history textbooks were characterized for decades by “oblivion after 1922.”2 This type of socially validated silence is often a feature of the commemoration of war, mimicking perhaps the liturgical practices of mourning.3 But silence takes on even greater political significance in post–civil war society, as calls for amnesty in the name of the common good often translate into “amnesia” or “commanded forgetting”
{"title":"The Silence and the Silence Breakers of the Irish Civil War, 1922–2022","authors":"Síobhra Aiken","doi":"10.1353/eir.2022.0012","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1353/eir.2022.0012","url":null,"abstract":"The original timeline proposed for the Decade of Commemorations (2012–22) omitted the latter half of the Irish Civil War. The June 2022 centenary of the burning of the Public Record Office during the battle of the Four Courts was considered as a possible “capstone to the decade of centenaries.”1 Following public criticism, however, the chronology of the “decade” was extended until 2023 to cover the final months of the Civil War. But this initial reluctance is highly revealing in terms of official attitudes toward the period of civil conflict. It speaks to a long-established tendency to shy away from the realities of Irish-on-Irish violence and particularly the contentious events of June 1922 to May 1923. The idea that the destruction of centuries of historical documents could offer a symbolic ending to the commemorations also reflects the long-standing characterization of the Irish Civil War as an absence within the historical narrative: memoirs mysteriously end with the truce of July 1921; statements in the Bureau of Military History (BMH) stop suddenly before the Civil War; history textbooks were characterized for decades by “oblivion after 1922.”2 This type of socially validated silence is often a feature of the commemoration of war, mimicking perhaps the liturgical practices of mourning.3 But silence takes on even greater political significance in post–civil war society, as calls for amnesty in the name of the common good often translate into “amnesia” or “commanded forgetting”","PeriodicalId":43507,"journal":{"name":"EIRE-IRELAND","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.6,"publicationDate":"2022-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"66305180","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
In 2010 I wrote a rather speculative paper exploring the “labour of representation” of a British identity constructed by unionist and loyalist groups entitled “Forget 1690, Remember the Somme.”2 It mapped an apparent shift in identity politics, manifested through rituals and symbols, away from commemorative practices around the Battle of the Boyne (1690) toward recognition of the Battle of the Somme (1916). That same year Rebecca Graff-McRae published a book noting some of the same processes that occurred after the 1998 Belfast Agreement.3 Since then the Decade of Centenaries in Ireland has provided what might be described as a supercharged field for commemorative practice providing spaces for negotiation and contestation over the symbolic and political capital invested in forms of
{"title":"Taking the History out of the Decade of Centenaries: Narratives, Rituals, and Symbols in British Identities in Northern Ireland","authors":"Dominic Bryan","doi":"10.1353/eir.2022.0002","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1353/eir.2022.0002","url":null,"abstract":"In 2010 I wrote a rather speculative paper exploring the “labour of representation” of a British identity constructed by unionist and loyalist groups entitled “Forget 1690, Remember the Somme.”2 It mapped an apparent shift in identity politics, manifested through rituals and symbols, away from commemorative practices around the Battle of the Boyne (1690) toward recognition of the Battle of the Somme (1916). That same year Rebecca Graff-McRae published a book noting some of the same processes that occurred after the 1998 Belfast Agreement.3 Since then the Decade of Centenaries in Ireland has provided what might be described as a supercharged field for commemorative practice providing spaces for negotiation and contestation over the symbolic and political capital invested in forms of","PeriodicalId":43507,"journal":{"name":"EIRE-IRELAND","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.6,"publicationDate":"2022-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47827660","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
What historian of revolutionary Ireland can claim to have remained utterly impervious to seduction during the current orgy of centennial commemoration? The study of how distant events have been remembered is suddenly both popular and profitable, offering almost irresistible attractions. . . . The hard questions of history (what actually happened and who thought what, why, and with what consequences) are neatly avoided. Released from tiresome delving into the distant past, historians easily mutate into columnists and pundits, accorded spurious authority because of their past credentials as scholars. —DaviD Fitzpatrick1
{"title":"The Politics of Pluralism: Historians and Easter 2016","authors":"Fearghal McGarry","doi":"10.1353/eir.2022.0001","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1353/eir.2022.0001","url":null,"abstract":"What historian of revolutionary Ireland can claim to have remained utterly impervious to seduction during the current orgy of centennial commemoration? The study of how distant events have been remembered is suddenly both popular and profitable, offering almost irresistible attractions. . . . The hard questions of history (what actually happened and who thought what, why, and with what consequences) are neatly avoided. Released from tiresome delving into the distant past, historians easily mutate into columnists and pundits, accorded spurious authority because of their past credentials as scholars. —DaviD Fitzpatrick1","PeriodicalId":43507,"journal":{"name":"EIRE-IRELAND","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.6,"publicationDate":"2022-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"66305020","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Within contemporary irish republicanism there is an acute consciousness of the echoes and ghostly resonances of previous schisms, many of which can be traced back to the Civil War era. This article interrogates the divisions that have been an almost constant characteristic of the republican movement over the last century.1 Deploying the metaphor of the republican “family,” it investigates internal divisions within contemporary Irish republicanism, which is today dominated by the Provisional movement in the guise of Sinn Féin.2 Reviewing the past century of commemorative dissent, this article predicts that the centenary of the Civil War (2022–23) will provide another occasion in which questions of legitimacy and struggles over “ownership” of the past demonstrate the fissiparous character of the republican family. Despite Sinn Féin’s electoral success, there are significant groups, many formed from splits within the party and its “armed wing,” the
{"title":"Remembering Schism: Commemoration of the Irish Civil War and Contested Narratives in the Contemporary Republican \"Family\"","authors":"S. Hopkins","doi":"10.1353/eir.2022.0010","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1353/eir.2022.0010","url":null,"abstract":"Within contemporary irish republicanism there is an acute consciousness of the echoes and ghostly resonances of previous schisms, many of which can be traced back to the Civil War era. This article interrogates the divisions that have been an almost constant characteristic of the republican movement over the last century.1 Deploying the metaphor of the republican “family,” it investigates internal divisions within contemporary Irish republicanism, which is today dominated by the Provisional movement in the guise of Sinn Féin.2 Reviewing the past century of commemorative dissent, this article predicts that the centenary of the Civil War (2022–23) will provide another occasion in which questions of legitimacy and struggles over “ownership” of the past demonstrate the fissiparous character of the republican family. Despite Sinn Féin’s electoral success, there are significant groups, many formed from splits within the party and its “armed wing,” the","PeriodicalId":43507,"journal":{"name":"EIRE-IRELAND","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.6,"publicationDate":"2022-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47384306","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The 2016 general election in Ireland was perhaps the most unpredictable in the country’s history. In hindsight it would be called “the election that nobody won” and resulted in a complicated minoritygovernment arrangement.1 The traditional parties Fianna Fáil, Fine Gael, and Labour were confronted with a Sinn Féin rising in the polls, two newly formed parties (Renua and the Social Democrats), radical left-wing groups, and strong support for independent candidates.2 In this altered political landscape both new and established political actors faced the challenge of defining what they could offer to an electorate that looked back to years of austerity in the wake of the financial crisis. They needed to articulate an identity as political actors different from the others to an extent that made them more appealing to voters. This was also the centenary year of the Easter Rising and the Proclamation of the Irish Republic. An election campaign a few months before Easter in such a year was likely to include some acknowledgment of the significance of the anniversary. Yet which political actors would or would not attempt to associate themselves with it and how
{"title":"The Irish Republic after the Crisis: Commemorating the Easter Rising in the 2016 Election Campaign","authors":"Isabel Kusche","doi":"10.1353/eir.2022.0006","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1353/eir.2022.0006","url":null,"abstract":"The 2016 general election in Ireland was perhaps the most unpredictable in the country’s history. In hindsight it would be called “the election that nobody won” and resulted in a complicated minoritygovernment arrangement.1 The traditional parties Fianna Fáil, Fine Gael, and Labour were confronted with a Sinn Féin rising in the polls, two newly formed parties (Renua and the Social Democrats), radical left-wing groups, and strong support for independent candidates.2 In this altered political landscape both new and established political actors faced the challenge of defining what they could offer to an electorate that looked back to years of austerity in the wake of the financial crisis. They needed to articulate an identity as political actors different from the others to an extent that made them more appealing to voters. This was also the centenary year of the Easter Rising and the Proclamation of the Irish Republic. An election campaign a few months before Easter in such a year was likely to include some acknowledgment of the significance of the anniversary. Yet which political actors would or would not attempt to associate themselves with it and how","PeriodicalId":43507,"journal":{"name":"EIRE-IRELAND","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.6,"publicationDate":"2022-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"66305057","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
In 2016 the Irish state marked the centenary of the Easter Rising with exhibitions, parades, projects, new heritage sites, and readings of the 1916 Proclamation in every primary school in the country. During the same year another commemoration was marked by a multidisciplinary, interinstitutional conference at UCD and NUI Galway. 1916: HOME: 2016 marked the twentieth anniversary of the closing of the last Magdalen laundry in Ireland. Scholars, artists, and activists gathered to consider “the history of the state since 1916 and the ways in which the ideals of the 1916 Rising were betrayed by the realities of the state and in particular by the treatment of, and attitudes to, women’s bodies over the course of the last one hundred years.”1 The event created spaces that enabled reflections on the histories of what remain, even now, largely invisible lives. Marginalized in most histories of the state, the accounts of institutionalized women and their children were central to 1916: HOME: 2016. In her keynote speech memorystudies scholar Marianne Hirsch spoke of her interest in seeing how, on her visit to Dublin, the Irish state would commemorate 1916. She felt that while many exhibitions “interrogating aspects of a foundational, if complex and contested, past [did exist] . . . , [the] official reckoning failed to reach more troubling aspects of the Irish past.”2 This article focuses on the relative success of demands for the inclusion of women’s histories in commemorative events over the
{"title":"Commemorating Women's Histories during the Irish Decade of Centenaries","authors":"M. McAuliffe","doi":"10.1353/eir.2022.0011","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1353/eir.2022.0011","url":null,"abstract":"In 2016 the Irish state marked the centenary of the Easter Rising with exhibitions, parades, projects, new heritage sites, and readings of the 1916 Proclamation in every primary school in the country. During the same year another commemoration was marked by a multidisciplinary, interinstitutional conference at UCD and NUI Galway. 1916: HOME: 2016 marked the twentieth anniversary of the closing of the last Magdalen laundry in Ireland. Scholars, artists, and activists gathered to consider “the history of the state since 1916 and the ways in which the ideals of the 1916 Rising were betrayed by the realities of the state and in particular by the treatment of, and attitudes to, women’s bodies over the course of the last one hundred years.”1 The event created spaces that enabled reflections on the histories of what remain, even now, largely invisible lives. Marginalized in most histories of the state, the accounts of institutionalized women and their children were central to 1916: HOME: 2016. In her keynote speech memorystudies scholar Marianne Hirsch spoke of her interest in seeing how, on her visit to Dublin, the Irish state would commemorate 1916. She felt that while many exhibitions “interrogating aspects of a foundational, if complex and contested, past [did exist] . . . , [the] official reckoning failed to reach more troubling aspects of the Irish past.”2 This article focuses on the relative success of demands for the inclusion of women’s histories in commemorative events over the","PeriodicalId":43507,"journal":{"name":"EIRE-IRELAND","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.6,"publicationDate":"2022-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"66305128","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
In 2018, after the final votes had been tallied in the Republic of Ireland’s successful referendum to repeal the Eighth Amendment, taoiseach Leo Varadkar tweeted, “Fantastic crowds at Dublin Castle. Remarkable day. A quiet revolution, a great act of democracy.” Ongoing efforts to reform Ireland’s restrictive abortion laws were, however, far from quiet. Advocacy for abortion reform long preceded the referendum and was public, visible, and often painful. Legal scholar Máiréad Enright characterizes the campaign to repeal the Eighth Amendment as inflicting harm. Reflecting on the labor of making legal change, Enright recalled, “I sat in a taxi while two women who had told their everyday abortion stories publicly wept together because they heard again and again in the public campaign talk that only exceptional abortions were legitimate. A hundred little violences. A hundred little wounds.”
{"title":"\"A Hundred Little Violences, a Hundred Little Wounds\": Personal Disclosure, Shame, and Privacy in Ireland's Abortion Access","authors":"Katherine Side","doi":"10.1353/eir.2021.0020","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1353/eir.2021.0020","url":null,"abstract":"In 2018, after the final votes had been tallied in the Republic of Ireland’s successful referendum to repeal the Eighth Amendment, taoiseach Leo Varadkar tweeted, “Fantastic crowds at Dublin Castle. Remarkable day. A quiet revolution, a great act of democracy.” Ongoing efforts to reform Ireland’s restrictive abortion laws were, however, far from quiet. Advocacy for abortion reform long preceded the referendum and was public, visible, and often painful. Legal scholar Máiréad Enright characterizes the campaign to repeal the Eighth Amendment as inflicting harm. Reflecting on the labor of making legal change, Enright recalled, “I sat in a taxi while two women who had told their everyday abortion stories publicly wept together because they heard again and again in the public campaign talk that only exceptional abortions were legitimate. A hundred little violences. A hundred little wounds.”","PeriodicalId":43507,"journal":{"name":"EIRE-IRELAND","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.6,"publicationDate":"2022-01-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"66304997","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
From 2015 to 2018 scandals surrounding the human papillomavirus (HPV) and cervical-cancer screening in the Republic of Ireland revealed serious deficiencies in the nation’s health-care system. A misinformation campaign conducted in 2015 about the HPV vaccine resulted in a sharp decline in Irish vaccination levels, and in 2018 Ireland’s CervicalCheck screening program was revealed to be flawed. In the Scally Report (2018), a scoping inquiry into the problems at CervicalCheck, key informants pointed to the significant gendered failings of the Irish health-care system, noting that “there is a history of looking at women’s health services as being secondary,” “women and women’s rights are not taken seriously,” and “paternalism is alive and well.” The report identified the need for expert and committed attention to women’s issues within the health-care system. Through an analysis of two scandals, the CervicalCheck screening program and the HPV-vaccination-misinformation campaign, this study investigates the cervical-cancer prevention crisis in Ireland through the lens of reproductive justice. HPV vaccination and cervical screening are health behaviors that illuminate the intersection of oppressions based on race, ethnicity, socioeconomic position, ability,
{"title":"\"Nuns Don't Get Cervical Cancer\": A Reproductive-Justice Approach to Understanding the Cervical-Cancer Prevention Crisis in Ireland","authors":"Beth Sundstrom","doi":"10.1353/eir.2021.0011","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1353/eir.2021.0011","url":null,"abstract":"From 2015 to 2018 scandals surrounding the human papillomavirus (HPV) and cervical-cancer screening in the Republic of Ireland revealed serious deficiencies in the nation’s health-care system. A misinformation campaign conducted in 2015 about the HPV vaccine resulted in a sharp decline in Irish vaccination levels, and in 2018 Ireland’s CervicalCheck screening program was revealed to be flawed. In the Scally Report (2018), a scoping inquiry into the problems at CervicalCheck, key informants pointed to the significant gendered failings of the Irish health-care system, noting that “there is a history of looking at women’s health services as being secondary,” “women and women’s rights are not taken seriously,” and “paternalism is alive and well.” The report identified the need for expert and committed attention to women’s issues within the health-care system. Through an analysis of two scandals, the CervicalCheck screening program and the HPV-vaccination-misinformation campaign, this study investigates the cervical-cancer prevention crisis in Ireland through the lens of reproductive justice. HPV vaccination and cervical screening are health behaviors that illuminate the intersection of oppressions based on race, ethnicity, socioeconomic position, ability,","PeriodicalId":43507,"journal":{"name":"EIRE-IRELAND","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.6,"publicationDate":"2022-01-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"66304941","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Transatlantic Railroad","authors":"Mary P. Burke","doi":"10.1353/eir.2021.0019","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1353/eir.2021.0019","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":43507,"journal":{"name":"EIRE-IRELAND","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.6,"publicationDate":"2022-01-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48078873","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：