Since the Irish parliament was dissolved in 1801 and Ireland was enveloped in the new United Kingdom (of Great Britain and Ireland) under the Act of Union, many Irishmen and women have at one point or another planned and carried out insurrections against the tyranny of the English. Although the insurrectionists of the Easter Rising of 1916 share the failure of their predecessors, they achieved a lasting impact on the history of Ireland in a way that those that came before never did. On that Easter Monday, 24 April 1916, the members of the Provisional Government, Patrick Pearse, James Connolly, Tom Clarke, Sean MacDermott, Eamonn Ceannt, Joseph Plunkett, and Thomas MacDonagh declared the beginning of a new Irish Republic that did not become
…show more content…
Edwards writes that with very few exceptions, everything written about Patrick Pearse for 50 years after his death was designed to prove his sanctity and his vision. She flouts this tradition by presenting Pearse as an intellectually, socially and sexually immature man who as a result of personal, financial and familial failures, concluded that self-immolation was his only choice. In this context, the Easter Rising was primarily an exercise in martyrdom regardless of its revolutionary aspects. Yet Edwards does not dismiss Pearse as selfishly seeking his own fame, she presents his view of what the Rising would do for Ireland; making it economically self-sufficient, isolationist, and full of charitable people. She also addresses the seemingly contradictory Catholic and pagan Irish traditions that influenced his arguments for the separation of Ireland from England. In addition, Edwards points out that Pearse, in his knowledge that the Rising would end in his death, made an effort through a series of pamphlets to justify his actions and forge a connection between those rebels of the past and those that would survive him. This to emphasize that the Rising although it may fail would be an event that prompted action from nationalists in future …show more content…
Foster claims that the intrinsic Catholicism of the Rising, identifying the Irish soul as Catholic and Gaelic, intentionally excluded the northern Protestants despite the nationwide appeal in the proclamation issued by the Provisional Government. Although Foster’s critics (not only politicians but other historians) accused him of seeming regretful that Ireland ever broke with Britain his thesis came to be influential in the context of revisionist approaches to the Rising and the general historiography of the
Edwards writes that with very few exceptions, everything written about Patrick Pearse for 50 years after his death was designed to prove his sanctity and his vision. She flouts this tradition by presenting Pearse as an intellectually, socially and sexually immature man who as a result of personal, financial and familial failures, concluded that self-immolation was his only choice. In this context, the Easter Rising was primarily an exercise in martyrdom regardless of its revolutionary aspects. Yet Edwards does not dismiss Pearse as selfishly seeking his own fame, she presents his view of what the Rising would do for Ireland; making it economically self-sufficient, isolationist, and full of charitable people. She also addresses the seemingly contradictory Catholic and pagan Irish traditions that influenced his arguments for the separation of Ireland from England. In addition, Edwards points out that Pearse, in his knowledge that the Rising would end in his death, made an effort through a series of pamphlets to justify his actions and forge a connection between those rebels of the past and those that would survive him. This to emphasize that the Rising although it may fail would be an event that prompted action from nationalists in future …show more content…
Foster claims that the intrinsic Catholicism of the Rising, identifying the Irish soul as Catholic and Gaelic, intentionally excluded the northern Protestants despite the nationwide appeal in the proclamation issued by the Provisional Government. Although Foster’s critics (not only politicians but other historians) accused him of seeming regretful that Ireland ever broke with Britain his thesis came to be influential in the context of revisionist approaches to the Rising and the general historiography of the