Why Were Some Forms Of Nationalism More Successful Than Others In Achieving Concessions From The British Government In The Period 1800-1900?

Authors Avatar

Why Were Some Forms Of Nationalism More Successful Than Others In Achieving Concessions From The British Government In The Period 1800-1900?

Constitutional Nationalism, which although prevailed over revolutionary and Cultural Nationalism throughout the period of 1800-1900, combined to spearhead a driving and determined nationalist force campaigning against the diverse British Governments of the period for Emancipation, Repeal of the Union, Home Rule amongst other concessions. Constitutional Nationalism, embodied by O’Connell, was known for legislatively campaigning for concessions; Cultural Nationalism was an evolutionary process while Revolutionary Nationalism was essentially revolutionary known for its commitment to violence and its predominant legacies which were left behind by numerous martyrs of the cause.

Daniel O’Connell, himself, was the protagonist of the emancipation story, who was followed by Charles Stuart Parnell in the late 1870s in the Home Rule and Land War sagas of the closing stages of the nineteenth century. Constitutional Nationalism sought greater autonomy for Ireland within the British Empire through gradual, peaceful change. This was personified in O’Connell’s clear dismissive attitude of violence in his Emancipation and Repeal movements, which ultimately contributed to his downfall in 1843 at Clontarf. The second unquestioned leader of Irish politics in the nineteenth century, Parnell, was more open to an alliance with the revolutionaries, shown by the ‘New Departure’, his alliance with the Fenians.

Key figures in the revolutionary movement included Robert Emmet in 1803, John Mitchel and Smith O’Brien, leaders of the Young Ireland movement. Abortive attempts in 1798 and 1803 failed to have much immediate effect, but these left a longer-term mark on Irish politics which led in part to the Young Ireland uprising of 1848 and the Fenian uprising of 1867. These two separate if sometimes overlapping ideologies provide the key to understanding the history of Irish Nationalism in the nineteenth century and furthermore in the last century also.

A further strand of Irish nationalism, defined as Cultural Nationalism, saw the need to, as Douglas Hyde put it, “de-anglicise” Ireland. According to ME Collins, “Ireland was developing an English culture that was indistinguishable from that in Britain” and therefore, in response to this, organisations were set up to promote an Irish culture at the end of the 1800s, where associations were founded such as the GAA that still exist today.

Slightly different to the goals of Theobald Wolfe Tone and the United Irishmen, Daniel O’Connell sought after political autonomy within the Union of Great Britain and Ireland rather than full independence. His methods were always peaceful; moral persuasion through mass agitation. This was most significantly displayed in his mobilisation of the peasantry during the struggle for Emancipation, a thing which to such an extent  was never again successfully repeated, constitutionally nor revolutionarily.

Join now!

At the passing of the Act of Union, the Protestant Ascendency, 10% of the population maintained its power in an oligarchy which oppressed the rest of the population, which was predominantly Catholic. The Catholic population were essentially a political tool waiting to be used and mobilised, at the start of the century.

The first reaction to the passing of the Act of Union was Robert Emmet’s unsuccessful rising of 1803, where he was soon easily captured, tried and executed. Without Emmet, and namely his highly rhetorical epitaph proclaiming that no man should write his epitaph until Ireland “takes her ...

This is a preview of the whole essay