Orangemen with native Irish ancestry

dpe

As an outside observer, this thread depresses the f*ck out of me.

ardmacha

because there would've been very few natives in northern ireland before the plantation, as far as i can see it nearly everyone in northern ireland is planter descent no matter catholic or protestant it just so happens that some ended up converting.

While this sort of nonsense may be in circulation among the planter community, you have to wonder that someone would post it in a history forum!!

But of course the reality is that a lot of people have a mixed heritage, despite all of the pseudo ethnic propaganda.

owenc

ardmacha wrote: »

While this sort of nonsense may be in circulation among the planter community, you have to wonder that someone would post it in a history forum!!

But of course the reality is that a lot of people have a mixed heritage, despite all of the pseudo ethnic propaganda.

Well it's true sp get over it were the he'll do you think the catholic population came out of in ni converts yes you guessed it! Not only that I have some sources from a census conducted in 1660 and according to them in just 40 years the Irish were well outnumbered over scots by looks of things the scots population was well above the Irish one and it didn't take long to overtake it! So these figures back up my facts and not only that 30 years after that even more scots came so the numbers wouldve been higher..

getz

Duffy the Vampire Slayer wrote: »

I know that the surname Smith or Smythe is often a derivative of the Irish name MacGabhanna.

smith is a english name for a person who worked in a trade ,like a person who made horse shoes ect,lots of english names came from a persons trade,like archer ,many other people woud have been given names from where they were from,like london,york,lancaster,or the son of john=johnson,

owenc

Nope Its Irish down south! Some peoples names are translated and they are not even English or Scottish desecnt it just so happens that their name came out like that... Mind you the smiths up here will all be English decent and there's quite alot of them here (that names common everywhere it seems)

getz

owenc wrote: »

Nope Its Irish down south! Some peoples names are translated and they are not even English or Scottish desecnt it just so happens that their name came out like that... Mind you the smiths up here will all be English decent and there's quite alot of them here (that names common everywhere it seems)

it is owen,the big difference between ireland and the UK is that most irish names will have come from the irish celtic clans,like my name is dolan ,dont ask me to right the irish spelling for that,but in england in the middle ages a lot of peasants did not have a second name,so they may have been called like robin of sherwood ect ,and the man who put the shoe on the horse would be the smith,

Judgement Day

Fratton Fred wrote: »

Emme,

Your experience of the CofI is obviously a lot different to mine.

I attend church fairly regularly and from what I can
see, there is a wide ranging and very welcoming community, it certainly isn't nearly extinct.

We regularly have ecumenical services as well and the local priest and rector are very good friends who work together for the benefit of the whole community.

there are one or two fairly stuffy ministers around, but most of the ones I have met are pretty liberal minded people (both male and female) and not in the slightest bit snobby or smug.

Welcome to the 'smug enclave of South Dublin and Wicklow COI'. Ooops can we include North Wexford too?

PS Quite what being a smug CoI member has to do with Orangemen with native Irish ancestry is beyond me.

xflyer

Seems to me there's a smug implication in some comments that they're pure bred Irish going back to the Ark. While my own surname is Irish and quite ancient. I didn't have to travel back far to find English sounding surnames in my family. I suggest most of you might have the same experience.

It's not so clear cut despite what some of you seem to think.

If anything the variety of names on both sides of the sectarian divide proves that the actual differences between us are mostly imaginary. The biggest curse in the this country was the way religion and politics were mixed in with cultural identity. It makes no sense anymore.

chughes

I would hazard a guess to say that if you research most family histories of people living in the UK or Ireland you will find genetic traces of each others DNA.

I would qualify this by only including familes whose ancestry can be traced back as residing in these islands for many generations.

We are not as different as some people like to think we are.

getz

chughes wrote: »

I would hazard a guess to say that if you research most family histories of people living in the UK or Ireland you will find genetic traces of each others DNA.

I would qualify this by only including familes whose ancestry can be traced back as residing in these islands for many generations.

We are not as different as some people like to think we are.

63% of DNA in britain is celtic,3% anglo/saxon ,the vikings did their bit,and what people do not realize,that the normans[ norsemen] were a viking tribe who settled in france,big connections

Wibbs

chughes wrote: »

We are not as different as some people like to think we are.

+1. Though many Irish(Scots and Welsh) like to think of themselves as genetically "Celtic" they're really not* and many English like to think of themselves as Anglo Saxon and while they'd have a better claim to that(and Italian and French and Scandinavian), they're mostly not either, save for small groups in the very eastern part of the country. You'd be hard enough pressed to separate an average Yorkshire man from a Wicklow man. We're much more related to each other than not. In the north of this country that would be even more the case. Even if they're of lowland Scots ancestry the differences if any are pretty small.







*Not if celtic means the tribes from the Germanic regions of Europe. Then again Celt is hard to pin down, even for those living nearby historically. The Greeks while great philosophers and the like, were often pretty crap at directions. Map makers they were not. "Up/down there, across the way, you know yourself" was a lot of it. The Romans weren't that much better(Caesar mentions Ireland as being just off the coast of Spain and posits a pincer movement invasion from Wales and Spain. Ok at a major stretch, but the Italians sailing from Spain would have been looking at their sundials asking "are we there yet? are we there yet?". Different writers place the true Keltoi in the aforementioned Germanic regions and others place them in northern Spain.

owenc

getz wrote: »

it is owen,the big difference between ireland and the UK is that most irish names will have come from the irish celtic clans,like my name is dolan ,dont ask me to right the irish spelling for that,but in england in the middle ages a lot of peasants did not have a second name,so they may have been called like robin of sherwood ect ,and the man who put the shoe on the horse would be the smith,

Yep Ano all that I was just informing you of the possibilities!

R.Dub.Fusilier

owenc wrote: »

Well it's true sp get over it were the he'll do you think the catholic population came out of in ni converts yes you guessed it! Not only that I have some sources from a census conducted in 1660 and according to them in just 40 years the Irish were well outnumbered over scots by looks of things the scots population was well above the Irish one and it didn't take long to overtake it! So these figures back up my facts and not only that 30 years after that even more scots came so the numbers wouldve been higher..

you may have the numbers and your facts but the reason the planters , invaders , out numbered the native Irish is because they stole our land and killed and starved the native Irish. pure and simple and no ammount of doctoring the books will ever change that even if wikipedia says different.

fontanalis

getz wrote: »

63% of DNA in britain is celtic,3% anglo/saxon ,the vikings did their bit,and what people do not realize,that the normans[ norsemen] were a viking tribe who settled in france,big connections

There's a british isles dna project that is releasing results later this year: preliminary results indicate a bigger than previously stated input from the North Sea area (it's difficult to distinguish Danish Vikings from the Angle/Saxon/Jutes due to being from a similar region).
In general people are genetically closer to those who are closer geographically. The main difference between the irish and a lot of British is in Y chromosome DNA which traces direct males lines.

owenc

R.Dub.Fusilier wrote: »

you may have the numbers and your facts but the reason the planters , invaders , out numbered the native Irish is because they stole our land and killed and starved the native Irish. pure and simple and no ammount of doctoring the books will ever change that even if wikipedia says different.

So yea that proves him wrong... :rolleyes: we did not steal land my ancestors were brought here by undertakers who paid for the land! it is well documented and the documents I have state that the Irish were paid for their land so you are talking complete crap! And we killed yous lol are you foreal the Irish used to attack the scots all the time that us also in the documents I have ... just look at the 1641 massacre. :rolleyes: what do you mean our land aswell... Irish people aren't natives...

fontanalis

owenc wrote: »

Well it's true sp get over it were the he'll do you think the catholic population came out of in ni converts yes you guessed it! Not only that I have some sources from a census conducted in 1660 and according to them in just 40 years the Irish were well outnumbered over scots by looks of things the scots population was well above the Irish one and it didn't take long to overtake it! So these figures back up my facts and not only that 30 years after that even more scots came so the numbers wouldve been higher..

There's a massive difference between saying protestants outnumbered catholics (which no one will disagree with) and saying that catholics don't have any background from the pre settler irish population.
Your first sentence highlights a pettiness that's apparent in a lot of your posts when your assumptions are challenged.

fontanalis

owenc wrote: »

So yea that proves him wrong... :rolleyes: we did not steal land my ancestors were brought here by undertakers who paid for the land! it is well documented and the documents I have state that the Irish were paid for their land so you are talking complete crap! And we killed yous lol are you foreal the Irish used to attack the scots all the time that us also in the documents I have ... just look at the 1641 massacre. :rolleyes: what do you mean our land aswell... Irish people aren't natives...

What with the what now.

jonniebgood1

Thread is away from OP and heading for row so its closed. If anyone has a reason to want it open again they can PM me.

Closed