! E L M E N T SE "#! $!%&' &( "#! )!*(+, !"#$%&!'(&!"' &)$ $#*+,&!*" *- &)$ .$""/ .0$%% ("1 &)$ $22(",$+ 3),03) 2,01$0% ALSO FEATURING • The Digital Pandemic • The Force on the Front!"# $%&#'(')&$)!# '#*#)'+" ,-$'%). -/ 0-*!-% +-..#(#-. +/ ' 0 2 0 21 · 1 &* 2 % ! 1 7 · / -- 2 ! 1 !"#$%&'’( '#)%'# *+ )#&,#&%"!#( (2012-2022) )*--#-*"%,#( .!(,*"!)%$ -!$#(,*&#( ,.%, $#' ,* ,.# )*/&,"0’( !&'#1#&'#&)# +"*- 2"#%, 3"!,%!& %&' ,.# )"#%,!*& *+ ,.# "#1/3- $!) *+ !"#$%&'. .*4#5#", (!&)# ,.# %'5#&, *+ ,.# !"!(. &%,!*&, !,( .!(,*"0 .%( %$4%0( 3##& % )*&,#(,#' (1%)#— 4.#"# *11*(!&2 1*$!,!)%$, (*)!%$, %&' )/$,/"%$ 2"*/1( &#- 2*,!%,# 3#,4##& .!(,*"!)%$ &%""%,!5#(—,* $%0 )$%!- ,* % ‘,"/#’ !"!(. .!(,*"0. ,.!( 1%- 1#" 1"#(#&,( ,.# )*-1#,!&2 .!(,*"!*2"%1.!#( !&5*$5#' !& ,.# !"!(. 2*5#"&-#&,’( '#- )%'# *+ )#&,#&%"!#( %&' !'#&,!+!#( ,.# (*)!*-1*$!,!)%$ %2#&'% 3#.!&' (,%,# )*--#-*"%,!*&(. % .!(,*"!)%$ %&%$0(!( *+ ,.# )*--#-*"%,!*&( ,.%, ,**6 1$%)# !& ,.# 2010( 1"*5#( ,.%, (*)!*-1*$!,!)%$ )*&(!'#"%,!*&( +%),*"#' !& ,.# 4%0 !"#$%&'’( +*/&'!&2 4%( 1*","%0#' 30 ,.# 2*5#"&-#&,, ,.# 1/3$!), %&' )!5!$ (*)!#,0. *5#"%$$, ,.!( 1%1#" )*&)$/'#( ,.%, ,.# !"!(. 2*5#"&-#&,’( ).!#+ %!-( 4#"# ,* (,"!6# % )*&)!$!%,*"0 ,*&# 4!,. &*",.#"& !"#$%&', ‘)"*4'-*/,’ *11*(!&2 .!(,*"!)%$ &%""%,!5#(, %&' 1"*7#), !"#$%&'’( #)*&*-!) 1"*2"#(( ,."*/2. ,.# !"!(. 1"*)$%-%,!*&. #",.#$#((, %)%'#-- !) .!(,*"!%&( %&' ,.# 1/3$!) !&,#"5#&#' !& ,.!( *,!%,!*& ,* )"#%,# "#-!-%2!&#' .!(,*"!#( *+ !"#$%&'. !"#$%&' "#-!(%)!&#' Grasping Historical Perceptions for the Decade of Centenaries )8%" (#1# “It is apparent that commemoration is intrinsically linked with the past. Nevertheless, commemoration is manifested in the present, and is subject to a society’s values, whether it is nineteenth-century nation-building or twenty-first century traumatic healing.” Ireland’s ‘Decade of Centenaries’ (DOC) can be character- ized as a negotiation between competing historical inter- pretations and present socio-political concerns. In particu- lar, themes of inclusion, transnationalism, and intersectionality colored commemoration events. To fur- ther explore this, the paper will provide the conceptual framework of a ‘negotiation’ of historical memory. Then, it will analyze the DOC Expert Advisory Group’s mission, the First World War and Easter Rising commemorations, the online platform Century Ireland, and the #WakeThe- Feminist movement. Overall, the Irish Government brought certain needs to the negotiating table: (1) a concil- iatory tone with Northern Ireland (NI), (2) a ‘crowding-out’ of opposing historical narratives, and (3) a projection of Ireland’s progress in relation to the Irish Proclamation. In the end, the Government was somewhat successful in this negotiation. With the intervention of academic historians and the public, the DOC accommodated ‘re-imagined’ his- tories of Ireland, outside of the state’s initial scope. In order to delve into the DOC commemorations, it is es- sential to provide a conceptual schema for commemora- tion as a negotiation between historical narratives and cur- rent socio-political needs. Pierre Nora challenges the traditional separation between history and memory by proposing lieux de mémoire. Such crossover spaces include commemoration, in which both “memory attaches itself to sites,” while “history attaches itself to events” (Nora, 1989). Further, Eric Hobsbawm comments on the rise of state commemoration during the nineteenth-century, as “…rul- ers…rediscovered the importance of ‘irrational’ elements in the maintenance of the social fabric…” of newly formed nation-states (Hobsbawn, 1983). Accordingly, this top- down concept is challenged in the twenty-first century, considering the idea of historical victimhood, which Guy Beiner notes that “…public remembrance of victims tend to be exclusive and monopolistic, denying the trauma of others and ranking one’s own su3ering above theirs” (Beiner, 2007). It is apparent that commemoration is in- trinsically linked with the past. Nevertheless, commemo- ration is manifested in the present, and is subject to a soci- ety’s values, whether it be nineteenth-century nation-building or twenty-first century traumatic healing. What is unique to today’s notion of commemoration is that it can no longer be imposed solely by the state, rather, a dialogue must take place between historical memories throughout a broad spectrum of society. Politics must be considered in the Irish context because “…commemora- tive rituals have become historical forces in their own right” (McBride, 2001). As this ‘lieux’ is limited because of financial constraints, physical space, and public will, a so- ciety must prioritize what is and is not remembered. Therefore, commemoration becomes a multi-faceted ne- gotiation between di3ering historical narratives on one hand and di3ering socio-political interests on the other. From this viewpoint, the Expert Advisory Group (EAG) was tasked to navigate the centenary of Ireland’s founda- tional years. In 2012, the DOC programme was launched, designed to be “…broad and inclusive, highlighting the economic and social conditions of the period, [and] the shifts in cultural norms and the experience of the Irish abroad” (Decade of Centenaries, 2020). A year earlier, the EAG was established to advise the Government on how to approach the decade, chaired by Dr. Maurice Manning. It is noteworthy that a respected Irish academic and politi- cian was appointed to this role. The EAG, supplementing the DOC’s statements, argued that “commemoration will be measured and reflective, and will be informed by a full acknowledgement of the complexity of historical events and their legacy…” and “…of the multiple identities and tra- ditions which are part of the Irish historical experience” (Department of Culture, Heritage, and the Gaeltacht, 2015). This spirit of inclusion is molded by past commem- orations of the 1916 Easter Rising, most notably the fiftieth anniversary of the Rising in 1966, which will be discussed later. Moreover, attempts to create a shared history come in the aftermath of the 1998 Good Friday Agreement, in 12 !"!#!$%& : : &'()$* 2021 which there came a strong imperative to maintain peace on the island. This is reflected in Northern Ireland’s ap- proach to the decade, in which Paul Mullan explains that “by embracing the nuances and complexity of past events, a new understanding can emerge that may help mitigate the potential for further conflict” (Mullan, 2018). Clearly, the notion of inclusion, as well as transnationalism and intersectionality in public commemoration, arose as a re- sult of a fear of conflict and Ireland’s past experiences with historical commemoration. Was the DOC successful in orchestrating their expressed goals? A marker of the DOC’s success in tackling the issues of inclusion and transnationalism is the commemoration of the First World War and leading up to the Battle of the Somme in 2016. Until the beginning of the twenty-first century, the war was overlooked by Irish society, in what historian F.X. Martin decried as a ‘national amnesia.’ How- ever, Keith Je3ery focuses on contemporary trends in First World War commemoration, such as the fact that it “…be- gan to be drawn into a wider, more general commemora- tion of all Irish people who had died for war,” rather than a unionist-dominated narrative prevalent in recent history (Je3ery, 2013). The war, through the unionist lens, legiti- mized NI’s place in the British Empire. With its ultimate sacrifice at the Battle of the Somme, Ulster unionists in- corporated First World War commemoration as a key part of their heritage. Meanwhile, Northern Irish nationalists viewed the war with contempt because of unionism’s fer- vent embrace of it. During the ‘Troubles’—a thirty-year sectarian conflict in Northern Ireland pitting Protestant unionists against Catholic nationalists—these antipathies were heightened so much so that Remembrance Day was a target for Provisional IRA attacks, namely the 1987 En- niskillen bombing. Though some loyalists sco3 at the ‘greening’ of Great War history, both Irish and Northern Irish state o4cials em- barked on a transnational e3ort to paint a reconciliatory picture. First, it started with joint commemorations in con- tinental battlefields, like in Messines in 2014, which “… demonstrated the power of using foreign locations as ‘safe’ spaces for Irish First World War commemoration,” as Ca- triona Pennell contends (Pennell, 2017). Placed in a broad- er European historical context, the Republic can better grapple with its role in the war. Irish President Michael D. Higgins, in an interview on RTÉ News, notes the Repub- lic’s duty is to “be able to take all of the experience of its citizens into account” (Century Ireland, 2014). Ireland’s participation in the events is premised in the wider Euro- pean context and in the inclusion of all Irish people. As for the Irish, “there has been an unprecedented and sustained public engagement…” as “…a way of dealing with the insta- bility of the present and future” (Pennell, 2017). By the 2010s, the public welcomed the new consensus of ‘re-dis- covery’ and reconciliation as a new historical motif that colored public commemoration. In e3ect, this phenome- non cannot be explained wholly by a ‘top-down’ theory of commemoration but also with a give-and-take between levels of society. Indeed, this sense of shared loss culminated in the state commemorations of the Battle of the Somme on 10 July 2016. In the Republic’s state ceremony at Islandbridge, all Irish regimental flags, including the 36th Ulster Division, were displayed. In addition, representatives of the Northern Irish Government, like the Secretary of State and the Deputy First Minister, laid wreaths representing both unionist and nationalist traditions. In Belfast City Hall, the Irish Minister for Social Protection laid a wreath at the Cenotaph on behalf of the Irish Government (Century Ireland, 2016). The reciprocity of representation signals the island’s attempt to reinforce the inclusive narrative of a shared loss, in which all can relate to the horror of the Somme’s carnage. James Evershed, on the other hand, posits that “the ‘sharedness’ of the Irish government’s !"# 0)!!.# -/ !"# *-11# +-12+: !"# *!-'3 -/ 42...2)1 1+/)&5#)% 13 !"#$%&' "#-!(%)!&#' approach to commemoration…has not engender[ed] any meaningful reflection on the violence of [Britain’s] imperial heritage…” (Evershed, 2019). This critique is not unfounded. For example, the Creative Centenaries graphic novel, The Battle of the Somme, depicts the heroism of Billy McFadzean in the trenches. Supported by the Northern Ireland Department of Culture, Arts and Leisure, the graphic novel focuses on Ulster’s pride and hints at the triumphalist tone that both states supposedly sought to dampen this time around. Thus, the concept of a shared historical loss shone through in First World War commemorations, following the EAG’s inclusive and globalized vision, and a brokered consensus between the Republic and Northern Ireland on historical reconciliation was widely accepted. After the First World War commemorations, the DOC reached its peak with its remembrance of the 1916 Easter Rising and the Irish Republic’s proclamation. There are two inherent historical issues with the commemoration of the Rising; (1) it was orchestrated in direct opposition to the United Kingdom, of which Northern Ireland is still part of, and (2) that it was an undemocratic, violent rebel- lion that ultimately achieved its goal of independence, which violates today’s political norms. Nonetheless, the Rising is central to the Irish state’s founding narrative. In this regard, how will the DOC programme adhere to its core tenets of inclusivity, intersectionality, and transna- tionalism? Rising commemoration has been marred by allegations that they were partisan in the past. For in- stance, the Rising’s fiftieth anniversary in 1966 was com- memorated in a patriotic, militarized manner. The highly- politicized events linked Irish president Éamon de Valera, the last surviving Rising leader, with his Government as they wished to cement their legacy as the bearer of Irish independence. Some even argue that the commemora- tions stirred the forces that would cause the Troubles a few years later. The southern Government chose to forgo o4- cial commemoration during the late-twentieth century un- til the ninetieth anniversary in 2006—eight years after the Good Friday Agreement. Hence, there were credible con- cerns about commemorating the centenary of Easter 1916. From the onset, the EAG unequivocally stated that al- though they outlined a commemoration based on a multi- plicity of traditions and identities, “…the State should not be expected to be neutral about its own existence” (Depart- ment of Culture, Heritage, and the Gaeltacht, 2015). The group acknowledged that there is a limit to the principles of inclusion, especially to the events of the Rising. Though it may be a noble attempt to de-politicize the Rising, the EAG soon came under government pressure to integrate the peace process into commemorations. According to the Irish Times, the advisory committee “…‘point blank’ re- fused a government request to use the Northern Ireland peace process as a frame of reference” (McGreevy, 2016). However, Roisín Higgins attests to the innate politics of Rising commemorations, as “Easter 1916 came to repre- sent a moment of possibility against which all subsequent realities could be measured or on which they could be blamed” (Higgins, 2016). For their part, the EAG’s resis- tance to the political interventions still did not prevent the Government, nor other political actors from bringing com- memoration to the bargaining table. Of course, Higgins’ insight on the ideas proclaimed dur- ing the Rising as a ‘measuring-stick’ of progress is evident throughout several aspects of the DOC. In particular, RTÉ’s dramatic production of “Centenary The Proclama- tion” projected what seems to be an accomplishment of the ideas enshrined in the document, showcasing the Irish people’s diversity and the diaspora community. Beginning with the unfurling of the tricolor by two descendants of leaders in the Rising, the video pans into the scenic coun- tryside and lush farmland of the island. As di3erent people read parts of the proclamation, one notices the wide-rang- ing locations of the people reading it. There is certainly no coincidence that a man with an American accent, who is assumed to be Irish-American, reads “…and supported by her exiled children in America…”(RTÉ-Ireland’s National Public Service Media). In essence, Higgins’ analysis strikes at the heart of why so many resources were a3orded to the Easter Rising commemoration. For the state, remember- ing the Easter Rising meant remembering how far Ireland has come since its foundation and in the realization of its ideals. Portraying a progressive, prosperous nation able to “For the state, remembering the Easter Rising was meant to remember how far Ireland has come since its foundation, in the realization of its ideals.” 14 !"!#!$%& : : &'()$* 2021 embrace its history and heritage, the Irish Government was keen on underscoring the DOC’s tenets of inclusivi- ty, transnationalism, and intersectionality. In Northern Ireland, the Rising commemorations were not as simple and proved to be a complicated negotiation between competing political actors. As demonstrated in the First World War commemorations, both the Republic and NI were committed to what John Brewer describes as “ethical remembering,” based on “truth, tolerance and trajectory” (Brewer, 2016). This is hard to do for the Ris- ing in NI, especially for unionists, because the event’s meaning is against the rationale behind the formation of the Northern Irish state. Alvin Jackson contextualizes the unionist historical interpretation, concluding that the Rising “…was not just about the safely distant history of the neighbouring state, it was also interlinked with the contemporary history and experience of Northern Ire- land,” although this was not always the case (Jackson, 2018). This is why unionists have more trouble acknowl- edging the event, as “…they feel that honoring the sacri- fices of the ‘martyrs’ of the Rising could, in fact, signal some agreement with their aim of extricating all of Ire- land from the United Kingdom” (Hancock, 2019). On the other hand, Sinn Féin—the leading republican politi- cal party—is not exempt from scrutiny, as Landon Han- cock points out that they “…tried to use their willingness to acknowledge [the Somme] as a platform to insist upon unionist recognition of the importance of the Easter Ris- ing…” (Hancock, 2019). Thus, the NI republican move- ment e3ectively pin unionists against a wall when they could claim that their unionist counterparts are not hold- ing up to the parity of esteem—their end of the bargain. Meanwhile, Northern Irish minority republican groups created their own commemorative spaces to rea4rm their legitimacy as the “true” heir to Easter 1916. Bren- dan Ciarán Browne shares incredible insight on the re- publican groups’ divergent Rising commemorative prac- tices, which is surprising for an event that seemed to unify the republican cause. As an example, he accounts of the groups’ choreographed dance in the Belfast repub- lican cemetery. Interestingly, “…rather than have any ‘of- ficial’ discussion between group hierarchies…the events are organised in deference to the historical precedent set in previous years” (Browne, 2016). One can view this as a gentleman’s agreement with the ultimate aim of “…em- bedding an historical narrative and about keeping the unique and distinct republican politics of the individual groups alive in the public arena” (Browne, 2016). This is the identity-rea4rming element of commemoration, piv- otal to these marginalized groups’ sense of solidarity. There is no need for understanding the other side when nationalist commemoration is the lifeblood of these politi- cal groups. In this case, republican actors were crowded out of commemoration by the state, so they negotiated a partition of alternative commemorative space amongst themselves. Although the DOC was a complicated a3air in the Irish and Northern Irish political spheres, the decade accomplished great strides in an intersectional and interdisciplinary study of Irish history, whether from state- sponsored events or grassroots activism. Century Ireland, formed in conjunction with Boston College, RTÉ, and the /2($'# 2: 6'-+.)1)!2-% -/ !"# 2'2*" '#6$0.2+ 15 !"#$%&' "#-!(%)!&#' Irish Government, provided an innovative tool in Irish history’s public engagement. This approach towards digital history “[tried] to capture the full extent of how lives were lived in Ireland those years and not simply give the narrative of the major political and military happenings,” as Mike Cronin explains (Cronin, 2017). The website o3ers podcasts, video interviews, archival photos, and its signature weekly newspaper, which reports on the week’s events from a century ago (Century Ireland, 2020). Lauded by the Government and cultural organizations, Century Ireland received a warm reception by the Irish public, as deep interest in “every day” history during this period was cultivated. Remarkably, this project demonstrates an acute awareness of its own historical significance, that “it will undoubtedly be seen as a product of its time, but one that o3ers…a contemporary record of commemoration” (Cronin, 2017). Another example of the DOC’s intersectional approach is its initial failure to be adequately intersectional, as high- lighted by the #WakingTheFeminists (#WTF) movement. After the Abbey Theatre’s 2016 “Waking the Nation” reper- toire featured only male Irish playwrights, a grassroots campaign mobilized to protest the lack of representation of women in Irish arts in general. A resurgence of Irish feminism in culture took hold as #WTF organizers suc- cessfully forced a nationwide reconsideration of women’s role in Irish society. How can the DOC, trumpeting inclu- sive thematic histories, be so blind to the fact that its own advisory group is made up of a disproportionate number of men? Oona Frawley explains this phenomenon through Irish academia’s proclivity for “oblivious remembering,” which “…lacks awareness of or dismisses the systemic bi- ases present in its institutional and/or o4cial approaches to the past” (Frawley, 2021). As a result of this pushback, Irish institutions introspectively looked at its governing structures, ultimately increasing the number of women in decision-making positions, including in the EAG. On the whole, this bottom-up e3ort pushed state-sponsored com- memoration to democratize and better represent the Irish experience, to the benefit of a more nuanced understand- ing founded upon the Irish Proclamation’s notion of equality—of “Irishmen and Irishwomen.” Lastly, the popularization of public historical engagement during the DOC should be embraced by historians, who serve as the sentinels for good history. Diarmaid Ferriter, an EAG committee member, viewed “…that in relation to commemoration, ‘we [the EAG] have a duty to prevent hi- jacking by the government or anyone else’” (Ferriter, 2018). In his opinion, historians are not mere fact-check- ers, they also carry ethical obligations to maintain integri- ty. However, Dominic Bryan adamantly disagrees with Fer- riter’s claims, saying that “the danger of using commemoration as a moment for historical engagement is that you collude with a statement of political identity…” (Bryan, 2016). Instead, he argues that social scientists, like anthropologists and political scientists, better explain com- memoration. Unfortunately, Bryan’s picture of history is outdated and generalized, rooted in the nineteenth-centu- ry historical method. Contemporary academic history is specialized, with themes of labor, cultural, and gender his- tory emerging as proper historical spheres. In addition, Irish public historians have demonstrated a consistent commitment to “…create about a meaningful and consid- ered state programme…” and “…to highlight and expose political abuses of the commemorations…,” which drasti- cally contrasts with Bryan’s simple characterizations (Fer- riter, 2018). After all, it would not be fair to base criticism of modern anthropology on its imperialistic, racist origins. On the contrary, public historians must be at the forefront of commemoration, serving as sentinels against propagan- da. It must be understood that “public commemoration is futile unless driven by the conviction that it will bring so- cial dividends…,” or, simply put, that history cannot be apolitical (Fitzpatrick, 2013). Even so, this should not deter historians from supporting or critiquing events publicly. The DOC has renewed public interest in Irish history, and local communities took the lead in most ceremonies. This democratized history, aided by increased open access to archival material, has made history personal for many. Given this public platform, historians have a moral duty in twenty-first century commemoration to mold a historically-educated society. 16 !"!#!$%& : : &'()$* 2021 Professional historians, therefore, should provide the con- textual roadmap for the public’s understanding of the cen- tenary so that people can be guided in their historical pur- suits. Given this public platform, historians have a moral duty in twenty-first century commemoration to mold a historically educated society. In conclusion, the Decade of Centenaries has been a nego- tiation between varying historiographies and multiple so- cio-political actors. The first half of the decade has proven that public commemoration conforms to present Irish val- ues, namely, an emphasis on inclusion, intersectionality, and transnationalism. Its multi-faceted approach, encom- passing Irish culture and transnationality brings nuance to Irish history. The DOC, at times, failed to reflect its aspi- rations accurately, but the historians and the people pushed back and won. Nevertheless, the DOC has benefit- ted Ireland, not because Irish history has been re-exam- ined or re-discovered but because it has been re-imagined. +!(!+!'5!- ‘About Century Ireland’, Century Ireland; https://www.rte. ie/centuryireland/index.php/about-century-ireland/. Last checked 29 April 2020. Guy Beiner, Between Trauma and Triumphalism: The Eas- ter Rising, the Somme, and the Crux of Deep Memory in Modern Ireland’ in Journal of British Studies, 46, no. 2 (2007), pp. 366-89. David W. Blight, ‘The Memory Boom: Why and Why Now?’ in Pascal Boyer and James V. Wertsch (eds.), Memory in Mind and Culture (New York, 2009), pp. 238-51. John Brewer, ‘How to mark the Easter Rising in Northern Ireland’, The Conversation, 5 April 2016. Brendan Ciarán Browne, ‘Choreographed Segregation: Irish Republican Commemoration of the 1916 Easter Ris- ing in ‘Post-Conflict’ Belfast’ in Irish Political Studies, 31, no. 1 (2016), pp. 101-21. Dominic Bryan, ‘Ritual, Identity and Nation: When the Historian Becomes the High Priest of Commemoration’ in Richard S. Grayson and Fearghal McGarry (eds.), Re- membering 1916: The Easter Rising, the Somme and the Politics of Memory in Ireland (Cambridge, 2016), pp. 24- 42. Mike Cronin, ‘Irish History Online and in Real Time: Cen- tury Ireland and the Decade of Centenaries’ in Éire-Ire- land, 52, no. 1&2 (2017), pp. 269-84. ‘Decade of Centenaries’, Department of Culture, Heritage and the Gaeltacht; https://www.decadeofcentenaries.com/ about/. Last checked 27 April 2020. Jonathan Evershed, ‘A War That Stopped a War? The Nec- ropolitics of (Northern) Ireland’s First World War Cente- nary’ in Global Discourse, 9, no. 3 (2019), pp. 537-56. Diarmaid Ferriter, ‘1916 in 2016: Personal Reflections of an Irish Historian’ in Irish Historical Studies, 42, no. 161 (2018), pp. 161-74. David Fitzpatrick, ‘Historians and the Commemoration of Irish Conflicts, 1912-23’ in John Horne and Edward Madi- gan (eds.), Towards Commemoration: Ireland in War and Revolution, 1912-1923 (Dublin, 2013), pp. 126-33. Oona Frawley, ‘Naming Names: Countering Oblivious Re- membering in the Decade of Commemorations’ in Oona Frawley (ed.), Women and the Decade of Commemora- tions (MS: Indiana University Press, forthcoming), pp. 1-28. Landon E. Hancock, ‘Narratives of Commemoration: Iden- tity, Memory, and Conflict in Northern Ireland 1916-2016’ in Peace and Change, 44, no. 2 (2019), pp. 244-65. Roisín Higgins, ‘“The Irish Republic Was Proclaimed by Poster”: The Politics of Commemorating the Easter Ris- ing’ in Richard S. Grayson and Fearghal McGarry (eds.), Remembering 1916: The Easter Rising, the Somme and the Politics of Memory in Ireland (Cambridge, 2016), pp. 43-61. Eric Hobsbawn, ‘Mass-Producing Traditions: Europe, 1870-1914’ in Eric Hobsbawm and Terence Ranger (eds.), The Invention of Tradition (Cambridge and New York, 1983), pp. 263-307. ‘Initial Statement by Advisory Group on Centenary Com- memorations’, Department of Culture, Heritage and the Gaeltacht; https://www.chg.gov.ie/app/uploads/2015/07/ 17 !"#$%&' "#-!(%)!&#' Advisory_Group_Statement.pdf. Last checked 26 April 2020. Alvin Jackson, ‘Mrs Foster and the Rebels: Irish Unionist Approaches to the Easter Rising, 1916-2016’ in Irish His- torical Studies, 42, no. 161 (2018), pp. 143-60. Keith Je3ery, ‘Irish Varieties of Great War Commemora- tions’ in John Horne and Edward Madigan (eds.), Towards Commemoration: Ireland in War and Revolution, 1912- 1923 (Dublin, 2013), pp. 117-25. Peter Leary, ‘Negotiating Ireland’s “Decade of Centena- ries” in the New Age of Brexit’ in History Workshop Jour- nal, 85 (2018), pp. 295-301. Ian McBride, ‘Memory and National Identity in Modern Ireland’ in Ian McBride (ed.), History and Memory in Modern Ireland (Cambridge and New York, 2001), pp. 1-41. Ronan McGreevy, ‘Historians said no to politics in 1916 commemorations’, Irish Times, 11 Aug 2016. Paul Mullan, ‘The Decade of Centenaries and a Methodol- ogy for Engaging with “Di4cult Heritage”’ in Elizabeth M. Crooke and Tom Maguire (eds.), Heritage after Conflict: Northern Ireland (Abingdon and New York, 2018), pp. 34- 48. Pierre Nora, ‘Between Memory and History: Les Lieux de Mémoire’ in Representations, no. 26 (1989), pp. 7-24. Catriona Pennell, ‘Choreography by the Angels? Ireland and the Centenary of the First World War’ in War and Soci- ety, 36, no. 4 (2017), p. 263. ‘RTÉ News, 11 Aug 2014: President Michael D. Higgins on the Commemoration of WW1’, Century Ireland; https:// www.youtube.com/watch?v=ydPBxBM5IEs. Last checked 27 April 2020. ‘RTÉ News, 1 July 2016: Somme Commemorations’, Cen- tury Ireland; https://www.youtube.com/ watch?v=vPxjM8Vx-hk. Last checked 27 April 2020. ‘RTÉ One: Centenary The Proclamation’; https://www. youtube.com/watch?v=ERCVSDileo0. Last checked 28 April 2020. 18 !"!#!$%& : : &'()$* 2021 */-" &( 6+"7&+8 !"# $%!!&# '( !"# )'**# +'*,+: !"# )!'-. '( /,&&,%* *+(%01#%2 © Creative Centenaries. (n.d.). The Battle Of The Somme comic: The story of William McFadzean | CCEA. CEA. Retrieved January 19, 2022, from https://ccea.org.uk/learning-resources/understanding-1916/creative-centena- ries/battle-somme-comic-story-william 13 15 28 28 28 28 29 29 (,34-# 1 © originally tweeted by User:@realDonaldTrump (account suspended) on 26 May, 2020. #%)!#- 5-'+&%*%!,'2 '( 1916 © originally uploaded to the English Wikipedia by w:User:Jtdirl (https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/ File:Easter_Proclamation_of_1916.png), „Easter Proclamation of 1916“, marked as public domain, more details on Wikimedia Commons: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Template:PD-old (,34-# 2 © GDI report: Ad-funded COVID-19 Disinformation: Money, Brands, and Tech (https://disinformationindex. org/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/GDI_Ad-funded-COVID-19-Disinformation-1.pdf), „Share of ad revenues generated by COVID Disinfo Sites“. (,34-# 3, 5%2#& % © originally published in Bursztyn, Rao, Roth, Yanagaziwa-Drott: Misinformation During a Pandemic (https:// www.nber.org/papers/w27417), „RF estimates of e3ect of di3erential viewership on cases and deaths (extend- ed)“. (,34-# 3, 5%2#& $ © originally published in Bursztyn, Rao, Roth, Yanagaziwa-Drott: Misinformation During a Pandemic (https:// www.nber.org/papers/w27417), „2SLS estimates of e3ect of di3erential viewership on cases and deaths (ex- tended)“. (,34-# 4, 5%2#& % © originally published in Bursztyn, Rao, Roth, Yanagaziwa-Drott: Misinformation During a Pandemic (https:// www.nber.org/papers/w27417), „Implied COVID-19 Curves, Panel A: Estimates on Cases“. (,34-# 4, 5%2#& $ © originally published in Bursztyn, Rao, Roth, Yanagaziwa-Drott: Misinformation During a Pandemic (https:// www.nber.org/papers/w27417), „Implied COVID-19 Curves, Panel B: Estimates on Deaths“. 35 38 43 45 %-!,(,+,%& ).2%5)#) $%)#0 '2 (#--'-#&#+!-,+ !422#& 642+!,'2) © Mike Davies Intel Labs, Intel Corporation et. al: (https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Artificial_syn- apses_based_on_FTJs.png), https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/legalcode !%$&# ,,, ,2(#-#2+# 5'/#- %20 5'/#- 4!,&,1%!,'2 © Tasbolat Taunyazov, Weicong Sng, Hian Hian See, Brian Lim, Jethro Kuan, Abdul Fatir Ansari, Benjamin C.K. Tee, and Harold Soh: (http://www.roboticsproceedings.org/rss16/p020.pdf), „Table III: Inference Speed and Power Utilization“ $&%+"# &%*'2! %! "#+&%, *'2!%2%, /,!" "#- )!40#2!), 1893 © Unknown authorUnknown author (https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Blanche_Lamont_with_stu- dents.jpg), „Blanche Lamont with students“, marked as public domain, more details on Wikimedia Commons: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Template:PD-US !"#'0'-# 04--%2!’) *43)"'! © originally published in Report of the trial of William Henry Theodore Durrant (https://archive.org/details/ reportoftrialofw00durr/page/10/mode/2up), marked as public domain. 60 61 61 61 3-%5" ,&&4)!-%!,23 !"# )",(!) ,2 5-,+# %20 74%2!,!. )455&. © originally published in 31.11 E4ciency and Deadweight Loss (https://saylordotorg.github.io/text_economics- theory-through-applications/s35-11-e4ciency-and-deadweight-loss.html), „Figure 31.8 Deadweight Loss“ 3-%5") )"'/,23 !"# 24*$#- %20 8%&4# '( *#-3#-) %20 %+74,),!,'2) © originally published in Statista: Mergers and acquisitions in the United States (https://www.statista.com/ study/65232/mergers-and-acquisitions-in-the-united-states). 3-%5") )"'/,23 3&'$%& 74#-. )"%-# $. )##&+! )#%-+" #23,2#) © originally published in Statista: Global market share of search engines 2010-2022 (https://www.statista.com/ statistics/216573/worldwide-market-share-of-search-engines). 3-%5") )"'/,23 0'*#)!,+ 4) )#%-+" 74#-. )"%-# $. )#&#+! )#%-+" #23,2#) © originally published in Statista: Market share of search engines in the United States 2008-2022 (https:// www.statista.com/statistics/267161/market-share-of-search-engines-in-the-united-states). */-" &( 6+"7&+8 +'-5'-%!# !#+"2'&'3. ,2('-*%!,'2 )#-8,+#) © unpublished tabulation from Corptech Database 62 62 71 75 78 80 82 (,34-# 1 © Samadi, Moradi, Moradinazar, Mostafai, Pasdar: Dietary pattern in relation to the risk of Alzheimer’s disease: a systematic review (https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10072-019-03976-3), „Figure 2: Healthy and unhealthy diet in relation to AD.“ !"# $-#%90'/2 '( '5,2,'2 -#3%-0,23 $-#%9,23 45 ‘$,3 !#+"’ © Statista : Majority of Americans in Favor of Breaking up Big Tech (https://www.statista.com/chart/19440/ survey-responses-breaking-up-big-tech) 5'!#2!,%& ),32%!'-,#), ),32%!'-,#), %20 5%-!,#) !' !"# %,,$ © L.tak (https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Asian_Infrastructure_Investment_Bank_map.svg), https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/legalcode +",2%’) '23',23 !#--,!'-,%& 0,)54!#)] © O4ce of the Secretary of Defense (https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:China’s_Disputed_Territories. PNG), „China’s Disputed Territories“, marked as public domain, more details on Wikimedia Commons: https:// commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Template:PD-US 4) 0#5%-!*#2! '( 64)!,+# %*'23 '!"#-) %22'42+#0 23 +-,*,2%& +"%-3#) © U.S. Department of Justice (https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:U.S._Commerce_Secretary_Wilbur_ Ross,_Acting_Attorney_General_Matthew_Whitaker,_Homeland_Security_Secretary_Kirstjen_Nielsen,_FBI_ Director_Christopher_Wray_Announces_23_Criminal_Charges_Against_China’s_Huawei_&_Wanzhou_ Meng.jpg), „U.S. Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross, Acting Attorney General Matthew Whitaker, Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen, FBI Director Christopher Wray Announces 23 Criminal Charges Against China’s Huawei & Wanzhou Meng“, marked as public domain, more details on Wikimedia Commons: https:// commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Template:PD-US %*#-,+% 3&'$%& !-%0# 0#(,+,! © Statista: U.S. Trade Deficit in Goods Reaches Record High, (https://www.statista.com/chart/17281/us-trade- balance). 98 +"%-&#) +'43"&,2, &#%0#- '( !"# +"-,)!,%2 (-'2! © Craine, Detroit (https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:CharlesCouglinCraineDetroitPortrait.jpg), „CharlesCouglinCraineDetroitPortrait“, marked as public domain, more details on Wikimedia Commons: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Template:PD-US 100 3#-*%2 %*#-,+%2 $420 -%&&., 2#/ .'-9, *%0,)'2 )74%-# 3%-#2, (#$ 1939 © Department of Defense. Department of the Army. O4ce of the Chief Signal O4cer. (09/18/1947 - 02/28/1964); ARC Identifier 36068 / Local Identifier 111-OF-2 1943 (https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/ File:Nazi_Strike_2.jpg), „Nazi Strike 2“, marked as public domain, more details on Wikimedia Commons: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Template:PD-US