Fortnight Publications Ltd.

Conventional Wisdom Isn'tAuthor(s): Brian WalkerSource: Fortnight, No. 294 (Apr., 1991), pp. 20-21Published by: Fortnight Publications Ltd.Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/25552832 .

Accessed: 28/06/2014 07:39

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

.

Fortnight Publications Ltd. is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Fortnight.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 141.101.201.171 on Sat, 28 Jun 2014 07:39:42 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

They weren't always so strait-laced

mr '^^mmmmmmmmmhbAit /$&&/$ ^F MttTJfc ^^^^B^^^^^a^K^B^HawBHtea^aaiiMft^^jtoM^,. & ^^^b^mmmmmL, - m)mm\ ^^ *_ _ _ ^l * ..i^^^^^HK:x"^:';': '*^lr'- '^ ^^. ^i^L^L^L^LVv^^L^L^^^L^LIi^^BL^aH^HHfealfe^^M^ ^^mmmmW^w^^^'^ 1 Jt

^i%ka#i^iajI i^K ̂ L^L^mB^i i^mSiK ** ? ^Hi^L^L^L^L^L^Iam 2^^^** ^^^^^KE^iiPJI fills"' *"? -w-^m^^^ w

IIP Hi^vfllL^L^L^L^L^L^L^L^L^L^L^L^L^B

S__ .^m* .mm* .^ ̂ ?. m^ ._ : Sk ^L^L^L^L^LH^Silk^LV^L^Ln&isB^^L^L^HK flffi ^B ^L^L^L^K SllKZBfeu!^^^^^ ^* ^^mmmmmmmmK^Sl^mmmmB&ffi * * ?* ^j.* f?TC^?3lY I^L^L^LKft ^^L^L^L^L^L^L^L^L^L^L^L^L^L^LSflfiB ^^ Ifiy^gyg >? ^^^^HP|Q|^^^H!^H^^.^HHHk ^Bf m sJL^^H ^ ̂ v-^^^hk & ' & mmmmmmmmWm']mmmm\MmW & 4ifir ^Lr ^^^L^LW-: .^L^L^IL^L^L^L^L^L^L^L^IR^imi

Conventional wisdom isn't

M' IUCH VALUABLE RESEARCH has been carried out on Irish history in

,_I recent years. But little has received at

tention outside the confines of academic books

and learned journals. So many myths, which

these studies have undermined, still prevail. One such is that partition in 1921 did great

harm to border towns like Newry and Derry, because it cut them off from their social and

economic hinterlands. Ten years ago an article

by David Johnson, Partition and Cross Border

Trade in the 1920s (in Plantation to Partition, Peter Roebuck ed), destroyed this argument.

Partition established a political and admin

istrative border, not an economic one. A fiscal

boundary was established in 1923 and some

tariffs and customs were subsequently intro

duced, but these had little effect on trade. The

real economic border in Ireland only material

ised in the 1930s, as a result of the economic

war between the Free State and the UK.

Johnson showed that in the early 1920s

there was some displacement of northern trade

with the south, particularly for the banks and

the Gallaher tobacco firm, due to the brief

southern boycott of northern goods. Between

1924 and 1931, however, as the overall trade

figures show, trade between Northern Ireland

and the Free State was little affected by the

minor new tariffs and duties.

Looking specifically at Derry, Johnson

pointed out that exports from the port rose

between 1924 and 1931 as a percentage of

exports from the island. The port's imports

dropped slightly as a percentage of all-Ireland

imports, but this was primarily due to a fall in

the value of particular commodities. And while

Derry did have economic difficulties in the 20s due to the closure of some of its industries,

particularly shipbuilding, these were not a

consequence of the border.

Newry had problems of its own, such as the

inadequacy of its canal port to deal with large modern carriers, but these had surfaced long before 1921. The population ofthe town, which

had fallen between 1881 and 1911, had started to rise again by 1926?which again under

mines the idea that the border was seriously

damaging its social and economic life.

The problems Derry and Newry faced in the

1920s had little or nothing to do with the border

cutting them off. And the few restrictions on

cross-border trade in the 1920s?on clothing, for instance?were frequently evaded. In the

1930s, however, first as a result of the eco

nomic war and then largely due to the protec tionist policies of Eamon de Valera's govern

ment, the border did become an economic

reality. Between 1931 and 1936 Free State

exports across the border fell by a third, while

imports from the north fell by two thirds.

The myth grew up because this was pro

jected backwards to an earlier decade and infer

ences drawn for the whole period which do not

withstand deeper examination. The same is

true of another myth: Protestants have always been temperate, good-living and hard-work

ing. Such a view has a lot of truth for the

Protestant community as a whole over the last

hundred years, but if we look to a slightly earlier period of the 1830s we find a very different picture in parts of Ulster.

The evidence comes from the ordnance

survey memoirs written in the 1830s to

accompany the first OS maps. This scheme

only covered the north, before being scrapped

entirely, and just one parish memoir was pub lished at the time. Some have been published

over the years, but all are now being produced

by the Institute of Irish Studies (see page 26). The memoirs for Co Antrim (parts of which I used in my book, Sentry Hill: an Ulster farm

family) are very revealing for parishes of east

Antrim, which had a largely Protestant, indeed

Presbyterian, population. Of the parish of

Donegore the memoir writer recorded:

To a casual observer their morality and appar

ently strict observance of the Sabbath would

appear striking. They are regular in their atten

dance at their meeting houses, where in summer

they hear two services, with an 'intermission' of

about half an hour between them. But this half

hour, as well as another or two after service, are

by the majority spent in the alehouse, an estab

lishment almost invariably to be found in the

immediate vicinity ofthe northern places of wor

ship. With this exception the Sabbath is most

properly observed.

Carnmoney's inhabitants were found to be

"rather fond of whiskey drinking", and outside

the town there were 18 spirit shops in the

parish. It was also observed that:

There is another species of immorality to which

from habit they are quite reconciled and which

among themselves does not bear the same charac

ter or appellation as is most commonly applied to

it. It is by no mean an unusal circumstance that

intercourse should have taken place between the

two parties previous to their being united by the

bond of matrimony.

Belief in witchcraft, sorcery, the fairies and

20 APRIL FORTNIGHT

This content downloaded from 141.101.201.171 on Sat, 28 Jun 2014 07:39:42 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

LETTERS enchantments was described as widespread in

Carnmoney. Fairy thorn trees were held in

great reverence. As regards industriousness,

farmers, having delivered their milk to Belfast in the mornings, were said to spend the day "in

a half active state loitering about the doors or

looking after the cattle". Only where landlords

had put up the rent was there a determined

effort to improve the farm.

How widespread this state of affairs was it

is difficult to say, but other studies, such as Don

Akenson's history of Islandmagee in the 19th

century, Between Two Revolutions, strongly

suggest that in this period social, moral and

religious matters were not viewed in the same

light by many as was commonplace 50 years

later. By the 1880s, thanks to the religious revival among Protestants in the middle of the

century, and the accompanying growth in

Sabbath schools, temperance societies and the

new Victorian work ethic, temperance became

a widespread virtue, sexual morality was firmly

established, superstitions were mainly forgot ten and hard work was praised.

What has again happened is that people have taken this new situation as normal for all

times. A similar myth is that Protestants and

Catholics have been at daggers drawn ever

since the plantation. The first thing this ignores is that for much

of our history Presbyterians and members of

the Church of Ireland have been strongly at

odds. After combining at the siege of Derry and

the Boyne, the two groups became bitterly

opposed. The penal laws, which we all know

affected Catholics, were also directed in con

siderable part against Presbyterianism. Nor did

this conflict end in the 18th century. As Richard McMinn has shown in an article Presbyterian

ism and Politics in Ulster, 1871-1906 (Studia Hibernica, xx,1981), resentment continued

strongly into the 19th century and even, in

parts, into the present century.

Secondly, there are important instances of

co-operation between Catholics and Protes

tants. There were many cases, for example, of

generous Protestant support for new Catholic

churches in the 19th century. James Rentoul, son of a Presbyterian minister, described Arch

bishop David McGettigan as regarding his father in the 1850s as "a co-worker engaged with him

in a common war, though fighting under differ

ent regimental colours".

Most importantly, this myth forgets the

examples of political alliance between Catho

lic and Protestant sections. Apparent in the

1798 rising, pressure for land reform in the

1850s, 1870s and 1880s also resulted in a

strong cross-sectarian vote in some areas. After

1885 such political co-operation may have

been rare, but its earlier occurrence contradicts

the simplistic view of complete confrontation.

Finally we should examine the myth that

Sinn Fein has always stood unequivocally for a

republic. In his original proposals for Ireland,

the Sinn F6in founder, Arthur Griffith, advo

cated a dual monarchy between Britain and

Ireland on the Austro-Hungarian model. At

this early stage Griffith was also keen to pro mote methods of non-violence.

Griffith was not the only early Sinn Feiner

to have less than pure republican principles. In

his autobiographical volume Memoirs of

Desmond Fitzgerald 1913-16, Fitzgerald

revealed that in the GPO in 1916 Patrick Pearse and Joseph Plunkett had discussed the possibil ity of a German victory in the Great War and

agreed that it would be a good idea to have a German prince as king of an independent Ire

land. Perhaps we will see the modern-day Sinn

Fein putting forward Princess Caroline of

Monaco as a new Queen of Ulster?

Why do these myths persist? Perhaps it stems in part from an inability?including sometimes on the part of historians?to see

matters in a proper historical perspective and to

realise that things have been and can be differ

ent from how we regard them today. Perhaps also in part from a desire to shape understand

ing of the past to strengthen our contemporary

position and ignore unattractive truths.

The view that partition damaged Derry and

Newry was widely accepted by northern na

tionalists because it confirmed their opposition to partition and conveniently displaced the role

of the economic policies of the southern gov ernment in damaging the economy of these

border towns. Similarly, the argument that

Protestants have always been good-living and

hard-working has helped promote a distinct,

self-image among loyalists, and pushed aside

the recent acquisition of many of these virtues

and the degree to which they have been shared with Catholic counterparts.

Next month?Brian Walker reveals how:

Katherine O'Shea nearly changed the course of history; E S Finnigan, not Lord Randolph Churchill, really played the 'Orange card'; Sir James Craig inspired the men of 1916; and the 1918 general election confirmed the partition of Ireland.

Ignoring

religion Dear editor

Simon Lee is right to suggest (Fortnight 293) that the

religious dimension of the Ulster

problem is largely ignored by your journal and the media generally.

We in the Ulster Humanist Asso

ciation have struggled for some time

to obtain publicity for our view that

it is primarily a religious conflict.

But we are constantly thwarted,

partly because, as Lee suggests, commentators insist on politicising

religious issues whereas in fact they should be addressing the ideologi cal divisions (and similarities) be

tween the two main traditions.

The religious cleavage is cru

cial, yet it is presented as a cloak for

some other factor. Take the social

estrangement. The vast majority of

Catholics and Protestant live in

different areas, attend separate schools and clubs, play separate

games and worship in separate churches. And it is the churches

themselves which have fostered this

alienation, through their negative attitudes to reconciling forces such

as integrated education, mixed

marriages and mixed worship.

Second, the cultural apartheid has been in no small part the result

of opposing Puritan and Catholic

ideologies. The predominantly Puritan ethic of 'practical values'

has engendered a Protestant prefer ence for business and a distrust of

literary culture; while the Catholic

stress on ideas has bred a passion for the arts and a denigration of

money matters. This cultural cleav

age makes Protestants reluctant to

examine their role on the island, while it nourishes a romantic na

tionalism among Catholics.

As for politics itself, the anti

quated nature of the religious be

liefs has fatally trapped the people in 17th-century certainties. Politics

in Ulster is dogmatic, impassioned and uncompromising, precisely because the brands of Christianity which provide meaning to the lives

of most people are dogmatic, im

passioned and uncompromising.

If, as Noel Browne argued in

the same issue, Home Rule WAS

Rome Rule, then similarly the

Unionist party and the Orange Order maintained a Puritan state in

Ulster for 50 years. The 'troubles'

have been a more violent expres sion of this division?a holy war

on behalf of conflicting Christian

philosophies.

It is impossible to remember a

single local TV programme which examined the theological differ

ences between Catholics and Prot

estants. We have had a plethora of

clerics telling us such matters are

unimportant or exaggerated. But it

is surely a fundamental question whether the churches have in fact

behaved in a truly Christian way at

all. And how can this important

question be properly debated if only representatives of these churches

are allowed to comment on it?if,

indeed, the churches are allowed to

act as both judge and jury of their role in the community?

In the 20 years ofthe 'troubles', I cannot recall having heard a single

sceptic or humanist viewpoint

expressed on either UTV or BBC.

Yet, at the last census, more than a

quarter of a million people refused

to state any religion, another 10,000 wrote 'no religion' and a further

2,000 called themselves atheists,

agnostics or humanists. Where can

this growing body of secularists

find opportunities amidst the pi etistic babble to air their dissenting voices?

Yours etc

Brian McClinton, secretary Ulster Humanist Association

25 Riverside Drive Lisburn

Co Antrim BT27 4HE

Real tragedy

Dear editor

I read with interest

your report (Fortnight 292) on the recent conference on emigration

organised by the Fortnight Educa

tional Trust.

The question 'did they jump or were they pushed?' seems to me,

however, almost irrelevant: one is

equally as damning a judgment on

our society as the other. I felt I

simply had no option if I was to

give myself the opportunity to ful

fil my ambitions. I did not go through any soul-searching?I

simply bought a ticket and left and very much doubt whether I shall be

returning in the foreseeable future.

I feel my resigned acceptance of the necessity of emigration is an

experience undergone by many,

particularly the young and well

educated?a commodity much

sought after by English employers. Perhaps it is in this sense of the

hopelessness of prospects in North

ern Ireland for people like myself that the real tragedy lies.

Yours etc

James Buckley 18 Reynolds Close

Merton

London SW19 3QJ

FORTNIGHT APRIL 21

This content downloaded from 141.101.201.171 on Sat, 28 Jun 2014 07:39:42 AMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions