Irish Education and Catholic Emancipation, 1791-1831: the Campaigns of Bishop Doyle and Daniel O'Connell by Brian Fleming (review)

Abstract

BOOK REVIEWS Irish Education and Catholic Emancipation, 1791–1831: the Campaigns of Bishop Doyle and Daniel O’Connell, Brian Fleming (Oxford: Peter Lang, 2017), ix+235 pages. Prominent historical figures, such as Daniel O’Connell, have traditionally been remembered in popular opinion for their contribution to the political arena in Ireland. Fleming’s publication follows on from recent studies which have sought to redefine or reassess this popular view of nationalist leaders and Irish rebels, by considering their roles in education. Elaine Sissons’s Pearse’s Patriots: St Enda’s and the Cult of Boyhood (2004), and Brendan Walsh’s The Pedagogy of Protest: the Educational Thought and Work of Patrick H. Pearse (2007), may be cited as examples. As Fleming contends, while O’Connell certainly played an important role in securing Catholic Emancipation, this victory has somewhat overshadowed the Liberator’s other political achievements of the time, most notably his contribution to education reform. Similarly, Fleming has identified how Catholic religious are frequently excluded from the canon of historical inquiry. In this volume, Fleming situates Bishop James Doyle’s contribution to education reform within the broader political developments of the time. This book will be of interest to history of education scholars, particularly those trying to grasp the complexities of the Irish education system at the turn of the nineteenth century. Using private papers, official reports and newspaper articles, the author builds a strong context in which to place the central figures, O’Connell and Doyle, and provides a concise history of the political, religious and educational environment of the time. The research is constructed chronologically, beginning with an overview of the penal laws during the seventeenth century through to the passing of Catholic Emancipation in 1829 and culminating in the establishment of the National System of Education in 1831. Written in an engaging style, the publication will also be accessible to those with a general interest in Irish history. However, for those with a knowledge of Irish history, and indeed the history of Irish education, the central arguments are often overshadowed by explanations of events, themes and ideas that are common knowledge. Indeed, the difficulty in this regard is compounded by the lack of scholarly referencing for the first fifty or so pages. Moreover, it appears that Fleming’s examination of O’Connell is largely derived from secondary source material Studies • volume 108 • number 430 220 Summer 2019: Book Reviews and edited volumes of O’Connell’s personal correspondence, indicating that the possibility of producing a new and unique study is therefore limited from the outset. The general concept for this publication is interesting but, regrettably, the research falls short of meaningful critical analysis or the incorporation of new insights into this specific topic. On numerous occasions the author makes reference to the private letters and papers of O’Connell, but fails to offer a deeper exploration of the content or to include detailed extracts from the source material which would undoubtedly have enhanced the narrative. The same shortcoming is evident in the treatment of Bishop Doyle. Despite Doyle’s plethora of publications and letters, Fleming does not explore them in any great detail. Rather, he mentions them in an occasional passing comment, or provides a brief summary of the contents of letters and pastoral addresses. For example, in November 1822, Doyle wrote a pastoral letter condemning the actions of an illegal organisation, the Ribbonmen (p.55). Fleming does not outline what grievous actions the illegal group had undertaken which spurred Doyle’s ‘strong stance on this issue’ (p.55). Doyle’s stance is not noted in Fleming’s discussion. However, according to Fleming, ‘In O’Connell’s view, it contributed more to peace in the country than any coercive legislation ever would’ (p.55). Again, lack of clarity regarding the specifics of the pastoral letter makes it difficult to fully comprehend Doyle’s influence at this time. Similarly, in April 1825, Doyle, who was unhappy with issues of proselytism in schools operating under the Kildare Place Society, encouraged Catholics whose schools were connected to the organisation to ‘withdraw from that arrangement’(p.114).According to Fleming, ‘It is clear from letters contained in the archives of the...