Scots Irish. the Synthetic Scots question

Scots Iwish

Plastic Paddy is used derogatorily.
But generally are those Irish born outside of Ireland, more realistic in who they are than the Synthetic Scots, who call themselves ScotIrish.
I know a lot wear kilts and most look like they play with their own pipe a lot, too much. I understand that many in Ulster of all religions emigrated to make up the bulk of the population of the west of Scotland. Over there you have IrishScots who claim Ireland as home, confusing, but good for them

First time I had ever even heard of the synthetic scots in Ireland as a claimed seperate culture was around 1998, on one of these junk loyalist websites that see every thing in the world through simple orange glasses.
Honestly never heard of them before and heard former loyalist prisoners say the same.
Example of invention of the Synthetic Scots.
I remember that website claiming that the famous American pioneer Davy Crockett as one of theirs, they even had his hat as a featured image on their site. Used his lifestyle to claim that is how they all are. So that was why he was also known as Dave 5 bellies Crockett.

Look up Davy Crocketts actual pedigree

Can't help but notice, the Synthetic scots don't mind exaggerating and stretching the history a wee bit, here and there.

Two more heroes of some of these proud Synthetic Scots
Michael Stone Look up ancestry and be prepared to be shocked.
Lenny Murphy surname says it all, according to some stories his surname was part of him having to prove himself as real British loyalist.
Most orangemen seem to have Irish names. Magee MacDermott two examples interviewed last night on Orange fest.

My questions are
How real are the Scots Irish?
How many people live in NI , must be tens of millions according to the BBC Orange fest attendance claims.
20,000 at one did not look like a 1000 to me, is it think of a number and X by 10

me_right_one

Scottish and Irish people are from the same Gaelic gene pool anyway, so I dont know how these loyalists think claiming Scottish ancestry makes them more "british". Just look at all the Mac names. Mac is the Gaelic word for "son of". A lot of the placenames in Scotland are Gaelic too. eg Glasgow, Balmoral, the "mull" of kintyre

fontanalis

me_right_one wrote: »

Scottish and Irish people are from the same Gaelic gene pool anyway, so I dont know how these loyalists think claiming Scottish ancestry makes them more "british". Just look at all the Mac names. Mac is the Gaelic word for "son of". A lot of the placenames in Scotland are Gaelic too. eg Glasgow, Balmoral, the "mull" of kintyre

Gaelic gene pool? More like post last glacial maximum gene pool.
There may have been a small movement of people from Ulster around 1,000 years ago bringing the language which was later adopted nationwide, and nearly everyone in Ireland speaks English and uses anglicised surnames but don't consider themselves English.

owenc

me_right_one wrote: »

Scottish and Irish people are from the same Gaelic gene pool anyway, so I dont know how these loyalists think claiming Scottish ancestry makes them more "british". Just look at all the Mac names. Mac is the Gaelic word for "son of". A lot of the placenames in Scotland are Gaelic too. eg Glasgow, Balmoral, the "mull" of kintyre

OMG for the 90th time ulster scots people are not native irish, we are descended from settlers who came from the lowlands which extend down to england and then to aberdeen in the north east, were they are mainly picts from england, but then in the west which is the islands like the mull of kintyre and the highlands,they speak galeic, most of these people are descended from ireland, that is were the confusion comes from! So stop saying we are native irish, that does my bloody head in!

deise go deo

From my understanding in Scotland you had the picts pushed into the north east by the Dal Riarda. who came from Ulster in the highlands who spoke galeic, This is where the word Gaeltacht came from. and other ''British'' tribes in the lowlands.

If you are saying that Ulster scots is decended from these lowland tribes then why would they have a gaelic dialect which would come from the highlands?

mathepac

owenc wrote: »

OMG for the 90th time ulster scots people are not native irish, ...

It's a bit odd though this Ulster-Scots / Scots-Irish thing. Apparently this group of people who claim to be different from the Irish, Gaelic speaking Western Isles / highland Scots only appear in the 6 counties of Ulster that are part of the United Kingdom. How come they never made it as far as Donegal, Cavan or Monaghan? This unique group of people displayed admirable prescience by largely only inhabiting the counties that would be politically partitioned from the rest of the island by 20th century gerrymandering. Their prescience though, doesn't prevent them consistently getting the names of one of the counties and one of the cities they inhabit wrong.:)

owenc wrote: »

... So stop saying we are native irish, that does my bloody head in!

Based on some of the web-sites I've viewed and some of the pronouncements I've read it'd do my head in too, thinking I might have connections with some of those claiming this Ulster-Scots / Scotch-Irish / Scots-Irish uniqueness. I'm happy with my Irish-Welsh-Norman-Irish'ness

As an example of one of the nuttier things I've come across is the call for the recognition of the Ulster-Scots dialect of English as a language in its own right, rather than what it actually is, just English pronounced (and written) in a Scottish accent with the odd Irish word tossed in for good measure. There's millions of EU money being thrown at this and it's just crazy.

fontanalis

deise go deo wrote: »

From my understanding in Scotland you had the picts pushed into the north east by the Dal Riarda. who came from Ulster in the highlands who spoke galeic, This is where the word Gaeltacht came from. and other ''British'' tribes in the lowlands.

If you are saying that Ulster scots is decended from these lowland tribes then why would they have a gaelic dialect which would come from the highlands?

The term Pict was used by the Romans for alot of tribes all over Britain, as the Roman border pushed towards Scotland the name was just used for tribes in Scotland.
The arrival of Gaelic into Scotland didn't necessarily have to arrive with a mass invasion (the arrival of gaelic into Ireland may have come on the back of trading), all it would have taken is a small military elite.
Look at Ireland, we all speak English but there wasn't a "genetic genocide" as the most of us consider ourselves mostly Irish.
Also look at England, the last big invasion was the Normans and they had a massive impact in Engalnd and Ireland but yet in England they still speak a Germanic language not French.

fontanalis

mathepac wrote: »

It's a bit odd though this Ulster-Scots / Scots-Irish thing. Apparently this group of people who claim to be different from the Irish, Gaelic speaking Western Isles / highland Scots only appear in the 6 counties of Ulster that are part of the United Kingdom. How come they never made it as far as Donegal, Cavan or Monaghan? This unique group of people displayed admirable prescience by largely only inhabiting the counties that would be politically partitioned from the rest of the island by 20th century gerrymandering. Their prescience though, doesn't prevent them consistently getting the names of one of the counties and one of the cities they inhabit wrong.:)
Based on some of the web-sites I've viewed and some of the pronouncements I've read it'd do my head in too, thinking I might have connections with some of those claiming this Ulster-Scots / Scotch-Irish / Scots-Irish uniqueness. I'm happy with my Irish-Welsh-Norman-Irish'ness

As an example of one of the nuttier things I've come across is the call for the recognition of the Ulster-Scots dialect of English as a language in its own right, rather than what it actually is, just English pronounced (and written) in a Scottish accent with the odd Irish word tossed in for good measure. There's millions of EU money being thrown at this and it's just crazy.

Or the province for that matter.

Fratton Fred

So who are the Ulster Scots or the Scots Irish then? they aren't Irish, they have a different heritage to the Irish, they aren't Scottish, most of them have no family or ties to Scotland. They could be described as British, but what if GB breaks up, who or what would they be then?

What they are trying to do is create an identity for themselves, which they are perfectly entitled to do. As far as creating a language for themselves, why not? I'm not sure if the EU recognises it at all, but I doubt very much they are actually spending millions on it. Besides, you could argue that the EU spending millions on a language that the representatives of that country don't even speak is an even bigger waste of money.

This thread tbh, just smacks of petty unionist bashing.

mathepac

Fratton Fred wrote: »

So who are the Ulster Scots or the Scots Irish then? ...

I don't know and that's my struggle.

I get the impression that this Ulster-Scots / Scots-Irish thing (originally an invention of the American genealogical industry I believe) is an attempt to create difference where no real differences exist. The focus is on the differences to the exclusion (IMHO) of the areas of sharing and commonality.

This is divisive at a time when cooperation and 'integration' are more important. That is why, at any opportunity that presents itself, I try to do a kind of reducio ad absurdum to poke fun at what I regard as artificial differences.

Fratton Fred wrote: »

... They could be described as British, but what if GB breaks up, who or what would they be then? ...

I believe this to be the crux of the problem.

They cannot be described as British because they are not of Britain and clearly with the new NI assembly in place, 'the British' whoever they are currently, agree. Generations of trying to be 'British' have been in vain.

Fratton Fred wrote: »

... What they are trying to do is create an identity for themselves, which they are perfectly entitled to do. As far as creating a language for themselves, why not? ...

You make my point - this whole identity and language thing is an artifice and unnecessary. We have a common identity. Let's glory in it and celebrate it, not invent ways to be different.

We've spent a long time telling each other how different and unique we are. What has it given us as an island race? IMHO years of tragedy and heartache.

Fratton Fred wrote: »

... This thread tbh, just smacks of petty unionist bashing.

I wondered when that old chestnut would be trotted out. TBH, it's a rather unimaginative comment and not entirely unexpected. IMHO it reflects more poorly on your thinking than on anything I've posted here.

I deliberately avoided the conventional "-ists" we've spent centuries at; I happen to prefer the "-ness" words - togetherness, Irishness, helpfulness, joyousness, etc.

Over and out comrades.

Fratton Fred

mathepac wrote: »

I don't know and that's my struggle.

I get the impression that this Ulster-Scots / Scots-Irish thing (originally an invention of the American genealogical industry I believe) is an attempt to create difference where no real differences exist. The focus is on the differences to the exclusion (IMHO) of the areas of sharing and commonality.

This is divisive at a time when cooperation and 'integration' are more important. That is why, at any opportunity that presents itself, I try to do a kind of reducio ad absurdum to poke fun at what I regard as artificial differences.

I believe this to be the crux of the problem.

They cannot be described as British because they are not of Britain and clearly with the new NI assembly in place, 'the British' whoever they are currently, agree. Generations of trying to be 'British' have been in vain.
You make my point - this whole identity and language thing is an artifice and unnecessary. We have a common identity. Let's glory in it and celebrate it, not invent ways to be different.

We've spent a long time telling each other how different and unique we are. What has it given us as an island race? IMHO years of tragedy and heartache.
I wondered when that old chestnut would be trotted out. TBH, it's a rather unimaginative comment and not entirely unexpected. IMHO it reflects more poorly on your thinking than on anything I've posted here.

I deliberately avoided the conventional "-ists" we've spent centuries at; I happen to prefer the "-ness" words - togetherness, Irishness, helpfulness, joyousness, etc.

Over and out comrades.

My last comment wasn't directed to you, more at the OP who, it appears, has an agenda and based on his posts in other forums I have no doubt my accusations are not far off the mark.

I don't really disagree with what you are saying, but my take on this (and I am thinking aloud to an extent) is that as we head for what I believe to be the inevitable reunification of Ireland, there is a sizeable chunk of the island that do see themselves as being different and are trying to define what that difference is. One of the major contributing factors to this is that another sizeable chunk of the island loves nothing more than to tell them they are different. These people consider themselves British, but the 26 county's entire history is based on telling people what a bunch of bastards the British are.

What I suggest the Ulster Scots are trying to do is to define who they are, their traditions and their culture and stand up and say this is who we are and we are proud of it, rather than be a displaced people with no identity. The Scots, Irish, Welsh and English all have a fall back position. No one in England calls themselves British, it is always English, similar to the Welsh and Scots. So what do the Ulster Scots call themselves?

It may seem a desperate case of "If their doing it, so will we" in terms of the language, but I think it is an important thing to establish. Personally i enjoy differences in culture, one of the things I really miss about living in Ireland is the relatively low level of immigration and the diversity of cultures you see in southern England.

owenc

deise go deo wrote: »

From my understanding in Scotland you had the picts pushed into the north east by the Dal Riarda. who came from Ulster in the highlands who spoke galeic, This is where the word Gaeltacht came from. and other ''British'' tribes in the lowlands.

If you are saying that Ulster scots is decended from these lowland tribes then why would they have a gaelic dialect which would come from the highlands?

They don't have a galeic dialect, the dialect comes from the lowlands, READ: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scots_language , it says it is sometimes called lowland scots to distungish itself from the highlands, its not a language at all my aunts have the accent, its basically an accent heard in antrim and parts of my county.

owenc

mathepac wrote: »

It's a bit odd though this Ulster-Scots / Scots-Irish thing. Apparently this group of people who claim to be different from the Irish, Gaelic speaking Western Isles / highland Scots only appear in the 6 counties of Ulster that are part of the United Kingdom. How come they never made it as far as Donegal, Cavan or Monaghan? This unique group of people displayed admirable prescience by largely only inhabiting the counties that would be politically partitioned from the rest of the island by 20th century gerrymandering. Their prescience though, doesn't prevent them consistently getting the names of one of the counties and one of the cities they inhabit wrong.:)
Based on some of the web-sites I've viewed and some of the pronouncements I've read it'd do my head in too, thinking I might have connections with some of those claiming this Ulster-Scots / Scotch-Irish / Scots-Irish uniqueness. I'm happy with my Irish-Welsh-Norman-Irish'ness

As an example of one of the nuttier things I've come across is the call for the recognition of the Ulster-Scots dialect of English as a language in its own right, rather than what it actually is, just English pronounced (and written) in a Scottish accent with the odd Irish word tossed in for good measure. There's millions of EU money being thrown at this and it's just crazy.

The answer the first question is because there is more ulster scots concentrated in antrim compared to donegal i.e its like something like 70% ulster scots ancestry around north antrim and only 15% in donegal

owenc

Fratton Fred wrote: »

So who are the Ulster Scots or the Scots Irish then? they aren't Irish, they have a different heritage to the Irish, they aren't Scottish, most of them have no family or ties to Scotland. They could be described as British, but what if GB breaks up, who or what would they be then?

What they are trying to do is create an identity for themselves, which they are perfectly entitled to do. As far as creating a language for themselves, why not? I'm not sure if the EU recognises it at all, but I doubt very much they are actually spending millions on it. Besides, you could argue that the EU spending millions on a language that the representatives of that country don't even speak is an even bigger waste of money.

This thread tbh, just smacks of petty unionist bashing.

Would you call the americans bashers then? As they are very big into this type of thing! We are just proud of ancestry that is all, like you are proud of your irish ancestry.:) Though i am not obsessed with the whole ulster scots language thing.

mathepac

Fratton Fred wrote: »

My last comment wasn't directed to you, more at the OP who, it appears, has an agenda and based on his posts in other forums I have no doubt my accusations are not far off the mark...

Sound, OK, I accept that.

Fratton Fred wrote: »

... Personally i enjoy differences in culture, one of the things I really miss about living in Ireland is the relatively low level of immigration and the diversity of cultures you see in southern England.

I too enjoy and value difference and diversity, but in order to bring about healing and reconciliation on this island I am convinced that we need to focus ourselves on the common ground first and leave the differences 'til later. Thank God enormous progress has been made, but we still have a fair few steps to take.

This is my fear: If my brother says to me "I'm different" what I may hear him say is "You're different, and not acceptable as my brother".

This may prevent me saying "Welcome to our home. I love you and I've missed you."

Denerick

Ulster Scots are a distinct identity. It doesn't matter if it is an invention, as most identities inevitably were invented by romantic nationalists in the 19th century. What really matters is that a large group of people consider themselves intrinsically different to the Gael; Hence, the Scots Irish are an identity as a consequence of that fact.

deise go deo

Denerick wrote: »

Ulster Scots are a distinct identity. It doesn't matter if it is an invention, as most identities inevitably were invented by romantic nationalists in the 19th century. What really matters is that a large group of people consider themselves intrinsically different to the Gael; Hence, the Scots Irish are an identity as a consequence of that fact.

From wiki:
Speaking at a seminar on 9 September 2004, Ian Sloan of the Northern Ireland Department of Culture, Arts and Leisure (DCAL) accepted that the 1999 Northern Ireland Life and Times Survey "did not significantly indicate that unionists or nationalists were relatively any more or less likely to speak Ulster Scots.

Now I think we can take it as a givin that nationalists dont concider themselves to be ''intrinsically'' different to the Gael.:rolleyes:

fontanalis

Denerick wrote: »

Ulster Scots are a distinct identity. It doesn't matter if it is an invention, as most identities inevitably were invented by romantic nationalists in the 19th century. What really matters is that a large group of people consider themselves intrinsically different to the Gael; Hence, the Scots Irish are an identity as a consequence of that fact.

Would the major defining factor be religion?

Fratton Fred

owenc wrote: »

Would you call the americans bashers then? As they are very big into this type of thing! We are just proud of ancestry that is all, like you are proud of your irish ancestry.:) Though i am not obsessed with the whole ulster scots language thing.

I was actually agreeing with what you have said (i think). Establishing a heritage is no bad thing, if used in the right way.

BTW, don't tell anyone, but I'm not Irish!

owenc

deise go deo wrote: »

From wiki:
Speaking at a seminar on 9 September 2004, Ian Sloan of the Northern Ireland Department of Culture, Arts and Leisure (DCAL) accepted that the 1999 Northern Ireland Life and Times Survey "did not significantly indicate that unionists or nationalists were relatively any more or less likely to speak Ulster Scots.

Now I think we can take it as a givin that nationalists dont concider themselves to be ''intrinsically'' different to the Gael.:rolleyes:

The accent is spoken by the whole of north antrim and the north east part of my county.;)

owenc

Fratton Fred wrote: »

I was actually agreeing with what you have said (i think). Establishing a heritage is no bad thing, if used in the right way.

BTW, don't tell anyone, but I'm not Irish!

Yes i seen that from one of your posts on the previous page.

Denerick

fontanalis wrote: »

Would the major defining factor be religion?

Religion is certainly a part of it. Moreso they are the descandants of large scale immigration of the 17th century. They are a distinct identity within Ireland just as the Italians are within the USA.

owenc

fontanalis wrote: »

Would the major defining factor be religion?

No the difference is they aren't native irish and they aren't galeic scots.

LordSutch

mathepac wrote: »

I don't know and that's my struggle.

I get the impression that this Ulster-Scots / Scots-Irish thing (originally an invention of the American genealogical industry I believe) is an attempt to create difference where no real differences exist. The focus is on the differences to the exclusion (IMHO) of the areas of sharing and commonality.

They cannot be described as British because they are not of Britain and clearly with the new NI assembly in place, 'the British' whoever they are currently, agree. Generations of trying to be 'British' have been in vain.

Interesting, you sound just like Pat Kenny who recently stirred up a real hornets on the radio by saying exactly the same thing! (many texts complaining), But then why do Northerners fervently claim to be British? (surely if they claim to be British then they are British), in the same way as Irish Americans - second generation, third, fourth, fifth, even sixth generation claim to be 'Irish', and the same can be said for Irish people living in Scotland or England, who may never have been here, but claim to be 'IRISH' because their Great Great Grand Father came from Ireland

owenc

Camelot wrote: »

Interesting, you sound just like Pat Kenny who recently stirred up a real hornets on the radio by saying exactly the same thing! (many texts complaining), But then why do Northerners fervently claim to be British? (surely if they claim to be British then they are British), in the same way as Irish Americans - second generation, third, fourth, fifth, even sixth generation claim to be 'Irish', and the same can be said for Irish people living in Scotland or England, who may never have been here, but claim to be 'IRISH' because their Great Great Grand Father came from Ireland

Yes and british claims for people in the united kingdom which northern ireland is in, and if we have a british passport which says our nationality is british then we are british!

fontanalis

owenc wrote: »

No the difference is they aren't native irish and they aren't galeic scots.

I know they don't consider themselves Irish as they look more to their recent Scottish ancestry. Is the gaelic thing not a bit overstated, gaelic is just a language really.

owenc

fontanalis wrote: »

I know they don't consider themselves Irish as they look more to their recent Scottish ancestry. Is the gaelic thing not a bit overstated, gaelic is just a language really.

No theres a such thing as the galeic scots in the highlands who are descended from the irish and the lowland scots who are descended from english people, that is what ulster scots people are, though alot of their families come from france before england, mines is supposed to be either native to the north east of england or from normandy?

fontanalis

owenc wrote: »

No theres a such thing as the galeic scots in the highlands who are descended from the irish and the lowland scots who are descended from english people, that is what ulster scots people are, though alot of their families come from france before england, mines is supposed to be either native to the north east of england or from normandy?

Do you mean some type of nobility who received land over the years?

owenc

fontanalis wrote: »

Do you mean some type of nobility who received land over the years?

No the majority that come from the lowlands are descended from people who moved up from england.

fontanalis

owenc wrote: »

No the majority that come from the lowlands are descended from people who moved up from england.

Well it seems from your last couple posts that Scotland is mainly made up of two groups; people in the East (lowlands) from English decent and the west (highlands) Irish decent. Am I understanding this correctly? If so then what happended to the original Scots?
Not trying to be a smart arse but this kind of thing interests me.

owenc

fontanalis wrote: »

Well it seems from your last couple posts that Scotland is mainly made up of two groups; people in the East (lowlands) from English decent and the west (highlands) Irish decent. Am I understanding this correctly? If so then what happended to the original Scots?
Not trying to be a smart arse but this kind of thing interests me.

There are no native scots the ones in the lowlands came from england after coming up from france. Sorry this is just what i am getting from joining up imformation from other history websites. Though i don't know if thats true as i've found ones from my family in scotland in 991 when they were ment to be in france at that time, is this the period most families came to the british isles?