Madam, - In a speech on Sunday at the National Museum and later on radio, the Taoiseach said that the core justification for the 1916 Easter Rising was that it asserted the right of Ireland to self-government.
On September 18th, 1914, the Home Rule Bill received the royal assent - and thus became an Act. This was not some obscure administrative trivium but the final concession by the entire British political and constitutional system, using due process, that Ireland did indeed have that right to self-government. It was the culmination of four years of debate that convulsed that same system - and of more than a hundred years of constitutional struggle in which that same system had used every possible means to kill the demand for that right.
Even the unionists knew they could not stop Home Rule, only modify it. The overwhelming majority of nationalists knew that Home Rule was now law - and acted accordingly.
Where, then, does that leave the moral justification for the Rising - and all its consequences? - Yours, etc,
MAURICE O'CONNELL, Tralee, Co Kerry.
Madam, - In the week leading up to the re-celebration of the 1916 Easter Rising, the Taoiseach urges us to begin "a great national conversation" on what it means to be Irish 90 years later.
Surely, being Irish does not include the building of a motorway through Tara's landscape? I doubt that those who died 90 years ago intended that their political descendants would drive ahead with this project, now considered by many as a sick joke gone terribly wrong.
Last week the Taoiseach stood with Tony Blair at Eamhain Mhacha and recognised it as the ancient capital of Ulster. Surely he can recognise Tara as the ancient capital of Ireland? Mr Ahern has the opportunity to give the Irish State an unforgettable 90th birthday present and to enter the history books himself. Let him bring his renowned negotiating skills to bear on this disaster, admit that Noel Dempsey, the NRA and Meath County Council have made a mind-boggling mistake, move the M3, and leave this virtually intact landscape for those who may celebrate the 190th and 200th anniversary of the Rising.
The Taoiseach has a choice. He can be a real leader and be commemorated as the man who saved Tara at a crucial time in our development as a nation or as the man who destroyed her.
If 1916 had not occurred would we be fighting to save Tara? After all, the DUP is trying to save the Boyne Valley. - Yours, etc,
MUIREANN NÍ BHROLCHAIN, Save Tara, Laurence Avenue, Maynooth, Co Kildare.
Madam, - I continue to read with interest the ongoing discussions about the legacy of 1916. I am surprised, however, that many people - including the Taoiseach - talk about Irish nationalism, and the idealism that goes with it, as though they were born suddenly in 1916 and as though there has been a continuous thread running through the fabric of the Irish State since that date.
The reality has been much more complex. There was a much older tradition of Irish nationalism, and the idealism of its adherents was not incompatible with British imperialism or loyalty to the crown. Indeed, after the foundation of the Free State there were many people who continued to believe in membership of the British Commonwealth. Yet even respected historians such as Diarmaid Ferriter claim that 1916 started a "struggle against British imperialism", as though Irishmen had not played a significant part in building up and benefiting from the Empire.
It is right that Ireland should celebrate its foundation, and remember the idealism of its founders. But I hope that people do not forget that we are engaged in a process of reconciliation in these islands, and that any discussion and commemoration of the past needs to be handled delicately by all sides. In particular, it is important for nationalists to remember that there are still people in Ireland who remember 1916 for a different reason.
There are those who cherish the idealism of alternative heroes such as Carson, which, although - like the idealism of the republican heroes of 1916 - distorted by the sectarianism and bitterness that afflicted our relations, was nonetheless a positive vision for a future of prosperity and diversity for Ireland as a whole. Just as Unionists should not forget that many of there forebears were happy to call themselves "Irish", and, therefore, that they have a duty to engage with their fellow Irishmen, I hope that sensible nationalists will remember that there were many of their forebears who were loyal to the crown.
I hope that they will therefore recognise that there are those who legitimately remain loyal to the crown and to British ideals, and that they have the right to have their concerns treated with sensitivity.
Nations such as Canada and Australia are no less "free" and prosperous because they remember the positive legacy of British Imperialism. In Ireland, we will only achieve true peace and reconciliation if we have a truly open mind when it comes to remembering the past. - Yours, etc,
DAVID SHIELS, Peterhouse, Cambridge, England.
Madam, - I should have known that neither your reporter Patsy McGarry nor your sub-editors would have committed such a blooper, but I checked the Taoiseach's website just in case. And just as Mr McGarry reports in last Friday's edition, its 1916 page does indeed state: "By May 1,600 had been interred in Wales, without trial".
I hadn't realised the British were quite that bad! - Yours, etc,
ÉANNA BROPHY, Bettyglen, Dublin 5.