The Gaelic State in the past & future : $b or, "The crown of a nation"Figgis, Darrell
History
The Gaelic State in the past & future : $b or, "The crown of a nation"
Figgis, Darrell
Ireland -- Politics and government; Irish question
The course of the nineteenth century in Ireland is like a resurrection
from the dead. It is full of memories--memories prior to 1603 and the
destruction of the Irish State. The very order is significant. The
Nation had lost certain things in a certain order; in its resurrection
it set about to regain them in the inverse order. It had lost, first,
its State; then its language and culture, the flowers of that State,
had been penalised; then its land, on which the State had been based,
was taken; and finally its liberty of faith. It won back, first, its
liberty to faith; then its land; then its separate culture; and now it
seeks its State.
Literally and precisely the nineteenth century in Ireland is one of
the most remarkable movements in history. It is like a great hall
full of ghostly memories, but ghosts that bewilderingly become flesh
and blood before our very eyes. It is a haunted hall where memories
become realities again, instead of realities passing into memories.
The struggle for Catholic Emancipation, it is true, was not of this
order. It was part of a larger world movement into which the Nation
was compelled by the leadership of one man. It may or may not have
been the best beginning to have made; its fruits were unreal; and the
victory was soon lost sight of by the Nation. But the land-war arose
spontaneously from the people in a form that suggested an ancient
memory. Before it found expression the compiler of the Devon Commission
Digest remarked “that the tenant claims what he calls a tenant-right
in the land, irrespective of any legal claim vested in him, or of any
improvement effected by him.” He mentions it as a curious thing; and to
him, with his foreign State-idea, it was indeed a curious thing; yet it
was only the first re-assertion of a very old memory. For the Nation
was not asserting a tenant’s right, but re-asserting a freeman’s right.
And inasmuch as the landlordry was now mainly absentee it was making
that re-assertion in a solid national formation.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account