Michael Collins

[smiffy]

The Republic

Pay attention Smiffy

I do try.

So the Republic supersedes the wishes of the people? You're going to have me running for my Brecht again, you know.

[jjcarroll]

Forgive my ignorance JJ but earlier you said "concepts invented in the 19th century" and then named nationalism and then said it was created in the 18th century but then said you yourself would argue it is a bit older than that...

Historians often through the end of the 18th century into the 19th century (things like the French and American revolutions, etc) both of which were very important in defining, and articulating if not arguably creating the concepts of nationalism and republicianism.

The reason the post read werid, was I wrote nationalism first taking a long view of the 19th century, then read over it, decided it needed editing so quailified it and wrote a brief synposis of my views on the subject.

[Conghaileach]

People who were retrospectively callsed Celts in the 19th century existed. The idea of a group of people on the fringes of the British Isles and France who shared a common ancestry, culture and political area is a 19th century and early 20th century novelty.

Nationalism in a defined and articulated form is a 19th century concept.

But we do know that there are 6 predominant Celtic langauges, split between the Q-Celtic and P-Celtic languages, and sharing a common mother language - Goedelic.

Fair enough, maybe they never called themselves Celts. But then I'm fairly sure that the cavemen didn't call themselves cavemen. It doesn't mean that they're a 19th century fiction.

[jjcarroll]

People who were retrospectively callsed Celts in the 19th century existed. The idea of a group of people on the fringes of the British Isles and France who shared a common ancestry, culture and political area is a 19th century and early 20th century novelty.

Nationalism in a defined and articulated form is a 19th century concept.

But we do know that there are 6 predominant Celtic langauges, split between the Q-Celtic and P-Celtic languages, and sharign a common mother language - Goedelic.

So? The concept of a celtic political, social and cultural sphere is a 19th century concept, and has been largely discreedited.

Fair enough, maybe they never called themselves Celts. But then I'm fairly sure that the cavemen didn't call themselves cavemen. It doesn't mean that they're a 19th century fiction.

The usage of the term Celt is generally used to suggest there was some common social, cultural and political sphere between Ireland, Wales, the Isles, Scotland, Cornwall and Breton. It is a largely discredited concept which should be confined to linguistic discussion.

[Conghaileach]

The usage of the term Celt is generally used to suggest there was some common social, cultural and political sphere between Ireland, Wales, the Isles, Scotland, Cornwall and Breton. It is a largely discredited concept which should be confined to linguistic discussion.

The problem there is that language is inextricably tied into social and cultural spheres.

[jjcarroll]

The usage of the term Celt is generally used to suggest there was some common social, cultural and political sphere between Ireland, Wales, the Isles, Scotland, Cornwall and Breton. It is a largely discredited concept which should be confined to linguistic discussion.

The problem there is that language is inextricably tied into social and cultural spheres.

Yes, and that was certainly the case in the common linguistic spheres; 1) Ireland, the Isles and west Scotland 2) Wales, and the northern Britons (possibly) 3) Cornwall 4) Breton. However, there was not in history a common cultural or social sphere between those regions of the British Isles and France which are described as Celtic.

However, on the subtantive issue, the phenomon was discovered, named and created in the 19th century. A thousand years ago, those described as celts were not, to the best of any knowledge aware of such a concept.

[thegeneral]

Cosgrave was a fine Republican in his day Rocky, your obviously a bit low on irish history. And contrary to widespread FF belief, I think he was actually the last Commanding Officer to surrender during the 1916 Rising, and not Dev. If memory serves me correct, didn't he and Mulcahy make a stand out in Bettystown in Meath, the only unit outside Dublin to fight in 1916

There was also an attempt made at a rising in Enniscorthy with Seán Etchingham and others. I'd be interested to see a reference for Cosgrave in Bettystown. Was he with Thomas Ashe?

[thegeneral]

Aren't there letters that Barton wrote home opposing the treaty anyway?

Quite possibly. I acknowledged he opposed it. It was Collins I said may have opposed it had he not negotiated it.

Barton voted for the Treaty in the Dáil, he felt he was obliged to having signed then document. However he joined the Anti-Treaty forces at the start of the Civil War and was in the command centre in the Gresham Hotel.

[edifice.]

Aren't there letters that Barton wrote home opposing the treaty anyway?

Quite possibly. I acknowledged he opposed it. It was Collins I said may have opposed it had he not negotiated it.

Barton voted for the Treaty in the Dáil, he felt he was obliged to having signed then document. However he joined the Anti-Treaty forces at the start of the Civil War and was in the command centre in the Gresham Hotel.

Barton on the negotiations;

Once we conceded that we were not representatives of the Irish Republic we were on the road to disaster.

[jjcarroll]

I'd be interested to see a reference for Cosgrave in Bettystown. Was he with Thomas Ashe?

I'm fairly certain that Cosgrave wasn't with Ashe at Ashbourne anyway.