{"title":"America and the making of an independent Ireland: a history. By Francis M. Carroll. Pp 312. New York: New York University Press. 2021. US$35.","authors":"R. McNamara","doi":"10.1017/ihs.2022.19","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/ihs.2022.19","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":44187,"journal":{"name":"IRISH HISTORICAL STUDIES","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.4,"publicationDate":"2022-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48587481","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
the American criticism that vast sums of money were transferred between the U.S. and Ireland as a consequence of the illegal sweepstake. The U.S. was unwilling to negotiate a bilateral trade agreement with Ireland but agreed one with Britain. Whelan poses an interesting counterfactual, asking if matters would have been different if John Cudahy (U.S. minister to Ireland, 1937–40) had remained in the post. David Gray, who replaced Cudahy, is widely blamed for the deteriorating relations between the U.S. and Ireland. While individuals do make a difference, the key individual in the relationship between Ireland and the U.S. was President Roosevelt. During most of the 1930s Roosevelt was indifferent to Ireland and U.S. diplomacy reflected this. From 1940, Roosevelt was committed to the defeat of Hitler even before the U.S. entered the war. Neither the State Department nor Roosevelt disagreed with Gray because his position largely reflected that of the president.
{"title":"The making of the Anglo-Irish Agreement of 1985: a memoir by David Goodall. Edited by Frank Sheridan. Pp vii, 237. Dublin: National University of Ireland. 2021. €35.00/€20.00.","authors":"A. Jeffery","doi":"10.1017/ihs.2022.22","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/ihs.2022.22","url":null,"abstract":"the American criticism that vast sums of money were transferred between the U.S. and Ireland as a consequence of the illegal sweepstake. The U.S. was unwilling to negotiate a bilateral trade agreement with Ireland but agreed one with Britain. Whelan poses an interesting counterfactual, asking if matters would have been different if John Cudahy (U.S. minister to Ireland, 1937–40) had remained in the post. David Gray, who replaced Cudahy, is widely blamed for the deteriorating relations between the U.S. and Ireland. While individuals do make a difference, the key individual in the relationship between Ireland and the U.S. was President Roosevelt. During most of the 1930s Roosevelt was indifferent to Ireland and U.S. diplomacy reflected this. From 1940, Roosevelt was committed to the defeat of Hitler even before the U.S. entered the war. Neither the State Department nor Roosevelt disagreed with Gray because his position largely reflected that of the president.","PeriodicalId":44187,"journal":{"name":"IRISH HISTORICAL STUDIES","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.4,"publicationDate":"2022-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43116313","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract This article aims to further understand the Irish immigrant experience with U.S. slavery by studying Irish overseers on southern plantations. The Irish relationship with U.S. slavery varied according to circumstances. However, as foreign-born outsiders, Irish immigrants in the South had to accommodate the region's slaveholding culture. This article takes the story of the Irish as urban pioneers of the antebellum South out into the southern countryside. Those who sought employment as overseers had no qualms about profiting from racial slavery, and the nationality of a successful overseer was immaterial to planters. Irish overseers were not categorically different from native-born southern overseers. Indeed, Irish overseers had to be as ruthless as their American counterparts if they hoped to be successful. The expansion of the southern economy in accordance with the rise of the ‘second slavery’ created more significant opportunities for Irish immigrants to become overseers and demonstrates the essential whiteness of the Irish in the South.
{"title":"Irish overseers in the antebellum U.S. South","authors":"J. Regan","doi":"10.1017/ihs.2021.52","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/ihs.2021.52","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This article aims to further understand the Irish immigrant experience with U.S. slavery by studying Irish overseers on southern plantations. The Irish relationship with U.S. slavery varied according to circumstances. However, as foreign-born outsiders, Irish immigrants in the South had to accommodate the region's slaveholding culture. This article takes the story of the Irish as urban pioneers of the antebellum South out into the southern countryside. Those who sought employment as overseers had no qualms about profiting from racial slavery, and the nationality of a successful overseer was immaterial to planters. Irish overseers were not categorically different from native-born southern overseers. Indeed, Irish overseers had to be as ruthless as their American counterparts if they hoped to be successful. The expansion of the southern economy in accordance with the rise of the ‘second slavery’ created more significant opportunities for Irish immigrants to become overseers and demonstrates the essential whiteness of the Irish in the South.","PeriodicalId":44187,"journal":{"name":"IRISH HISTORICAL STUDIES","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.4,"publicationDate":"2021-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"41475253","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This is a remarkable study in terms of its chronological sweep, its use of diverse sources and its multi-disciplinary approach to the past. It grapples with the elusive traces left in the Irish landscape by a form of pastoral farming known in the international literature as transhumance and in Ireland as booleying. The author employs archaeological field work, soil science, documentary evidence, place names analysis, oral history and cartography to trace the evolution of this set of farming practices and their eventual demise. Transhumance is an intricate system of farming whereby livestock are moved in summertime from one farming environment, usually lowland farms, up on to the rough pastures found on the slopes of neighbouring hills or mountains. In wintertime the flocks of animals are returned from these commonages to the home farms. The kinds of livestock moved about might include sheep, goats, cows, bulls and bullocks. In this way farmers gained access to additional grazing and economised on land use at home. The distances travelled in these seasonal movements could vary but in Ireland they seem to have been well under twelve kilometres in most cases. As Costello emphasises, booleying involved the movement of people as well as stock. Rough shelters were constructed on the hillsides to house the herders who typically were of adolescent age or children, the opportunity cost of whose labour presumably was low. The numbers of people involved were considerable. Three areas are studied intensively in this work: those of the Carna peninsula, Connemara, County Galway, the parish of Gleann Cholm Cille in south-west Donegal and the Galtee Mountains on the Tipperary– Limerick borderlands. In the first of these two study areas something like one-third of the people were dispatched to the hills to look after livestock. To an outsider to the field this seems surprisingly high, implying large movement and relocation of people, albeit on a temporary seasonal basis. The origins of booleying lie in the medieval period and possibly much earlier. Nor was the practice confined to Gaelic areas. It existed in Old English territories as well. Costello explores the post-medieval period and is refreshingly frank about the speculative nature of much of what can be said before the nineteenth century in view of the paucity of documentation and the absence of more detailed archaeological work. Ironically, the sources become more plentiful when the practice is under pressure from population growth, commercialisation of agriculture (dairying and cattle raising in particular) and efforts at estate improvement. Some theoretical borrowings from the property rights paradigm in the economics literature might perhaps have sharpened some of the valuable insights developed by the author, particularly in relation to transitions over time. Explosive pre-Famine population growth, it is argued, led to a much more crowded rural landscape and eventually reduced opportunities for transhu
{"title":"Transhumance and the making of Ireland's uplands, 1550–1900. By Eugene Costello. Pp 240. Woodbridge: Boydell Press. 2020. £75 hardback.","authors":"L. Kennedy","doi":"10.1017/ihs.2021.31","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/ihs.2021.31","url":null,"abstract":"This is a remarkable study in terms of its chronological sweep, its use of diverse sources and its multi-disciplinary approach to the past. It grapples with the elusive traces left in the Irish landscape by a form of pastoral farming known in the international literature as transhumance and in Ireland as booleying. The author employs archaeological field work, soil science, documentary evidence, place names analysis, oral history and cartography to trace the evolution of this set of farming practices and their eventual demise. Transhumance is an intricate system of farming whereby livestock are moved in summertime from one farming environment, usually lowland farms, up on to the rough pastures found on the slopes of neighbouring hills or mountains. In wintertime the flocks of animals are returned from these commonages to the home farms. The kinds of livestock moved about might include sheep, goats, cows, bulls and bullocks. In this way farmers gained access to additional grazing and economised on land use at home. The distances travelled in these seasonal movements could vary but in Ireland they seem to have been well under twelve kilometres in most cases. As Costello emphasises, booleying involved the movement of people as well as stock. Rough shelters were constructed on the hillsides to house the herders who typically were of adolescent age or children, the opportunity cost of whose labour presumably was low. The numbers of people involved were considerable. Three areas are studied intensively in this work: those of the Carna peninsula, Connemara, County Galway, the parish of Gleann Cholm Cille in south-west Donegal and the Galtee Mountains on the Tipperary– Limerick borderlands. In the first of these two study areas something like one-third of the people were dispatched to the hills to look after livestock. To an outsider to the field this seems surprisingly high, implying large movement and relocation of people, albeit on a temporary seasonal basis. The origins of booleying lie in the medieval period and possibly much earlier. Nor was the practice confined to Gaelic areas. It existed in Old English territories as well. Costello explores the post-medieval period and is refreshingly frank about the speculative nature of much of what can be said before the nineteenth century in view of the paucity of documentation and the absence of more detailed archaeological work. Ironically, the sources become more plentiful when the practice is under pressure from population growth, commercialisation of agriculture (dairying and cattle raising in particular) and efforts at estate improvement. Some theoretical borrowings from the property rights paradigm in the economics literature might perhaps have sharpened some of the valuable insights developed by the author, particularly in relation to transitions over time. Explosive pre-Famine population growth, it is argued, led to a much more crowded rural landscape and eventually reduced opportunities for transhu","PeriodicalId":44187,"journal":{"name":"IRISH HISTORICAL STUDIES","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.4,"publicationDate":"2021-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42280996","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
licit resistance to the end of the seventeenth century. This counter discourse existed not just in legal textbooks but also on the streets of the cities that De Benedictis examines. Historians of Ireland might wish to read these arguments alongside Kenneth Nicholls’s remarks on the obsessively centralised nature of English monarchy, and the studies of F. W. Maitland and Alan Orr on the history of treason in England, if revisiting resistance to English power in Ireland. Did rebels in England or English-Ireland have access to much weaker legal resources than rebels in contact with civil law traditions? Are there traces of the traditions with which De Benedictis is concerned in Scotland? De Benedictis leaves sacred power largely to one side, despite the traditional association between crimen laesae maiestatis and heresy, the well-known writings of Catholic and Protestant theologians on religious self-defence, and the arguments of Paolo Prodi on the tendency of the early modern state to make itself more and more sacred. Chapter one deals with the tumult at Urbino in the 1570s, an event which later became exemplary in histories and treatises on taxation in France and the German-speaking lands. Chapter two turns to the legal theory of rebellion, beginning with Justinian’s Codex and the phenomenon of the defensa, the appeal of a people to their prince against his or her wicked officers. De Benedictis tracks these concepts through the thickets of the learned law (Bartolus of Sassoferrato’s commentary on the Codex, a book well known across Europe, is important here) and it would be interesting to compare these traditions to the common law, not least because historians of the Stuart monarchy tend to think of the civil law as a tool of absolutism. This chapter is probably the most important to historians of Ireland. Chapter three, an intermezzo, ranges more widely in early modern culture, touching on the theatre and emblem literature as well as law. Here, De Benedictis is interested in the concept of the unpunishable multitude (the idea that when many err, no one is punished) as well as seventeenth-century distinctions between revolution and rebellion. Chapter four analyses the revolts of Messina and Mondovì between the 1670s and 1680s. This begins with a treatment of the legal distinction between the punishment of individuals and whole communities. Chapter five tackles Castiglione delle Stivere in the last decade of the seventeenth century, and arguments by jurists that a tyrannous prince might become an enemy to his own people. This recalls John Locke but appears entirely grounded in the ius commune. De Benedictis’s learned and stimulating work thus suggests resources that legitimated resistance to state power in Italy and were propagated across the continent in a learned Latin literature, but which lay quite outside the conventional Anglophone liberal tradition (readily accessible in the work of Quentin Skinner) of common law, Calvinist revolutionaries,
十七世纪末的合法抵抗。这种反话语不仅存在于法律教科书中，也存在于德·本尼迪克蒂斯所考察的城市街道上。爱尔兰的历史学家可能希望将这些观点与肯尼斯·尼科尔斯(Kenneth Nicholls)对英国君主专制的过分集中的评论，以及f·w·梅特兰(F. W. Maitland)和艾伦·奥尔(Alan Orr)对英格兰叛国史的研究一起阅读，如果要重温爱尔兰对英国权力的抵抗。英格兰或英格兰-爱尔兰的反叛者获得的法律资源是否比接触民法传统的反叛者少得多?苏格兰是否有与德·本尼迪克提斯有关的传统的痕迹?德·本尼迪克特将神权很大程度上放在一边，尽管传统上将“犯罪”(crimen laesae maiestatis)与异端联系在一起，尽管天主教和新教神学家关于宗教自卫的著名著作，以及保罗·普罗迪(Paolo Prodi)关于早期现代国家趋向于使自己变得越来越神圣的论点。第一章讲的是1570年代乌尔比诺的骚乱，这一事件后来成为法国和德语国家关于税收的历史和论文的典范。第二章转向反叛的法律理论，从查士丁尼的法典和辩护现象开始，人民向他们的君主上诉，反对他或她邪恶的官员。德·本尼迪克蒂斯通过错综复杂的法学来追踪这些概念(萨索费拉托的巴托洛斯对法典的评论，一本在欧洲闻名的书，在这里很重要)，将这些传统与普通法进行比较将会很有趣，尤其是因为斯图亚特王朝的历史学家倾向于认为民法是专制主义的工具。这一章对研究爱尔兰的历史学家来说可能是最重要的。第三章为间奏曲，对早期现代文化进行了更广泛的探讨，涉及戏剧、象征文学和法律。在这里，德·本尼迪克提斯感兴趣的是不受惩罚的大众的概念(即当许多人犯错时，没有人受到惩罚)，以及17世纪革命和叛乱之间的区别。第四章分析1670年代至1680年代墨西拿起义和Mondovì起义。这首先是处理对个人和整个社区的惩罚之间的法律区别。第五章讨论了17世纪最后十年的卡斯提里奥内·德尔·斯蒂维尔，以及法学家们关于暴虐君主可能成为自己人民敌人的争论。这让人想起约翰·洛克，但似乎完全建立在美国公社的基础上。因此，德·本尼迪克蒂斯学识丰富、令人振奋的著作为意大利对国家权力的抵抗提供了合法的资源，并在学识丰富的拉丁文学中传播到整个欧洲大陆，但这与普通法、加尔文主义革命家、天主教神学家和约翰·洛克的传统英语自由主义传统(在昆汀·斯金纳的著作中很容易找到)完全不同。虽然爱尔兰历史学家无疑会继续选择属于一个国际化的、讲英语的、自由的学术团体，但能够超越这个团体及其传统的界限，对我们这个职业的健康发展仍然至关重要。
{"title":"The daughters of the first earl of Cork: writing family, faith, politics and place. By Ann-Maria Walsh. Pp 178. Dublin: Four Courts Press. 2020. €45 hardback.","authors":"C. Tait","doi":"10.1017/ihs.2021.33","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/ihs.2021.33","url":null,"abstract":"licit resistance to the end of the seventeenth century. This counter discourse existed not just in legal textbooks but also on the streets of the cities that De Benedictis examines. Historians of Ireland might wish to read these arguments alongside Kenneth Nicholls’s remarks on the obsessively centralised nature of English monarchy, and the studies of F. W. Maitland and Alan Orr on the history of treason in England, if revisiting resistance to English power in Ireland. Did rebels in England or English-Ireland have access to much weaker legal resources than rebels in contact with civil law traditions? Are there traces of the traditions with which De Benedictis is concerned in Scotland? De Benedictis leaves sacred power largely to one side, despite the traditional association between crimen laesae maiestatis and heresy, the well-known writings of Catholic and Protestant theologians on religious self-defence, and the arguments of Paolo Prodi on the tendency of the early modern state to make itself more and more sacred. Chapter one deals with the tumult at Urbino in the 1570s, an event which later became exemplary in histories and treatises on taxation in France and the German-speaking lands. Chapter two turns to the legal theory of rebellion, beginning with Justinian’s Codex and the phenomenon of the defensa, the appeal of a people to their prince against his or her wicked officers. De Benedictis tracks these concepts through the thickets of the learned law (Bartolus of Sassoferrato’s commentary on the Codex, a book well known across Europe, is important here) and it would be interesting to compare these traditions to the common law, not least because historians of the Stuart monarchy tend to think of the civil law as a tool of absolutism. This chapter is probably the most important to historians of Ireland. Chapter three, an intermezzo, ranges more widely in early modern culture, touching on the theatre and emblem literature as well as law. Here, De Benedictis is interested in the concept of the unpunishable multitude (the idea that when many err, no one is punished) as well as seventeenth-century distinctions between revolution and rebellion. Chapter four analyses the revolts of Messina and Mondovì between the 1670s and 1680s. This begins with a treatment of the legal distinction between the punishment of individuals and whole communities. Chapter five tackles Castiglione delle Stivere in the last decade of the seventeenth century, and arguments by jurists that a tyrannous prince might become an enemy to his own people. This recalls John Locke but appears entirely grounded in the ius commune. De Benedictis’s learned and stimulating work thus suggests resources that legitimated resistance to state power in Italy and were propagated across the continent in a learned Latin literature, but which lay quite outside the conventional Anglophone liberal tradition (readily accessible in the work of Quentin Skinner) of common law, Calvinist revolutionaries, ","PeriodicalId":44187,"journal":{"name":"IRISH HISTORICAL STUDIES","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.4,"publicationDate":"2021-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45209540","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Newspapers and journalism in Cork, 1910–23: press, politics and revolution. By Alan McCarthy. Pp 312. Dublin: Four Courts Press. 2020. €45 hardback.","authors":"Niall Murray","doi":"10.1017/ihs.2021.43","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/ihs.2021.43","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":44187,"journal":{"name":"IRISH HISTORICAL STUDIES","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.4,"publicationDate":"2021-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"47769131","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"The rise and fall of the Orange Order during the Famine years: from reformation to Dolly's Brae. By Daragh Curran. Pp 224. Dublin: Four Courts Press. 2021. €50/£45 hardback.","authors":"James Frazer","doi":"10.1017/ihs.2021.39","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/ihs.2021.39","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":44187,"journal":{"name":"IRISH HISTORICAL STUDIES","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.4,"publicationDate":"2021-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"49112329","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract This article presents an edition and translation of an Irish didactic poem found in a large compilation of remedies, charms and prayers that was written in the early sixteenth century by the Roscommon medical scribe Conla Mac an Leagha. The contents of this poem, and of the treatise in which it occurs more generally, are of inherent interest for our understanding of the history of medical learning in medieval Ireland. However, the poem is also of particular significance due to the fact that its penultimate stanza, which invokes the authority of one ‘Colmán mac Oililla’, is attested in two much later sources that provide insight into the transmission and reception of medieval Irish medical texts in the early nineteenth century, as well as into the relationship between manuscript, print and material culture during that period. The two sources in question, one of which is a previously unprovenanced signboard now kept in the Wellcome Collection in London, can both be connected with the work of the Munster ‘herb doctor’ Michael Casey (1752?–1830/31), who in 1825 advertised the publication of a new herbal containing cures derived from much earlier Irish-language medical manuscripts.
摘要:本文介绍了一个版本和翻译的爱尔兰说教诗发现在一个大的汇编的补救措施，魅力和祈祷，写于16世纪初由罗斯康门医学抄写康拉Mac和利阿哈。这首诗的内容，以及它更普遍出现的论文的内容，对我们理解中世纪爱尔兰医学学习的历史具有内在的兴趣。然而，这首诗也具有特殊的意义，因为它的倒数第二节引用了一个“Colmán mac Oililla”的权威，这在两个更晚的来源中得到了证明，这些来源提供了对19世纪早期中世纪爱尔兰医学文献的传播和接受的洞察，以及那个时期手稿，印刷和物质文化之间的关系。这两个有问题的来源，其中一个是一个以前未经证实的广告牌，现在保存在伦敦的惠康收藏中，两者都可以与明斯特“草药医生”迈克尔·凯西(1752? -1830/31)的工作有关，他在1825年宣传了一种新的草药的出版，该草药含有来自更早的爱尔兰语医学手稿的治疗方法。
{"title":"Medieval Irish medical verse in the nineteenth century: some evidence from material culture","authors":"D. Hayden","doi":"10.1017/ihs.2021.50","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/ihs.2021.50","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This article presents an edition and translation of an Irish didactic poem found in a large compilation of remedies, charms and prayers that was written in the early sixteenth century by the Roscommon medical scribe Conla Mac an Leagha. The contents of this poem, and of the treatise in which it occurs more generally, are of inherent interest for our understanding of the history of medical learning in medieval Ireland. However, the poem is also of particular significance due to the fact that its penultimate stanza, which invokes the authority of one ‘Colmán mac Oililla’, is attested in two much later sources that provide insight into the transmission and reception of medieval Irish medical texts in the early nineteenth century, as well as into the relationship between manuscript, print and material culture during that period. The two sources in question, one of which is a previously unprovenanced signboard now kept in the Wellcome Collection in London, can both be connected with the work of the Munster ‘herb doctor’ Michael Casey (1752?–1830/31), who in 1825 advertised the publication of a new herbal containing cures derived from much earlier Irish-language medical manuscripts.","PeriodicalId":44187,"journal":{"name":"IRISH HISTORICAL STUDIES","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.4,"publicationDate":"2021-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"48333891","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Abstract This article offers a critical analysis of the representation of early modern popular violence provided by the 1641 depositions. Exploring the problems of how reported ‘speech’ was produced and recorded in the 1641 depositions, the article challenges the tendency within the depositions to represent violence as a spontaneous and immediate act, explicable by a racialised reading of Irish ‘barbarity’ and Catholic treachery. Exploiting a large cache of depositions and examinations in the relatively resource-rich urban context of Galway, it offers a micro-historical narrative of two brutal episodes of popular violence there in 1642 to reveal the complex histories and politics that might lie behind acts of violence in the Irish rising. Examining the local impact of the state's policies of anglicisation and Protestantisation, the paper recovers the prolonged, but ultimately unsuccessful, negotiations that preceded popular violence. Contextualizing the episodes, the article locates that violence in the more complex (and divided) politics of the city and in the radical challenges it brought to traditional structures of rule in Galway. Referencing the developing body of work on the politics of early modern crowd actions in Ireland, the article argues that the popular violence was political, both a consequence of and contributor to political change there.
{"title":"Crowds and political violence in early modern Ireland: Galway and the 1641 depositions","authors":"J. Walter","doi":"10.1017/ihs.2021.51","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1017/ihs.2021.51","url":null,"abstract":"Abstract This article offers a critical analysis of the representation of early modern popular violence provided by the 1641 depositions. Exploring the problems of how reported ‘speech’ was produced and recorded in the 1641 depositions, the article challenges the tendency within the depositions to represent violence as a spontaneous and immediate act, explicable by a racialised reading of Irish ‘barbarity’ and Catholic treachery. Exploiting a large cache of depositions and examinations in the relatively resource-rich urban context of Galway, it offers a micro-historical narrative of two brutal episodes of popular violence there in 1642 to reveal the complex histories and politics that might lie behind acts of violence in the Irish rising. Examining the local impact of the state's policies of anglicisation and Protestantisation, the paper recovers the prolonged, but ultimately unsuccessful, negotiations that preceded popular violence. Contextualizing the episodes, the article locates that violence in the more complex (and divided) politics of the city and in the radical challenges it brought to traditional structures of rule in Galway. Referencing the developing body of work on the politics of early modern crowd actions in Ireland, the article argues that the popular violence was political, both a consequence of and contributor to political change there.","PeriodicalId":44187,"journal":{"name":"IRISH HISTORICAL STUDIES","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.4,"publicationDate":"2021-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"46796612","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"历史学","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：