Recent from talks
Nothing was collected or created yet.
Young Ireland
View on Wikipedia
Key Information
| Part of a series on |
| Radicalism |
|---|
Young Ireland (Irish: Éire Óg, IPA: [ˈeːɾʲə ˈoːɡ]) was a political and cultural movement in the 1840s committed to an all-Ireland struggle for independence and democratic reform. Grouped around the Dublin weekly The Nation, it took issue with the compromises and clericalism of the larger national movement, Daniel O'Connell's Repeal Association, from which it seceded in 1847. Despairing, in the face of the Great Famine, of any other course, in 1848 Young Irelanders attempted an insurrection. Following the arrest and the exile of most of their leading figures, the movement split between those who carried the commitment to "physical force" forward into the Irish Republican Brotherhood, and those who sought to build a "League of North and South" linking an independent Irish parliamentary party to tenant agitation for land reform.
Origins
[edit]The Historical Society
[edit]Many of those later identified as Young Ireland first gathered in 1839 at a reconvening of the College Historical Society in Dublin. The club at Trinity College had a history, stretching back through the student participation of the United Irishmen Theobald Wolfe Tone and Robert Emmet to Edmund Burke, of debating patriotic motions. Not for the first time, the club had been expelled from college for breaching the condition that it not discuss questions of "modern politics".[3]
Those present for meeting in the chambers of Francis Kearney were, in Irish terms, a "mixed" group. They included Catholics (first admitted to Trinity in 1793), among them Thomas MacNevin, elected the Society's president, and (later to follow him in that role) John Blake Dillon. Chief among the other future Young Irelanders present were law graduate Thomas Davis, and the Newry attorney John Mitchel.[4]
The Repeal Association
[edit]With others present, these four would go to join Daniel O'Connell's Repeal Association. In 1840 this was a relaunch of a campaign to restore an Irish parliament in Dublin by repealing the 1800 Acts of Union. O'Connell had suspended Repeal agitation in the 1830s to solicit favour and reform from Whig ministry of Lord Melbourne.
In April 1841 O’Connell placed both Davis and Dillon on the Association's General Committee with responsibilities for organisation and recruitment. Membership uptake had been slow.[5]
In the south and west, the great numbers of tenant farmers, small-town traders and journeymen O'Connell had rallied to the cause of Emancipation in the 1820s did not similarly respond to his lead on the more abstract proposition of Repeal.[6][7] Patriotic and republican sentiment among the Presbyterians of the north-east had surrendered, since the Rebellion of 1798, to the conviction that the union with Great Britain was both the occasion for their relative prosperity and a guarantee of their liberty.[8] Protestants were now, as a body, opposed to a restoration of the parliament in Dublin whose prerogatives they had once championed. In these circumstances, the Catholic gentry and much of the middle class were content to explore the avenues for advancement opened by Emancipation and earlier "Catholic relief". The suspicion, in any case, was that O'Connell's purpose in returning to the constitutional question was merely to embarrass the incoming Conservatives (under his old enemy Sir Robert Peel) and to hasten the Whigs return.[6]
In working with O'Connell, Thomas and Dillon contended with a patriarch "impatient of opposition or criticism, and apt to prefer followers to colleagues". They found an ally in Charles Gavan Duffy, editor in Belfast of the Repeal journal The Vindicator.[6]
The Nation
[edit]
Duffy proposed a new national weekly to Davis and Dillon, owned by himself but directed by all three. The paper first appeared in October in 1842 bearing the title chosen for it by Davis, The Nation, after the French liberal-opposition daily Le National. The prospectus, written by Davis, dedicated the paper "to direct the popular mind and the sympathies of educated men of all parties to the great end of [a] nationality" that will "not only raise our people from their poverty, by securing to them the blessings of a domestic legislature, but inflame and purify them with a lofty and heroic love of country".[9]
The Nation was an immediate publishing success. Its sales soared above all other Irish papers, weekly or daily. Circulation at its height was reckoned to be close to a quarter of a million.[10] With its focus upon editorials, historical articles and verse, all intended to shape public opinion, copies continued to be read in Repeal Reading Rooms and to be passed from hand to hand long after their current news value had faded.[6] It may have been a "reinforcement for which O’Connell had scarcely dared to hope",[11] but the journal's role in the revived fortunes of the Repeal Association has to be weighed against other contributions. Legislative independence was powerfully endorsed by Archbishop McHale of Tuam.[5][12]
Beyond Davis and Dillon's Historical Society companions, the paper drew on a widening circle of contributors. Among the more politically committed these included: the Repeal MP William Smith O'Brien; Tithe War veteran James Fintan Lalor; prose and verse writer Michael Doheny; author of Traits and Stories of the Irish Peasantry, William Carleton; militant-nationalist priest, John Kenyon; poet and early suffragist Jane Wilde; republican and labour-rights activist Thomas Devin Reilly; former American journalist (and future "Father of the Canadian Confederation") Thomas D'Arcy McGee; and the renowned Repeal orator Thomas Francis Meagher.
It was an English journalist who first applied to this growing circle the label "Young Ireland".[6] Although there was no direct connection, the reference was to Giuseppe Mazzini's insurrectionist, anti-clerical, Young Italy, and to other European national-republican movements (Young Germany, Young Poland... ) that Mazzini had sought loosely to federate under the aegis of "Young Europe" (Giovine Europa). When O'Connell picked up on the moniker and began referring to those he had considered his junior lieutenants as "Young Irelanders" it was a signal for an impending break.[13]
Conflicts with O'Connell
[edit]
Retreat from Repeal
[edit]The Nation was loyal to O'Connell when, in October 1843, he stood down the Repeal movement at Clontarf. The government had deployed troops and artillery to enforce a ban on what O'Connell had announced as the last "monster meeting" in the Year of Repeal. (In August at the Hill of Tara crowds had been estimated in the hostile reporting of The Times at close to a million).[14] O'Connell submitted at once. He cancelled the rally and sent out messengers to turn back the approaching crowds.[15]
Although in Duffy's view, the decision deprived the Repeal movement of "half its dignity and all of its terror", the Young Irelanders acknowledged that the risk of a massacre on many times the scale of "Peterloo" was unacceptable. Pressing what they imagined was their advantage, the government had O'Connell, his son John and Duffy convicted of sedition. When after three months (the charges quashed on appeal to the House of Lords) they were released, it was Davis and O'Brien who staged O'Connell's triumphal reception in Dublin.[16]
The first sign of a breach came when, through an open letter in The Nation, Duffy pressed O'Connell to affirm Repeal as his object.[17] While insisting he would "never ask for or work" for anything less than an independent legislature, O'Connell had suggested he might accept a "subordinate parliament" (an Irish legislature with powers devolved from Westminster) as "an instalment".[18]
A further, and more serious, rift opened with Davis. Davis had himself been negotiating the possibility of a devolved parliament with the Northern reformer William Sharman Crawford.[19] The difference with O'Connell was that Davis was seeking a basis for compromise, in the first instance, not at Westminster but in Belfast.
Protestant inclusion
[edit]When he first followed O'Connell, Duffy concedes that he had "burned with the desire to set up again the Celtic race and the catholic church".[6] In The Nation he subscribed to a broader vision. In the journal's prospectus, Davis wrote of a "nationality" as ready to embrace "the stranger who is within our gates" as "the Irishman of a hundred generations".[9]
Davis (conscious of his family's Cromwellian origin) was persuaded by Johann Gottfried von Herder: nationality was not a matter of ancestry or blood but of acclimatising influences. Cultural traditions, and above all language, "the organ of thought", could engender in persons of diverse origin common national feeling.[20]
Davis was a keen promoter of the Irish language in print, at a time when, while still the speech of the vast majority of the Irish people, it had been all but abandoned by the educated classes. Such cultural nationalism did not appear to interest to O'Connell. There is no evidence that he saw the preservation or revival of his mother tongue, or any other aspect of "native culture", as essential to his political demands.[21] His own paper, the Pilot, recognised but one "positive and unmistakable" marker of the national distinction between English and Irish—religion.[22]
O'Connell "treasured his few Protestant Repealers",[23] but he acknowledged the central role of the Catholic clergy in his movement and guarded the bond it represented. In 1812/13 he had refused emancipation conditioned on Rome having to seek royal assent in the appointment of Irish bishops.[24][25] Throughout much of the country the bishops and their priests were the only figures of standing independent of the government around which a national movement could organise. It was a reality on which the Repeal Association, like the Catholic Association before it, was built.[26][27]
In 1845 O'Connell, in advance of the bishops, denounced a "mixed" non-denominational scheme for tertiary education. The Anglicans could retain Trinity in Dublin; the Presbyterians might have the Queens College proposed for Belfast; but the Queens colleges intended for Galway and Cork had to be Catholic. When Davis (moved to tears in the controversy) pleaded that "reasons for separate education are reasons for [a] separate life", O'Connell accused him of suggesting it a "crime to be a Catholic". "I am", he declared, "for Old Ireland, and I have some slight notion that Old Ireland will stand by me".[28][29]
O'Connell rarely joined the Young Irelanders in invoking the memory of 1798, the union of "Catholic, Protestant and Dissenter". His one Repeal foray to the Presbyterian north (to Belfast), organised by Duffy in 1841, was cut short by hostile demonstrations. For the key to an Irish parliament, O'Connell looked to liberal England, not Protestant Ulster. Once a parliament restored to Dublin had retired their distinctive privileges, he was content to suggest that Protestants would, "with little delay, melt into the overwhelming majority of the Irish nation".[30]
Whig concessions
[edit]Thomas Davis's sudden death in 1845 helped close the matter. But his friends suspected that behind the vehemence with which O'Connell opposed Davis on the colleges question there also the intent, again, to frustrate Peel and to advantage the Whigs. This was not a strategy, Meagher argued, that had paid national dividends. The last concession wrung from the Melbourne administration, the 1840 municipal reform, had elected O'Connell to the Lord Mayoralty of Dublin (Dublin's first Catholic mayor since James II). But with the Grand Jury system of county government untouched, it left the great majority of people to continue under the local tyranny of the landlords. In return for allowing a "corrupt gang of politicians who fawned on O'Connell" an extensive system of political patronage, the Irish people being "purchased back into factious vassalage".[31][32]
In June 1846 the Whigs, under Lord John Russell, returned to office. Immediately they set about dismantling Peel's limited, but practical, efforts to relieve the gathering Irish Famine.[33] Barricaded behind laissez-faire doctrines of "political economy", the government left O'Connell to plead for his country from the floor of the House of Commons: "She is in your hands—in your power. If you do not save her, she cannot save herself. One-fourth of her population will perish unless Parliament comes to their relief".[34] A broken man, on the advice of his doctors O'Connell took himself to the continent where, on route to Rome, he died in May 1847.
The Peace Resolutions
[edit]
In the months before O'Connell's death, Duffy circulated letters received from James Fintan Lalor.[35]: 58 In these Lalor argued independence could be pursued only in a popular struggle for the land. This alone could bring about a union of North and South, without which separation from England was impossible to contemplate. But recognising that "any and all means" that employed in this struggle could be made "illegal by Act of Parliament", the Young Irelanders would have, at the very least, to ready themselves for a "moral insurrection". He proposed that they should begin with a campaign to withhold rent, but more might be implied.[36] Parts of the country were already in a state of semi-insurrection. Tenants conspirators, in tradition of the Whiteboys and Ribbonmen, were attacking process servers, intimidating land agents, and resisting evictions. Lalor advised only against a general uprising: the people, he believed, could not hold their own against the country's English garrison.[37]
The letters made a profound impression, particularly on John Mitchel and Father John Kenyon.[38] When the conservative Standard observed that the new Irish railways could be used to transport troops to quickly curb agrarian unrest, Mitchel responded that the tracks could be turned into pikes and trains ambushed. O’Connell publicly distanced himself from The Nation, appearing to some to set Duffy, as the editor, up for prosecution.[39] When the courts failed to convict, O'Connell pressed the issue, seemingly intent on effecting a break.
In July 1846, the Repeal Association tabled resolutions declaring that under no circumstances was a nation justified in asserting its liberties by force of arms. Meagher argued that while the Young Irelanders were not advocating physical force, if Repeal could not be carried by moral persuasion and peaceful means they believed a resort to arms would be a no less honourable course.[40] In his O'Connell's absence, his son John forced the decision: the resolution was carried on the threat of the O'Connells themselves quitting the Association.
An offer by United Irish veteran, Valentine Lawless (Lord Cloncurry) to chair a committee to adjust the dispute between Old and Young Ireland had been rejected by John O'Connell in reportedly "very saucy and unbecoming language".[41] An offer of mediation from the abolitionist and pacifist James Haughton was also spurned.[42]
The Irish Confederation
[edit]
Secession
[edit]The Young Irelanders withdrew from the Repeal Association, but not without considerable support. In October 1846, the Association chairman in Dublin was presented with a remonstrance protesting Young Irelanders exclusion signed by fifteen hundred of the city's leading citizens. When John O’Connell ordered this to be flung into the gutter, a large protest meeting was held,[43] suggesting the possibility for a rival organisation. In January 1847, the seceders formed themselves as the Irish Confederation. Michael Doheny recalls "no declarations or calls for rebellion, and no pledges [given] of peace". The objectives were "independence of the Irish nation" with "no means to attain that end abjured, save such as were inconsistent with honour, morality and reason".[43]
In the shadow of the Famine
[edit]As first directed by Duffy, in towns Confederate clubs were to encourage the use of Irish resources and manufactures, work for the extension of popular franchise, and instruct youth in the history of their country which was being kept from them in the government's National Schools. The village clubs were to promote the rights of tenants and labourers, diffuse knowledge of agriculture and—in token of the continuing commitment to non-violence—discourage secret societies. All were to promote harmony between Irishmen of all creeds, making it a point to invite the participation of Protestants.[44] But in "Black '47", the worst year of the potato-blight famine, the search was for policies that could address the immediate crisis.
The Confederation urged cultivators to hold the harvest until the needs of their own families were supplied. As Duffy was later to acknowledge, the poorest had lost the art and means of preparing for themselves anything other than the potato. Even were it not at the cost of eviction, holding back grain and other foodstuffs grown to pay rent might avail them little.[45] As "temporary relief for destitute persons", in the spring of 1847 the government opened soup kitchens. In August they were shut. The starving were directed to abandon the land and apply to the workhouses.[46]
Mitchel urged the Confederation to pronounce for Lalor's policy and make control of land the issue. However, Duffy had cut Michel's access to the leader columns of The Nation' over a seemingly extraneous issue. In Duffy's view, Mitchel had abused a temporary editorship to take unsanctioned and, in themselves, scandalous positions on matters that had been sacrosanct to O'Connell. O'Connell had repeatedly assailed what he described as "the vile union" in the United States "of republicanism and slavery".[47][48] He had also criticised Pope Gregory XVI over the treatment of Jews in the Papal States.[49] Conscious of the risk to American funding and support, Duffy himself had difficulty with O'Connell's vocal abolitionism: the time was not right, he suggested, "for gratuitous interference in American affairs".[50] In articles written for the New York-based Nation, Mitchel espoused proslavery thought and opposed Jewish emancipation in the United States.[51][52] His views were similar to many other Young Ireland émigrés such as Thomas D'Arcy McGee, who defended American slavery while espousing Irish nationalism.[53]
In February 1848 Mitchel established a paper of his own. Under its title The United Irishman he placed Wolfe Tone's declaration: "Our independence must be had at all hazards. If the men of property will not support us, they must fall; we can support ourselves by the aid of that numerous and respectable class of the community, the men of no property".[54] The paper boldly advocated Lalor's policy. In May, as its publisher, Mitchel was convicted of a new crime of treason felony and sentenced to transportation for 14 years to the Royal Naval Dockyard on Ireland Island in the "Imperial fortress" of Bermuda (imprisoned in the Prison hulk HMS Dromedary),[55] and Van Diemen's Land.[56][57]
Land War or Parliamentary Obstruction
[edit]Duffy recalled from his youth a Quaker neighbour who had been a United Irishman and had laughed at the idea that the issue was kings and governments. What mattered was the land from which the people got their bread.[58] Instead of singing the La Marseillaise, he said that what the men of '98 should have borrowed from the French was "their sagacious idea of bundling the landlords out of doors and putting tenants in their shoes".[59] But Duffy's objection to "Lalor's theory" was that "his angry peasants, chafing like chained tigers, were creatures of the imagination--not the living people through whom we had to act".[60] At the same time Duffy was trying to hold together a broader coalition, and had for that reason advanced O'Brien to the leadership, a Protestant and a landowner. On the Confederation's Council he was supported by Patrick James Smyth who argued that with propertied classes, as well as the priesthood opposed, the Confederation could not hope to call out a single parish in Ireland.[61]
By a vote of fifteen to six, the Council adopted Duffy's alternative proposition: a Parliamentary Party that, accepting no favours, would press Ireland's claims by threatening to put a stop to the entire business of the Commons. Such a party would either have its demands conceded, or be forcibly ejected from Westminster, in which case the people united behind its single purpose would know how to enforce their will. Opposition was led by Thomas Devin Reilly and by Mitchel. Class coalitions attempted in past had failed, and they continued to insist on Lalor's plan.[62]
The path to insurrection
[edit]
Duffy's Creed
[edit]By the spring of 1848, the scale of the catastrophe facing the country had persuaded all parties on the Council that independence was an existential issue; that the immediate need was for an Irish national government able to take control of national resources. In May 1848 Duffy published "The Creed of the Nation." If Irish independence was to come by force, it would be in the form of a Republic. The avoidance of deadly animosities between Irishmen was of course preferable.
An independent Irish parliament, elected by widest possible suffrage, a responsible minister for Ireland [i.e. an Irish executive accountable to an Irish parliament] a Viceroy of Irish birth, would content the country... Such a parliament would inevitably establish Tenant Right, abolish the Established Church..., and endeavour to settle the claims of labour upon some solid and satisfactory basis. But one step further in the direction of Revolution... it would not go.[63]
Other peoples in Europe had been protected from starvation because their rulers were "of their own blood and race". That this was not the case for Ireland, was the source of its present tragedy.[64]
The Government made clear that its chosen response to the crisis in Ireland was coercion, not concession. Mitchel had been convicted under new martial law measures approved by Parliament (including by a number of "Old Ireland" MPs). On 9 July 1848 Duffy, with the Creed as evidence, was arrested for sedition. He managed to smuggle a few lines out to The Nation but the issue that would have carried his declaration, that there was no remedy now but the sword, was seized and the paper suppressed.[65]
1848 Uprising
[edit]

Planning for an insurrection had already advanced. Mitchel, although the first to call for action, had scoffed at the necessity for systematic preparation. O'Brien, to Duffy's surprise, attempted the task. In March he had returned from a visit to revolutionary Paris with hopes of French assistance. (Among the leading republicans in France, Ledru-Rollin had been loud in his declaration of French support for the Irish cause).[66] There was also talk of an Irish-American brigade and of a Chartist diversion in England[67] (Allied with the Chartists, the Confederation had a relatively strong organised presence in Liverpool, Manchester and Salford).[68] With Duffy's arrest, it was left to O'Brien to confront the reality of the Confederates' domestic isolation.
Having with Meagher and Dillon gathered a small group of both landowners and tenants, on 23 July O'Brien raised the standard of revolt in Kilkenny.[69] This was a tricolour he had brought back from France, its colours (green for Catholics, orange for Protestants) intended to symbolise the United Irish republican ideal.
With Old Ireland and rural priesthood against them, the Confederates had no organised support in the countryside.[70] Active membership was confined to the garrisoned towns. As O'Brien proceeded into Tipperary he was greeted by curious crowds, but found himself in command of only a few hundred ill-clad largely unarmed men. They scattered after their first skirmish with the constabulary, derisively referred to by The Times of London as "Battle of Widow McCormack's Cabbage Patch".[71]
O'Brien and his colleagues were quickly arrested and convicted of treason. Following a public outpouring, the government commuted their death sentences to penal transportation to Van Diemen's Land, where they joined John Mitchel. Duffy alone escaped conviction. Thanks to a token Catholic juror whose character the government had misjudged, and able defence of Isaac Butt, Duffy was released in February 1849, the only major Young Ireland leader to remain in Ireland.[72]
In a judgement shared by many of their sympathisers, John Devoy, the later Fenian, wrote of the Young Irelander rebellion:
The terrible Famine of 1847 forced the hand of the Young Irelanders and they rushed into a policy of Insurrection without the slightest military preparation... Their writings and speeches had converted a large number of the young men to the gospel of force and their pride impelled them to an effort to make good their preaching. But... an appeal to arms made to a disarmed people was little short of insanity.[73]
James Connolly, however, was to argue that the response to arrest the Young Ireland leaders suggests that in the towns, people would have taken to arms if only the signal been given. He writes that when Duffy was arrested on July 9, Dublin workers surrounded the military escort, pressed up to Duffy and offered to begin an insurrection then and there. “Do you wish to be rescued?” “Certainly not,” said Duffy. In Cashel, Tipperary, people stormed the jail and rescued Michael Doheny, only for him to give himself up again and apply for bail. In Waterford, people brought the cavalcade carrying Meagher to a standstill with a barricade across a narrow bridge over the River Suir. They begged him to give the word, for they had the town already in their hands, but Meagher persisted in going with the soldiers, and ordered the barricade removed.[74]
Aftermath
[edit]The League of North and South
[edit]Convinced that "the Famine had 'dissolved society' and exposed landlordism both morally and economically",[75] in September 1849 Lalor attempted with John Savage, Joseph Brenan and other Young Irelanders to revive the insurrection in Tipperary and Waterford. After an indecisive engagement at Cappoquin, once again in view of their small number the insurgents disbanded.[38] Lalor died three months later of bronchitis. This was just as a new movement was lending new credence to his belief that the independence of cultivator would bring "national independence in its train".[76]
Tenant farmers and cottiers may not have been prepared to fight for a republic, but with the formation of tenant protection societies they were beginning to see value in an open and legal combination for furtherance of their interests.[77] Seeking to link the new tenant agitation to his vision of an independent parliamentary party, in August 1850 Duffy, with James McKnight, William Sharman Crawford and Frederick Lucas, moved the formation of an all-Ireland Tenant Right League.[78] In addition to tenant representatives, among those gathered for the inaugural meeting were magistrates and landlords, Catholic priests and Presbyterian ministers, and journalists with the Presbyterian James McKnight of the Banner of Ulster in the chair.[79]
In the 1852 election, organised around what Michael Davitt described as "the programme of the Whiteboys and Ribbonmen reduced to moral and constitutional standards",[80] the League helped return Duffy (for New Ross) and 47 other MPs pledged to tenant-rights.[81] What Duffy hailed as the "League of North and South",[82] however, was less than it appeared. Many of the MPs had been sitting Repealers who had broken with the Whig government over the Ecclesiastical Titles Act, and only one pledged MP, William Kirk for Newry, was returned from Ulster.[83]
After a modest land bill was defeated in the Lords,[84] the "Independent Irish Party" began to unravel. Catholic Primate of Ireland, Archbishop Paul Cullen approved the MPs breaking their pledge of independent opposition and accepting positions in a new Whig administration.[85] In the North McKnight and Crawford had their meetings broken up by Orange "bludgeon men".[86]
Broken in health and spirit, Duffy published in 1855 a farewell address to his constituency, declaring that he had resolved to retire from parliament, as it was no longer possible to accomplish the task for which he had solicited their votes. He emigrated to Australia.[87] From 1870 a Land League and Irish Parliamentary Party realised the combination he had sought: coordinated agrarian agitation and obstructionist representation at Westminster.
Irish Republican Brotherhood
[edit]Some of the "Men of 1848" carried the commitment to physical force forward into the Irish Republican Brotherhood (IRB), formed in 1858 in Dublin, and in the sister Fenian Brotherhood (later Clan na Gael) established by Meagher and fellow exiles in the United States. In 1867, in a loosely co-ordinated action, the Fenians, mobilising Irish veterans of the American Civil War, raided across the northern border of the United States with a view to holding Canada hostage to the grant of Irish Independence.[88] while the IRB attempted an armed rising at home.[89]
With critical and continuing support from the Irish post-Famine diaspora in the United States, the IRB survived to play a critical role in raising the Young Irelander tricolour over Dublin in the Easter Rising of 1916.
Notable Young Irelanders
[edit]- Thomas Antisell
- Joseph Brenan
- Margaret Callan
- Thomas D'Arcy McGee
- Thomas Davis
- John Blake Dillon
- Michael Doheny
- Charles Gavan Duffy
- Father John Kenyon
- James Fintan Lalor
- Terence MacManus
- Thomas MacNevin
- John Martin
- Thomas Francis Meagher
- John Mitchel
- William Smith O'Brien
- Kevin Izod O'Doherty
- Patrick O'Donoghue
- John Edward Pigot
- Thomas Devin Reilly
- John Savage
- Jane Wilde
- Richard D'Alton Williams
See also
[edit]References
[edit]- ^ Peter Billingham, ed. (2005). Radical Initiatives in Interventionist and Community Drama. Intellect. ISBN 9781841500683.
Active in the 1840s, Young Ireland was formed by radical intellectuals, and was influenced by the pan European nationalist movements of the period. The group launched an unsuccessful rising in 1848.
- ^ Braungart, Richard G. (Spring 1984). "Historical Generations and Generation Units: A Global Pattern of Youth Movements". Journal of Political & Military Sociology. 12 (1). JSTOR: 119, 127. JSTOR 45293423. Retrieved 11 April 2025.
- ^ Young Ireland, Sir Charles Gavan Duffy, Cassell, Petter, Galpin & Co 1880 pg.34
- ^ Dennis Gwynn, Young Ireland and 1848, Cork University Press, 1949, pg 5
- ^ a b Beckett, J. C. (1966). Modern Ireland 1603-1923. London: Faber and Faber. p. 323. ISBN 0571092675.
- ^ a b c d e f Moody, T. W. (Autumn 1966). "Thomas Davis and the Irish nation". Hermathena (103): 11–12. JSTOR 23039825. Archived from the original on 22 September 2021. Retrieved 3 September 2020.
- ^ Beckett (1966), p. 291
- ^ Connolly, S.J. (2012). "Chapter 5: Improving Town, 1750–1820". In Connolly, S.J. (ed.). Belfast 400: People, Place and History. Liverpool University Press. ISBN 978-1-84631-635-7.
- ^ a b Bardon, Jonathan (2008). A History of Ireland in 250 Episodes. Dublin: Gill & Macmillan. p. 367.
- ^ Foster, R. F. (1988). Modern Ireland 1600-1972. Allen Lane, Penguin. p. 311. ISBN 0713990104.
- ^ Dennis Gwynn, Young Ireland and 1848, Cork University Press, 1949, pg 9
- ^ "British Library Catalogue entry". Archived from the original on 22 September 2021. Retrieved 3 September 2020.
- ^ Dennis Gwynn, O'Connell, Davis and the Colleges Bill, Cork University Press, 1948, p. 68
- ^ Bardon, Jonathan (2008). A History of Ireland in 250 Episodes. Dublin: Gill & Macmillan. pp. 362–363. ISBN 9780717146499.
- ^ Beckett, J>C> (1966). The Making of Modern Ireland 1603-1923. London: Faber and Faber. pp. 323–327. ISBN 0571092675.
- ^ Duffy, Charles Gavan (1898). My life in two hemispheres, Volume 1. London: Fischer Unwin. pp. 95–97. Archived from the original on 23 September 2021. Retrieved 1 September 2020.
- ^ Duffy, Charles Gavan (1898). My life in two hemispheres, Volume 1. London: Fischer Unwin. p. 99. Archived from the original on 23 September 2021. Retrieved 1 September 2020.
- ^ Quoted in MacDonagh, Oliver (1977). Ireland: The Union and its Aftermath. London. p. 58. ISBN 978-1-900621-81-6.
{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: location missing publisher (link) - ^ "Davis to R.R. Madden, March 1843 (Gaven Duffy Papers) quoted in Terence LaRocca (1974) "The Irish Career of Charles Gavan Duffy 1840-1855", Doctoral Dissertation, Loyola University Chicago, pp. 17-18. Loyola eCommons" (PDF). Archived from the original on 23 September 2021. Retrieved 3 September 2020.
- ^ Votruba, Martin. "Herder on Language" (PDF). Slovak Studies Program. University of Pittsburgh. Archived (PDF) from the original on 24 November 2017. Retrieved 30 June 2010.
- ^ Ó Tuathaigh, Gearóid (1975). "Gaelic Ireland, Popular Politics and Daniel O'Connell". Journal of the Galway Archaeological and Historical Society. 34: 21–34. JSTOR 25535454.
- ^ Beckett, J.C. (1966). The Making of Modern Ireland, 1603-1923. London: Faber & Faber. p. 332. ISBN 0571092675.
- ^ Foster, R.F. (1988). Modern Ireland, 1600-1972. London: Allen Lane. p. 317. ISBN 0713990104.
- ^ Clifford, Brendan (1985). The Veto Controversy. Belfast: Athol Books. ISBN 9780850340303.
- ^ Luby, Thomas Clarke (1870). The life and times of Daniel O'Connell. Glasgow: Cameron, Ferguson & Company. p. 418. Archived from the original on 31 July 2021. Retrieved 6 September 2020.
- ^ MacDonagh, Oliver (1975). "The Politicization of Irish Catholic Bishops: 1800-1850". The Historical Journal. xviii (1): 37–53. doi:10.1017/S0018246X00008669. JSTOR 2638467. S2CID 159877081. Archived from the original on 23 September 2021. Retrieved 4 September 2020.
- ^ Clifford, Brendan (1997). Spotlights on Irish History. Millstreet, Co. Cork: Aubane Historical Society. p. 95. ISBN 0952108151.
- ^ Macken, Ultan (2008). The Story of Daniel O'Connell. Cork: Mercier Press. p. 120. ISBN 9781856355964.
- ^ Mulvey, Helen (2003). Thomas Davis and Ireland: A Biographical Study. Washington DC: The Catholic University of America Press. p. 180. ISBN 0813213037. Archived from the original on 24 June 2021. Retrieved 3 September 2020.
- ^ O'Connell to Cullen, 9 May 1842. Maurice O'Connell (ed.) The Correspondence of Daniel O'Connell. Shannon: Irish University Press, 8 vols.), vol. vii, p. 158
- ^ Griffith, Arthur (1916). Meagher of the Sword:Speeches of Thomas Francis Meagher in Ireland 1846–1848. Dublin: M. H. Gill & Son, Ltd. p. vii
- ^ O'Sullivan, T. F. (1945). Young Ireland. The Kerryman Ltd. p. 195
- ^ Woodham-Smith, Cecil (1962). The Great Hunger: Ireland 1845–1849. London: Penguin. pp. 410–411. ISBN 978-0-14-014515-1.
{{cite book}}: ISBN / Date incompatibility (help) - ^ Geoghegan, Patrick (2010). Liberator Daniel O'Connell: The Life and Death of Daniel O'Connell, 1830-1847. Dublin: Gill & Macmillan. p. 332. ISBN 9780717151578. Archived from the original on 22 September 2021. Retrieved 3 September 2020.
- ^ LaRocca, Terrence (1975). "The Irish Career of Charles Gavan Duffy, 1840-1855". Dissertations, Loyola University Chicago: 87.
- ^ Finton Lalor to Duffy, January 1847 (Gavan Duffy Papers).
- ^ Finton Lalor to Duffy, February 1847 (Gavan Duffy Papers).
- ^ a b T. F. O’Sullivan, The Young Irelanders, The Kerryman Ltd. 1945.
- ^ McCullagh, John (8 November 2010). "Irish Confederation formed". newryjournal.co.uk/. Newry Journal. Archived from the original on 25 September 2020. Retrieved 27 August 2020.
- ^ O'Sullivan, T. F. (1945). Young Ireland. The Kerryman Ltd. pp. 195-6
- ^ "Valentine Brown Lawless, Baron Cloncurry - Irish Biography". www.libraryireland.com. Archived from the original on 5 June 2021. Retrieved 5 March 2021.
- ^ Roger Courtney (2013), Dissenting Voices: Rediscovering the Irish Progressive Presbyterian Tradition, Ulster Historical Foundation, Belfast, p. 156
- ^ a b Michael Doheny’s The Felon’s Track, M.H. Gill & Son, LTD, 1951 Edition pg 111–112
- ^ Terence LaRocca (1974) "The Irish Career of Charles Gavan Duffy 1840-1855", Doctoral Dissertation, Loyola University Chicago, pp. 52-55. Loyola eCommons[permanent dead link]
- ^ Duffy, Charles Gavan (1898). My life in two hemispheres, Volume 1. London: Fischer Unwin. pp. 198–203. Archived from the original on 23 September 2021. Retrieved 1 September 2020.
- ^ Gray, Peter. (2012). "British Relief Measures". Atlas of the Great Irish Famine. Ed. John Crowley, William J. Smyth, and Mike Murphy. New York: New York University Press.
- ^ Jenkins, Lee (Autumn 1999). "Beyond the Pale: Frederick Douglass in Cork" (PDF). The Irish Review (24): 92. Archived (PDF) from the original on 17 February 2018. Retrieved 3 September 2020.
- ^ "Daniel O'Connell and the campaign against slavery". historyireland.com. History Ireland. 5 March 2013. Archived from the original on 8 September 2020. Retrieved 23 August 2020.
- ^ Bew, Paul; Maune, Patrick (July 2020). "The Great Advocate". Dublin Review of Books (124). Archived from the original on 4 August 2020. Retrieved 7 August 2020.
- ^ Kinealy, Christine (August 2011). "The Irish Abolitionist: Daniel O'Connell". irishamerica.com. Irish America. Archived from the original on 14 August 2020. Retrieved 24 August 2020.
- ^ Duffy, Charles Gavan (1883). Four Years of Irish History, 1845-1849. Dublin: Cassell, Petter, Galpin. pp. 500–501. Archived from the original on 9 June 2021. Retrieved 4 September 2020.
- ^ Gleeson, David (2016) Failing to 'unite with the abolitionists': the Irish Nationalist Press and U.S. emancipation. Slavery & Abolition, 37 (3). pp. 622-637. ISSN 0144-039X
- ^ Fanning, Bryan (1 November 2017). "Slaves to a Myth". Irish Review of Books (article). 102. Retrieved 11 November 2018.
- ^ William Theobald Wolfe Tone, ed. (1826). Life of Theobald Wolfe Tone, vol. 2. Washington D.C.: Gales and Seaton. p. 45. ISBN 9781108081948. Archived from the original on 23 September 2021. Retrieved 3 September 2020.
{{cite book}}: ISBN / Date incompatibility (help) - ^ Mitchel, John (1854). JAIL JOURNAL; OR, FIVE YEARS IN BRITISH PRISONS. New York: PUBLISHED AT THE OFFICE OF THE "CITIZEN,". p. Title page.
COMMENCED ON BOARD THE SHEARWATER STEAMER, IN DUBLIN BAY, CONTINUED AT SPIKE ISLAND—ON BOARD THE SCOURGE WAR STEAMER—ON BOARD THE "DROMEDARY" HULK, BERMUDA-ON BQARD THE NEPTUNE CONVICT SHIP—AT PERNAMBUCO—AT THE CAPE OF GOOD HOPE (DURING THE ANTI-CONVICT REBELLION)—AT VAN DIEMAN'S LAND—AT SYDNEY—AT TAHITI—AT SAN FRANCISCO—AT GREYTOWN—AND CONCLUDED AT NO. 8 PIER, NORTH RIVER, NEW YORK
- ^ "John Mitchel 1815-1875 Revolutionary". www.irelandseye.com. Archived from the original on 9 November 2020. Retrieved 19 August 2019.
- ^ "United Irishman (Dublin, Ireland : 1848) v. 1 no. 16". digital.library.villanova.eduUnited Irishman (Dublin, Ireland : 1848) v. 1 no. 16. Archived from the original on 20 September 2020. Retrieved 20 August 2019.
- ^ "Terence LaRocca (1974) "The Irish Career of Charles Gavan Duffy 1840-1855", Doctoral Dissertation, Loyola University Chicago, p. 3. Loyola eCommons" (PDF). Archived from the original on 23 September 2021. Retrieved 3 September 2020.
- ^ Duffy, Charles Gavan (1898). My life in two hemispheres, Volume 1. London: Fischer Unwin. p. 16. Archived from the original on 23 September 2021. Retrieved 1 September 2020.
- ^ Buckley, Mary (1976). "John Mitchel, Ulster and Irish Nationality (1842-1848)". Studies: An Irish Quarterly Review. 65 (257): (30–44) 37. ISSN 0039-3495. JSTOR 30089986.
- ^ LaRocca, p. 63
- ^ LaRocca pp.61-65
- ^ Duffy, Charles Gavan (1848). The Creed of "The Nation": A Profession of Confederate Principles. Dublin: Mason Bookseller. p. 6. Archived from the original on 23 September 2021. Retrieved 3 September 2020.
- ^ Duffy, Charles Gavan (1848). The Creed of "The Nation": A Profession of Confederate Principles. Dublin: Mason Bookseller. p. 9. Archived from the original on 23 September 2021. Retrieved 3 September 2020.
- ^ La Rocca, p. 87
- ^ John Huntly McCarthy (1887), Ireland since the Union, London, Chatto & Windus. p.121
- ^ La Rocca, p. 78-80
- ^ Sir Charles Gavan Duffy, Four Years of Irish History 1845–1849, Cassell, Petter, Galpin & Co. 1888, p. 389
- ^ Duffy, Charles Gavan (1883). Four Years of Irish History, 1845-1849. Dublin: Cassell, Petter, Galpin. pp. 640–645. Archived from the original on 9 June 2021. Retrieved 4 September 2020.
- ^ Grogan, Dick (29 July 1998). "Taoiseach to announce purchase of 1848 'Warhouse' in Tipperary". The Irish Times. Archived from the original on 23 September 2021. Retrieved 6 September 2020.
- ^ Duffy, Charles Gavan (1883). Four Years of Irish History, 1845-1849. Dublin: Cassell, Petter, Galpin. pp. 743–745. Archived from the original on 9 June 2021. Retrieved 4 September 2020.
- ^ Devoy, John (1929). Recollections of an Irish rebel.... A personal narrative by John Devoy. New York: Chas. P. Young Co., printers. p. 290. Retrieved 13 October 2020.
- ^ Connolly, James (1910). Labour in Irish History. p. 168.
- ^ Foster, R. F. (1988). Modern Ireland 1600-1972. Allen Lane, Penguin. p. 381. ISBN 0713990104.
- ^ Foster, R. F. (1988). Modern Ireland 1600-1972. Allen Lane, Penguin. p. 381. ISBN 0713990104.
- ^ Beckett, J.C. (1966). the Making of Modern Ireland, 1603-1923. London: Faber. p. 348. ISBN 0571092675.
- ^ Lyons, Dr Jane (1 March 2013). "Sir Charles Gavan Duffy, My Life in Two Hemispheres, Vol. II". From-Ireland.net. Archived from the original on 28 February 2021. Retrieved 27 March 2021.
- ^ Lyons, Jane (March 2013). "Irish Alliance and the Tenant Right League". From-Ireland.net. Archived from the original on 28 September 2020. Retrieved 6 September 2020.
- ^ Davitt, Michael (1904). The fall of feudalism in Ireland; or, The story of the land league revolution. London: Dalcassian Publishing Company. p. 70. Archived from the original on 23 September 2021. Retrieved 21 September 2020.
- ^ Duffy, Charles Gavan (1886). The League of North and South. London: Chapman & Hall.
- ^ Duffy, Charles Gavan (1886). The League of North and South: An Episode in Irish History, 1850-1854. London: Chapman and Hall.
- ^ Bew, Paul (2007). Ireland: The Politics of Enmity 1789-2006. Oxford: Oxford University Press. pp. 238–239. ISBN 9780198205555. Archived from the original on 2 April 2021. Retrieved 3 September 2020.
- ^ Anton, Brigitte; O'Brien, R. B. (2008). "Duffy, Sir Charles Gavan". Oxford Dictionary of National Biography (online ed.). Oxford University Press. doi:10.1093/ref:odnb/32921. ISBN 978-0-19-861412-8. (Subscription, Wikipedia Library access or UK public library membership required.)
- ^ McCaffrey, Lawrence (1976). The Irish Catholic Diaspora in America. Washington DC: The Catholic University of America Press. p. 145. ISBN 9780813208961. Archived from the original on 2 April 2021. Retrieved 3 September 2020.
- ^ Bew, Paul (2007). Ireland: The Politics of Enmity 1789-2006. Oxford: Oxford University Press. pp. 238–239. ISBN 9780198205555. Archived from the original on 2 April 2021. Retrieved 3 September 2020.
- ^
This article incorporates text from a publication now in the public domain: O'Brien, Richard Barry (1912). "Duffy, Charles Gavan". In Lee, Sidney (ed.). Dictionary of National Biography (2nd supplement). London: Smith, Elder & Co.
- ^ Senior, Hereward (1991). The Last Invasion of Canada: The Fenian Raids, 1866-1870. Dundurn. ISBN 9781550020854. Archived from the original on 21 July 2020. Retrieved 26 June 2020.
- ^ Bardon, Jonathan (2008). A History of Ireland in 250 Episodes. Dublin: Gill & Macmillan. p. 389. ISBN 9780717146499.
Bibliography
[edit]- Bew, Paul (2007). Ireland: The Politics of Enmity 1789-2006. Oxford: Oxford University Press. ISBN 9780198205555.
- James Quinn. Young Ireland and The Writing of Irish History (2015).
- Bryan McGovern, "Young Ireland and Southern Nationalism," Irish Studies South (2016) : Iss. 2, Article 5. online Archived 8 November 2017 at the Wayback Machine
- Richard Davis The Young Ireland Movement (Dublin, 1987).
- Malcolm Brown, The Politics of Irish Literature: from Thomas Davis to W.B. Yeats, Allen & Unwin, 1973. Archived 7 April 2007 at the Wayback Machine
- Aidan Hegarty, John Mitchel, A Cause Too Many, Camlane Press.
- Arthur Griffith, Thomas Davis, The Thinker and Teacher, M.H. Gill & Son, 1922.
- Young Ireland and 1848, Dennis Gwynn, Cork University Press, 1949.
- Daniel O'Connell The Irish Liberator, Dennis Gwynn, Hutchinson & Co, Ltd.
- O'Connell Davis and the Colleges Bill, Dennis Gwynn, Cork University Press, 1948.
- Smith O’Brien And The "Secession", Dennis Gwynn, Cork University Press
- Meagher of The Sword, Edited By Arthur Griffith, M. H. Gill & Son, Ltd., 1916.
- Young Irelander Abroad: The Diary of Charles Hart, Ed. Brendan O'Cathaoir, University Press.
- John Mitchel: First Felon for Ireland, Ed. Brian O'Higgins, Brian O'Higgins 1947.
- Rossa's Recollections: 1838 to 1898, The Lyons Press, 2004.
- James Connolly, The Re-Conquest of Ireland, Fleet Street, 1915.
- Louis J. Walsh, John Mitchel: Noted Irish Lives, The Talbot Press Ltd, 1934.
- Life of John Mitchel, P. A. Sillard, James Duffy and Co., Ltd 1908.
- John Mitchel, P. S. O'Hegarty, Maunsel & Company, Ltd 1917.
- R. V. Comerford, The Fenians in Context: Irish Politics & Society 1848–82, Wolfhound Press, 1998
- Seamus MacCall, Irish Mitchel, Thomas Nelson and Sons Ltd, 1938.
- T. A. Jackson, Ireland Her Own, Lawrence & Wishart, Ltd, 1976.
- T. C. Luby, Life and Times of Daniel O'Connell, Cameron & Ferguson.
- T. F. O'Sullivan, Young Ireland, The Kerryman Ltd., 1945.
- Terry Golway, Irish Rebel John Devoy and America's Fight for Irish Freedom, St. Martin's Griffin, 1998.
- Thomas Gallagher, Paddy's Lament: Ireland 1846–1847 Prelude to Hatred, Poolbeg, 1994.
- James Fintan Lalor, Thomas, P. O'Neill, Golden Publications, 2003.
- Charles Gavan Duffy: Conversations With Carlyle (1892), with Introduction, Stray Thoughts on Young Ireland, by Brendan Clifford, Athol Books, Belfast, ISBN 0-85034-114-0.
- Brendan Clifford and Julianne Herlihy, Envoi, Taking Leave of Roy Foster, Cork: Aubane Historical Society
- Robert Sloan, William Smith O'Brien and the Young Ireland Rebellion of 1848, Four Courts Press, 2000
- An Gorta Mor), M. W. Savage, The Falcon Family, or, Young Ireland, London: 1845, Quinnipiac University
External links
[edit]- Young Ireland Archived 15 February 2005 at the Wayback Machine from the Encyclopedia of 1848 Revolutions
- An Gorta Mor Archived 8 March 2010 at the Wayback Machine from Quinnipiac University
- Legal transcripts relating to the trials of Young Irelanders.
- Young Irelanders in Tasmania Archived 6 July 2011 at the Wayback Machine
- Young Irelanders in Tasmania wiki Archived 1 September 2013 at the Wayback Machine
Young Ireland
View on GrokipediaHistorical Context
Precedents in Irish Nationalism
The Society of United Irishmen, established in Belfast in 1791, represented an early radical strain in Irish nationalism by advocating for parliamentary reform, Catholic enfranchisement, and ultimately an independent republic modeled on non-sectarian principles uniting Presbyterians, Catholics, and Anglicans.[5] Drawing inspiration from the American Revolution of 1776 and the French Revolution of 1789, the society's shift toward conspiracy and armed insurrection culminated in the 1798 rebellion, which aimed to overthrow British rule through coordinated uprisings across Ulster, Leinster, and Munster.[6] However, the revolt collapsed due to internal disorganization, insufficient arms and training for its estimated 16,000–20,000 fighters, informant betrayals, and swift British military countermeasures, including martial law and loyalist militias, leading to over 10,000 rebel deaths and subsequent mass executions that entrenched sectarian animosities rather than resolving them.[7] [8] The Acts of Union, passed in 1800 and effective from January 1, 1801, dissolved the Irish Parliament and legislatively united Ireland with Great Britain, ostensibly to secure stability after 1798 but amid broken assurances of Catholic relief that fueled perceptions of elite betrayal.[9] This integration exacerbated grievances by centralizing power in Westminster, where Irish representation was minimal—only 100 MPs and 28 peers for a population exceeding 5 million—while economic woes intensified under absentee landlordism, with numerous proprietors residing in Britain and prioritizing rent extraction over estate improvements, resulting in subdivided holdings, chronic tenancy insecurity, and widespread rural indebtedness by the 1820s.[10] [11] Daniel O'Connell's Catholic Association, founded in 1823, pioneered mass constitutional nationalism through organized petitions, clergy mobilization, and the tactic of registering 40-shilling freeholders to amplify Catholic electoral influence, pressuring Parliament to enact the Roman Catholic Relief Act on April 13, 1829, which abolished key religious tests for office-holding and extended suffrage eligibility.[12] This victory underscored the efficacy of peaceful, legal agitation in securing reforms without violence, amassing support from over a million signatures on emancipation petitions.[13] Yet O'Connell's framework, rooted in Catholic-majority mobilization, inadvertently deepened Protestant alienation by framing nationalism through confessional lenses, sidelining demands for broader parliamentary or economic equity that appealed to Ulster Presbyterians and Ascendancy interests, thus limiting its appeal to a unified Irish identity.[14]European Romantic Influences
Young Ireland's cultural nationalism drew substantially from the broader European Romantic movement, which exalted the organic unity of a nation's language, folklore, and historical traditions as expressions of its unique Volksgeist, or national spirit. Johann Gottfried Herder's writings, emphasizing the revival of folk culture and the ties between language and collective identity, provided an intellectual foundation for viewing nations as living entities shaped by their indigenous heritage rather than abstract political constructs. This perspective resonated with Young Irelanders seeking to counteract cultural anglicization by promoting Ireland's Gaelic past and ballads as sources of moral and patriotic renewal.[15] Walter Scott's historical novels, such as Waverley (1814) and Ivanhoe (1819), further exemplified Romanticism's fascination with medieval and clan-based societies, inspiring Irish writers to romanticize their own pre-Norman and Gaelic eras as authentic wellsprings of national genius. Thomas Davis, a key Young Ireland figure, echoed this by advocating the study of Irish history and poetry to foster a sense of continuity and pride, drawing implicit parallels to Scott's revival of Scottish lore without direct emulation of his unionist undertones. Scott's influence permeated European nationalist circles, reinforcing the idea that literature could galvanize collective memory against modern homogenization.[16] Giuseppe Mazzini's establishment of Young Europe in 1834 extended Romantic ideals into republican activism, envisioning a federation of self-determining nations united against monarchical absolutism through moral suasion and cultural awakening rather than immediate violence. This transnational framework appealed to Young Ireland's leaders, who saw parallels in their struggle against British dominance and adopted Mazzini's emphasis on educated youth leading ethical revolts informed by national history. Correspondence and shared motifs of martyrdom in The Nation reflect this affinity, positioning Irish nationalism within a pan-European crusade for liberty and self-realization.[17][18] The French July Revolution of 1830, which replaced absolutist Charles X with the constitutional July Monarchy, demonstrated Romantic nationalism's potential for blending revolutionary fervor with parliamentary reform, influencing Irish observers to envision similar non-sectarian coalitions for autonomy. Concurrently, Félicité de Lamennais's post-revolutionary advocacy in L'Avenir (founded 1830) for a liberal Catholicism—separating church authority from state tyranny while upholding democratic participation—offered a model for reconciling Ireland's religious demographics with progressive ideals, though papal condemnation in 1832 tempered its direct adoption. These currents underscored Young Ireland's departure from insular precedents toward a cosmopolitan yet rooted vision of cultural resurgence.[19]Formation
Intellectual Origins
The intellectual origins of the Young Ireland movement emerged in the early 1840s within Dublin's academic circles, particularly the College Historical Society at Trinity College Dublin, where members debated Ireland's historical legacy free from the influence of dominant political figures like Daniel O'Connell. Thomas Davis, serving as auditor of the society in 1840, delivered speeches and lectures urging the study of Irish history to cultivate national identity and pride, arguing that "the study of our history is the best way to make us a nation."[20][21] These discussions, spanning 1840 to 1842, focused on cultural and educational revival rather than immediate political agitation, providing a forum for young intellectuals to explore Ireland's past without sectarian or partisan constraints.[20] Central to these early gatherings was an emphasis on educating a cross-sectarian elite—encompassing Protestants and Catholics—to drive national regeneration, with Davis critiquing religious divisions as a primary obstacle to unity and progress.[20] Associated literary figures, including the poet James Clarence Mangan, contributed to this milieu through Dublin's intellectual networks, aligning poetic and historical endeavors toward non-political cultural enrichment.[20] This approach sought to transcend O'Connellite dominance by fostering independent scholarship that highlighted shared Irish heritage over religious antagonism.[22] Early writings and addresses from this period promoted self-reliance and moral regeneration as foundational to Irish advancement, rejecting dependency on British goodwill in favor of internal renewal through education and historical awareness.[20] Davis advocated intellectual and ethical self-improvement to build a cohesive national character, laying the groundwork for broader cultural initiatives without yet engaging in organized political reform.[20]Entry into Repeal Movement
In 1843, key figures of the emerging Young Ireland group, including Thomas Davis who had enrolled in Daniel O'Connell's Repeal Association two years prior, provided tactical support to the campaign seeking repeal of the 1801 Act of Union and restoration of an independent Irish parliament.[20][23] This alignment stemmed from the movement's emphasis on mass mobilization as a non-violent means to assert Irish self-government, harnessing widespread discontent with British rule amid economic pressures.[20][23] Young Irelanders actively participated in O'Connell's series of Monster Meetings, large-scale public demonstrations intended to showcase numerical strength and coerce parliamentary concessions; for example, the Ennis gathering on 15 June 1843 drew between 400,000 and 500,000 attendees, underscoring the scale of agrarian and urban support.[23] Davis contributed through fervent speeches at these events and poetry such as "The West's Asleep," published on 22 July 1843, which evoked martial heritage and fostered a sense of collective Irish resilience and identity.[20] Subtle divergences appeared early, as Young Ireland championed an inclusive patriotism transcending Catholic majoritarianism—O'Connell's core base—by urging unity among Protestants, Catholics, and Dissenters under a shared national banner, rather than prioritizing sectarian mobilization.[20][24] Davis's advocacy for self-reliance and cultural revival hinted at a broader, less Westminster-dependent vision, setting the stage for ideological friction without yet prompting outright separation.[24]Cultural Initiatives
The Nation Newspaper
The Nation was established as a weekly Irish nationalist newspaper on 15 October 1842 by Thomas Davis, Charles Gavan Duffy, and John Blake Dillon, with the explicit aim of serving as Young Ireland's principal organ for propagating its views.[25][26] Its founding prospectus articulated a motto—"To create and foster public opinion in Ireland and to make it racy of the soil"—emphasizing the cultivation of a distinctly Irish sentiment through literature and commentary that drew on native traditions rather than imported models.[27][28] The paper prioritized accessible prose essays, poetry, and ballads that extolled figures from Ireland's Gaelic past, such as ancient chieftains and bards, while offering fact-based historical analyses of British policies, including land confiscations and penal laws, to substantiate claims of systemic misrule.[29] Circulation expanded swiftly, reaching the highest levels among Irish periodicals by 1843, outselling competitors like the Pilot by a factor of ten and disseminating content through shared readings in reading rooms and public gatherings across rural and urban areas.[30][31] This growth stemmed from its strategy of blending emotional appeals via verse—such as Davis's own compositions invoking heroic sacrifice—with reasoned critiques supported by archival references to events like the Cromwellian plantations, thereby appealing to both literate elites and broader audiences seeking cultural affirmation amid economic hardship.[32] The paper's independence from O'Connellite structures allowed it to prioritize long-term opinion formation over immediate agitation, positioning it as a vehicle for embedding nationalist consciousness in everyday discourse. Despite its influence, The Nation encountered financial pressures from high printing costs and reliance on subscriptions without substantial patronage, prompting a relocation of operations from 12 Trinity Street to 4 D'Olier Street in Dublin by early January 1844.[27][33] Authorities scrutinized its content for sedition, leading to trials against Duffy in 1843–1844 over articles deemed inflammatory, though these did not result in permanent closure at the time.[34] Such challenges highlighted the publication's role as a resilient cultural bulwark, sustaining Young Ireland's vision of national regeneration by evading full suppression and continuing to rally readers around shared historical narratives, even as editorial transitions occurred due to legal and personal exigencies.[35]Revival of Irish History and Language
Thomas Davis contributed significantly to the reinterpretation of Irish historical figures, portraying leaders such as Brian Boru and Hugh O'Neill as exemplars of indigenous sovereignty and resistance against external domination. In his essays, Davis emphasized Boru's unification efforts around 1000 AD as a model of centralized authority absent in later periods, drawing from Gaelic annals to counter narratives that depicted pre-Norman Ireland as anarchic. Similarly, he highlighted O'Neill's late 16th-century campaigns against Elizabethan forces as a defense of native governance, challenging historiographical traditions that justified English intervention by portraying Gaelic society as primitive or divided. These reinterpretations aimed to instill national pride through evidence-based accounts, prioritizing primary sources over Anglican-influenced chronicles that often minimized Irish agency to legitimize Protestant ascendancy.[36][37] Young Irelanders critiqued prevailing historiography for its systemic biases, particularly those embedded in works by English and Anglo-Irish authors that emphasized cultural inferiority to rationalize conquest and penal laws. Davis and associates advocated sourcing from empirical records, such as bardic poetry and monastic chronicles, to reconstruct a narrative of continuous Irish statecraft and resilience, eschewing romantic myths in favor of causal analysis linking historical defeats to failures in unity rather than inherent flaws. This approach sought to foster intellectual independence, recognizing that distorted histories perpetuated colonial self-doubt among the Irish populace. Scholarly efforts included compiling and analyzing untranslated Gaelic manuscripts to verify claims, thereby grounding national identity in verifiable continuity rather than imported interpretations.[38][39] Regarding language, Davis's 1846 essay "Our National Language" posited Gaelic not as an obsolete artifact but as a foundational element causal to social cohesion and cultural transmission, arguing that its decline under English policies eroded communal bonds and historical memory. He promoted bilingual education for elites to access Gaelic etymologies and literature, facilitating translations of key texts like annals and sagas to broaden accessibility and preserve linguistic vitality amid anglicization pressures post-1800 Act of Union. Young Ireland supported informal scholarly circles for linguistic study, viewing mastery of Irish as essential for authentic self-understanding and countering assimilation, with Davis estimating that widespread proficiency could unify disparate classes in shared heritage. This preservationist stance emphasized practical utility over sentiment, linking language retention to sustained national resilience.[40][41][42]Core Ideology
Non-Sectarian Nationalism
Young Ireland advanced a nationalism that deliberately transcended religious affiliations, aiming to encompass Catholics, Protestants, and Dissenters in a common pursuit of Irish self-determination. This principle distinguished the movement from the predominantly confessional orientation of O'Connellite politics, which aligned closely with Catholic ecclesiastical interests. Thomas Davis, a Protestant co-founder, embodied this inclusivity by advocating in his essays and poetry for a shared Irish identity unbound by sectarian loyalty.[43][20] The group's emphasis on non-sectarian unity drew from historical precedents, particularly the 1798 Rebellion, where the United Irishmen's initial vision of interdenominational republicanism faltered amid resurgent religious animosities that facilitated British suppression.[44] Young Ireland interpreted such divisions as empirically causal in past national defeats, arguing that overcoming them through civic equality was essential for pragmatic success against entrenched colonial power. By prioritizing national cohesion over religious exclusivity, the movement sought to mitigate risks of internal schism or territorial partition, fostering a realist strategy grounded in the evident debilitation wrought by confessional fractures.[44]Views on Democracy and Reform
Young Irelanders advocated a transition from moral force agitation—characterized by public meetings, petitions, and intellectual mobilization—to the establishment of democratic self-rule through an independent Irish legislature, viewing such evolution as essential for national maturity rather than reliance on British parliamentary concessions.[23] Influenced by the American federal model, figures like Thomas Davis proposed decentralizing authority to Ireland's historic provinces (Ulster, Leinster, Munster, and Connacht) to foster local self-governance while maintaining a central parliament, arguing this structure would balance unity with regional autonomy and prevent centralized tyranny.[20] This provincial federalism aimed to empower communities economically and politically, drawing on precedents of Gaelic confederacies rather than imperial subordination. In addressing land tenure, Young Ireland emphasized reform through fixity of tenure, linking absentee landlordism directly to rural poverty via absenteeism's extraction of rents without reinvestment, which stifled local enterprise and perpetuated dependency.[45] James Fintan Lalor, a key ideologue, contended that historical conquests had invalidated proprietary claims, reverting land rights to the nation and necessitating state-mediated occupancy to ensure tenant security and productivity, as evinced by his 1847-1848 writings urging reclamation of soil for Irish cultivators over foreign extraction.[46] This causal reasoning prioritized agrarian democracy, where secure tenure would underpin self-reliant yeomanry capable of sustaining independent governance, distinct from mere rent adjustments.[47] Young Ireland critiqued Whig administrative reforms, such as those under Lord John Russell's ministry from 1846, as superficial dilutions that deferred structural change by offering incremental measures like poor law extensions without addressing sovereignty or property redistribution.[1] They expressed skepticism toward unchecked parliamentary obstructionism, favoring instead widespread education in history, economics, and civic duties to cultivate an informed electorate resistant to elite demagoguery, as Davis articulated in The Nation's columns promoting literacy as prerequisite for discerning self-rule over manipulated voting blocs.[20] This educational imperative underscored their belief in organic democratic capacity, where enlightened public opinion would drive reform without perpetual Westminster dependence.[23]Conflicts and Schism
Disputes with Daniel O'Connell
Tensions between the Young Irelanders and Daniel O'Connell intensified in 1846 amid strategic divergences within the Repeal Association, as O'Connell maneuvered toward accommodation with the Whig administration under Lord John Russell, which had assumed power in June, offering potential famine relief in exchange for moderated agitation on repeal. Young Ireland figures, including Charles Gavan Duffy, perceived these overtures as a dilution of the repeal commitment, arguing that prioritizing immediate socioeconomic aid over sustained political pressure risked dissipating the movement's organizational momentum and moral authority.[13] The rift deepened with O'Connell's "Peace Resolutions," introduced on 11 July 1846, which mandated the absolute disavowal of physical force in pursuit of repeal to reassure British authorities of non-violence. Duffy, William Smith O'Brien, and others opposed this as an unnecessary capitulation that foreclosed legitimate defensive options and clashed with their pragmatic nationalism, which held that moral force alone might prove insufficient against entrenched imperial resistance; the resolutions passed amid acrimony, prompting Young Ireland's withdrawal from the Association by late July.[48][13] Young Irelanders further accused O'Connellites of fostering clerical dominance and Catholic sectarianism, which they contended alienated Protestant sympathizers crucial for a cohesive national front; Duffy's editorials in The Nation and private correspondence emphasized that this religious exclusivity perpetuated divisions, impeding the inclusive cultural revival needed for genuine independence beyond mere legislative repeal. O'Connell's dependence on mass rallies and emotive oratory was critiqued as demagogic spectacle lacking enduring intellectual or institutional depth, contrasting with Young Ireland's advocacy for educated patriotism rooted in history and literature to sustain long-term resolve.[48][49]Establishment of the Irish Confederation
The Irish Confederation emerged on 13 January 1847 as the organizational successor to the Young Ireland faction following its irreconcilable split from Daniel O'Connell's Repeal Association, with key figures including Charles Gavan Duffy, John Mitchel, and Thomas Francis Meagher spearheading the formation at Dublin's Round Room.[50][51] This secession, precipitated by earlier tensions at Conciliation Hall in 1846 over O'Connell's insistence on pacifist resolutions that Young Ireland viewed as constraining vigorous agitation for repeal of the Act of Union, aimed to refocus efforts on securing Ireland's legislative independence through dedicated nationalist organization.[52] The new body rejected the Repeal Association's centralized control, prioritizing instead a structure that enabled broader participation while maintaining core commitments to repeal.[50] The Confederation's constitution, adopted at inception, established a less centralized framework with a national council overseeing policy but empowering provincial branches and local clubs to adapt agitation to Ireland's diverse regional conditions, such as Ulster's Protestant concentrations and Leinster's agrarian tensions.[53] This devolved approach reflected a pragmatic recognition of Ireland's socioeconomic and confessional fractures, which demanded localized strategies to build unified support without alienating provincial interests under a rigid Dublin-centric model.[54] The document outlined the Confederation's objectives as uniting "Irishmen of all classes and creeds" against English legislation, explicitly disavowing violence, civil war, or illegal acts in favor of moral and political influence to achieve self-government.[53] From the outset, the Confederation emphasized moral-force tactics, including public meetings, petitions, and electoral agitation exclusive to repeal, while extending recruitment beyond the Catholic majority to incorporate Protestant Ascendancy elements for enhanced legitimacy and cross-sectarian appeal.[53] This inclusive posture, articulated in the constitution's call for class and creed amalgamation, sought to counter the Repeal Association's perceived Catholic exclusivity and foster a national consensus capable of pressuring Westminster effectively.[50] Early activities centered on establishing branches in major centers like Cork and Belfast, laying groundwork for coordinated but autonomous provincial efforts.[54]The Great Famine Era
Famine's Socioeconomic Realities
The Great Famine (1845–1852) was proximately triggered by the arrival of the potato blight fungus Phytophthora infestans in Ireland in autumn 1845, which rapidly destroyed the crop that provided up to 60% of caloric intake for the rural poor.[55] This vulnerability arose from structural agricultural dependencies, including widespread monoculture of a genetically uniform potato variety susceptible to disease, exacerbated by pre-famine population expansion to over 8 million amid land fragmentation into holdings averaging under 5 acres, which precluded diversified farming or cash crops for most tenants.[56] Export-oriented production of grains, livestock, and dairy—primarily for British markets—further strained domestic food security, as these commodities continued to be shipped out even as potato yields collapsed, leaving scant reserves for subsistence amid high rents and absentee landlordism.[57] British policy responses prioritized market mechanisms over direct intervention, with Prime Minister Robert Peel's administration repealing the Corn Laws on 26 June 1846 to facilitate cheaper grain imports, alongside limited imports of Indian maize and temporary public works schemes that employed over 700,000 by early 1847 but yielded minimal nutritional relief due to inadequate wages and project inefficiencies.[58] Under the subsequent Whig government of Lord John Russell, adherence to laissez-faire doctrine shifted burden to the amended Poor Law of 1838, confining relief to workhouses that housed only 200,000–250,000 at peak capacity despite documented starvation reports from inspectors; soup kitchens, which peaked at feeding 3 million weekly in mid-1847, were discontinued by autumn after harvest, ignoring ongoing blight recurrence and empirical data on typhus and dysentery outbreaks.[59] Critics, including contemporary economists like John Stuart Mill, argued this approach undervalued causal links between crop failure and mass privation, favoring fiscal restraint over scaled aid despite Treasury surpluses.[60] Demographically, the famine exacted an estimated 800,000–1.5 million excess deaths from starvation and epidemics, reducing Ireland's population from 8.17 million in 1841 to 6.55 million by 1851, with fertility rates dropping 14% due to deferred marriages and miscarriages.[57] Net emigration reached about 1–2 million in the same period, primarily to North America, driven by collapsing rural economies rather than solely policy expulsion.[61] Landlord evictions, numbering 250,000–500,000 holdings cleared between 1846 and 1854, accelerated exposure to disease and mortality by demolishing cabins and consolidating land for grazing, but evidence indicates they followed rather than initiated mass die-offs, as pre-eviction starvation rendered many tenants unable to pay rents on holdings already economically marginal before 1845.[62][63]Strategic Responses and Divisions
The Great Famine exacerbated internal divisions within Young Ireland, prompting debates over whether to pursue moral force through parliamentary obstruction or escalate to physical resistance amid widespread destitution. John Mitchel, increasingly radicalized by eyewitness accounts of starvation and evictions, argued for immediate tactics like rent strikes and rate-in-aid boycotts to halt landlord exactions, viewing the crisis as evidence of systemic British exploitation that demanded confiscatory land reforms to secure peasant tenure.[1] Influenced by James Fintan Lalor's analysis of land monopoly as the famine's underlying cause, Mitchel contended that tenant organization must prioritize proprietary rights over mere relief, rejecting incremental reforms in favor of revolutionary reconfiguration of property relations.[1] In opposition, Charles Gavan Duffy and William Smith O'Brien advocated restraint, favoring sustained agitation within the Irish Confederation—formed on January 13, 1847—to build coalitions for democratic independence without precipitating futile violence that could invite harsher repression.[64] These moderates critiqued Mitchel's proposals as disruptive to unity, emphasizing obstructionist tactics in Parliament and public meetings to pressure for tenant protections, though they shared his view that government soup kitchens, peaking at over 100 stations feeding 3 million daily by mid-1847, offered only transient palliation without addressing rack-rents or eviction-prone leases.[65] The rift deepened when Duffy rebuffed Mitchel's calls for explicit commitment to physical force, leading Mitchel to resign from The Nation and launch The United Irishman on January 8, 1848, to propagate uncompromising separatism.[66] Young Irelanders collectively dismissed British relief as structurally flawed, with Confederation discourse highlighting how public works and depots perpetuated dependency on absentee landlords while exports of grain and livestock—totaling over 4,000 ships' worth from Irish ports in 1847—sustained British markets at Ireland's expense.[65] Instead, they urged grassroots tenant associations as a bulwark against famine recurrence, prefiguring post-1848 leagues by advocating collective withholding of rents to enforce "fixity of tenure" and valuation-based pricing, though implementation lagged amid the crisis's chaos.[1] This strategic divergence underscored the movement's evolution from cultural revival to pragmatic contention over survival imperatives, yet sowed seeds for its fragmentation.[64]Revolutionary Turn
Inspiration from 1848 European Revolutions
The February Revolution in France on February 22–24, 1848, which overthrew King Louis Philippe and established the Second Republic, electrified the Young Ireland movement by demonstrating the vulnerability of entrenched monarchies to popular uprisings. This event, coupled with contemporaneous revolts in Italy under Giuseppe Mazzini's influence—such as the Milan uprising against Austrian rule in March 1848—signaled to Irish nationalists the potential for a coordinated European-wide advance of liberal and republican ideals against absolutist powers. Young Irelanders interpreted these developments as a strategic window, where distractions in continental capitals could weaken British imperial control over Ireland, prompting a pivot from moral force advocacy toward preparations for physical resistance.[67][68] Thomas Francis Meagher emerged as a vocal proponent of arming for self-defense, framing it as an ethical necessity in speeches that drew direct causal links between Ireland's subjugation and its socioeconomic woes, including the ongoing famine exacerbated by absentee landlordism and export policies. He contended that denied national sovereignty perpetuated underdevelopment, rendering passive agitation futile against entrenched oppression, and urged adoption of the sword as the arbiter when parliamentary paths failed—a stance rooted in the perceived successes of armed continental revolutionaries rather than mere imitation.[69][70] While inspired by Europe's urban and bourgeois-led insurrections, Young Ireland rejected wholesale emulation, emphasizing Ireland's distinct agrarian crisis over proletarian models evident in Paris or Vienna. The movement highlighted how British land tenure systems and famine relief inadequacies—evidenced by over 1 million deaths and mass emigration between 1845 and 1852—demanded a revolt attuned to rural dispossession, not factory-based class struggles, thereby adapting revolutionary tactics to local causal realities of colonial extraction.[70][1]Planning and Creed Articulation
In April 1848, Charles Gavan Duffy published "The Creed of the Nation" in The Nation, outlining the Irish Confederation's doctrinal stance amid escalating tensions. The document positioned armed insurrection as a final recourse only after moral and constitutional means—such as petitions and public agitation—had been exhausted without yielding self-government. Duffy stressed rejection of anarchy, robbery, or gratuitous violence, instead calling for disciplined organization, universal arming of the populace for defense, and reliance on honor, truth, and courage to achieve an independent Irish parliament elected by broad suffrage, with a responsible executive and Irish-born viceroy.[71] While preferring a sovereign state under monarchical order to maintain stability, the creed accepted republican governance if independence required forceful attainment against British resistance.[71] This creed, which Duffy described as substantially reflecting the Confederation's principles, underscored non-sectarian unity across class and religious lines to reclaim Ireland's historic rights, without demanding separation from Britain unless compelled by refusal of equitable terms like federal arrangements.[71] It served as a rallying manifesto for pre-uprising mobilization, emphasizing that victory would prioritize justice, clemency, and national revival over vengeance.[71] Parallel to doctrinal clarification, Confederation leaders organized local clubs in southern counties such as Waterford and Tipperary to build grassroots networks and secure weaponry, including improvised pikes for potential defensive actions.[73] Thomas Francis Meagher, active in Waterford, helped unfurl symbolic flags and propagate club formation on March 1, 1848, aiming to drill members and amass arms despite a July 20 British proclamation demanding surrender of weapons.[74] [75] These efforts faced severe constraints from pervasive government informant networks, which infiltrated meetings, and the famine's toll, which left rural populations emaciated and reluctant to join, yielding sparse recruitment amid widespread destitution.[73] Strategic planning included debates over military tactics suited to Ireland's conditions, weighing guerrilla-style hit-and-run operations against formal pitched engagements. Publications like The Nation and John Mitchel's United Irishman promoted partisan warfare to exploit terrain and avoid direct confrontation with Britain's superior regular forces and artillery, reflecting a pragmatic recognition that conventional battles would favor the Crown's disciplined troops and logistics.[23] Leaders like William Smith O'Brien grappled with these options in Tipperary councils, prioritizing realist assessments of limited manpower and arms over idealistic open-field assaults, though divisions persisted between advocates of prolonged irregular resistance and those favoring decisive, if risky, stands to inspire broader revolt.[76]The 1848 Insurrection Attempts
The primary insurrection attempt unfolded on 29 July 1848 at Ballingarry, County Tipperary, where William Smith O'Brien led a small band of rebels in a confrontation with police forces. The clash centered on Widow McCormack's residence, where approximately 47 constables barricaded themselves against the insurgents, resulting in a desultory siege marked by minor exchanges rather than decisive engagement or mass uprising.[77][78] Concurrent efforts in Dublin to ignite a broader revolt collapsed due to fragmented leadership and preemptive government measures, including arrests following the suspension of habeas corpus in late June, which dismantled coordinated action before it could materialize. Provincial initiatives, such as scattered gatherings in areas like Waterford and Tipperary, likewise fizzled amid logistical disarray and inability to rally supporters.[79][80] These failures stemmed from acute coordination deficits among dispersed Young Ireland figures, compounded by pervasive public disengagement rooted in the ongoing Great Famine's toll of starvation and disease, which sapped rural energies and precluded widespread mobilization. The actions drew fewer than 100 committed participants overall, evidencing a tactical overreliance on intellectual elites disconnected from a viable grassroots foundation.[81][80]Suppression and Consequences
Government Crackdown
In response to the Irish Confederation's activities and the minor skirmishes of July 1848, the British government under Prime Minister Lord John Russell swiftly implemented coercive measures to preempt wider unrest. Habeas corpus was suspended in Ireland in June 1848, empowering authorities to detain suspects indefinitely without charge, a step justified by fears of revolutionary contagion from Europe.[1] This suspension, enacted amid the Whig administration's emphasis on public order over further political concessions, facilitated targeted arrests relying on intelligence from government informers embedded in nationalist circles.[82] The Treason Felony Act of 1848 further broadened legal tools against the movement by classifying advocacy for republicanism or the overthrow of monarchical rule as a felony punishable by transportation, rather than requiring proof of high treason. This legislation targeted seditious publications and organizations, enabling preemptive suppression without awaiting overt violence. Complementing these measures, the Nation newspaper—central to Young Ireland propaganda—was seized and its publication halted on 29 July 1848, with operations suspended until September 1849 under government orders.[27] [28] The Irish Confederation clubs faced dissolution through raids and prohibitions, reflecting the administration's strategy to dismantle organizational infrastructure. Deployments of the Irish Constabulary and regular army units, coordinated from Dublin Castle, underscored the crackdown's efficiency, with forces positioned in counties like Tipperary and Kilkenny to intercept gatherings. Despite these mobilizations—involving thousands of troops—the response entailed minimal bloodshed, as the revolt's limited scale and poor coordination allowed preemption before escalation, highlighting the effectiveness of surveillance and rapid legal action over brute force.[1] The Russell government's approach prioritized containment, viewing the disturbances as a manageable extension of famine-era disorder rather than a full-scale threat warranting negotiation.Trials, Exile, and Transportation
John Mitchel, editor of the United Irishman, faced trial in Dublin from May 25 to 27, 1848, under the recently enacted Treason Felony Act of 1848, which criminalized advocacy for overthrowing British rule short of high treason.[83] Convicted by a jury, he received a sentence of 14 years' penal transportation, reflecting the British authorities' intent to suppress revolutionary agitation amid the failed uprising.[84] Mitchel was initially transported to Bermuda before transfer to Van Diemen's Land (Tasmania) in 1850, where conditions for political prisoners varied but included restrictions on movement and association.[85] William Smith O'Brien, leader of the Ballingarry skirmish in July 1848, underwent state trials for high treason in Clonmel, County Tipperary, culminating in his conviction by a special jury on May 28, 1849.[78] Despite a death sentence pronounced on June 9, 1849, public pressure and royal prerogative commuted it to transportation for life; O'Brien departed Kingstown on July 9, 1849, aboard the Swift, arriving in Hobart, Tasmania, on October 27.[86][87] Similarly, Thomas Francis Meagher, Patrick O'Donoghue, and Terence MacManus were convicted of high treason and transported to Tasmania in 1849, with sentences commuted from death.[85] In contrast, Charles Gavan Duffy endured multiple trials for seditious conspiracy tied to the Irish Confederation, but juries' divisions—often reflecting Catholic jurors' reluctance amid Protestant-dominated panels—resulted in hung verdicts or acquittals, as in his April 1849 proceeding where seven jurors favored acquittal.[88] This selective outcome highlighted enforcement favoring figures like Duffy, who emphasized moral force over violence, allowing his release on bail and subsequent emigration to Australia in 1850 without formal exile.[49] Juries' conservatism, including loyalty to the crown and evidentiary scrutiny, thwarted convictions in several cases despite government orchestration of special juries.[89] Transportation to Tasmania scattered Young Ireland leaders, but escapes underscored their resilience: in January 1852, Meagher, MacManus, and Michael Harman fled Van Diemen's Land via rowboat to a waiting whaler, evading recapture through South American ports before reaching New York in 1852, where they bolstered Irish-American nationalist networks.[90][91] Mitchel also escaped Tasmania in 1853, rejoining diaspora circles in the United States, though O'Brien remained confined until conditional pardon in 1854 and full return to Ireland in 1856.[85] These outcomes fragmented the movement domestically while seeding enduring exile communities.[92]Enduring Impact
Links to Fenianism and IRB
James Stephens, a participant in the Young Ireland uprising at Ballingarry on 29 July 1848, fled to France following its collapse and later returned to Ireland in 1856, where he founded the Irish Republican Brotherhood (IRB) in Dublin on 17 March 1858 alongside figures like Thomas Clarke Luby.[93] This organization adapted Young Ireland's commitment to republican separatism by instituting oath-bound secrecy and a hierarchical structure to evade government infiltration, addressing perceived deficiencies in the open, non-secretive approach of 1848 leaders like William Smith O'Brien, whom Stephens and co-founder John O'Mahony criticized for rejecting oaths and commandeer tactics that contributed to the rapid defeat against a small police force.[94] The IRB, also known as the Fenian Brotherhood in its Irish context, represented a pivot to uncompromising physical force Irish nationalism, diverging from the Irish Confederation's post-1848 emphasis on moral force agitation through public meetings and petitions, which had yielded no substantive gains amid ongoing British suppression and famine recovery.[94] This shift prioritized revolutionary conspiracy over parliamentary or electoral engagement, a strategy critiqued for overlooking limited reforms like expanded suffrage under the Reform Act of 1867, which might have broadened nationalist bases without immediate violence, though Fenians viewed constitutional paths as inherently futile given Britain's entrenched control.[94] The IRB's 1867 rising replicated organizational frailties of 1848, including poor coordination, inadequate arms, and failure to synchronize rural skirmishes with urban actions, resulting in swift suppression and fewer than 100 casualties; yet it leveraged Young Ireland's prior cultural dissemination of separatist ideals via publications like The Nation to sustain underground recruitment, evidenced by IRB orchestration of the 1861 funeral procession for exiled Young Irelander Terence Bellew MacManus, which drew over 200,000 attendees and amplified republican symbolism.[94][93]Intellectual and Global Legacy
The Young Ireland movement's intellectual legacy lies primarily in its advocacy for a culturally grounded nationalism that emphasized historical revival and linguistic preservation as foundations for political self-determination. Through publications like The Nation, figures such as Thomas Davis promoted a vision of Irish identity that integrated Protestant, Catholic, and dissenter elements into a unified civic nationality, drawing on Enlightenment republicanism and pre-Norman Gaelic traditions to assert Ireland's ancient sovereignty independent of English influence.[43][32] This approach influenced subsequent historiography by modeling a selective yet popular narrative that prioritized inspirational ballads and essays over rigorous archival scholarship, fostering a romantic interpretation of Ireland's past that endured in 19th- and early 20th-century scholarship. However, modern analyses critique this historiographical method for its romantic biases, including anachronistic projections of modern nationalism onto medieval sources and minimization of internal divisions like clan rivalries, which Quinn attributes to Young Ireland's ideological drive to construct a cohesive national myth rather than objective history.[95][96] Despite these limitations, Davis's framework contributed to long-term identity formation by embedding cultural self-awareness in public discourse, evidenced by the persistence of his essays in shaping debates on sovereignty and heritage into the 20th century.[97] Globally, exiled Young Irelanders exported these principles to the United States, where they engaged in the Civil War by applying notions of minority rights and resistance to centralized authority. Thomas Francis Meagher commanded the Irish Brigade in Union service from 1861 to 1863, leveraging nationalist rhetoric to recruit over 7,000 Irish immigrants and demonstrating their military utility, which bolstered arguments for immigrant citizenship amid nativist opposition.[98] Conversely, John Mitchel, editing the pro-Confederate New York Daily News from 1862, voiced sympathy for Southern secession as analogous to Irish anti-unionism, reflecting a federalist skepticism of imperial consolidation despite his earlier abolitionist inconsistencies.[99] This diaspora involvement disseminated Young Ireland's blend of democratic nationalism and civic virtue, influencing American discourses on ethnicity and self-governance, though divided allegiances underscored the movement's ideological tensions rather than unified export of federalism.[100] Causally, the movement's cultural initiatives proved more resilient than its political strategies; by prioritizing identity revival amid the Great Famine's disruptions (1845–1852), Young Ireland embedded lasting motifs of resilience in global Irish diaspora narratives, yet its 1848 revolt—timed during peak starvation and emigration—garnered minimal support, with fewer than 100 active insurgents at Ballingarry, constraining immediate sovereignty outcomes to symbolic rather than structural gains.[99] This disparity highlights how empirical miscalculations in mobilizing a famine-weakened populace outweighed aspirational rhetoric, limiting the legacy to inspirational precedents over transformative statehood.[101]Key Figures
Primary Leaders
William Smith O'Brien (1803–1864), a Protestant landowner and Member of Parliament for Limerick County from 1828 to 1848, emerged as the aristocratic figurehead of Young Ireland, embodying gentry radicalism through advocacy for Irish self-reliance and economic reform alongside political independence.[102] As president of the Irish Confederation founded in January 1847, he coordinated efforts for repeal of the Act of Union and democratic reforms, leading the faction's withdrawal from Daniel O'Connell's Repeal Association on 27 July 1846 following disputes over non-violent tactics.[103] His leadership in the July 1848 uprising at Ballingarry, County Tipperary, involved a small force of about 50 men clashing with police, resulting in his capture and conviction for high treason; historians have critiqued his strategic indecisiveness, as he delayed mobilization amid famine conditions and hesitated between moral suasion and armed action, contributing to the revolt's rapid collapse.[102] Transported to Van Diemen's Land in July 1849, O'Brien received a pardon in 1856 and returned to Ireland, where he retired from politics, focusing on literary reflections like Principles of Government (1856) until his death.[103] Charles Gavan Duffy (1816–1903), a journalist from Monaghan, provided administrative and propagandistic acumen to Young Ireland as co-founder and editor of The Nation newspaper from its launch on 15 October 1842, using it to articulate nationalist ideals blending cultural revival with political agitation.[49] Instrumental in organizing the Irish Confederation, Duffy drafted key documents and moderated debates among radicals, though his pragmatic constitutionalism clashed with more militant voices, leading to his temporary alignment with O'Brien's leadership.[49] Arrested in 1848 for seditious conspiracy, he faced multiple trials but secured acquittals or procedural escapes, avoiding transportation.[104] Emigrating to Australia in 1855 amid post-rebellion disillusionment, Duffy adapted his organizational skills to colonial politics, serving as Premier of Victoria from June 1871 to July 1872 and again briefly in 1872, before retiring as a knighted statesman whose Irish experiences informed advocacy for federation and land reform.[104] John Mitchel (1815–1875), initially a Confederation journalist, pursued uncompromising agrarian radicalism, railing against British land policies and famine relief failures in his United Irishman founded 12 February 1848, where he demanded tenant proprietorship and physical-force separatism, escalating Young Ireland's rhetoric toward extremism.[52] Convicted of felony sedition on 27 May 1848 for inciting revolt, Mitchel was sentenced to 14 years transportation and arrived in Van Diemen's Land by September 1848, rejecting a ticket-of-leave to plot escape.[52] He fled in June 1853 via the Henry to the United States, where he continued publishing abolitionist critiques intertwined with Confederate sympathies during the American Civil War, reflecting his unyielding ideological trajectory until his death in Newry.[105]
Influential Contributors
Thomas Davis (1814–1845) provided foundational ideological contributions to Young Ireland through his poetry and essays published in The Nation, the movement's newspaper, which he co-founded in 1842 with Charles Gavan Duffy and John Blake Dillon.[20] His writings emphasized a non-sectarian nationalism that sought to unite Protestants, Catholics, and Dissenters under a shared Irish identity, advocating for education systems that integrated rather than segregated youth by religion to foster lasting national cohesion.[106] Davis's vision of patriotism rooted in historical revival and cultural self-reliance, rather than confessional exclusivity, shaped the movement's early ethos, influencing its rejection of Daniel O'Connell's Repeal Association in favor of broader inclusivity; his premature death from scarlet fever on September 16, 1845, elevated him to a symbolic status within the group.[20] Thomas Francis Meagher (1823–1867) advanced Young Ireland's rhetorical framework with his oratory, particularly his July 1846 "Sword Speech" at a Limerick junction meeting, where he defended the legitimacy of physical force against British rule as a necessary complement to moral persuasion.[107] Initially aligned with moral-force tactics, Meagher's evolving stance—rejecting O'Connell's absolute pacifism while critiquing reckless violence—positioned him as a bridge between intellectual advocacy and revolutionary symbolism, articulating that arms were justifiable when peaceful appeals failed empirically, as evidenced by Ireland's historical subjugation.[108] His eloquence galvanized supporters, framing force not as barbarism but as a pragmatic response to systemic denial of self-determination. James Clarence Mangan (1803–1849) contributed to Young Ireland's cultural dimension by translating Gaelic poetry into English, preserving Ireland's literary heritage amid linguistic decline and underscoring the primacy of indigenous lore over immediate political agitation.[109] Works like his rendering of "Dark Rosaleen" (Róisín Dubh), published in The Nation, romanticized Ireland's mythic past and infused the movement with poetic symbolism that prioritized spiritual and historical revival.[110] Mangan's efforts, though loosely interpretive, highlighted the empirical value of Gaelic sources in countering cultural erasure, aligning with the group's aim to reclaim national identity through accessible literature rather than solely partisan manifestos.[109]References
- https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/[commons](/page/Commons)/e/e1/Young_Ireland_-a_fragment_of_Irish_history%252C_1840-1850%2528IA_youngirelandfrag00duffiala%2529.pdf