For modern Ireland to turn its back on Easter 1916 - or to relinquish it to the political necrophiliacs of provisionalism - would be absurd, writes Michael McDowell
It is a simple, undeniable truth that the 1916 Rising was one of a handful of events which led to the independence of the Irish people. It was a coup by the revolutionaries of the IRB and the Citizens Army. The rebels believed that such a violent coup was essential if the cause of Irish independence was to be advanced in the aftermath of the first World War then raging.
Huge amounts of paper and thought have been expended in the intervening 90 years on the issue of the morality or justification of the use of revolutionary violence by those who plotted the Rising. There are very strong and passionate arguments both ways.
For my part, such arguments are rather unattractive. Once events move from the realm of contemporary politics into the realm of history, they have to be viewed from a different perspective.
I fully accept that using historical events as a justification for contemporary political choices has tended to merge some peoples' attitudes to the Provisionals' 30-year campaign of terror with attitudes to the 1916 Rising. But those two matters are profoundly different and they should not be confused.
As the youngest grandson of Eoin MacNeill, I obviously have more than a passing interest in how he is viewed and treated by history. But I do not allow that personal interest to distort my objective view of the significance of the Rising. He was a courageous, devout and thoughtful Catholic nationalist who had well-developed views on the moral issue as to when the use of violence by the Irish Volunteers would have been justified. His beliefs on that issue were not shared by Pearse or Connolly. They too were brave and idealistic men.
It is hard to fault the beliefs MacNeill held or the actions he took on foot of them. He was deceived by those planning the Rising, who generally regarded him as an obstacle to their project. He countermanded the orders for the Rising, He was arrested and tried by general court martial. He was sentenced to life imprisonment. But by late 1917, in the aftermath of the executions and despite the bitter hostility of some few, he attended the Sinn Féin convention, and he headed the poll in the election of its national executive body.
He did not walk away from those who had participated in the Rising. And they did not walk away from him. They all worked on for the cause of Irish freedom. And none of them believed it either necessary or appropriate to divide on the question as to whether the Rising was justified. They could live with differences on that issue. They all knew that the Rising and its repression had been catalytic events in the struggle for Irish freedom.
MacNeill played a significant personal part in later events in that struggle. His three oldest sons joined the IRA. Subsequently two of them fought on the Treaty side in the Civil War; one was shot down by Free Staters on Ben Bulben fighting against the government in which MacNeill was a minister.
By the way, I have never seen a convincing case made out that a more general Rising in 1916 would have led the cause of Irish independence more speedily or more satisfactorily to a very different outcome.
At this remove, railing against the respective positions in 1916 of Redmond, or of Pearse and Connolly, or of MacNeill is futile and, I think, faintly ridiculous. Each had his courage, his beliefs and his own integrity and fidelity to Ireland. To acknowledge that in respect of each of them is not to diminish any of them. To rubbish their patriotism or sacrifices is self-indulgent. Their times were complex. The sequence and out-turn of events was neither inevitable nor pre-ordained.
Revolutionary acts throughout history, whether successful or not, always hang by their own boot-straps to await the judgment of history.
Which is not to say that politics, as distinct from history, is amoral. I merely point out that history is a rich storehouse as much for error as it is for inspiration. In a liberal democratic society such as ours, there are no mandates from history. Republican mandates come from the ballot box - not the Armalite or ideology.
For modern Ireland to turn its back on Easter 1916 - or to relinquish it to the political necrophiliacs of Provisionalism - would be as absurd as the French abandoning Bastille day in a rictus of self doubt about the actions of the revolutionary mob which stormed the Paris prison.
We are who we are. And we have come from where we have come. As a 21st century Irish republican, I believe that recent events more than ever set us the challenge of reconciling green and orange - a challenge which has never been taken up successfully by Irish republicans since the 1790s. That aspiration of the 1916 Proclamation remains unfinished business. And the 90th anniversary celebration of Easter 1916 should not blind us - even momentarily - to our challenging republican vocation of reconciliation.
Michael McDowell is Minister for Justice