The Border: The Legacy of a Century of Anglo-Irish Politics

by Diarmaid Ferriter

'Anyone who wishes to understand why Brexit is so intractable should read this book. I can think of several MPs who ought to.' The Times

For the past two decades, you could cross the border between Northern Ireland and the Republic half a dozen times without noticing or, indeed, turning off the road you were travelling. It cuts through fields, winds back-and-forth across roads, and wends from Carlingford Lough to Lough Foyle. It is frictionless - a feat sealed by the Good Friday Agreement. Before that, watchtowers loomed over border communities, military checkpoints dotted the roads, and smugglers slipped between jurisdictions. This is a past that most are happy to have left behind but might it also be the future?

The border has been a topic of dispute for over a century, first in Dublin, Belfast and Westminster and, post Brexit referendum, in Brussels. Yet, despite the passions of Nationalists and Unionists in the North, neither found deep wells of support in the countries they identified with politically. British political leaders were often ignorant of the conflict's complexities, rarely visited the border, and privately disliked their erstwhile unionist allies. Southern leaders' anti-partition statements masked relative indifference and unofficial cooperation with British security services.

From the 1920 Government of Ireland Act that created the border, the Treaty and its aftermath, through the Civil Rights Movement, Thatcher, the Troubles and the Good Friday Agreement up to the Brexit negotiations, Ferriter reveals the political, economic, social and cultural consequences of the border in Ireland. With the fate of the border uncertain, The Border is a timely intervention by a renowned historian into one of the most contentious and misunderstood political issues of our time.

Genres: History, Nonfiction, Ireland, Politics, Irish Literature, Audiobook, 21st Century

192 pages, Paperback

First published February 7, 2019

Reviews

[Sarah]

Phew (glad that’s over).

[Joe O'Donnell · Rating 3 out of 5]

Many of the reviews of Diarmaid Ferriter’s “The Border” have urged that copies of it should be made mandatory reading for every Tory MP, and every fossilised member of the Conservative Party who currently has the unearned privilege of deciding the next British Prime Minister. And “The Border” does serve as a worthy corrective to the bluster and blather that the Tory Party has been discharging for the last three years about their post-Brexit plans for the Irish border. Indeed, a recurring theme throughout Diarmaid Ferriter’s book (billed as an analysis of “the legacy of a century of Anglo-Irish politics”) is the wilful ignorance and lack of interest within the British political establishment towards Northern Ireland.

The problem with this book is that if you are reasonably conversant with the last 100 years of Irish history (i.e. unlike practically every single member of the Tory Party), you will find “The Border” unexpectedly slight and superficial. A reader familiar with Ferriter’s previous weighty tomes such as “A Nation and not a Rabble” and “Ambiguous Ireland” will be surprised that “The Border” clocks in at a comparatively brisk 180 pages.

This means that many of the events and episodes of the almost 100 years of Partition are not covered with quite the amount of depth you might expect from a historian of Diarmaid Ferriter’s renown. So, the IRA’s disastrously counter-productive ‘Border Campaign’ in the late 1950s is skipped over in the space of two paragraphs. The outbreak of ‘The Troubles’ during 1968-1969 is ploughed through in a remarkably rapid fashion. Seismic events like the IRA Hunger Strikes and the signing of the 1985 Anglo-Irish Agreement get scant space. And for a book ostensibly about the creation and maintenance of the Irish border – and how it’s imposition effected the people living in its vicinity – there is not nearly enough on how the Catholic and Protestant communities along the border interacted with each other during the terrible years of ‘The Troubles’.

Thankfully, Ferriter is much more insightful on the origins of the Irish border, and how partition was essentially imposed by Britain in the aftermath of the First World War – not out of any concern for the internal dynamics of the island of Ireland, but far more to preserve the stability of British party politics. Whatever about the duplicity of the British establishment towards Ireland, Ferriter is superb at unpicking the hypocrisy of successive Irish governments in relation to the border. Despite paying lip service to the aspiration to a United Ireland and rattling the cages with anti-partition rhetoric come-election time, the Dublin political establishment washed their hands of Northern Ireland after partition, content that sectarianism was “confined to its Ulster quarantine”.

Correspondingly, the Catholic minority in Northern Ireland increasingly came to the view that they had been sold out by the South and what the broadcaster Vincent Browne once described as their “calculated, disguised indifference to the seething anger of the nationalist community”. This led to the creation of a distinct Northern nationalist identity, with the Catholic minority in Northern Ireland effectively living in “a semi-state on their own, reconciled neither to the Northern or the Southern state”.

After almost thirty years of sectarian violence , this independent nationalist identity could only be reconciled to the border and the existing constitutional order through the signing of the Good Friday Agreement in 1998 (a power-sharing settlement that allowed for much ambiguity). Sadly, this ambiguity has been shattered by Brexit, which threatens to inflict the hardest of hard borders, wrenching apart communities that had managed over the last twenty years to develop some semblance of peace (however uneasy) with each other. For these reasons, Diarmaid Ferriter’s “The Border” is a hugely timely and relevant book. It is very much a whistle-stop tour through the last 100 years of Northern Ireland history, but any reader looking for an introduction to that history – and the often fraught Anglo-Irish relations surrounding it – will find this book a useful primer.

[Ciaran Monaghan · Rating 2 out of 5]

I was disappointed by this. Admittedly, it is very short so was not supposed to give an in-depth history of the border in Ireland but I don't really feel like my surface-level understanding has been much expanded by reading it. It has a lot of facts and dates and names, and is well-referenced, but the book is so short that everything feels very rushed. Ferriter also writes using long, rambling sentences which doesn't really help with engagement. In the end, I was left with a general understanding, but little else, and feel like I could have gotten that kind of summary from a long-form journalistic piece.

[Eliza · Rating 3 out of 5]

Though I did learn something from this, I really did not enjoy it and I found myself skipping parts. This book has the potential to be a really interesting and invigorating examination of the relation between NI and ROI, but instead it has become a really dry enumeration of what different people were thinking at different times. It does not contain explanations or analyses of the positions, and it is certainly not accessible for anyone with no previous knowledge about the issues discussed. Disappointed.

[Mark Durrell · Rating 4 out of 5]

Excellently written and profoundly insightful. The Border has been released at a crucial time in our history.

[Brenna · Rating 3 out of 5]

As someone who spends a lot of time engaging w content related to Anglo-Irish border disputes and general culture, I did not think it was possible to feel so completely neutral ab this book. I hypothesize it’s because the author seems to have no real passion or vested beliefs that come through until the very end, in which he gets incredibly snide about Tory incompetence (valid) regarding Brexit. Anyways, generally well-researched and well-written, but not exactly groundbreaking.

[Keen Reader · Rating 2 out of 5]

Religion, nationalism and politics are arguably the three greatest ways to cause rupture, division and conflict within any area of the world, which is why so many opportunistic politicians try to exploit them in so many ways. The border of Ireland has suffered from significant problems with all three.

Whenever the British government is mentioned in relation to the words border and partition in terms of its former colonies or areas it chooses to intervene in, you can bet there will be a lot of division, doubt, death and destruction. The amount of bloodshed that has occurred and continues to this day because of an incompetent, ignorant ruling class of British elites is frankly breath taking. Think Palestine and India, think Britain’s vital role in the Sykes-Picot Agreement which carved up the Middle East and that’s before we even get to Africa.

This is a short and interesting enough account of the modern history around the highly controversial and divisive subject of the Irish border. I found the prose bone dry and as a result this wasn’t an easy read. There was some good background and research and I certainly learned a thing or too. Ferriter goes into the political machinations, religious intolerance and oppression that have kept the border an open sore for so long, and he makes clear how poorly the border has been handled by an ignorant, condescending parliament in London.

For all I know Ferriter could be the greatest professor and historian working in the Emerald Isle today, but I really don’t like his writing style at all. I find it far too dry, but this doesn’t make him any less of a talented historian. I believe that this book suffers from the classic problem which surfaces when certain academics write books on their subject, it may have the research and the knowledge, but it is another skill entirely to convert that into an enjoyable and readable form. Overall this just felt too cold, academic and detached for me.

[Jessica · Rating 4 out of 5]

‘What the Irish government were confident of was that ‘Ireland’s interests and the EU’s interests were not indivisible.’ They were also content, it seemed, that there was more appreciation by the EU of the importance of the border as an issue of societal and political stability connected to the Belfast Agreement than just a technical, trade-related issue. Little appreciation of this had been shown in Britain; novelist Colm Tóibín, who had written of his travels around the border in the late 1980s, in an interview after the Brexit vote noted: ‘No one in the world would claim it was a campaign run with Northern Ireland in mind. It’s another example, in case we need one, of how little Northern Ireland matters to anyone in Britain.’’
.
.
.
Since the Brexit referendum, we’ve heard a lot about the backstop, the border and escalation of tension between Northern Ireland and Ireland (or, at least, a prediction of more tension.) But do you know what these terms and these cultural and political events really mean? Do you know why Northern Ireland has slightly different economic policies with Ireland than the rest of Britain does? Do you know what an economic backstop would mean? Do you know what the border, the only land border we have with an EU country, even *looks* like? Ferriter is known for his tomes on Irish history from the Easter Rising to the Troubles to the Good Friday Agreement, but his newest book The Border is a relatively brisk 150 pages. The reason behind this was probably urgency — a need to get a book out that would answer all of these questions in the immediate wake of Brexit and how it will definitely impact delicate relations between Northern Ireland and Ireland, Republicans and Unionists. A large reason as to why we still haven’t left the EU is that politicians are unable to come to an agreement on how the border will operate now that an EU country and a non-EU country will share land. Ferriter charts the 100+ history of Anglo-Irish relations and why there are such deep set feelings involved for citizens on both sides of the border. This is very much an introductory text as he skims through huge events in a couple of paragraphs, but this such a great book for anyone who wants to start looking into what Brexit will mean and why it such a complicated situation that has no solution that will please everyone in Ireland and Northern Ireland specifically. The frustration at the lack of awareness in the British public is palpable from the writer at times, but it is a necessary frustration in this case.

[Saara · Rating 4 out of 5]

Todella perusteellinen katsaus Britannian ja Irlannin välisiin poliittisiin suhteisiin. Alkuun tulee paljon nimiä ja puolueiden johtohahmoja, joiden perässä asiaan vihkiytymättömän on välillä vaikea pysyä. Mutta se mitä tästä ennen kaikkea jää käteen on ymmärrys siitä, kuinka ylimielisesti ja suorastaan välinpitämättömästi Britannian poliittinen eliitti on suhtautunut kautta aikojen Irlannin ja Pohjois-Irlannin kysymykseen. Sama ylimielisyys näkyy edelleen Brexitissä.

[MR J · Rating 5 out of 5]

Very helpful

A balanced history of the border from its inception right up to the present challenges with Brexit. Well written and a gripping read. All secondary school children in N. Ireland should read this book.

[Joe Braham · Rating 4 out of 5]

Book 1/35 ✅

Amazed at how little I appreciated the Irish situation when considering brexit

Insightful and some cool anecdotes surrounding Irish RFU yet seperate FAs. Enjoyed it and a good background. Still need to read a little more before speaking on the subject.

[Danee]

Very busy rn but I might post some of my thoughts later

[Martin Dubéci · Rating 4 out of 5]

Pekný a krátky historický výklad posledných 100 rokov na írsko-britskej hranici a prečo to je epic fuck-up s Brexitom.

[Laura · Rating 4 out of 5]

Reviews of The Border: The Legacy of a Century of Anglo-Irish Politics quoted in copies of the book seem very keen to emphasize how important it is to read it in order to understand Brexit. Out of the eleven paragraphs selected, six mention Brexit. This in itself is symptomatic: the border between Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland has become noteworthy for the general British public only because of its effect on Brexit negotiations. Otherwise, preoccupation with this region in the UK tends to be scarce, and the general public and electorate appeared to be somewhat uninformed about the history of this part of their country. As Irish novelist Colm Tóibín noted in an interview after the EU Referendum in 2016, “no one in the world would claim it was a campaign run with Northern Ireland in mind. It’s another example, in case we need one, of how little Northern Ireland matters to anyone in Britain” (cit. in Ferriter, 2019, p. 129).
Nevertheless, more and more British people are now paying attention to the impact that the border issue has on the viability of the Brexit project, but many have become more mindful too of the consequences that a disarranged, drastic Brexit will have on the people living on this area. This new awareness can only be positive. In recent months the testimonies of this community and the landscape of the border have been given more visibility on the media. However, Ferriter’s book focuses on Anglo-Irish politics. Anyone wishing to understand more deeply the experiences of the people who live and work on and across the border may wish to read also Garrett Carr’s book The Rule of the Land: Walking Ireland’s Border, which Ferriter refers to on several occasions, as well as to other writers, poets or musicians. The reality of Irish lives tends to be portrayed by Ferriter through this prism, while Carr engages people in conversation and allows them to tell their own stories.
Ferriter’s focus is thus on the political processes involved in the relationship between Northern Ireland, The Republic of Ireland and The United Kingdom since Partition in 1920. A key argument throughout is the lukewarm interest of the UK government in Northern Ireland, and a lack of commitment to the reunification cause by the Republic of Ireland. For example, on the onset of Partition, Ferriter claims that the UK government was keen to disengage itself from the whole Irish problem, which had been having, in its opinion, a disproportionate effect on the affairs of the parliament in Westminster. For Ferriter, the Government of Ireland Act that brought about Partition in 1920 was “a reflection of the growing determination of British politicians to get the Irish question off its tables” (Ferriter, 2019, p. 9). Interestingly, at that point it was not necessarily assumed by the British side that Northern Ireland would continue to remain in the UK for eternity: “It was envisaged that the new Act would ultimately lead to Irish unity, but if the two parliaments could not agree to come together they could stay in isolation; there would be no forcing of Ulster to join the South but neither was there an assumption Ulster would remain a fully integrated part of the UK” (Ferriter, 2019, p. 8). In fact, according to Ferriter, Northern Ireland would come to have a different status to the other parts of the UK. Early on, there was no conscription or military service; later, the legal situation was entirely different there regarding abortion or same-sex marriage. Ferriter seems rather surprised that the DUP insist so ardently on refusing the Irish backstop because they are not prepared to accept that Northern Ireland be treated differently to the rest of the UK: “Nigel Dodds insisted the DUP wanted a ‘seamless border’ but also wanted, in facing Brexit, to be no different ‘from other parts of the UK’. This was another nonsense; Northern Ireland has always been treated differently from the rest of the UK” (Ferriter, 2019, p. 137). Additionally, the Good Friday Agreement of 1998 meant that previous legislation about Northern Ireland was superseded and that Northern Ireland in effect would have “a different constitutional status from the rest of the UK” (Ferriter, 2019, p. 133).
What was the attitude of the newly independent Ireland with regard to Partition? Ferriter’s argument is that from the outset the Irish Free State discreetly washed its hands off the Northern Ireland’s business, whilst on public insisting that it was not prepared to recognise Northern Ireland. The aspiration to reunification was paraded out occasionally in order to gain political votes and reputation, but their attitude appeared rather passive, if pragmatic. As Ferriter points out, admitting the large Unionist population of Ulster within the state would have threatened its stability at a crucial time. Thomas Bartlett in Ireland: A History mentions this idea too: “Partition, along with emigration, were the twin pillars on which southern Irish society would be constructed in the period post-1922. Both of the main parties would continue to denounce them as evil legacies of British rule; but both also guiltily recognised that the first allowed democratic rule to bed itself down, while the second permitted the creation of a society that was both manageable and malleable” (Bartlett, 2010, p. 426). In fact, as part of a nation-building project, partition was also rather convenient in order to develop an Ireland that was truly Irish, without having to accommodate any of those other traits that were also present in Ulster: Anglicanism, Presbyterianism, Britishness, Unionism. As Ferriter indicates, “for some nationalists, partition was not seen in negative terms; it could offer an opportunity to generate a ‘pure’ Irish identity uncontaminated by the ‘Black North’ ” (pp. 35-36).
Another issue that would make reunification rather difficult for the state was the fact that Northern Ireland was heavily dependent on funding from the British government. This would prove an enduring theme. According to Ferriter, “at the outset of its existence, four-fifths of the Belfast government’s revenue came from London” (Ferriter, 2019, p. 9). Later on, within the Welfare System, this dependence strengthened: “Britain by 1970 was subsidising Northern Ireland to the tune of £100 million a year” (Ferriter, 2019, p. 77). For the Republic of Ireland reunification would mean a heavy financial burden that may have a serious effect on the standard of living of, as they would see it, their own population.
Ferriter believes that a bigger effort should have been made by the Irish side to win over Ulster Unionists, involving them creatively, somehow, in the Irish project. Instead, the legitimacy of their concerns was dismissed by the Irish state. He calls this “the failure to engage with the reality of the unionist mentality, long an Achilles heel of Irish nationalism” (Ferriter, 2019, p. 17). In his book Ferriter outlines chronologically the difficulties that arose within Anglo-Irish relationships, mainly Ireland’s loosening of its ties with the Commonwealth, its neutrality during the Second World War, and the Troubles. It clearly became imperative to engage in a political process that would bring peace, stability and prosperity. Ferriter covers the diverse political agreements that, although unsuccessful at the time, gradually paved the way towards a political consensus by introducing concepts that would become key building blocks of the Good Friday Agreement and the St Andrews Agreement: ideas previously rejected, such as the fact that the Republic of Ireland would have to be allowed in the conversation, or the necessity to accept and respect equally all the different cultural identities present in Northern Ireland.
Given the many difficulties that were overcome by all parties involved to reach agreement and stability, Ferriter is not forgiving of the cavalier attitude of the Brexit supporters who have endangered the situation. He refers to it as “the contemptuous arrogance with which those who championed Brexit had treated the weight of Anglo-Irish history” (Ferriter, 2019, p. 144). However, it would be wrong to consider Brexit the only current difficulty in Northern Ireland, given the depth of the political disagreement over the Irish Language Act. Sadly, the Good Friday Agreement was not the future-proof solution that it was hoped it would be. However, at least the British public is now more aware than ever of the history of Northern Ireland and the role of the border in the politics of the UK and the EU, and, having gained a lot of experience since the EU referendum, is hopefully better prepared to evaluate critically the oversimplified choices and plans posed to them by their politicians.

References
Bartlett, T. (2010) Ireland: A History, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press
Carr, G. (2017) The Rule of the Land: Walking Ireland’s Border, London, Faber and Faber
Ferriter, D. (2019) The Border: The Legacy of a Century of Anglo-Irish Politics, London, Profile Books

[David Kenvyn · Rating 5 out of 5]

The history of British-Irish relations is a history of a disaster, that began when Diarmuid MacMurrough, the King of Leinster, invited the Anglo-Norman Lord, Richard FitzGilbert, known as Strongbow, the Earl of Pembroke to restore him to his throne. In 1170, Strongbow invaded Ireland and captured Dublin. This alarmed Henry II, who was only too well aware that his great-grandfather, William I, had invaded England and had made himself more powerful than his suzerain, the King of France. The fact that Strongbow had married Eva, the daughter of Diarmuid MacMurrough only added to his concern. So, Henry II gathered an army, went to Ireland and proclaimed himself the Lord of the whole country.
From there it went from bad to worse with the English Kings and especially one Queen, Elizabeth I, asserting control over the whole country. The centre of resistance was Ulster, under the leadership of the O’Neill Earls of Tyrone. James VI and I then took the momentous decision of planting Protestant settler as a colony in Ulster from both Scotland, in the main, and England. The Scots were Presbyterian and the English from the Church of England. The rest of Irish history hinges on this colonisation. Northern Ireland, in effect, is James VI and I’s colony. The process began with the expulsion of Catholic tenants from their farms, and they in turn rose in rebellion in 1641, massacring Protestants when they could. An English army under Cromwell invaded and massacred Catholics in its turn. Thus, centuries of conflict began that resulted in an independent Ireland and a self-governing Northern Ireland within the United Kingdom. This is where Ferriter picks up the story.
A border had to be created. It was not obvious where the border was going to be, so the county boundaries imposed by James VI and I in the seventeenth century were chosen. This border has been described as porous. It consists of streams and tracks from one part of a farm to another part of the same farm, and similar things. It is a border without natural barriers, and that is the heart of the problem. As soon as it came into existence smuggling became a common practice. Why, for instance, would a farmer pay import duties to move a flock of sheep from one field to another, on the same side of the border, just because the track to be used crossed that border? This kind of thing, of course, was ignored but smuggling became common because goods on one side of the border were cheaper than on the other side. People became adept at finding routes across the border that avoided the border posts, and this became a crucial security matter when trouble broke out, which it did immediately.
South of the border there was an immediate, short and bloody civil war. In the 1950s the IRA launched a low-intensity border war which was notable for its lack of success. Meanwhile the Ulster Unionists were busy creating their own fiefdom within the United Kingdom, which was different from the start because it had its own Parliament, at Stormont, and its own Prime Minister. As laws became liberalised within the UK, it became more different from the rest of the UK. The introduction of the welfare state by the 1945 Labour Government intensified its differences from what had by then become the Republic of Ireland. The Unionists also set about gerrymandering the electoral boundaries to ensure their continued domination of Northern Ireland, and denied the Catholic inhabitants their civil rights. It was this spark that lit the fire.
In 1968, the Northern Ireland Civic Rights Association (NICRA) was formed under the leadership of Eamonn McCann, following the example set in the USA. A march was organised that passed through a village called Burntollet. It was there that the Royal Ulster Constabulary (RUC) “B” Specials ambushed the marchers and beat them to a bloody pulp. It was shocking. I joined the protest march in London. It was not long afterwards that the Bogside went up in flames and Bernadette Devlin (now McAliskey) rose to prominence at the barricades fighting the RUC. That was when the Wilson Government sent the troops in to restore order and the Northern Ireland Premier, Captain Terence O’Neill, who had let the situation get out of hand, resigned. It felt like a revolutionary moment. All of this happened because of the politics of Northern Ireland. It was nothing to do with the border.
The Provisional IRA (the Provos) soon found themselves in armed conflict with the British army on the streets of Belfast and Derry (or Londonderry of you were Protestant). This led to arms smuggling across the border and the introduction of internment without trial by the Conservative Government of Edward Heath. This led to protest demonstrations and, at one in Derry, the Paratroop Regiment opened fired and killed 13 people immediately. (I believe that one died later). The Saville Enquiry subsequently established that those killed were unarmed and completely innocent. One solder has now been charged, and the case is going to court. The result of Bloody Sunday was two decades of civil war, with the Provos on one side and the British army on the other.
The Heath Government, to its credit, did try to find a solution involving the Irish Government, but this was scuppered by Unionist intransigence, led by the Rev Ian Paisley. I had the misfortune to almost literally bump into him once when lobbying Parliament and he is the only person I have net who, I felt, exuded malevolence. One of the great ironies of life is that in his old age he implemented a version of the Sunningdale Agreement that he so vociferously opposed in 1974.
Eventually, after two decades of violence, the Good Friday Agreement emerged, brokered by President Clinton and for two decades, until Brexit, the peace has held. People were allowed freedom of movement across the border, both states were part of a common trading partnership, the EU, and there were well over 150,000 cross border pensions, not to mention other areas of co-operation, such as conservation policies, and tourism.
Ferriter’s point is that the border has been an embarrassment to both the UK and Irish governments since its inception. The Conservative Party became committed to the border because it had encouraged Ulster Unionist irredentism from 1910 onwards, with its slogan “Ulster will fight and Ulster will be right” simply because it wanted to cause difficulties for the Liberal Government. It then could not withdraw. Subsequent generations lost all interest in Northern Ireland but were caught up in the rhetoric. The introduction of the Welfare State made Northern Ireland a huge drain on the UK economy, costing £100,000s a year which only increased with “The Troubles”. It is estimated that, if Northern Ireland joined the Republic, the living standard would drop by 15%. But their parties are caught up in the rhetoric of “United Ireland”.
Ferriter’s narrative shows, time and again, that politicians and governments on both sides of the border could not escape the historic rhetoric that some of them had helped to forge and which others inherited as “the sins of the fathers are visited upon the sons even unto the third and fourth generations.”
Then came Brexit and a border that had been porous to the point of invisibility for 20 years suddenly became an issue. Quite clearly, if Britain was not a member of the EU and the Customs Union, there would have to be a border. The problem is how to make this work. The Irish Government want a fluid border and the Northern Irish Government agree with this, but they do not want to be on the Irish side of the customs border. They are arguing that Northern Ireland should not be treated differently from any other part of the UK. This is despite the fact that it has been since its inception. The British Government is arguing that Northern Ireland is an integral part of the UK, but that the success of the peace process over the last 20 years must be protected. Extreme right-wing Conservative MPs are saying that this must not be at the cost of a backstop being in place that would effectively allow the EU to interfere in the affairs of the UK.
Ferriter shows again and again that Conservative MPs are intensely ignorant, even arrogantly ignorant, about the implications of the border and its effective re-imposition on the people of Ireland both north and south of the border.
This is a story that has not come to an end as yet. Indeed, it has just been extended to 30th June 2019. It is also extremely depressing.

[Brendan McKee · Rating 4 out of 5]

Though this book offers only a cursory look at the history of the border, this slim volume (it isn’t even 150 pages) wins points for timeliness and approachability. Those who are well versed on Irish history and the issue of the border will likely find little new in this book, but then again it isn’t really written for such people. The clear target here is those unfamiliar with the border. The theme of this book is that many of the issues that have arisen in the last century are the direct result of ignorance of the problems and clearly Ferriter has written this in the hopes that it will help dissipate some of that ignorance.

[Thomas Cafe · Rating 3 out of 5]

What I can say about this book is that it did its job. Ferriter does well in providing a sharp and succinct play by play of the political (as in of government) history of the partition of Ireland. I wouldn’t say I necessarily enjoyed it ... but it was a good primer on 150 years of border politics. I found it lacklustre in those parts of Irish history I’m already versed in but suitable for those more contemporary parts I’m not. TLDR; a good introduction to the topic...

[Eoghan O'Brien · Rating 4 out of 5]

Succinct and digestible whistlestop tour of the history of the border since partition. I always enjoy Ferriter's direct writing style.

[Kris · Rating 5 out of 5]

This was far more interesting than I perhaps thought when I started this book that centres about the politics around the Irish border. Fearing it to be a bit dry I decided to go for the audio book in the end. I think this was the right choice.

Of course I knew something about the ‘border problem’, having lived the UK for ten years. My husband is English and we listen to English radio and in the turbulent period since the Brexit vote I was aware that the issue of the Irish border had come up once again. Also, I was aware of some of the conflicts of the past, but I felt I wanted to know a bit more.

This book was exactly what I needed on the subject. It told me the hard facts, the politics, but also the human problems that the ‘border problem’ created over the years. It has been a subject of much heat and discussion in Ireland, but has the British government ever quite cared enough?

On paper, yes, this book was quite dry, as it dealt with facts and dates and chronicles the border’s turbulent history, but the way it was narrated by Aidan Kelly brought it to life for me. I found myself listening quite attentively.

I found this book very interesting and well told. It did what I wanted it to.

[vladimiro sassone · Rating 5 out of 5]

Recommended read! It’s excellent, informed and informative without going in too many details, well researched and well narrated.

The thing I’ve learned that most stayed with me is that arrogance, deception and disregard for all but “the party” did not start with brexit!!! The author tells us that at the time of the partition of Ireland, in the 1920s, the Tory could not really give a toss about ulster unionists and would have been quIte happy to settle for “home rule” for the whole of Ireland. It ended up the way it did in order to placate Tory party politics and internal factions. A high price payed mostly by Ireland for “the party” to save face. The incompetent and casual way with which the British imperial elites have divided, stitched up and drawn senseless borders all over the world —causing trouble that still persist today— its only equalled by the arrogance and stubbornness and persistence with which they defended their own mistakes and blamed others. Yesterday like today.

All the recent talk about “Northern Ireland” and its protocol —with attempts to shift blame here and there— made reading this book even more interesting for me.

[Melissa · Rating 4 out of 5]

Diarmaid Ferriter takes historical grievances and the resultant century of political unrest (from the 1920 Government of Ireland Act up to the overtures of the Brexit negotiations) and contextualises them evenhandedly. The subject of the border tends to inspire bombastic polemics, which is why I was never particularly interested in reading about it; thankfully, Ferriter will point out the intractable reactionary unionist/British position and also detail the opportunistic rhetoric and hollow punditry of nationalists.

On a completely extraneous note, I wasn't aware of how much Northern Ireland was poised like the bastard stepchild of Britain and the Republic of Ireland. How often the North is simply forgotten in British affairs, except to throw money at (or in the case of the Republic used for emotional manipulation), is kind of incredible.

At 144 pages, it's an easy and quick read, very informative, and worth a read to anyone the least bit curious about the border.

[Thomas Harte · Rating 5 out of 5]

An excellent political, social and economic history of the border by Ireland’s foremost historian. You really get the sense that Britain would gladly like to be rid of this thorny problem of Northern Ireland and the final chapter about Brexit neatly outlines the contemporary issues about the border. To those who say that Northern Ireland is no different from other parts of the UK I would say read this book and study the history of the province. It always was different, a fact that the author clearly shows in this book. The book neatly outlines all the political and social maneuverings associated with the history of the border. An excellent and very timely addition to the debate on Northern Ireland and the border question.

[Carolyn Lochhead · Rating 3 out of 5]

This is an important book but it’s not an easy read. We move from partition in 1920 up to the beginning of Boris Johnson’s premiership, taking in countless agreements, disagreements and changes in position along the way.

It’s a useful account of Irish and Northern Irish history over the years, but I found it hard to stay engaged. There was little colour about the characters who have shaped the border, and the most interesting parts were the few references to the people who actually live on the border.

The book makes clear that Brexit poses a serious threat to the peace and freedom achieved over the last two decades. It does not propose any solutions, but its pages contain a reminder of how intractable the problem has been.

[Tom Richards · Rating 3 out of 5]

The three stars is more a reflection of my lack of prior knowledge of the subject than any deficiency on the part of the author; schooled in England, we did no Irish history at all. I knew more of the troubles and the Belfast agreement, and Brexit, from being alive through them, but anything prior to about 1985 (the Anglo-Irish agreement) I knew nothing of at all. I probably need a book which explains the passions driving the actors in this centuries-old drama, rather than this somewhat drier history. Fiction may be the answer, possibly starting with Colm Toibin’s “Walking along the border”, referenced by Ferriter. Summary: a detailed summary of the history of the border, with somewhat dry exposition.

[Emily Walsh · Rating 2 out of 5]

The Border is an informative and well-researched book that clearly reflects Diarmuid Ferriter’s deep knowledge of the topic. As someone with a history degree, I appreciated the detail and archival depth.

That said, it often reads more like a university paper than an accessible history book. The writing is longwinded, with dramatic, rambling sentences that made it easy to lose focus. I frequently had to pause and reengage just to follow the thread.

While it’s a valuable resource, it is not an easy read, even for those familiar with the subject. It is best suited to readers who are comfortable with dense academic prose.

I hate to say it, but I’m even more confused about the Irish border than I was when I started…

[Senioreuge · Rating 5 out of 5]

A truly well timed review of the last 100 years of the influence of the border imposed in Ireland by the British as a way of avoiding their obligation to undo all the harm their control of Ireland has caused. The ridiculously absurd imposition of a border through, in some instances, peoples homes meant nothing to those who imposed it; neither did the subsequent suffering it caused and continues to cause. I wonder if now that "Brexit" is such a big feature in everyday life do politicians in London reflect on and possibly regret ever having the stupidly to patrician Ireland 100 years ago, fearful that other countries in the Empire would learn from the Irish and seek to break free from their shackles; which is what happened anyway. However I fear that they will, as usual just create yet another "paddy bashing" solution, for their latest blunders. Maybe someone will order 700 copies of this work and make it compulsory reading before the next "meaningful vote".

[✨arrianne✨ · Rating 4 out of 5]

At just about 150 pages, this is a superficial run through of an obviously very complicated set of issues around recent Irish history and the border. The author clearly has ~opinions on the Tory-driven disaster that is Brexit and the border which are touched on in the final chapter so if you want something neutral, this is not the book for you.

It’s a reasonable first introduction to how we got to where we are with Northern Ireland and Ireland and the border though. And the Tories are fuckwits so here we are *shrugs demonstratively*

[Christopher · Rating 4 out of 5]

A detailed if quick overview of a century of Ango-Irish politics on the Irish border. It presumes some prior knowledge that I must admit I lacked for the earliest years covered, so it could feel like a slog to many not familiar with older Irish history. Nevertheless, the central tenants got easier to follow as the book progressed, and in the end the message was clear: to understand the Irish border today in the context of Brexit, one must understand how both the Irish and British politicians thought about, debate, and postured towards the Irish border.

[Vera · Rating 2 out of 5]

I got a general overview of the history of the Republic and Anglo-Irish politics, but it was a struggle. Perhaps I'm not the audience, but this felt more a list of events than any kind of meaningful exploration, and without prior knowledge a lot of it didn't clarify. I found the writing forcefully jargon-heavy and full of long, convoluted sentences. (E.g. 'He argued that the partition question, largely because of the irredentism of the unionist ascendancy, was insoluble, but that such intractability could be endured etc.)

[Alex Butler · Rating 3 out of 5]

An enjoyable and fairly easy skim through 100 years of border history in 145 pages. I love Northern Ireland and it's complex and rich history needs to be heeded and respected in political policy. The book makes several arguments that, throughout the last century, many politicians have not heeded or learnt their history when making speeches or policy.

The arrogance and bluster of the Tory government and DUP through a complex period of negotiation is particularly laid bare.

Enjoyable and balanced read