Scotch-Irish-L Archives

Archiver > Scotch-Irish > 1998-02 > 0886540015


From: "Raymond W. Ryan Jr." <>
Subject: Fw: Fw: The Irish in America
Date: Tue, 3 Feb 1998 16:06:55 -0500


Hello Linda,

> You asked the question, "Do you mind being called British?" How do you
> define British? As I see it defined as "the people of Great Britian",why
> would anyone call me British. It is not a race of people. I,
fortunately,
> am an American. But, I must stress, one's country of origin is not an
> indication of his/her particular grouping. For one to be properly called
> "Irish", they would be Celts, not Picts. Contrary to your statement, all
> the people of the British Isles were not of the same race. The Picts
were
> the people who inhabited Great Britain and became merged with the Scots
in
> the 9th Century. Also, history teaches that the people of Scotland were
> originally the Celts from Ireland. These were Celts, way before the
Gaels. Celts then returned back to Northern Ireland (Ulster) to make
things bad for those who stayed in Northern Ireland. That was a few
hundred years later. These people returned to Scotland yet again later on.
Hence, the difference in accents. The rolling 'r' omnipresent in Scottish
speech is an old Irish sound.
This is why the English spoken in Australia sounds closer to modern British
English, while the English spoken in the Appalachian chain sounds closer to
17th century British English.....people are left in pockets, do not migrate
to any other place, and their language does not mutate as the rest of the
population would. (Another good example of this is Tangier Island,
Virginia.) Hence, the Scottish accent is actually an older Irish accent -
listen closely. The Irish and ESPECIALLY the Northern Irish sound more
like the British.....compare the way a modern day Dubliner (Ireland) speaks
to the manner in which the Beattles speak, and suddenly, the distance
between Dublin and Liverpool shrinks. The "newest" British accent is the
Cockney, East London accent. Remember, a few hundred years change in
migration and accent patterns does not change what WE actually are.
> > Incidentally, I have no problem in relating to the Scots/Irish
particularly
> since my ancestors on my maternal side include Harkness, Carmichael,
Boyd,
> Baskin, Andrews, Wilson, Macklin, Aiken, Douglass; also Farley, Walden,
> Lester, and Skinner. And yes, my paternal grandfather was English and
his
> name was Lester. Of this I am very proud. Unfortunately, people are too
> quick to group others into some nice neat little ambiguous package of
> generality. I am proud of my English, Scotch, Irish, and Welsh heritage.

> Speaking of Welsh, my fraternal ancestor, William Edwards, came to
Virginia
> in 1623 so my family has been here for 375 years. No big deal! Just a
> matter of fact. Also, I would be interested to know your source of
> knowledge that "when they first arrived in America in 1718, they did not
> feel they were Irish." How do you know how they felt? Then you say
"Since
> the vast majority of us came in three waves of emigration...... ....".
US!
> Were you with them?
> Concerning the potato: What did your ancestors eat when they lived in
> Ireland? The potato has been the main source of food for the Irish for a
> long, long, time. I do not believe caviar was their steady diet. No
> offense meant, but how can you be 1/4 Irish if your Irish ancestors came
> over here before the potato famine? Too many generations have passed to
> make this possible. As far as reading about the Ulster Scots, I am very
> well acquainted with their history. I must caution, though, that much
of
> what is written on the internet is a lot of opinion, not supported by
fact.
> Be very cautious using it. No, I do not need any WEB page addresses.
> But, thanks for asking. I have been involved with computers, LANs and
> WANs, for quite a number of years and am fairly well versed in finding my
> way around on the internet. What did you mean "we have talked enough
about
> this a lot and are perhaps tired of the topic." Was this meant to
dismiss
> me? Reminds me of the quip, "I am going to take my marbles and go home."

> When one does not agree with another (I didn't know there were so many
> experts out there) then the exchange of information is one of the best
ways
> in which to become a better learned person. One should never take things
> personally - then they lose sight of the objective. Worse still, is to
> leave the subject with over simplified, romanticized, and incorrect
> conjecture. No one is right all of the time. Keep up the good work.

>
> > ----------
> > > From: linda Merle <>
> > > To: Raymond W. Ryan Jr. <>
> > > Cc:
> > > Subject: Re: Fw: The Irish in America
> > > Date: Monday, February 02, 1998 11:42 PM
> > >
> > > Hi Raymond,
> > >
> > > The reason the Ulster Scots are not called "Irish" except by the
> > > ignorant is that they are different from the Irish. One can argue
> > > that at the most basic level they are of the same racial stock as
> > > all the other folk on the British Isles (by the way, do you mind
> > > being called "British"???), but as time passed they felt themselves,
> > > the British felt them to be, and the indiginous Irish themselves
> > > felt them to be different.
> > >
> > > They were generally different by religion, origin, and culture.
> > >
> > > When they first arrived in America in 1718, they did not feel
> > > they were Irish, nor have they ever felt that they were. Since
> > > the vast majority of us came in three waves of emigration -- all
> > > three completed BEFORE 1800, the times of emigation are different
> > > as well.
> > >
> > > The famine struck the potato, not folk of a particular ethnic group,
> > > so grouping people who were struck by the impact of the famine as
> > > anything but fellow famine sufferers is kinda overly simplistic,
> > > don't ya think?
> > >
> > > My family has been in the USA for 300 years now -- does that make
> > > us Cherokee? With all due respect to both the Irish and the Cherokee
--
> > > NO!
> > >
> > > I might add that my 1/4th Irish side (which came over long before the
> > > famine too) finds "potato people" offensive too. It would like to
> > > proclaim (though this is an Ulster Scots/Scotch Irish list) that
> > > there were plenty of Irish in the Americans before the 1840's and
> > > to add that we are Irish, not potato people.
> > >
> > > There are various books on the subject of who and what the Ulster
> > > Scot/Scotch-Irish person is. We have talked about this a lot and are
> > > perhaps tired of the topic. I can refer you to some web pages if you
> > > wish.
> > >
> > > As someone who is both Irish and Ulster Scots, I can personally
assure
> > > you - they are very different. I myself like both.
> > >
> > > Linda Merle
> > >

This thread: