The Great Melody—Discordant Notes

by Connor Cruise O’Brien

My book The Great Melody: a thematic biography and commented anthology of Edmund Burke was published last September and in America the following month. It is now in its second hard cover printing, both in these islands and in North America. More copies of it have been sold in the Republic of Ireland than in the United Kingdom (not just proportionately, but absolutely). A paperback edition will be published in September, by Heinemann Mandarin Books.

The book has been extensively and mostly favourably reviewed in the book pages of the principal Irish, British and North American daily and Sunday newspapers and in a number of periodicals, including the Times Literary Supplement, New York Review of Books and London Review of Books. Apart from the review in History Ireland, I have not yet seen any reviews in specialised scholarly publi­ cations. In this article I shall consider the negative criticisms. Only one reviewer – Roy Porter in the Sunday Times – gave the book an overall thumbs down. He found The Great Melody ‘suffocating’; possibly he had subliminal memories of that other Burke, Hare’s partner. Apart from the Sunday Times, the most critical review was that of Edward P. Thompson in the Times Literary Supplement on 4 October last.

The two complaints most frequent­ly made about The Great Melody con­cerned my treatment of Sir Lewis Namier and his school, and my treat­ment of Edmund Burke’s Irish Catholic associations and what I see as their effects on other areas of his political feelings and activities.

Sir Lewis Namier

On the matter of Namier, the com­plaints are somewhat divergent, depending on which side of the Atlantic they originate from. American reviewers tend to see me as reading too much importance into the belittlement of Burke at the hands of the Namierite school. It was all such a long time ago – mostly in the 1950s and 1960s – and had nothing like the influence I attribute to it, in their view. The fact is that the Namier school, though it was influential on both sides of the Atlantic, never enjoyed, in America, anything close to the hegemonic authority which the school exercised over British (and Irish) historiography of the late eigh­teenth century from the thirties through the sixties of the present cen­tury. The impact of this school’s reductivist attitude necessarily had a major impact on Burke’s reputation and the effects of this are still felt at a time when Namierite influences are more faint and indirect than was once the case.

British reviewers were not inclined to dismiss my view of Namier’s importance: they were inclined to challenge my contention that that influence was deliberately used to cut Burke down to size. My evidence for that view is set out in my book (mainly but not exclusively in the Introduction) and readers will make up their own minds as to the weight of the evidence and of the arguments based on it. Most of my critics did not go into detail. One writer who did, to some extent, is quoted later, as is my answer.

Burke’s lrishness

Several British reviewers – though not a majority of these – felt that I made too much of Burke’s lrishness. Thus the eminent British political thinker, and fellow of Peterhouse, Cambridge, Maurice Cowling, review­ ing The Great Melody for The Wall Street Journal (8 April 1993) found that ‘The Great Melody is too long and loses its way because of Dr O’Brien’s insistence that Burke’s lrishness was the most important fea­ture of his politics’. It may be that it was Mr Cowling himself who lost his way, through finding Irish history bor­ing and so failing to take in the actual drift of my argument in this particular area. I did not say, or imply, let alone ‘insist’ ‘that Burke’s lrishness was the most important feature of his poli­tics’. I did suggest, and supplied rea­sons for suggesting, that his lrishness had a more significant influence on his politics than has hitherto been supposed. Cowling apparently dis­ agrees, but without giving reasons. But I need not in these columns, labour this particular point. Readers of History Ireland are by definition, quite unlikely to regard Irish history as boring. And two reviewers of The Great Melody who (unlike Mr. Cowling) are specialists in late eighteenth century history – Linda Colley and Thomas Bartlett – had no fault to find with my handling of Burke’s lrishness

In conclusion, I should like to quote an exchange which should be of some interest to those readers who are curious about the question of Burke’s lrishness. When Maurice Cranston reviewed The Great Melody (favourably) in the Book World··of the Washington Post (17 January 1993), a reader, Elizabeth R. Lambert, wrote to demur concerning the Irish bits. Unlike Mr. Cowling, she supplied some reasons. Her letter was pub­ lished in Book World on 21 March 1993. It is set out below, in tull, together with my reply, also in full.

——————————————————————————————

Sir, – Maurice Cranston is certainly cor­ rect in his assessment of Conor Cruise O’Brien’s The Great Melody: a thematic biography 0and commented anthology of Edmund Burke (Book World; l 7 Jan) as a volume to be warmly welcomed after ‘a whole series of inferior and mostly hostile studies of Burke in recent years’. However, Cranston is not quite as accurate in his statement that O’Brien uses ‘new and impressive research Into Burke’s origins and early history’ to support his portrayal of Burke as an Irish Catholic in Protestant Whig clothing. The material O’Brien uses Is not new; it has been around for some time. What is new and disconcert­ ing is O’Brien’s manipulation of it to build his case for a Catholic Burke. O’Brien omits several parts damaging to his case in an account he uses as evi­ dence that Burke converted to Catholicism during his early years as a student at Middle Temple. •

On a subject only slightly less contro­ versial, the religion of Burke’s wife, Jane Nugent Burke, O’Brien rejects out of hand a statement by R.B. McDowell. (editor of Vol. VIII 9f Burke’s correspon­ dence) that ‘Jane’s mother was a strong Presbyterian who brought Jane up as a protestant’. That daim originates with Basil O’Connell, a noted genealogist who devoted a lifetime to working on the B.urke and Nugent families. O’Brien gives no significant reasons for dismiss­ ing O’Connell’s research other.than that ‘in the circumstances I doubt the authenticity of that Protestant educa­ tion’. That will not do, and as a scholar O’Brien knows better.

There is no doubt that O’Brien has done us a great service by putting Burke squarely in the centre of the major political concerns of 18th-century Britain: America, Ireland, India and the French Revolution. He does so in a style that is lively and often confrontational – not dull reading. In fact, those familiar with Burke might wish that O’Brien had also dealt with other problematic aspects of Burke’s life, his bitter quarrel with William Gerard Hamilton, for instance. However, readers should be warned that what we have in this biog­ raphy is O’Brien’s Burke and not neces­ sarily the Edmund Burke familiar to his contemporaries or perhaps even to himself.

——————————————————————————————

Sir, – I have to take up some points in Elizabeth R. Lambert’s reply (3.21.93) to Maurice Cranston’s generous review (3.17.93) of my Burke biogra­ phy, The Great Melody (Chicago University Press). Mrs Lambert, near the beginning of her reply says that ‘Cranston is not quite as accurate in his statement that O’Brien ‘uses new and impressive research into Burke’s origins and early history’ to support his portrayal of Burke as an Irish Catholic in Protestant Whig clothing’.

It is quite true that the material I use ‘has been around for some time’. This generally applies to the material on which historians and biographers must rely. In this case, much of the most relevant work (in this particular context) ‘has been around’ in the con­tributions of the late Basil O’Connell and others to the columns of the Journal of the Cork Historical and Archaeological Society for the 1950s and 1960s. My special indebtedness to O’Connell’s work in particular is referred to in the Acknowledgements (p xiv) and reflected in the text and in a number of footnotes.

The material itself is not new. What is new – and this is essentially what Maurice Cranston was talking about – . is the taking of this material into account by a biographer of Edmund Burke. None of the previous biogra­ phers allow for it at all, and once it is adequately taken into account, the whole of Burke’s life appears in a dif­ ferent light. Mrs Lambert over-simpli­ fies the result when she refers to my ‘portrayal of Burke as an Irish Catholic in Protestant Whig clothing’. The reader of The Great Melody will find a more complex portrayal than that but many of Burke’s contemporaries thought they detected something of that kind, the hostile ones (like Horace Walpole) being the most vocal on the point. The Great Melody sug­ gests that this perception was over simplified but nearer the mark than later historians and biographers gen­ erally assumed. Mrs. Lambert goes on: ‘What is new and disconcerting is O’Brien’s manipulation of it [the mate­ rial] to build his case for a Catholic Burke’. Short of forgery, manipulation of evidence – generally understood as deliberate distortion – is the most offensive charge that can be brought by one scholar against another, and it is the first time that anyone has ever levelled it against my work. Mrs. Lambert has made it without citing any evidence that could possibly justify it, and I hope that, on reflection, she will withdraw this term.

Mrs Lambert says: ‘O’Brien omits several parts damaging to his case in an account he uses as evidence that Burke converted to Catholicism during his early years as a student at the Middle Temple’. The reader who turns to the relevant pages of The Great Melody (37-8) will find that the rea­ sons for doubting what I refer to as ‘a piece of rather conversational gossip’ are there taken into account.

Mrs Lambert rebukes me for ques­ tioning or, as she puts it ‘rejecting out of hand’, R.B. McDowell’s statement that Jane Nugent – Burke’s mother – ‘was a strong Presbyterian who brought Jane up as a Protestant’. (This statement is to be found in Volume IX (p 407) of Burke’s Writings and Speeches, not in Volume VIII of his Correspondence to which Mrs Lambert refers). Lambert says that I give ‘no significant reason’ for dismissing what she calls ‘O’Connell’s research’ (when I was in fact discussing McDowell’s obiter dictum which makes no refer­ ence to O’Connell) other than that ‘in the circumstances I doubt the authen­ ticity of that Protestant education’. That will not do, and as a scholar O’Brien knows better.’

He does indeed and he did cite a ‘sig­nificant reason’ for the doubt he expressed. Edmund Burke’s closest friend and an impeccable witness, Richard Shackleton, wrote of Jane Burke: ‘She was of a Popish family (Shackleton’s italics); I cannot say whether she loyally conformed to the Church of England, but she practised the duties of the Romish religion (Shackelton’s italics) with a decent pri­ vacy’. Shackleton refers to Jane as ‘a genteel, well-bred woman, of the Roman faith, whom he married neither for her religion, nor her money, but from the natural impulse of youthful affection’. (Correspondence of Edmund Burke Vol. ii, pl29)

I cite Shackleton’s statements about Jane Burke’s religion, in the context in which I express doubts about the authenticity of the Protestant upbring­ ing ascribed to her by McDowell (Jane’s father was a Catholic). The matter will always remain open to some argument but how can Mrs Lambert, in informing your readers that I have no significant reason for doubting McDowell’s assumption that Jane was brought up as Protestant, ignore the weighty contemporary evi­ dence about her mature belief which I cite? Before administering any further lectures to others, concerning scholar­ ly standards, she might do weH to review her own practice, as exempli­ fied in the letter under reply.

In her conclusion (after quite gener­ ously allotting various merits to The Great Melody) Lambert says that ‘those familiar with Burke might wish that O’Brien had also dealt with other prob­ lematic aspects of Burke’s life, his bit­ ter quarrel with William Gerard Hamilton, for instance’. The quarrel in question, including its problematic aspects, is dealt with in three pages (47-9) of chapter 1 of The Great Melody. The most recent previous biography of Burke – that of Stanley Ayling – gives the quarrel half a page, without advert­ ing to ‘problematic aspects’.

In her last sentence, Mrs Lambert says: ‘Readers should be warned that what we have in this biography is O’Brien’s Burke and not necessarily the Edmund Burke familiar to his con­ temporaries or perhaps even to him­ self.’ Not necessarily, indeed, but 1 have no doubt that the picture in The Great Melody would be more ‘familiar’ to many of Burke’s contemporaries than that offered by previous biogra­phers. Ayling, for example, says that Burke ‘had grown up mostly among the middle ranks of the Irish Protestant ascendancy’. ‘Mostly’ is stretching it quite a bit. Even the term ‘Protestant ascendancy’ was not in use when Burke was growing up. Most of Burke’s friends and acquaintances when he was an undergraduate at Trinity College did belong to the Protestant (Anglican) middle class, but these may well have been his first close and sustained contacts with peo­ple of that description. Both his par­ ents, and his extended family, sprang from the Catholic gentry, and would not have been perceived by anyone in Ireland, or any well-informed person in Britain, as belonging to ‘the Protestant interest’ (the expression current in their lifetime). Burke’s secondary edu­ cation at Ballitore, Co. Kildare, was mainly among dissenters (Quakers) and his earliest education was at a Catholic hedge-school in Co. Cork, as remote from anything resembling ‘Protestant ascendancy’ as could pos­ sibly be imagined. As soon as the term ‘Protestant ascendancy’ came into gen­ eral use in the late eighteenth century, Burke attacked it unreservedly, and clearly had never regarded himself or his family as belonging to it.

Among Burke’s contemporaries, both friends like Richard Shackleton and Charles O’Hara, and enemies like Horace Walpole and Gerard Hamilton would have found O’Brien’s Burke more readily recognisable than the ethnically-sanitised and securely Protestant version offered by earlier biographers.

A Final Note

Since the above was written, my attention has been drawn to a review of The Great Melody in the Irish Literary Supplement (Spring 1993) by Seamus Deane. His review is totally hostile, far eclipsing in that regard even the most negative of the reviews noted above. My first reaction was to recall an advice from a chess text-book: ‘a wild attack in the old style, the best defence against which is to ignore it’. There is, however, one point which requires to be refuted immediately. Deane writes:

Some authors are notably absent from his erratic indexes – most especially Isaac Kramnick whose biography of Burke supplies a con­ siderable part of the O’Brien thesis on Burke’s relationship to Ireland.

This finding will come as a sur­prise to Kramnick himself, if he ever sees it. Kramnick’s book The Rage of Edmund Burke is a piece of Freudian psycho-history, con­cerned with Burke’s relation to his mother and father, and with a pre­sumed   homosexual relation between Burke and his ‘cousin’ William Burke. Kramnick shows lit­tle familiarity with, or interest in, Burke’s relation to Ireland. I am not interested in Kramnick’s psycho­ historical speculations, still less in his uninformed references to Burke’s relationship to Ireland. My book owes nothing to Kramnick’s, which is why I did not mention it in The Great Melody. I reviewed it at the time of its publication (for the New York Review of Books), point­ ing out Kramnick’s obvious lack of familiarity with the Irish back­ ground. No one who has read the two books could possibly imagine that the later one owes anything to the earlier. I accept that Deane has read The Great Melody, perhaps he would now read The Rage of Edmund Burke.

Conor Cruise O’Brien is Pro­-Chancellor of the University of Dublin.