Contrary to the claim famously articulated by E.P. Thompson that ‘food riots did not “work” in Ireland … because there was no political space (as in England) within which the plebs could exert pressure on their rulers’, an examination of the historical record permits the conclusion that Ireland sustained a ...
(Show more)Contrary to the claim famously articulated by E.P. Thompson that ‘food riots did not “work” in Ireland … because there was no political space (as in England) within which the plebs could exert pressure on their rulers’, an examination of the historical record permits the conclusion that Ireland sustained a vigorous tradition of food protest. The purpose of this presentation is to identify, and describe its main features, as follows:
Chronology and duration: Food protest assumed an identifiable form in Ireland in the early eighteenth century, later than in England, but it became an established feature during the eighteenth century and continued albeit in an attenuated form until c. 1860. It is first identified in the port towns and food distribution centres: Cork, Youghal, Clonmel, Dublin, Drogheda, later Belfast, Kilkenny, Wexford. It expanded inland thereafter, and in the early nineteenth century was largely concentrated in the western half of the country.
Early nineteenth century expression: Irish food protest intersected with established forms of agrarian protest in the early nineteenth century as the number of poor in Ireland increased, and the country experiences a major economic crisis. It also put down firmer rural roots.
Great Famine. The Great Famine witnessed an unprecedented surge in Food Protest, which was at its peak in 1846 and 1847. This presents a new perspective on the Famine that has not hitherto been traced, and that serves both to link the Great Famine to earlier moments of crises and to illuminate the response of the populace to this exceptional crisis.
Distinguishing features: (i) Food protest was prompted by the apprehension of scarcity, and the reality of high prices; (ii) It could be violent and destructive of property, but many incidents were essential expressions of protests, and involved seizing food for sale at an affordable price, or for distribution gratis. It was possessed of ritual elements: crowds marched behind a leader bearing a loaf of bread on a pole; sometimes food was seized and put in storehouses so it could be accessed by all. Ships were disabled so it could not be transported; canals were breached etc. These are all identifiable features of a moral economy
Response of the authorities: The authorities tended, but it was not invariable, to manifest understanding of food protest when it coincided, as a detailed reconstruction of its chronology attests, with food crises. There was thus a limited 'moral economy'. Its chronology suggests it is best seen as a response to the fear, or reality of high prices and its concomitant, hunger than as a protest against a commercial economy, or as an attempt to keep a customary, reciprocal economic relationship in place.
(Show less)