No CrossRef data available.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 28 June 2017
The body of recent historical explorations of Englishness and Britishness can seem practically interminable. To some, this work is more a cause than a product of the dynamic underlying recent constitutional changes in the United Kingdom. Linda Colley, in particular, is singled out for vituperation by right-wing commentators for an alleged attempt to depict the United Kingdom as “an artificial creation, built from opposition to Frenchmen and Catholics and lacking any form of coherent cultural core,” thus preparing the ground for its wilful destruction by the Blair government. Yet others have suggested that Colley overstated the hegemony of the idea of Britishness among the nations of the United Kingdom. It is contended that British identity penetrated in England to a unique degree, a process which has produced long-term imbalance and instability in the United Kingdom. Tom Nairn thus blamed English arrogance for this instability. For other commentators the historical absence of a tangible demand for English self-government is to be problematized and regarded as an indication of “backwardness.” As Bernard Crick wrote: “England is the problem. Because English nationalism is suppressed and not explicit, it is soured, not wholly in control of its own reactions and is difficult to deal with by the other nations.”
1 A union of multiple identities: the British Isles, C.1750-C.1850, ed. Brockliss, L. W. B. and Eastwood, David (Manchester, 1997): The British problem, c. 1534-1707: state formation in the Atlantic Archipelago, ed. Bradshaw, Brendan and Morrill, J. S. (Basingstoke, 1996)Google Scholar: British consciousness and identity: the making of Britain, 1533-1707, ed. Bradshaw, Brendan and Roberts, Peter (Cambridge, 1998)Google Scholar: Myths of the English, ed. Roy Porter (Cambridge, 1992): Ward, P. J., Red flag and Union Jack: Englishness, patriotism and the British left, 1881-1924 (Woodbridge, 1998)Google Scholar: Davies, Norman, The Isles: A History (Basingstoke, 1999)Google Scholar. Originally, of course, this body of recent scholarship owes much to Pocock, J. G. A., “British history: a plea for a new subject,” Journal of Modern History 67 (Dec. 1975): 601–21.Google Scholar
2 Hague’s identity: strong themes will achieve little without policy detail,” The Times (20 Jan. 1999), p. 19: Hitchens, Peter, The abolition of Britain: the British cultural revolution from Lady Chatterley to Tony Blair, 2nd ed. (London, 2000), p. 332:Google Scholar Colley, , Britons: the forging of a nation, 1707-1837 (New Haven, 1992)Google Scholar.
3 Crick, Bernard, “Essay on Britishness,” Scottish Affairs 2 (Winter 1993): 71–83 Google Scholar: Morton, Graeme, Unionist-nationalism: governing urban Scotland, 1830-1860 (Phantassie, East Lothian, 1999), pp. 14–16:Google Scholar Marquand, David, “How united is the modern United Kingdom?,” in Uniting the Kingdom? The making of British history, ed. Grant, Alexander and Stringer, Keith J. (London, 1995), p. 288:Google Scholar Samuel, Raphael, Island stories: unravelling Britain. Theatres of memory, vol. II, ed. Alison Light, Sally Alexander, and Gareth Stedman Jones (London, 1998), pp. 27–28, 31Google Scholar : Pittock, Murray, Inventing and resisting Britain: cultural identities in Britain and Ireland, 1685-1789 (Basingstoke, 1997), p. 133.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
7 Morton, Unionist-nationalism, p. 3.
8 Crick, Bernard, “The English and the British,” in National identities: the constitution of the United Kingdom, ed. Crick, Bernard (Oxford, 1991), pp. 97, 99:Google Scholar Finlay, Richard J., “The rise and fall of popular imperialism in Scotland, 1850-1950,” Scottish Geographical Magazine 113 (Mar. 1997): 18.Google Scholar
9 Brockliss, L. W. B., Eastwood, David and John, Michael, “From dynastic union to unitary state: the European experience,” in A union of multiple identities, ed. Brockliss and Eastwood (Manchester, 1997), pp. 193–212:Google Scholar Howe, Stephen, Ireland and empire: colonial legacies in Irish history and culture (Oxford, 2000)Google Scholar.
10 Issues of regional identity: in honour of John Marshall, ed. Edward Royle (Manchester, 1998).
11 Lynd, “On strong silent men,” Daily News (1 Dec 1926): 6e.
12 Loughlin, James, Ulster Unionism and British national identity since 1885 (London, 1995), p. 51.Google Scholar
13 Englishness: politics and culture, 1880-1920, ed. Robert Colls and Philip Dodd (London, 1986), preface.
16 Anderson, Benedict, Imagined communities: reflections on the rise and spread of nationalism, rev. ed. (London, 1991)Google Scholar: Gellner, Ernest, Nations and nationalism (Oxford, 1983), p. 138:Google Scholar Men-nell, Stephen, “The formation of we-images: a process theory,” in Social theory and the politics of identity, ed. Craig Calhoun (Cambridge, Mass., 1994), pp. 175–98.Google Scholar
22 Gladstone to Morley, 9 July 1886, quoted in Richard Shannon, Gladstone, 2 vols. (London, 1982-1999), 2: 449. The late Colin Matthew piercingly observed that from 1886, Unionism developed into the argument that though the United Kingdom required “a single representative assembly, within that assembly only English votes counted on questions of organic change”: Matthew, H. C. G., Gladstone, 1875-1898 (Oxford, 1995), pp. 215, 235.Google Scholar
23 Pelling, Henry, Social geography of British elections, 1885-1910 (Aldershot, 1994), p. 417.Google Scholar
24 Quoted in Morris, A. J. A., The scaremongers: the advocacy of war and rearmament, 1896-1914 (London, 1984), p. 227.Google Scholar
25 Quoted in Loughlin, Ulster Unionism, p. 55.
27 Kendle, John, Ireland and the federal solution: the debate over the United Kingdom constitution, 1870-1921 (Kingston, 1989):Google Scholar Kendle, John, Federal Britain: a history (London, 1997), pp. 59–78:Google Scholar Jalland, Patricia, “United Kingdom devolution, 1910-14: political panacea or tactical diversion?,” English Historical Review 94 (1979): 757–83 Google Scholar: Boyce, D. G., “Federalism and the Irish question,” in The federal idea, 2 vols., ed. Andrea Bosco (London, 1991-92), 1119.Google Scholar
28 The case for devolution and a settlement of the home rule question by consent, ed. Viscount Hythe (London, 1913), pp. 9-10.
29 Observer (5 Apr. 1914): 12.
30 Pall Mall Gazette (24 Apr. 1913): 6.
31 Kendle, Federal Britain, p. 70.
32 The case for devolution, ed. Hythe, pp. 12-17. On Garvin see Peatling, G. K., British opinion and Irish self-government, 1865-1925: from Unionism to liberal commonwealth (Dublin, 2001), p. 127 Google Scholar: Ayerst, David, Garvin of the Observer (Beckenham, 1985), pp. 43–17, 80–84 Google Scholar: Gollin, A.M., The Observer and J. L. Garvin, 1908-1914: a study in great editorship (London, 1960), p. 17:Google Scholar Stubbs, J. O., “Appearance and reality: a case study of the Observer and J. L. Garvin,” in Newspaper history from the seventeenth century to the present day, ed. Boyce, D. G., Curran, James, and Wingate, Pauline (London, 1978), pp. 320–38.Google Scholar
33 The case for devolution, ed. Hythe, p. 18: Robertson, John M., The meaning of Liberalism (London, 1912), p. 113.Google Scholar
34 The case for devolution, ed. Hythe, pp. 21-22. Garvin also fell foul of this problem: see Peatling, British opinion, p. 129: Gollin, Garvin, pp. 216-18, 229-30.
36 Brockliss, L. W. B. and Eastwood, David, “Introduction: a union of multiple identities,” in A union of multiple identities, ed. Brockliss and Eastwood, p. 2.Google Scholar
38 Matthew, Gladstone, p. 215.
39 Local parliaments for England—Mr Churchill’s outline of a federal system,” The Times (13 Sept. 1912): 4a-b.
40 Ibid, p. 4a.
41 For summaries of hostile comments see “Home rule in new shape,” Pall Mall Gazette (13 Sept. 1912): lb: “Mr. Churchill’s phantasy,” Pall Mall Gazette (14 Sept. 1912): 2c.
42 “Mr. Churchill’s speeches,” The Times (13 Sept. 1912): 5c: “The new statesmanship,” The Times (14 Sept. 1912): 7c: “Mr. Churchill and federation all round,” The Times (17 Sept. 1912): 5c. This interpretation has been echoed by some subsequent historians: Kendle, Ireland and the federal solution, p. 154: Jalland, Liberals and Ireland, pp. 104-05.
43 “The new Machiavelli,” Pall Mall Gazette (14 Sept. 1912): 6.
44 “The paternal instinct,” Pall Mall Gazette (18 Sept. 1912): 7.
45 The Times (13 Sept. 1912): 4a.
46 Harvie, Christopher, The rise of regional Europe (London, 1994), p. 18.Google Scholar “A region is the result of the meeting of various concepts of space,” is Michael Keating’s alternative definition (“Is there a regional level of government in Europe?,” in Regions in Europe, ed. Patrick Le Gales and Christian Lequesne [London 1998], p. 11).
47 Thompson, Paul, Socialists, Liberals and Labour: the struggle for London, 1885-1914 (London, 1964)Google Scholar: Clarke, P. F., Lancashire and the new Liberalism (Cambridge, 1971)CrossRefGoogle Scholar: Pugh, M. D., ‘“Yorkshire and the new Liberalism’?,” Journal of Modern History 50 (1978), on demand supplement: D1139-D1155: Morgan, K. O., “The new liberalism and the challenge of labour: the Welsh experience, 1885-1929,” in Essays in anti-Labour history: responses to the rise of Labour in Britain, ed. Brown, K. D. (London, 1974), pp. 159–82:Google Scholar Howe, John, “Liberalism, Lib-Labs and independent Labour in north Gloucestershire, 1890-1914,” Midland History 11 (1986): 117–37.Google Scholar
48 Waller, P. J., Democracy and sectarianism: a political and social history of Liverpool, 1868-1939 (Liverpool, 1981)Google Scholar.
49 McCord, Norman, “The regional identity of north-east England in the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries,” in Issues of regional identity: in honour of John Marshall, ed. Edward Royle (Manchester, 1998), pp. 102–17.Google Scholar
50 Clarke, Lancashire and the new Liberalism, p. 7.
53 Kendle, Ireland and the federal solution, pp. 236-38.
54 Though omitting Cornwall and the Northeast, for instance.
55 Keating, “Regional level of government,” p. 23.
56 West Yorkshire Archive Service, Leeds: LIB P 1; Yorkshire Liberal Federation minutes (esp. Executive committee meeting, 18 Nov 1911): LIB P 8; Leeds Liberal Federation, minutes of Cabinet Committee: LIB P 6; Leeds Liberal Federation, minutes of Executive Committee.
57 Harvie, Christopher, “English regionalism: the dog that never barked,” in National identities: the constitution of the United Kingdom, ed. Crick, Bernard (Oxford, 1991), pp. iii.Google Scholar
58 The Times (13 Sept. 1912): 4a.
59 ”Mr. Churchill’s thoughts,” Daily News (14 Sept. 1912): 4b-c: “Federal England,” Manchester Guardian (13 Sept. 1912): 6b-c: Nation 11 (21 Sept. 1912): 888-89. In retrospect, a tangential if different observation about Churchill’s speech is that while he recognized contemporary divisions of “interest” and “point of view” between parts of England, he was not so sensitive to the analogous division between north and south Wales: see Williams, Gwyn A., When was Wales? A history of the Welsh (Harmondsworth, 1991), pp. 229–31.Google Scholar
60 Morton, Unionist-nationalism, passim (the concept is defined on p. 183).
61 Ibid, pp. 14, 17, 175, 181-82, 200. Also see Finlay, “Popular imperialism,” pp. 13-21: David S. Forsyth, “Empire and Union: imperial and national identity in nineteenth century Scotland,” Scottish Geographical Magazine 113 (Mar. 1997): 6-12. Significantly, a constituent of this Scottish Unionist-nationalism was the deployment of icons of the Scottish ethnie—the same icons more recently associated with modern Scottish Nationalism. See Morton, , Unionist-nationalism, p. 199 Google Scholar: Marinell Ash, “William Wallace and Robert the Bruce: the life and death of a national myth,” in The myths we live by, ed. Raphael Samuel and Paul Thompson (London, 1990), p. 92: Raphael Samuel, Island stories, pp. 12, 14, 43.
62 For instance, in 1916, with home rule apparently imminent, John Redmond called upon nationalist Ireland “to prove that this concession of liberty would have the same effect in our country as it has had in every other portion of the Empire, and that henceforth Ireland would be a strength instead of a weakness”: quoted in Keith Jeffery, “The Irish military tradition and the British empire,” in “An Irish empire”? Aspects of Ireland and the British empire, ed. Keith Jeffery (Manchester, 1996), p. 109.
63 Thoraley, David, Isaac Butt and home rule (London, 1964)Google Scholar: Spence, Joseph, “Isaac Butt, nationality and Irish Toryism, 1833-1852,” Bullan: an Irish studies journal 2 (Summer 1995): 45–60 Google Scholar: Boyce, D. G., “Trembling solicitude: Irish conservatism, nationality and public opinion, 1833-86,” in Political thought in Ireland since the seventeenth century, ed. Boyce, D. G., Robert Eccleshall, and Vincent Geoghegan (London, 1993), pp. 124–45 Google Scholar.
64 Witness the response in Scotland to Parnell’s suggestion that Scotland had “ceased to be a nation” through her acceptance of the Union: Forsyth, “Empire and Union,” p. 9.
65 On the centrality of myths to national identity see Smith, Myths and memories, pp. 9, 13-15, 19: Smith, National identity, pp. 19-22.
66 On the issue of Irish representation at Westminster and successive Home Rule Bills, see Alan O’Day, Irish home rule, 1867-1921 (Manchester, 1998), pp. 109-10, 112, 161-63, 248, 250. The Daily News argued: “British politics cannot become normal without Home Rule. The Irish question has distracted the public life of England for thirty years, and would continue to do so if it were not settled”: Daily News (14 Feb. 1912): 4: Chesterton, G. K., “The release of England,” Daily News (20 Apr. 1912): 46–8.Google Scholar
67 Turner, John, “Letting go: The conservative party and the end of the Union with Ireland,” in Uniting the Kingdom, ed. Grant and Stringer, pp. 256, 274.Google Scholar (See also Evans, Stephen, “The Conservatives and the redefinition of Unionism, 1912-21,” Twentieth Century British History 9 (1998): 1–27 Google Scholar.) This hypothesis assimilates the assumption, influential with contemporary English Unionists (though historically problematic), of the “Englishness” of Ulster Protestants: Loughlin, Ulster Unionism, p. 56.
68 Howe, Ireland and empire, p. 67.
69 Jalland, Liberals and Ireland, p. 94.
71 Dutton, David, “His Majesty’s loyal opposition”: the Unionist party in opposition, 1905-1915 (Liverpool, 1992), pp. 212–16 Google Scholar: Murphy, Richard, “Faction in the Conservative party and the home rule crisis, 1912-14,” History 71 (June 1986): 230–33:Google Scholar Rodner, William S., “Leaguers, Covenanters, moderates: British support for Ulster, 1913-14,” Eire-Ireland 17 (Winter 1982): 68–85:Google Scholar Smith, Jeremy, “Conservatives, ideology and representations of the Union with Ireland,” in The Conservatives and British society, 1880-1990, ed. Martin Francis and Ina Zweiniger-Bargielowska (Cardiff, 1996), pp. 18–38.Google Scholar
72 Jalland, Liberals and Ireland.
73 Peatling, British opinion., pp. 73-81, 85, 90-91, 99, 178-79.
74 The Times (17 Nov. 1913): 9: “Some phantoms,” Daily News (17 Oct. 1913): 6b-c.
75 Cunningham, Hugh, “The conservative party and patriotism,” in Englishness: politics and culture, 1880-1920, ed. Robert Colls and Philip Dodd (London, 1986), pp. 283–307 Google Scholar.
76 Green, E. H. H., The crisis of conservatism: the politics, economics and ideology of the British Conservative party, 1880-1914 (London, 1995), pp. 1, 16, 59–65 Google Scholar: Evans, Brendan and Taylor, Andrew, From Salisbury to Major: continuity and change in Conservative politics (Manchester, 1996):Google Scholar Davies, A. J., We, the nation: the Conservative party and the pursuit of power (London, 1995)Google Scholar: The Conservatives and British society, 1880-1990, ed. Francis and Zweiniger-Bargielowska.
77 Fraser, T. G., “Ireland and India,” in An “Irish” Empire? Aspects of Ireland and the British empire, ed. Jeffery, , pp. 79–83, 88–89 Google Scholar: Finlay, “Popular imperialism,” pp. 16-19: Fitzpatrick, David, “Ireland and the empire,” in The Oxford history of the British empire. Vol. III, The nineteenth century, 5 vols., ed. Nicholas Canny, et al. (Oxford, 1998–99), 3: 509–12.Google Scholar
78 Morton, Unionist-nationalism, p. 177-78, 181-82: Ellis, John S., “Reconciling the Celt: British national identity, empire, and the 1911 investiture of the Prince of Wales,” Journal of British Studies 37 (Oct. 1998): 391–418 Google Scholar.
79 See for instance the Daily News (2 Mar. 1912): 4b-c: “Equality of citizenship and self-government may claim to be the specifically English contribution to the art of government.” This idea that Englishness/Britishness was marked by a unique tolerance is a myth, though, as with most national myths, a myth for which selective evidence could be found: Samuel, Raphael, “Continuous national history,” in Patriotism: the making and unmaking of British national identity, ed. Samuel, Raphael, 3 vols. (London, 1989), 1: 9:Google Scholar Howe, Ireland and empire, p. 230: Crick, “The English and the British,” p. 93.
80 Peatling, British opinion, pp. 133^14, 149-51, 159, 161-62, 178-79: Fraser, T. G., “Partitioning Ireland, India and Palestine,” in Nationalism and unionism: conflict in Ireland, ed. Collins, Peter (Belfast, 1994), pp. 177–86 Google Scholar. This suggestion is consistent with some historians’ intimation that the dynamic behind the partition of Ireland came from within Ireland itself: see for instance Paul Bew, “Moderate nationalism and the Irish revolution, 1916-1923,” Historical Journal 42 (Sept. 1999): 729-49.
82 Pittock, Inventing and resisting Britain, pp. 173, 175: Colley, Britons, p. 162: Pearling, British opinion, p. 119.
83 Dicey, A. V., England’s case against home rule, 3rd ed. (London, 1887), pp. 15–16 Google Scholar, 283: Lecky, W. E. H., “Some aspects of home rule,” Contemporary Review 63 (1893): 636–37 Google Scholar. Cf. Dicey, A. V., Lectures on the relations between law & public opinion in England during the nineteenth century, 2nd ed. (London, 1914), pp. 455–56 Google Scholar, where Dicey interrupts his analysis of law and public opinion in England with a panegyric on the British empire.
84 Dicey, A. V., “The due representation of England,” National Review 38 (Nov. 1901): 359–82 Google Scholar.
85 Witness the “Englishness” of the critique of the British government’s really rather moderate counter-terror in nationalist Ireland in 1920-21: Peatling, British opinion, pp. 92-93, 180-81. This idea of the self-penalizing potential of expressions of national identity has been influenced by Craig Calhoun’s notion of nationalism as a discursive formation (Calhoun, Nationalism, p. 3), and by Michel Foucault’s intimation of the possibility of a “discourse” exercising autonomy from the interests of ruling classes and groups (Foucault, Discipline and punish: the birth of the prison, trans. Alan Sheridan [London, 1977], pp. 26-27).
86 Observer (20 Mar. 1932): 16b. The assumption that England can lead the world in doing without national identity altogether, though most often found on the “internationalist” English left, can thus be seen as a curious hangover of the British empire: see Michael Bywater, “Englishness: who cares?,” New Statesman (3 Apr. 2000): 11-2.
87 Parris, Matthew, “Opinion—once the Scots have their own parliament, English nationalists will turn nasty—and against Tony Blair,” The Times (27 May 1996), p.14.Google Scholar It is significant, as Loughlin points out, that in the 1910-14 period, English Unionist antipathy to and suspicion of the “Celtic fringe” tended to find its most dogmatic expressions in private: Loughlin, Ulster Unionism, pp. 55-56.
88 An attitude apparently most common amongst English radicals, whose efforts at political pluralism, though noisy, were often fundamentally half-hearted: See Daily News (8 May 1916): 44-8.
89 Morgan, Hiram, “An unwelcome heritage: Ireland’s role in British empire-building,” History of European Ideas 19 (July 1994): 619–25 Google Scholar: Holmes, Michael, “The Irish and India: imperialism, nationalism and internationalism,” in The Irish diaspora, ed. Andy Bielenberg (Harlow, 2000), pp. 235–50 Google Scholar: Howe, Ireland and empire, pp. 43-56: Charles James O’Donnell and Brendan Clifford, Ireland in the Great war: the Irish insurrection of 1916 set in the context of the world war (Belfast, 1992), ch. 1.
90 This fallacious argument seems to be shared by Murray Pittock (Celtic identity and the British image [Manchester, 1999], p. 106, and idem, Inventing and resisting Britain, pp. 173-75) and Clark, J. C. D. (“The history of Britain: a composite state in a Europe des Patries?,” in Ideas and politics in modern Britain, ed.Clark, J. C. D. (Basingstoke, 1990), pp. 32–49)CrossRefGoogle Scholar, though they offer wildly different estimates of the beneficence of this supposed English hegemony.
92 Scruton, Roger, England: an elegy (London, 2000)Google Scholar: Redwood, John, The death of Britain? the UK’s constitutional crisis (Basingstoke, 1999):Google Scholar Hitchens, Abolition of Britain: Correlli Barnett, The lost victory: British dreams. British realities, J945-1950 (London, 1995), p.xiii: Barnett, The verdict of peace: Britain between her yesterday and the future (London, 2001).
93 Peathng, British opinion, p. 118.
94 Note however that Gladstone’s Scottish connections lead him to be claimed by some Scots: Forsyth, “Empire and Union,” p. 9.
95 Lecky, “Some aspects of home rule,” pp. 636-37. Jonathan Parry observes that Gladstone’s championing of Scottish and Welsh nationalism, which incurred Lecky’s ire, “generated more distrust of him in England, especially among those most anxious for Great Britain to play a forceful international role.” While this is a substantially accurate observation, it begs many questions: Parry, Jonathan, The rise and fall of Liberal government in Victorian Britain (New Haven, 1993), p. 306.Google Scholar
96 “Marginal men and micks on the make: the uses of Irish exile, c.1840-1922,” in Foster, Roy, Paddy & Mr. Punch: connections in Irish and English history (London, 1993), pp. 304, 283, 284, 282, 291 Google Scholar.
97 Peatling, British opinion, pp. 117-18: Daily News (19 Jan. 1914): 4d-e.
98 Notes on nationalism,” in George Orwell, Decline of the English murder and other essays (Harmondsworth, 1965), pp. 164, 163. In his defense, Orwell is not just talking here about nationalism as modern observers would understand it, but two attitudes which have been associated with it by some scholars: “the habit of assuming that human beings can be classified like insects and that whole blocks of millions or tens of millions of people can be confidently labelled ‘good’ or ‘bad’,” and, more fundamentally, “the habit of identifying oneself with a single nation or other unit, placing it beyond good and evil and recognising no other duty than that of advancing its interests” (pp. 156, 155).
101 Smith, , Nationalism and modernism: a critical survey of recent theories of nations and nationalism (London, 1998), pp. 204–05 Google Scholar.
103 Kearney, Richard, Postnationalist Ireland: politics, literature, philosophy (London, 1997), p. 168. It can be suggested that Kearney's own pursuit of this agenda is however not single-minded: see Howe, Ireland and empire, p. 143.Google Scholar
No CrossRef data available.