Retired
This user is no longer active on Wikipedia.
| “ | " hominem unius libri timeo" (I fear the man of a single book)." – St. Thomas Aquinas | ” |
| “ | To make the country familiar with its own his history—with the various events of great importance which have occurred in our memorable annals, is surely a task both honourable in itself and productive of great advantages to the people. Erroneous views of political history may occasionally be taken: most men feel rather than think on politics now-a-days; error is, consequently, sometimes unavoidable even by the most careful; but the readers of this series will find nothing in our pages to offend the most delicate moral feeling, or, we earnestly hope, to inculcate evil or mischievous doctrines. Our object is the service of our country. Thomas MacNevin' | ” |
| “ | Perhaps in no country, but only Ireland, would a plain narrative of wars and revolutions that are past and gone two centuries and a half ago, run any risk of being construed as an attempt to foster enmity between the descendants of two races that fought so long since for mastery in the land. Yet the writer of this short record of the life of the greatest Irish chieftain Hugh O’Neil is warned that such construction may, and by some assuredly will, be put upon the following story and the writer’s manner of telling it. But as to the narrative itself undoubtedly the only question ought to be—is it true? And if so—is the truth to be told, or hidden —Is it not at all times, in all places, above all things, desirable to hear the truth instead of a lie? ' John Mitchel' | ” |
| “ | There are transactions in history so falsified and misunderstood, that the chief difficulty in dealing with them springs from the rooted prepossessions of the reader. Whenever important interests have been in conflict and one has succumbed, the facts are certain to be misjudged by the next generation, who commonly hear only the story of the successful competitor…Of the period which I am now about to describe a fixed idea has got possession of the public mind—that certain immature politicians, of whom it is not clear, to critical persons, whether they were generous enthusiasts or only rash and contumacious youngsters, broke away from the veteran leader of the Irish people, set up a theory of physical force in opposition to his constitutional doctrines, and having unfortunately got the lead, led the country to disgrace and disaster…And yet in all history there is no theory fatally contradicted by the facts of the case, when the facts come to be known. ' Charles Gavan Duffy' | ” |
| “ | Impartiality in Irish history writing has meant in every case a non-acceptance of the historic Irish Nation, and the result has been a political pamphlet rather than a history. Ireland has been written at rather than about, and the statements of those whose interest it was to belie her have been accepted unchecked. But history, if it is to be true history, must be, like biography, sympathetic towards its subject, it must accept its subject and not deny it. There are writers on Irish history who deny that there is, in any national sense, an Ireland to write about, whose authorities are the State Paper scribes, and whose acquaintance with Irish authorities is nil. The present writer accepts the historic Irish Nation. ' Patrick Sarsfield O'Hegarty' | ” |
| “ | It often seems to me as if History was like a child's box of letters, with which we can spell any word we please. We have only to pick out such letters as we want, arrange them as we like, and say nothing of those which do not suit our purpose. ' James Anthony Froude' | ” |
| “ | Many others have written on either side of the controversy, but apparently without having gone to the sources for information, since they make statements either without references or with references which lead to nothing relevant, and even give some references which, when tested, are found to be incorrect. The primary object of some of them at least being not the elucidation of what is admittedly obscure, but the furtherance of current religious or political controversy, they adopt a particular view at the outset. This they are determined not to relinquish. By a process of rejecting rigid facts, twisting pliable ones, and inventing some padding material, they make that preconceived opinion their final conclusion and obtrude it on the public, misrepresenting the purport of the documents and even tampering with their text. They then call for the peremptory closure of the controversy. Such controversy, being wrong in purpose and in method, can have no effect except a bad one. The question at issue, though small, is not to be solved by prejudice or predilection, but by diligent investigation of facts and rational deduction therefrom. Legitimately treated, it is of no practical importance whatever, does not involve either the religion or the politics of our day, and can be properly discussed only by keeping quite aloof from these. The question is purely historical. Laurence Ginnell, (1899). | ” |
| “ | Gerald Barry (Giraldus Cambrensis), Welshman by birth, monk by profession, knave and sycophant by nature, was the first British historian to deal with Anglo-Irish affairs. James A. Froude, Englishman by birth, ex-theologue by profession, bigot and partisan by temperament and education, is the latest adventurer who has donned the cap of Cambrensis. Each may be accurately described as the historian laureate of England, bound to earn his porridge by praising his master through thick and thin, and halting at no obstacle of rude fact while doing so. The Welsh man was commissioned by Henry II. to paint the Irish as a lawless, graceless, god less crew; so Gerald promptly reported that “their chief characteristics were treachery, thirst for blood, unbridled licentiousness, and inveterate detestation of order and rule”! Of the scribe who penned these words it has been said that 'he never spoke the truth, unless by accident.' Stephen J. McCormick (1889). | ” |
| “ | England has often hired moral assassins to keep Ireland within her clutches. Unfortunately for the cause of Erin England has found even Catholics who were willing to be bribed into writing so called 'histories'; which like Scott's 'Life of Napoleon,' were written to order by the British Government in order to convince the world that England was right in every iniquity she perpetrated against those whom she overthrew.' Stephen J. McCormick (1889). | ” |
| “ | For seven hundred years England has been before the world as spokesman for Ireland, from the days of Giraldus and Matthew Paris, the so-called history of Ireland as it went forth to the world, was in great part written for diplomatic purposes, and each falsehood became the parent of a brood. Rev. W. B. Morris “Life of St. Patrick,” cited in “The Pope and Ireland” by Stephen J McCormick 1889 pg.83 | ” |
| “ | Time neither corroborates error nor invests it with the slightest authority, and even though it should have supplanted and obscured the truth during several centuries, its old age must not impose on us, nor extort an obsequious and credulous assent derogatory to truth. We know, from experience, that a fable once circulated among the vulgar, and adorned with several additions as it passes from mouth to mouth, is often so well received and acquires such authority that it passes for fact, as long as the negligence of an undiscerning public allows it to wear its mask.' Cambrensis Everus (1848). | ” |
Retired
This user is no longer active on Wikipedia.
| “ | " hominem unius libri timeo" (I fear the man of a single book)." – St. Thomas Aquinas | ” |
| “ | To make the country familiar with its own his history—with the various events of great importance which have occurred in our memorable annals, is surely a task both honourable in itself and productive of great advantages to the people. Erroneous views of political history may occasionally be taken: most men feel rather than think on politics now-a-days; error is, consequently, sometimes unavoidable even by the most careful; but the readers of this series will find nothing in our pages to offend the most delicate moral feeling, or, we earnestly hope, to inculcate evil or mischievous doctrines. Our object is the service of our country. Thomas MacNevin' | ” |
| “ | Perhaps in no country, but only Ireland, would a plain narrative of wars and revolutions that are past and gone two centuries and a half ago, run any risk of being construed as an attempt to foster enmity between the descendants of two races that fought so long since for mastery in the land. Yet the writer of this short record of the life of the greatest Irish chieftain Hugh O’Neil is warned that such construction may, and by some assuredly will, be put upon the following story and the writer’s manner of telling it. But as to the narrative itself undoubtedly the only question ought to be—is it true? And if so—is the truth to be told, or hidden —Is it not at all times, in all places, above all things, desirable to hear the truth instead of a lie? ' John Mitchel' | ” |
| “ | There are transactions in history so falsified and misunderstood, that the chief difficulty in dealing with them springs from the rooted prepossessions of the reader. Whenever important interests have been in conflict and one has succumbed, the facts are certain to be misjudged by the next generation, who commonly hear only the story of the successful competitor…Of the period which I am now about to describe a fixed idea has got possession of the public mind—that certain immature politicians, of whom it is not clear, to critical persons, whether they were generous enthusiasts or only rash and contumacious youngsters, broke away from the veteran leader of the Irish people, set up a theory of physical force in opposition to his constitutional doctrines, and having unfortunately got the lead, led the country to disgrace and disaster…And yet in all history there is no theory fatally contradicted by the facts of the case, when the facts come to be known. ' Charles Gavan Duffy' | ” |
| “ | Impartiality in Irish history writing has meant in every case a non-acceptance of the historic Irish Nation, and the result has been a political pamphlet rather than a history. Ireland has been written at rather than about, and the statements of those whose interest it was to belie her have been accepted unchecked. But history, if it is to be true history, must be, like biography, sympathetic towards its subject, it must accept its subject and not deny it. There are writers on Irish history who deny that there is, in any national sense, an Ireland to write about, whose authorities are the State Paper scribes, and whose acquaintance with Irish authorities is nil. The present writer accepts the historic Irish Nation. ' Patrick Sarsfield O'Hegarty' | ” |
| “ | It often seems to me as if History was like a child's box of letters, with which we can spell any word we please. We have only to pick out such letters as we want, arrange them as we like, and say nothing of those which do not suit our purpose. ' James Anthony Froude' | ” |
| “ | Many others have written on either side of the controversy, but apparently without having gone to the sources for information, since they make statements either without references or with references which lead to nothing relevant, and even give some references which, when tested, are found to be incorrect. The primary object of some of them at least being not the elucidation of what is admittedly obscure, but the furtherance of current religious or political controversy, they adopt a particular view at the outset. This they are determined not to relinquish. By a process of rejecting rigid facts, twisting pliable ones, and inventing some padding material, they make that preconceived opinion their final conclusion and obtrude it on the public, misrepresenting the purport of the documents and even tampering with their text. They then call for the peremptory closure of the controversy. Such controversy, being wrong in purpose and in method, can have no effect except a bad one. The question at issue, though small, is not to be solved by prejudice or predilection, but by diligent investigation of facts and rational deduction therefrom. Legitimately treated, it is of no practical importance whatever, does not involve either the religion or the politics of our day, and can be properly discussed only by keeping quite aloof from these. The question is purely historical. Laurence Ginnell, (1899). | ” |
| “ | Gerald Barry (Giraldus Cambrensis), Welshman by birth, monk by profession, knave and sycophant by nature, was the first British historian to deal with Anglo-Irish affairs. James A. Froude, Englishman by birth, ex-theologue by profession, bigot and partisan by temperament and education, is the latest adventurer who has donned the cap of Cambrensis. Each may be accurately described as the historian laureate of England, bound to earn his porridge by praising his master through thick and thin, and halting at no obstacle of rude fact while doing so. The Welsh man was commissioned by Henry II. to paint the Irish as a lawless, graceless, god less crew; so Gerald promptly reported that “their chief characteristics were treachery, thirst for blood, unbridled licentiousness, and inveterate detestation of order and rule”! Of the scribe who penned these words it has been said that 'he never spoke the truth, unless by accident.' Stephen J. McCormick (1889). | ” |
| “ | England has often hired moral assassins to keep Ireland within her clutches. Unfortunately for the cause of Erin England has found even Catholics who were willing to be bribed into writing so called 'histories'; which like Scott's 'Life of Napoleon,' were written to order by the British Government in order to convince the world that England was right in every iniquity she perpetrated against those whom she overthrew.' Stephen J. McCormick (1889). | ” |
| “ | For seven hundred years England has been before the world as spokesman for Ireland, from the days of Giraldus and Matthew Paris, the so-called history of Ireland as it went forth to the world, was in great part written for diplomatic purposes, and each falsehood became the parent of a brood. Rev. W. B. Morris “Life of St. Patrick,” cited in “The Pope and Ireland” by Stephen J McCormick 1889 pg.83 | ” |
| “ | Time neither corroborates error nor invests it with the slightest authority, and even though it should have supplanted and obscured the truth during several centuries, its old age must not impose on us, nor extort an obsequious and credulous assent derogatory to truth. We know, from experience, that a fable once circulated among the vulgar, and adorned with several additions as it passes from mouth to mouth, is often so well received and acquires such authority that it passes for fact, as long as the negligence of an undiscerning public allows it to wear its mask.' Cambrensis Everus (1848). | ” |