In Laura's post here, she notes that "It’s really interesting to me that it was the arguments over religion that seemed to be the most divisive, that the Dutch people were willing to take a whole lot from their oppressive monarchs as a general rule, to give up a lot of their own freedoms, even their right to their land and money in some cases (although, as we’ll see/we’ve seen, those were two big subjects of contention), but not to give up their religion, even though it had so newly (in the grand scheme of things) become a part of their lives."
This reminded me of the original point I was/I've been trying to make with my various posts, including this one and this one as well as those on the oppression of the Irish here, here, and here. I will try to be succinct.
I think the thing I have been chasing throughout this entire project is the development of Irish identity and specifically how English occupation (and Potato Famine) helped in shaping this. I was specifically intrigued earlier by a bit I read in one of the three books. Basically, it stated that the Protestants in Ireland were initially pro-Union because they believed that they would be better protected from Catholics by their Anglican brethren. However, the Act of Union preceded the Potato Famine. The Potato Famine, I believe, was a key part of the development of the Irish identity. Protestant or Catholic, if you grew and ate potatoes, the blight affected you. This common suffering (and exacerbation by insufficient British aid my post here) solidified the Irish versus English stances (a point coaxed out of me in response to Andra's post here). This in turn led to the struggle for independence in the early 20th century, but curiously, it seems as though Protestant/Catholic resentment returned within Ireland after the declaration of the Republic of Ireland.
May 26, 2009
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment