ABSTRACT

Like that of Charles Trevelyan, John Mitchel's name is indelibly associated with the Great Famine, although for very different reasons. Both wrote about the tragedy, but from opposite perspectives. Their divergent viewpoints about British government culpability set the tone for later explanations associated with the revisionist and nationalist interpretations, respectively. As one historian writing in 2014 explained. 'They may be considered as representative to some extent, albeit in an extreme form, of two dominant trends within its historiography as far as London's role during the Famine is concerned'. 1