EPONA e-journal Harzallah: The Uses and Abuses of History in Ireland 1 THE USES AND ABUSES OF HISTORY IN IRELAND: A MANICHEAN FAMINE HISTORIOGRAPHY MOHAMED SALAH HARZALLAH Higher Institute of Applied Studies in the Humanities of Tozeur, Tunisia Abstract The Famine period in Ireland (1845-1851) witnessed the death of about a million persons due to a wide range of contagious diseases, hunger and the shortage of effectual relief policies. An examination of the debate over the Famine shows that two major interpretations of the past dominate the historiography of the calamity. This debate is polarised and there seems to be no middle ground between the two interpretations. “Nationalist” historians hold the British government of the time guilty of genocide. “Revisionist” historians, however, hold a sympathetic attitude towards the role of the British government. This paper tries to examine these two major interpretations with a special emphasis on the idea that the Famine historiography has been marked by binary dualities. It also seeks to show that both interpretations do not really inform us about what really happened in the 1840s. It attempts to examine the way in which Nationalist and Revisionist historians claim to write the correct history and that the other’s version of the past is just propaganda. Apart from examining the highly polarised nature of the Famine historiography, the paper identifies the tendency to provide a more “objective” version of the Irish past while challenging the conclusions of both schools of thought. The Great Irish Famine (1845-1851) was a serious tragedy which had a profound influence upon the writing of Irish history. The Famine period witnessed the death of about a million persons due to a wide range of contagious diseases, hunger and the shortage of effectual relief policies (O’Grada 1989: 9). In terms of its magnitude the tragedy inflicted much suffering with varying degrees upon the Irish over six successive years. The British governments of the day as well as the charitable associations devised many relief policies in an attempt to help the poorest section of the Irish society. An examination of the debate over the Famine shows that two major interpretations of the past dominate the historiography of the calamity. This debate is polarised and there seems to be no middle ground between the two interpretations. “Nationalist” historians focus on the themes of mass mortality, suffering and the indifference of the British officials to the dilapidated situation of the Irish. They also hold the British government of the time guilty of genocide. “Revisionist” historians, however, understate what happened in Ireland during the 1840s. They hold a sympathetic attitude towards the role of the British government. Their examination of the past focuses on the idea that British relief policy-makers and relief administrators did what they could to avert the tragedy. This paper tries to examine these two major interpretations with a special emphasis on the idea that the Famine historiography has been marked by binary dualities. It also seeks to show that both interpretations do not really