County Cork: the experience of members of the establishment whose houses were burned in the IRA arson campaign, 1920-23

Between May 1920 and March 1923, there were seventy-three houses belonging to the County Cork establishment burnt down by IRA and anti-treaty forces. More houses were destroyed by this method in Cork than in any other Irish county in the same timeframe. The establishment were targeted by the IRA for their political, military and social persuasions that were essentially in opposition to the nationalist movement. The motivations behind these burnings is examined, the main reasons being reprisals for actions taken by Crown forces, military reasons, loyalty of house owners to the British government and agrarianism. The geographical distribution of these burnings is also provided to reveal how active individual IRA brigades were that operated within the county. Though there were few areas of the county left unaffected by the occurrence of arson attacks, there were higher concentrations of burnings in some areas. The house burnings in County Cork did not conform to the national pattern of house burnings and the reasons for this are explored. This study argues that the presence of Crown forces in Cork and their implementation of an official reprisal policy in January 1921 escalated military conflict, and arson attacks became a key tactic utilised by IRA forces in response to this policy. The aftermath of house burnings for members of the establishment is revealed through the various compensation committees that were formed after both the War of Independence and Civil War. Key sources for this study included personal papers of both the establishment and military figures, IRA witness statements, local and national newspapers, the 1901 and 1911 Irish Censuses, Colonial Office Papers, compensation claims filed with the British government and Irish Free State, and others from archives throughout Ireland and the United Kingdom.

The Kyoto School and Confucianism: a Confucian reading of the philosophy of history and political thought of Masaaki Kosaka

This dissertation examines the philosophy of Masaaki Kōsaka (1900-1969) from the East Asian perspective of Confucianism, which I believe is the most appropriate moral paradigm for comprehending his political speculations. Although largely neglected in post-war scholarship, Kōsaka was a prominent member of the Kyoto School during the 1930s and 40s. This was a group of Japanese thinkers strongly associated with the philosophies of Kitarō Nishida and Hajime Tanabe. Kōsaka is now best known for his participation in the three Chūō Kōron symposia held in 1941 and 1942. These meetings have been routinely denounced by liberal historians due to the participants’ support for the Pacific War and the Co-Prosperity Sphere. However, many of these liberal portrayals have failed to take into account the full extent of the group’s resistance to the military junta of Hideki Tōjō. Adopting the methods and techniques of the empirical disciplines of academic history and Orientalism, I develop an interpretative framework that is more receptive to the political values that mattered to Kōsaka as a Confucian inspired intellectual. This has necessitated the rejection of moral history, which typically prioritises modern liberal values brought a priori to the historical record of wartime Japan, as well as recognition of the different ontological foundations that inform the unique political theories of the East Asian intellectual tradition. Reinforced by the prior research of Michel Dalissier and Graham Parkes, as well as my own reading of the Confucian canon, I adopt David Williams’s thesis of ‘Confucian Revolution’ as my principle schema of interpretation. This, I believe, is better able to reconcile Kōsaka’s support for the war with his strong condemnation of the imperialist practices of the Japanese military. Moreover, acknowledging the importance of Confucianism allows us to fully appreciate Kōsaka’s strong affinity for Kant’s practical metaphysics, Hegel’s political philosophy and Ranke’s historiography.