The popular image of pre-Famine Ireland has long been of an exceptionally violent country. Disturbances troubled the Irish countryside for much of the pre-Famine period, and trial by jury was suspended on a number of occasions. In addition there were regular attacks on land agents, tithe proctors, and occupiers of evicted land, together with sporadic outbreaks of violence at fairs and markets. The idea that the Irish were naturally violent became part of political and historical tradition, both justifying English rule and explaining why it had been so constantly challenged. One reason for Ireland's violent reputation was the sheer volume of information about violent crime that was available: newspaper reports, crime statistics, and travelers' accounts all provided continual and mutually reinforcing evidence of Irish criminality and disorder. But today, while there is no shortage of either statistical or documentary evidence relating to crime and disorder in early nineteenth-century Ireland, historical analyses remain surprisingly limited. Existing studies have concentrated on agrarian disturbances with little attention focused on crime and disorder more generally. Richard McMahon's study of homicide in pre-Famine and Famine Ireland is, therefore, both long overdue and greatly to be welcomed.

McMahon seeks to establish whether the perception of Ireland as a peculiarly violent country is justified by empirical evidence. As he notes, estimating levels of crime and disorder poses considerable problems for the historian. Returns of reported crime are not available prior to the early 1830s, and it is not until 1837 that these attain a relatively reliable format following the establishment of a national police force with a central office in Dublin where crime statistics could be classified on a systematic basis. Figures for committals for trial are more extensive and date from the early years of the nineteenth century, but, here again, the format changed in the 1830s. Committal figures are, moreover, notoriously difficult to interpret since an increase in numbers could reflect the better working of the justice system rather than a greater amount of crime. Then there is the lack of comparative evidence. Ireland appeared to have much higher committal rates for violent crimes than England and Wales in the early decades of the nineteenth century, but the figures were not in fact directly comparable since they were collected on a different basis.

McMahon opens his study with a very useful discussion of crime statistics and problems with their analysis. He highlights the importance of context, pointing out, for example, that the distinctive role played by the police in investigating suspicious deaths in Ireland may be one factor that helps to explain why Ireland returned more homicide cases than England. But he has surprisingly little to say about the legal context. In England, the intervention of the authorities in the detection and prosecution of crime was minimal before the 1840s, leaving the victims of crime to take the initiative. In Ireland, by contrast, government law officers took increasing responsibility for bringing offenders to court and seeing them prosecuted. Crown solicitors were appointed for each circuit in Ireland in 1801, and at the beginning of the 1830s the attorney general began to assign crown cases at quarter sessions to a particular solicitor in each county. By the end of the 1830s, all serious cases were prosecuted by the crown. A more detailed discussion of how the court system worked would have helped to contextualize the source material (court records) that provides the basis for the study.

Focusing on homicide, which is explored through the records of cases brought to court in four sample counties (Armagh, Fermanagh, Kilkenny, and Queen's), McMahon provides an in-depth analysis of one type of violent crime. He examines different aspects of homicide cases with separate chapters on personal relations, the family, land, and sectarianism. He offers a convincing challenge to Carolyn Conley's argument about the recreational nature of Irish violence, concluding that personal disputes (personal, economic, or political) lay at the root of the vast majority of homicides. He found perpetrators of homicide to be overwhelmingly male, and alcohol to be a contributory factor in a significant number of cases. There was, he suggests, more continuity between pre- and post-Famine Ireland in this respect than is often supposed. Social controls normally operated to restrain individual behavior; violence was the exception, not the norm.

While McMahon's detailed discussion of homicide cases in the four sample counties is perceptive and revealing, his study as a whole is somewhat reductive, and his archive is problematic. Concentrating on homicide provides a clear focus, but it also excludes a much larger body of violent crime, including attempted murder, conspiracy to murder, and assault. Assault was far more common than homicide, and threatened assault more common still. Furthermore, McMahon never fully addresses or acknowledges a fundamental methodological problem, which is that his source material is unrepresentative. Two of his four sample counties are in Ulster, which he admits had much the lowest committal rates of all the Irish provinces. Kilkenny also had low committal rates. This leaves Queen's as the only county that could be said to represent those parts of the country where violence was prevalent and pervasive. Moreover, McMahon uses one type of source material, grand jury books, for Armagh, Fermanagh, and Queen's, and another type, crown books, for Kilkenny, and the sources cover different periods for different counties. The sources for Queen's, for example, span the years 1821–50, while those for Kilkenny cover only 1833–50. The study is thus far more limited than McMahon suggests, and as a consequence his conclusions should be presented in a much more cautious way, as applying to particular counties for particular decades. McMahon is to be commended for his diligent research, his heroic efforts to grapple with criminal statistics, and his rigorous analysis of his source material. His study will be an invaluable resource for students and scholars of the history of crime in Ireland, but whether or not there was propensity for violence within the Irish population remains to be established.