Talk:Edmund Burke

Edmund Burke was Anglo Irish

There is no argument over the fact that England was the forum in which Burke achieved greatness, but the question hinges on whether this qualifies him as 'Anglo-Irish', which would be a term used to describe somebody like, say, the Duke of Wellington. Burke was born and grew up in Ireland, was educated at Trinity College Dublin, left for London afterwards and retained his Irish accent throughout his life. He championed Irish causes from Westminster, and maintained a large retinue of Irish people. There really isn't a lot more to it than that, and if you were to substitute the word Dublin with Edinburgh, that would be the end of the matter. To the other points, both of Burke's parents were Irish as had their people been for centuries: his mother was a Catholic, and whether or not his father was an 'old' Anglican or a recent convert to the Established Church in order to practice law doesn't really matter. The talk of Burke being an old English name is going back to the Normans and is rather desperate. By that logic vast swathes of English people are 'Franco-English', a moniker they would no doubt chafe under. Was Brunel 'Franco-English' or just English? I would submit the latter. Moreover, the paternal name is a small percentage of one's genetic makeup, but again that doesn't really matter. As for Burke's utterances, he was a politician and a pamphleteer. Wrapping himself in the flag to count himself as English is the only way in which an outsider could expect to have influence in the court of public opinion, and he used this technique in provoking empathy with the Americans by describing them as Englishmen. 'Englishman' in this sense has a different, more universal meaning than literally being from England. Burke's sympathies and actions on behalf of Ireland speak for themselves, and his wanting Ireland to remain in union with Britain makes him no less Irish than Gordon Brown is Scottish. His Irish sympathies weren't a secret: when the Duke of Argyll heard of Gladstone studying the writings of Burke on the question of Home Rule he said "Your perfervidum ingenium Scoti does not need being touched with a live coal from that Irish alter" [1] Bob Geldof for example left Ireland at roughly the same age as Burke, is an ardent unionist, a political agitator, a KBE, but still sounds and regards himself as Irish, which is easier today than in Burke's time. The Anglo prefix is pregnant with meaning and is not the correct way to describe Burke. I hope that sense prevails in this matter. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lucid19 (talk • contribs) 14:21, 10 January 2024 (UTC)

I would suggest that the commenter above take their own advice and read through the Wikipedia entry on "Anglo-Irish". Not only does it explicitly reference and link to Burke's page, in a speech by Yeats about the Anglo-Irish, but it clearly states, "Not all Anglo-Irish people could trace their origins to the Protestant English settlers of the Cromwellian period; some were of Welsh stock, and others descended from Old English or even native Gaelic converts to Anglicanism". His paternal family, Burke was English in origin and again the "House of Burke" page on Wikipedia mentions its Anglo-Irish branches. The Fitzgerald Dukes of Leinster, George Canning and the Guinness family are all from a similar "Old English" stock but nevertheless are referred to as Anglo-Irish. Edmund Burke's Irish identities by Sean Patrick Donlan is a good reference for clarifying the complicated nature of Burke's nationality. He had English and Jacobite ancestor's who emigrated to Ireland during the traditional Anlgo-Irish period.

In the discussion below about the use of "British vs Irish", Pailsimon put together a good collection of 16 references. Of which 7 refer to Burke exclusively as Anglo-Irish 1 234 5 67, one as both Irish and Anglo-Irish, 5 as exclusively Irish and one doesn't seem to mention his nationality but does mention that he was a lifelong Anglican (often associated with the Anglo-Irish). The vast majority of the academic articles (as opposed to newspapers) use Anglo-Irish.

To these I would add my own examples of Burke referred to as Anglo-Irish 123456

Surely this is good grounds to conclude that the consensus is that Burke was Anglo-Irish.

Admittedly the situation is clearly complicated, so I would also support not leading the article with a mention of his national identity, as seems to be the norm with historical figures who cannot be easily categorised with modern nationalities.

However personally the fact that Burke referred to himself repeatedly as an Englishman, as is stated later on this page, for example in his letter to the Sheriffs of Bristol (1777) "Liberty is in danger of being made unpopular to Englishmen. Contending for an imaginary power, we begin to acquire the spirit of domination, and to lose the relish of honest equality" strongly supports for referring to him as at least Anglo-Irish.

This is of course in addition to his membership of the British Parliament, the 47 years he lived in England (where he was buried), as opposed to 21 in Ireland and his Anglican faith.

Tchaikovskyflowers (talk) 17:54, 7 December 2021 (UTC)

Your post suggests you don't understand what Anglo-Irish means. "Anglo-Irish" is a term for the foreign ruling class that immigrated to Ireland from England in the early modern period. It is first and foremost an ethnic term that does not fit the Irish Catholic-descended Burke. One of your sources (https://www.cs.mcgill.ca/~rwest/wikispeedia/wpcd/wp/e/Edmund_Burke.htm) even mentions that he was of "Munster Roman Catholic" stock, thus disqualifying him from this label despite the author's own lack of insight.

Other Sources demonstrating a lack of an "Anglo-Irish" consensus (which was forged out of a slim majority of those sources):

https://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/48582359.pdf? https://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/1404698.pdf?ab_segments=0%252Fbasic_search_gsv2%252Fcontrol&refreqid=excelsior%3A24df0fb5056b445876a60a1360a4f77bab_segments=0%252Fbasic_search_gsv2%252Fcontrol&refreqid=excelsior%3Abf57036cd9a57d4669ca6e61590c8ff0 (Refers to Burke as an "Irishman") http://www.let.rug.nl/usa/biographies/edmund-burke/ https://theamericanscholar.org/the-right-honourable-mr-burke/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by ComradeKublai (talk • contribs) 00:49, 8 December 2021 (UTC) ComradeKublai (talk) 00:56, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

Anglo-Irish as an ethnic term: https://artsandculture.google.com/entity/anglo-irish-people/m0152s7?hl=en, Anglo-Irish as being defined by descent: https://www.definitions.net/definition/anglo-irish+peopleComradeKublai (talk) 00:56, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

I'm sorry I thought my post was quite clear, I was following the definition used by Wikipedia, the Oxford Reference Dictionary, Miriam Webster, besides others, all of which all refer to Anglo-Irish as a person with mixed ancestry living in Ireland.

Burke qualifies to be in this group, as being of English descent. Most obviously his surname is English, from Old English "burh" meaning "fortified hill" and being derived originally from his ancestors in East Anglia.

Anglo-Irish does not solely refer to those who immigrated in the early modern period. Could you find me a source that defines Anglo-Irish as solely those who immigrated in the early modern period?

You seem to be overstressing the distinction between Old English and New English settlers in Ireland. Both pages on Wikipedia make it clear that there was interrelation and assimilation between the two groups.

"And while most of the Anglo-Irish originated in the English diaspora in Ireland, some were of native Irish families who had converted from the Catholic Church to Anglicanism.[6]"

"Conversely, some Hiberno-Normans assimilated into the new English Protestant elite, as the Anglo-Irish."

Burke would be a perfect example of this. He had Jacobite ancestry that immigrated in the 17th century and English ancestry such as Edmund Spenser, who would qualify as Early Modern.

Rather than implying that the Mcgill article's author has a lack of insight, I would suggest considering that they acknowledged Burke's "Munster Roman Catholic stock" and still decided to label him Anglo-Irish. This is strong evidence that the term is not as narrow as you claim.

Your four sources aren't very persuasive as to Anglo-Irish not being the preferred term, the second one doesn't label him Irish anywhere I can see, and the third refers to him as British before Irish. Even if we were to acknowledge them, it would reinforce my point that this is a complicated issue, where the academic community is split and simply calling him Irish isn't suitable. Again an alternative might be to remove any reference to his ethnicity in the header and let the article on his life simply speak for itself, it's quite clear later on that Burke was ambiguous in his identity.

If we are simply trading sources though, here are another two that clearly include him as one of the most important figures in discussions of Anglo-Irish literature.

[2]

Britannica has a subheading dedicated to Burke in its discussion of Anglo-Irish literature. [3]

Again I should explain that my argument is not to deny his Irishness, he was absolutely born in Ireland, spoke a fair amount of Gaelic and expressed deep fondness for the land and people. However identity and ethnicity are extremely complicated and nuanced concepts, and a person can often identify with multiple labels. Burke was clearly one such case. I believe that Anglo-Irish captures this ambiguity far better than simply Irish.

If instead you refuse to discuss or try to understand the situation and simply revert my changes, you'll be in breach of WP:CON, where it is clearly the protocol to try and reach an evidence based consensus.

If you have the time I'd again recommend reading more widely on Burke's identity, most important for this discussion being Edmund Burke's Irish identities by Sean Patrick Donlan. At the moment all you seem to be biasedly edit warring, and oversimplifying the issue down to "Roman Catholic Stock".

Tchaikovskyflowers (talk) 13:18, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

Here we go again..

Yes, let's look at the Anglo-Irish page and pay particular attention to the talk section I opened cautioning editors to tone down all the genealogy talk.

You fundamentally misunderstand how "Anglo-Irish" is being used in this context. It does not, for example, mean "Normans" who came to Ireland in the 12th Century, nor is it solely referring to Cromwellian expropriators in the Early Modern period. It's a term used to describe the privileged (Anglican) Irish from about the 17th until the 19th Century, regardless of their origins. The Guinness family didn't come from "Old English stock" -- they had ancient Irish McCartan origins, and like most Anglo-Irish were intermarried with other members of this social class, as well as the British aristocracy. The "Burke" name isn't "English" either - it's primarily an Irish surname of Anglo-Norman origins, not that this matters as to who was "Anglo-Irish"[4].

The question regarding Burke's identity has been answered by the number of sources describing him as "Irish" or "Anglo-Irish". "Irish" with no qualifier is used by a slight majority, but I've no personal problem using "Anglo-Irish" on this page (although it should be used consistently in other bios for subjects who meet this criteria, which it's not). Granted, Burke was barely Anglo-Irish considering his family background and upbringing, but if using the term is to highlight his social position in contradistinction to about 80% of Ireland's population at the turn of the 19th Century, then it has its value.

A lot of the problem here has to do with political sensitivities in a post-1922, post-Brexit world rather than editors genuinely trying to improve this article, which is not something usually accomplished by incessantly rehashing the same argument. Who gives a shit if Burke's described as "Irish" or "Anglo-Irish"? The issue is that the Irish claim him as their own and so do the British. Which again raises the question of whether the "Anglo-Irish" designation is actually appropriate here, or merely a compromise between annoying ethnic chauvinists who can't let this thing go.Jonathan f1 (talk) 01:55, 19 December 2021 (UTC)

I think the problem is labelling him ‘Anglo-Irish’ for the reasons you list potentially robs any privileged Irish person of the period who participated in the institutions of the British/English state of their Irishness. Some Irish people were willing participants of Empire and we should not shy away from it, as many do. Adding Anglicanism as a criterion, as if Protestantism somehow qualifies one’s Irishness, is especially dangerous. English ancestry in and of itself is irrelevant - how then should we classify Gerry Adams? I would prefer to approach ‘Anglo-Irish’ as a very distinct social class/grouping, whose boundaries are highly context-dependent - depending as much on self-identification as anything else. Did Burke ever identify himself as Anglo-Irish or as belonging to the Ascendancy? Given that he referred to himself as an Englishman then we would almost be better off describing him as such rather than shoehorning Anglo-Irish somewhere it does not obviously belong. Sipkeo (talk) 12:58, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

If this were an academic debate, my position would be that "Anglo-Irish" is clearly an anachronism to use on 18th Century figures, and I do agree that it's often used by laymen (and some partisan scholars) to distance certain Irish people from involvement in the British Empire. It is also not applied consistently on this encyclopedia: check out the Felix Doran (slave trader) article as an example, and tell me what's the difference between Doran and Burke? Both born and raised in Ireland, both moved to England, both involved with the British Empire and spent the better part of their careers in England, both buried in England. Yet Doran is described as an "Irish slave trader" and Burke an "Anglo-Irish statesman".

Of course this is not an academic debate and so we have to reach a consensus based on how reliable sources describe him. And I think it's clear that sources use "Irish" as much as "Anglo-Irish", if not slightly more. And considering Burke was one of less than a handful of prominent Irish Enlightenment philosophers, I think it is somewhat petty to make an issue out of this. Jonathan f1 (talk) 01:48, 17 March 2024 (UTC)

British vs Irish

Burke was born and lived in Ireland making him Irish. Plus the vast majority of sources call him Irish. There's no conceivable way he is "British". PailSimon (talk) 19:50, 19 January 2021 (UTC)

The two are not mutually exclusive in this context. He was most definitely Irish, and nonetheless British for it. Although I admit (and have been campaigning for this on C.S. Lewis's page) that this on its own does not merit the 'British' description, is the fact that he was a Briton who served in an official capacity as a politician (a statesman, as the lede we are discussing states) in the Union-wide House of Commons that makes this one of the few cases where mention of his being British must be made. This is a well-established precedent elsewhere on this website. I believe something to the effect of "Irish-born British" strikes the right balance, as it is true that his Irishness (and I do not say Irish-born to imply his ethnicity is of importance per se, as per a silly Wikipedia rule) is also — though less — notable.

SeanEML (talk) 20:25, 19 January 2021 (UTC)

Some links:

https://www.britannica.com/biography/Edmund-Burke-British-philosopher-and-statesman https://www.encyclopedia.com/people/social-sciences-and-law/political-science-biographies/edmund-burke

If you are able to provide evidence that he is Irish to the exclusion of being British, then we can talk.

Kind regards, SeanEML (talk) 20:28, 19 January 2021 (UTC)

You dont get to demand anything by the way, please read WP:CONSENSUS. Regardless the overwhelming majority of sources bar one or two strays refer to him as Iriah without qualification so Wikipedia should reflect that.PailSimon (talk) 20:39, 19 January 2021 (UTC)

As I'm sure you're aware, I only meant by "then we can talk" that then you will have a sufficient case. It's a colloquial expression. We can continue this editing war, but as I am the only one who is making a sophisticated case for my edits, I fail to see why the onus is on me and not you. You are equally liable to be blocked, perhaps especially as only I have justified my edits. Only a short while ago 'Anglo-Irish' was the description (which is of course completely incorrect) so I am not interfering with some historic consensus. Rather, I am following a long-established precedent of referring to MPs and other statesmen in a Union-wide capacity as British.

SeanEML (talk) 20:48, 19 January 2021 (UTC)

There is no "we", there is simply you in the edit warring case. Please read WP:BRD and WP:CON. You are in breach of both, which I am not. "Only I have justified my edits" is just patently false and needs no response considering the edit summaries and everything I have said on the talk page. "Only a short while ago 'Anglo-Irish' was the description (which is of course completely incorrect) so I am not interfering with some historic consensus." Calling him British is evidently challenging a long term version, so again I ask you to familiarize yourself with the relevant Wikipedia polices. "I am following a long-established precedent of referring to MPs and other statesmen in a Union-wide capacity as British" No such precedent exists and even if it did it means nothing, please see WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. The simple fact of the matter is you are edit warring without consensus and violating BRD by inserting something not backed up by the vast majority of reliable sources. PailSimon (talk) 21:47, 19 January 2021 (UTC)

You can continue to hurl Wikipedia pages at me or you can actually respond to the points I have made. You harp on about "the vast majority of reliable sources" but provide no sources, and you have not responded to my essential about him being Irish and British in equal measure, with the latter being of fundamental importance considering his role as statesman. I have cited credible sources to this end, including the most reputable encyclopaedia in the English language. But however many sources you fail to cite describe him as Irish, this does not disqualify my fundamental point about his also being British and the relevance thereof, which I am confident any reliable source will also mention, although perhaps not consistently in the lede. As I keep on saying, one must be cautious about the British/Irish false dichotomy. Putting 'British' in the lede conforms with Wikipedia's policy, however, as I was enlightened about in relation to a similar issue recently, and this is why the precedent does in fact matter - see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Biography#Context

You seriously need to understand that Burke is extremely commonly identified as British. This is not really a debatable point, he was an MP in the British House of Commons representing an English constituency whilst living in England. Clearly the label 'Irish' on its own is restrictive ... Please, PLEASE enlighten me with sources that identify him as Irish to the exclusion of being British SeanEML (talk) 22:44, 19 January 2021 (UTC)

I am "hurling wikipedia pages" to inform you that you are breaking the rules. As for the sources which call Burke Irish without qualification or simply Anglo-Irish 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16. Wikipedia does what most reliable sources do and most call him Irish or perhaps more commonly Anglo-Irish without mentioning "British" whatever that even means.PailSimon (talk) 10:12, 20 January 2021 (UTC)

Interesting how SeanEML has stopped responding after being given the sources he requested, yet continues to edit war. This shows clear dishonesty and a blatant disregard for Wikipedia's rules. Should SeanEML be allowed to continue engaging in this sort of behavior? ComradeKublai (talk) 02:23, 17 March 2021 (UTC)

Again with this obsession with his identity. It was just recently changed again to "Anglo-Irish". There are a significant number of sources using this description, but the majority of the references cited here, as far as I can tell, describe Burke as Irish with no qualifier. Looking at the edit history and how many times the lede's been changed from Irish to Anglo-Irish to British and back again, this is getting tiresome and has very little to do with improving the article.Jonathan f1 (talk) 00:05, 9 November 2021 (UTC)

Dating the completion of "A Philosophical Enquiry"

I am leaving this here as a note on the Talk page because I fear I won't get the reference formatting correctly. F P Lock (volume 1), page 92, writes: "Burke told his readers that 'it is four years now since this enquiry was finished' (1757 preface), that is, in 1753." A footnote on this reads "To Shackleton, E.B. wrote more vaguely that 'it lay by me for a good while, and I at last ventured it out' (10 Aug 1757) [Oxford, Clarendon Press, 1998] Frank Lynch (talk) 18:51, 27 March 2023 (UTC)

Restore 'influenced' and 'influenced by' to philosophy infobox

Useful section has been removed. Mediatelevitate (talk) 14:22, 14 September 2023 (UTC)

Apparently an error in the article

We read the following: "On 12 March 1757, Burke married Jane Mary Nugent (1734–1812), daughter of Dr. Christopher Nugent, a Catholic physician who had provided him with medical treatment at Bath. Their son Richard was born on 9 February 1758 while an elder son, Christopher, died in infancy." Has Christopher been born before or immediately after their marriage, i.e., was he conceived out of wedlock? This seems unlikely in that sphere of society at that time. Yet, since Richard was born roughly 11 months after their marriage, Christopher could hardly have been "an elder son". FeliksK (talk) 20:19, 1 May 2024 (UTC)

Lock agrees on Richard being born 9 February 1758 and puts Christopher as being born on 14 December 1758 (vol I page 90), so yes, going by Lock "elder" is incorrect. Frank Lynch (talk) 12:18, 2 May 2024 (UTC)