PDA

View Full Version : Ulster Scots History and Culture



Appalachian
Wednesday, September 7th, 2005, 01:46 PM
http://ulsterscotsagency.com/sitefiles/images/usahome.gif


Tha Noarth-Sooth Boord ò Leid is cum aboot frae tha Bilfawst Greeance as yin o tha Noarth-Sooth boords. Tha Boord o Leid taks in twa faictòries, Tha Boord o Ulstèr-Scotch an Tha Boord o Gaelick (Foras na Gaeilge). Ilka yin o thir twa faictòries haes its ain boord quhilk thegither maks tha Noarth-Sooth Boord o Leid. The preses o ilka Boord is baith Claucht-Preses o tha Boord o Leid.
Tha Boord o Ulstèr-Scotch bis gart unnèr tha laa guide tha "forderin o mair forstannin an uise o tha Ulstèr-Scotch leid an o Ulstèr-Scotch fowkgate daeins, baith ben Norlin Airlann an athort tha islann".
Tha Boord maun gie answer til tha Noarth-Sooth Cooncil o Männystèrs, an maist o aa tae tha twa Männystèrs, baith in tha Norlin Airlann Semmlie an Dáil Eireann, as taks adae wi tha leid an tha heirskip o Ulstèr-Scotch fowkgates.
Tha Boord is ootbye govermenn männystries, but haes laa-makkin pooers in baith kintras on tha islann o Airlann.
Tha Boord wull hae its heich offis in Bilfawst, an an unnèr-offis in Dunnygal.

The Ulster-Scots Agency, or Tha Boord o Ulstèr-Scotch as it is known in Ullans, is a relatively new but important body that aims to promote the Ulster-Scots language and culture within the island of Ireland and beyond.
The Agency is part of the North/South Language Body (Tha Boord o Leid); one of six new cross-border bodies born out of the Belfast Agreement, on Good Friday, 10 April, 1998.
This body comprises two agencies, The Ulster-Scots Agency and Foras na Gaeilge, the agency responsible for the development of the Irish (Gaelic) language.
Each agency has its own board, whose members together constitute the board of the North/South Language Body.
The remit of the Ulster-Scots Agency is “the promotion of greater awareness and the use of Ullans and of Ulster-Scots cultural issues, both within Northern Ireland and throughout the island”.
The Agency is jointly funded by the Department of Culture, Arts and Leisure in Northern Ireland and the Department of Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs in the Republic of Ireland. The Agency is based in Belfast. It is opening a second office in east Donegal, an Ulster-Scots heartland area.
Homepage (http://ulsterscotsagency.com/)
Language (http://ulsterscotsagency.com/language.asp)
Education (http://ulsterscotsagency.com/education.asp)
Culture (http://ulsterscotsagency.com/culture.asp)
Awareness (http://ulsterscotsagency.com/awareness.asp)
Audio-Visual Library (http://ulsterscotsagency.com/Audiolanguage.asp)
"The Ulster Scot" newsletter (http://ulsterscotsagency.com/theulsterscot.asp)
"Tha Crack" weekly column (http://ulsterscotsagency.com/thacrack2.asp)
http://www.ulsterscotsagency.com/sitefiles/images/us_fin_lan-aware.gif

Appalachian
Wednesday, September 7th, 2005, 02:03 PM
Cultural affinities between Ulster and the western coasts of Scotland probably extend back to at least 8000BC,, when the hunter-gatherers who were the first inhabitants of the north coast of Ireland, and whose remains have been found at Mount Sandel, Coleraine, arrived across the North Channel, which was even narrower then than its current 12 miles.



During the Neolithic period, after the adoption of an agricultural way of life, massive stone monuments including passage tombs and court tombs were constructed over much of the northern part of Ireland and the west and north coasts of Scotland. Archaologist Barry Cunliffe observes that "The structural similarities and close geographical proximity of the Irish and Scottish monuments – seperated only by the narrow North Channel – is an indication that the two areas may well have been in regular contact with each other" (2001:171). Similar monuments are found on the western coasts of Wales and Cornwall, and the Atlantic coasts of Europe extending from Sweden to Portugal. Cunliffe has suggested that this shows the importance of the sea in binding together communities such as those in Ulster and Scotland at a time when travel by land was much more difficult.



During the Bronze Age the communal burial rites of the megalithic monuments started to give way to individual burials with grave goods including pottery, reflecting social changes spreading through the Atlantic coastal regions of Europe. Cunliffe observes that the new traditions "including the pottery styles, are shared between eastern and northern Ireland and southern Scotland, particularly the west coast, and clearly indicate a broad zone of contact and cultural interaction extending over a long period of time. Thus, in the third and second millenia (BC) Ireland seems to crystallise into two broad cultural groupings, one facing outwards to the Atlantic and retaining its old collective burial rites, the other facing inwards to the Irish Sea and western Scotland and sharing in the escalating social changes which were gripping Britain at the time (2001:242).



This pattern seems to continue into the Iron Age: Cunliffe notes that the range and quality of elite metalwork available througout the first millenium BC and into the first millenium AD are sufficient to suggest that much of eastern, central, and northern Ireland was under the domination of an aristocratic warrior elite, and it is within this broad central and eastern zone that the great ritual sites, Tara, Navan, Rathcroghan, and Dun Ailinne, are to be found. The Atlantic-facing lands from Co. Donegal to Co. Kerry in the west and from Co. Cork to Co. Wexford in the south lie, for the most part, outside this zone of elite dominance and, apart from a few scattered exotic artefacts emanating from the elite zone, lack a distinctive material culture. Thus, although the artifactual evidence is disparate and contextually lacking, it does suggest that Ireland, in the later first millenium BC, divided into two distinctive socio-economic zones.


The epic tales of ‘the Ulster Cycle’, which were written down by Christian monks in the early medieval period, but probably passed down in the oral tradition for centuries beforehand, have been described by Jackson as "a window on the Iron Age". They portray a society in Ulster dominated by a warrior elite, in accordance with the archaeological evidence. They describe an Ireland divided into five Provinces: Ulster, Leinster, Munster, Connacht and Meath, some of the stories suggesting that the boundary of Ulster lay as far south as the Boyne during this period. They also record regular contacts with Alba, later to become Scotland. The warrior Cuchulain travelled there to be trained in the martial arts, and Deirdre of the Sorrows fled there to escape the wrath of the king of Ulster, her lover Naoise taking service with the king of the Picts.


Ian Adamson has demonstrated the presence in Ulster during the Iron Age of a people known as the Cruthin or Qretani (1974). These are Gaelic or Q-Celtic interpretations of the name Pretani or Prydein which referred to the same people in the P-Celtic or Brittonic language of the neighbouring island. The names Prydein and Pretani were later romanised as Britain and Britons, which was the name by which the Romans referred to those they had conquered. Those elements of the population in the area now known as Scotland, which they did not bring under their control, they referred to as Picts. The names Cruthin, Qretani, Pretani (and hence Briton)and Pict all translate into English as ‘People of the Pictures’ or ‘People of the Designs’, according with Roman accounts of the Britons as heavily painted or tattooed (Davies 1999).



Pictish settlement in Ulster may not have been as extensive as Adamson has claimed, but it seems clear that they formed a significant part of the population of the north-eastern coastal region. The Ulster Cycle legends also make reference to Pictish warriors in Ireland..

The Pictish language was a P-Celtic or Brittonic language, whose closest modern relatives are Welsh and Breton. It is preserved in many Scottish placenames, but there is little evidence of its use in Ulster, and it seems likely that the Cruthin adopted the Gaelic tongue of their neighbours, and eventually became culturally assimilated..

During the 4th Century, Gaels from Ulster whom the Romans described as Scoti or Scots, a term meaning raiders or pirates, allied themselves with the Picts and with other tribes including Saxons from northern Europe to raid the Roman province of Brittania. In the course of this raiding, a romanised Briton named Patricius was seized from his home in northwestern Britannia and taken into slavery in Ulster. He escaped but later returned as an evangelist for Christianity basing himself in Armagh. Cunliffe notes that "If Patrick’s original home was in the north of Britain, possibly in the romanised region of Dumbarton (The Fort of the Britons), his choice of the north of Ireland would have been entirely logical in that he would have been following the long-established and no doubt still-operative trade route across the North Channel (2001:469).

In the 5th and 6th Centuries, raiding gave way to settlement: the Life of St. Columba tells of the landing of a small band of 150 men from Dal Riata in Antrim (Cunliffe 2001:459-60) who gave their name to the land they settled Ar Gael (Argyll) ‘The Coast of the Gaels’.



From this modest initial settlement grew the powerful kingdom of Dalriada, which held power on both sides of the sea. The settlement is well attested by placenames of Irish origin on the mainland and adjacent islands. Similar evidence also points to Irish settlement on the Galloway peninsula. That the settlers on the two sides of the North Channel should have been in close contact with each other in the 5th and 6th centuries need occasion no surprise. A community of common cultural ideas can be traced back to the Neolithic period when the region was closely linked by a common burial ritual, and throughout the Iron Age and Roman period the archaeological record shows that there was constant contact. The 150 settlers mentioned by St. Columba’s biographer were simply part of a continuing process of interaction.

Columba (also known as Columb or Colmcille: ‘The Dove of the Church’), was himself an example of the significance of continued ties between Ulster and the the land which was in the process of becoming Scotland. Originally from Donegal, Columba had founded the monastic settlement at Doire (Derry), where the Church of Ireland cathedral still bears his name.

In about 563 Columba sailed from northern Ireland with twelve followers to Dalriada in west Scotland, and two years later founded a monastery on the island of Iona…The establishment flourished and became highly influential, both as the focus of a group of Columbian monasteries spread throughout the north of Ireland and as the centre from which the Picts were converted (Cunliffe 2001:475).


The Scottish settlement of Dalriada existed alongside Pictland until"by a combination of aggression and intermarriage, the Scots merged with their Pictish neighbours, The traditional date of the final union is 843, when the whole of the Highlands and Islands came under the rule of Kenneth macAlpine. Throughout these four formative centuries the Scots retained a close relationship with their northern Irish forbears, and indeed much of their history as we know it comes from the Irish Annals…the importance of the sea in linking the communities was crucial (Cunliffe 2001:466).



Although the Scots were still a minority of the population, it was their language and culture that gradually came to dominate northern Britain, and from this time on, the kingdom of Scotland was a reality. It only encompassed the central part of the area we now call Scotland however. To the south were the Romano-British Kingdom of Strathclyde, centred on Dumbarton, the Viking Kingdom of Jorvik (York) and the Anglian kingdom of Northumbria, whilst Moray, Caithness and the northern and western isles came to be largely dominated by Vikings, who also maintained a fleet of longships on Lough Neagh, adding a Scandinavian element to the Ulster-Scottish heritage.



The maritime kingdom of Dalriada was replaced by the ‘Lordship of the Isles’ under the powerful Macdonald clan, who traced their descent to the Viking Somerled. The Macdonalds maintained a presence in Ulster, where they became known as MacDonnells, their stronghold being the spectacular castle at Dunluce, County Antrim, and the Lords of the Isles maintained their independence from the Kings of Scotland until the 13th century, holding their maritime realm together with Viking-style galleys, or Bir linn. The traditional wooden fishing boats of Ulster, known as Drontheims, are directly descended from the Viking longships, and a few are still sailed on the north coast.

In 1603, King James VI, now in control of all the territory we currently call Scotland, became King of England as well, following the death of the childless Queen Elizabeth. His first project was ‘The Breaking of the Border’: the subjugation of the turbulent border clans who had effectively ruled the frontier regions of England and Scotland, which James wanted to change from an almost permanent battleground between the two kingdoms into "the Middle Shires’ of a new ‘Great Britain’.


James then turned his attention to an equally turbulent part of his newly acquired domains – Ulster. He planned to settle Scottish Protestants there in order to subjugate the rebellious Catholic natives, and integrate the province into the new ‘British’ economic system. The task was initiated by private enterprise, the counties of Antrim and Down being effectively settled by Presbyterian Scots under the auspices of two Ayrshire lairds, and a similar project was initiated in County Monaghan. The ‘Flight of the Earls’ in 1607 made much greater areas of land available, and this led to a massive state-sponsored Plantation in the six remaining counties of Ulster. The effect of the various Plantations was that Antrim and Down became largely dominated by a Scots-speaking, Presbyterian immigrant population, whilst the whole of Ulster received a significant number of immigrants, mostly Scots, but including a smaller number of English, most of whom were borderers. Many of the Scots were also borderers: refugees or fugitives from James’ army, whilst others were from the western lowlands, with a smaller number from the extreme north-east, chiefly economic migrants fleeing recession and the collapse of rural communities brought about by the change from feudalism to a mercantilist economic system.



For James, the plantations seemed to kill three birds with one stone, pacifying the Gaelic natives of Ulster, making a region which had been reduced almost to desert by years of war economically productive, and removing a surplus population from Scotland, particularly rebellious borderers and ideologically dangerous Presbyterians. Of course, it did not work out exactly as planned.



It was as a result of these population movements that Ulster-Scots became the dominant tongue in those areas that had received the heaviest Scottish settlement, as well as influencing the English spoken throughout the province. It is a mistake to see Ulster-Scots culture as purely a result of the Plantation, however. As we have seen, this was only the latest of a series of population movements and cultural exchanges going back millenia.

During the 18th and early 19th centuries, Ulster experienced massive out-migration to North America as a result of continued economic and religious oppression of both Presbyterians and Catholics. These immigrants, who were called ‘Scotch-Irish’ became hugely influential, particularly in Pennsylvania and the southern colonies, and played a major role in the American Revolution which ended British rule. Their language and culture metamorphosed in response to the new environment and new cultural contacts, but many cultural commonalites remained, particularly in religious practice and in music. The impact of Ulster-Scots participation in the American Revolution also fed back into Ulster, contributing to the growth of the United Irishmen movement in Ulster-Scots communities, and to their traumatic involvement in the rebellion of 1798.

Throughout the modern period, constant movement between Ulster and Scotland has continued from the voyages of fishermen, to the seasonal migration of farm workers, to the permanent migration in both directions into industrial cities such as Belfast and Glasgow. These links are perhaps most strongly symbolised and constantly recreated by the massive support within Ulster for Glasgow Celtic and Glasgow Rangers football clubs. These movements, of course, always included the movement of music and musicans which has been documented since the time of the Gaelic harpers, and no doubt goes back as long as the islands have been inhabited.
http://www.qub.ac.uk/sa-old/resources/Belfast_Project/Sites_2004/USFO/pages/UlsterScotsHistoryCulture.html

Appalachian
Wednesday, September 7th, 2005, 02:42 PM
Scotland

Most Ulster Scots were in Scotland before they migrated to Ireland. MOST but not ALL.. We'll discuss where else they might have been later. But for now, where were they in Scotland and when did they move to Ireland and why?

Most of them were in areas of Scotland adjacent to Ireland. The largest migration of Scots to Ireland was in the early 1600's. Due to lack of definitive records, we do not have exact numbers, but in the early 1600's 120,000 are believed to have migrated -- from both England and Scotland. Bailyn says in one 24 month period in the 1630's at least 10,000 Scots migrated to Ireland (Bailyn, Bernard. The Peopling of British North America: An Introduction, Vintage Books, 1988, p 26).

In the early 1600's Ireland was the primary destination for migrating Scots because it provided opportunities that Scotland couldn't offer-- and Scots were not welcome in English colonies. Protestants were welcome. Catholic Scots, of which there are many, were not welcomed by the government in Ireland, though some did come, largely at the behest of Scottish Catholic lords, on whose lands in Scotland they may have already been living. But the bulk were Presbyterian lowlanders. They include a group of Protestant lowlanders that the Scottish government settled in Kintyre. They were run off by hostile natives and sheltered by Sir Randal McDonald (Catholic) on his lands in Antrim. He appreciated the lowland farmer. This group were a few of the many victims of the McDonald/Campbell feud.

Many tenant farmers came from Ayrshire -- though Ireland attracted enterprising landlords and merchants from all over Scotland. Other Scots had come from Argyle and other McDonald homelands in the mid 1500's with the McDonalds. Many of them were Catholic. They are still settled in the Glens of Antrim. Many are ethnically Irish because they are Catholic.

Another source of Scottish and English settlers was the Scottish/English border. At the time, James I/VI was breaking up those clans to secure the border between the two countries. Many fled hanging in England or Scotland to Ireland, largely settling in Fermanagh.

Often lords acquiring lands in Ireland recruited from their own Scottish estates or the estates of their neighbors, relatives, and friends.

An unknown number of Scots fled back to Scotland in the 1630's to avoid religious persecution in Scotland.

Ulster

In the early 1600's the Scots joined a small Irish population. Since poor Ulster had been decimated by more than 50 years of war at the time of the Plantations there were not many Irish. AND, contrary to popular belief, they were not "run off". If you doubt me, read Elliott The Catholics of Ulster --or any number of history books. True, the government WANTED to run them off and pursue a "Cherokee" type solution. However they were very short of men to farm and bring in the harvests. They could not afford to displace the Irish as their lives depended on them staying to bring in the harvests.Though the law prohibited the newcomers from renting to Irish, many did anyway. The Church (Protestant) was under no such restraints so many of its tenants were Irish.

The Ulster Irish spoke of course Irish, which was simply a different dialect of Gaelic. Scots and Irish could communicate without difficulty. This isn't surprising since the Scotti, an Irish tribe, moved from Ireland originally. They also followed similar naming patterns to the Irish. There were sons of Hughs, Johns, and James everywhere. So they sometimes ended up with the same or similar surnames as the incoming Scots.

Due to the destruction caused by war, there were no habitable houses. All the churches were in ruin. There were very few priests or Protestant clergy. It is documented that in at least one Antrim parish the entire Irish population became Presbyterian because the only minister about was the Scottish Presbyterian minister. If you wanted the baby baptized, he did it. In a world where religion was not yet politicized, this happened without communal pressure -- in some locations.

In 1641 many Ulster Scots were killed by the Irish in the Rising, but we are not sure how many. We do not know how many people were in Ulster as many had fled to Scotland in the 1630's to avoid the Black Oath. In 1642 more Scots arrived to defend the survivors as part of Monroe's army. It founded the first Presbyterian presbytery in Ireland. Before that, there was none. Though Presbyterian, not all these men were lowlanders. I have an ancestor who presumably arrived in 1642 in Monroe's army. He came from Kintyre and was a Lamont, though the surname of his descendants is BLACK. They settled into Antrim.

In the 1680's more Scots came to Ireland, fleeing the Killing Times in south western Scotland.

In the late 1690's another period of enhanced Scots immigration to Ireland occurred after King William secured his throne. Apparently whole new towns and villages sprang up at this time. There is also evidence of a famine in Scotland which caused increased migration.

After the Williamite Settlement there were no large movements of Scots to Ireland because economic conditions in Ireland were not good. Sometimes they fled to Ireland to avoid religious persecution, though sometimes they fled back to Scotland to escape it in Ireland. People also moved in both directions at various times to avoid political problems. People also migrated seasonally to Scotland to work on farms.

Non-Scots "Ulster Scots"

However not all "Ulster Scots" were from Scotland. Assimilating into this ethnic group, which has become synonymous for Presbyterians in Northern Ireland, were the English settlers of the Ulster Plantations. The English did not survive well in the tough climate of Ulster in the early 1600's. The Scots tended to replace them even in the English Plantations.

Other English/Welsh blood was donated by the Chichesters, who started a colony of their tenants in Antrim from their lands in Devon and Wales in the later 1500's. This is called the "Lost English Colony". The surnames remain in the Belfast area.

Also you have other immigrants such as the Thompson family, who emigrated from Holland. They became a prominent Belfast merchant family. After 1690 many of King William's continental soldiers settled in Ireland. Not too many of Cromwell's soldiers were settled in Ulster since it already was largely in the hands of loyal Protestants.

Protestants such as Huguenots and Germans also settled in Ireland in the 1600's. Many of these settled elsewhere in Ireland than Ulster, though there were settlements of Germans in Antrim and Huguenots in Lisburn -- as well as others.

The surnames of the non-British settlers rapidly became anglicized so that they can be difficult to identify by surname alone.

Finally Irish assimilated into the Ulster Scots ethnic group. As Irish converted to Protestantism, descendants assumed their families came from Scotland as they adopted the myths of the Ulster Scot as their own. However some don't. Surnames were fluid. Adopting a new ethnic identity was very simple: drop the O. Some Irish surnames began with Mac as well as Scots. By dropping the Mac, the name was anglicized and indistinguishable from English surnames.

In the 1600's there appears to have been an ethnic fluidity in Ireland. Your "ethnicity" was determined more by your choice of religion rather than your ancestrage. In some areas in south Antrim, it is believed that, due to lack of both Catholic and Church of Ireland clergy and the presence of Gaelic-speaking Presbyterian clergy, the indigenous population became Presbyterian by default. The first Presbyterian minister in Bushmills was an Irishman named O'Quinn in the early 1600's. He preached in Irish to his congregation and went on missions to convert the Irish. Evidence remains that the Scottish Presbyterians maintained an active ministry in Irish though this became impossible to maintain due to the government policies outlawing the use of Irish. Meanwhile Scottish men were marrying Irish women -- who raised their offspring Catholic and Irish speaking. In fact, when the law was repealed in the early 1600's which made it illegal for Scots to marry Irish, we are told there was "great rejoicing".

Let none of this of course detract from your current ethnic tag. We are who were are; our ancestors, however, may well have been something different. At one time they were Strathclydians, Mercians, Northumberlanders or Irish or Scots warriors fighting with Irish or Scots warriers of differing clans. These kingdoms and the clan rivalries are forgotten though at one time their inhabitants fought bitterly with one another to establish their cultures in Great Britain. In fact, the Scotti of Roman days were an Irish clan -- from County Antrim. They later invaded Scotland (500 AD) and won the local cultural battle with the Picts.

As long as Ireland and Scotland have been next to each other, there's been migration between the two to adjacent areas. Ulster is adjacent to Scotland -- so that's where many Scots went. It was easy to go over and come back again.

Often it was difficult to tell a Scot from an Irish because in many cases, they shared a common culture and spoke a common tongue. They had similar cultures. Many Scots clans are founded by Irish clans. In fact, Scotland is a colony of Ireland. Before 500 AD the "Scotti" were in Ireland. Scotland was called "Alba" then and Picts lived there. The Scotti established a colony on the western shores. Eventually these Antrim boys lost their lands in Ireland to marauding Irish clans, but they supplanted the Picts. Kenneth McAlpin united the thrones of the Picts and Scots. However the eastern lowlanders were a different people. They are the descendants of Angles and Vikings and Pictish clans, not the Irish Scotti.

In the late Middle Ages a new phenomena began to occur that would have a massive impact on Ireland. Irish lords began to hire Scottish mercenaries to help fight their intertribal and wars with the English. They were called Galloglass soldiers from the Irish gall oglaigh or stranger soldiers. They were apparently from the western Scotland and of mixed Scots and Viking origin. They changed the course of history in the 1500's. Through one dynastic marriage an Irish lord got 10,000 of these soldiers. Some of them settled down in Ireland and established clans of their own. The McSweenies are one example of a galloglass clan who assimilated into the Irish. If they stayed Catholic, they assimilated into the Irish and lost their ethnic identity as Scots.

As mentioned, the majority of the Ulster Scots came in the Ulster Plantation period. They came willingly, recruited by their lairds, many of whom were also acquiring Irish estates. Their forte was not only farming but also the skilled labor required to create a colony. They could build homes, raise livestock, blacksmith, and so on.

Seventeen Hundreds

Much of the text on this page has focused on the sixteen hundreds since it was the formative period of the Ulster Scots. It was also a very turbulent hundred years in Ireland. Nonetheless, Scots didn't attempt to emigrate to the Americas in any large numbers. A few did leave. In fact Rev Mckemie began the Presbyterian Church in America. However most didn't leave till the 1700's.

In the early 1700's the political situation in Ireland stabilized. There would be no more rebellions till 1798. However economic conditions worsened, at least partially due to trade restrictions placed on the economy by Parliament.These laws also impacted the Scottish economy. Consequently Ireland was no longer an attractive destination for immigrants.

While in the 1600's the Presbyterians were persecuted and neither they or Catholics worshipped in churches, as the Penal Laws were reduced in the 1700's, they began to construct churches, called meeting houses. While in the 1600's it was common for families to move to new farms frequently, in the 1700's people "settled down" and attempted to hold onto the lease that they'd had. Thrown into competition over reduced resources, Irish and Scots began to conflict locally. For instance the Hearts of Oak disturbance.

The great wave of emigration of Ulster Scots to American began in 1718 and continued till the start of the American Revolution.

Click here to continue. (http://homepages.rootsweb.com/~merle/History/index.htm)

http://homepages.rootsweb.com/~merle/History/SI-History.htm#HistUlster

Appalachian
Wednesday, September 7th, 2005, 03:08 PM
http://www.lowcountryboys.com/images/LCB-Map-1-lrg.jpg
http://www.lowcountryboys.com/images/LCB-Map-2-lrg.jpg
http://www.lowcountryboys.com/images/LCB-Map-3-lrg.jpg
http://www.lowcountryboys.com/images/LCB-Map-5-lrg.jpg

Milesian
Tuesday, September 20th, 2005, 10:59 AM
Tha Noarth-Sooth Boord ò Leid is cum aboot frae tha Bilfawst Greeance as yin o tha Noarth-Sooth boords. Tha Boord o Leid taks in twa faictòries, Tha Boord o Ulstèr-Scotch an Tha Boord o Gaelick (Foras na Gaeilge). Ilka yin o thir twa faictòries haes its ain boord quhilk thegither maks tha Noarth-Sooth Boord o Leid. The preses o ilka Boord is baith Claucht-Preses o tha Boord o Leid.
Tha Boord o Ulstèr-Scotch bis gart unnèr tha laa guide tha "forderin o mair forstannin an uise o tha Ulstèr-Scotch leid an o Ulstèr-Scotch fowkgate daeins, baith ben Norlin Airlann an athort tha islann".
Tha Boord maun gie answer til tha Noarth-Sooth Cooncil o Männystèrs, an maist o aa tae tha twa Männystèrs, baith in tha Norlin Airlann Semmlie an Dáil Eireann, as taks adae wi tha leid an tha heirskip o Ulstèr-Scotch fowkgates.
Tha Boord is ootbye govermenn männystries, but haes laa-makkin pooers in baith kintras on tha islann o Airlann.
Tha Boord wull hae its heich offis in Bilfawst, an an unnèr-offis in Dunnygal.

Is that Appalachian again?
At first I thought it related to the rest of the posts, but knowing very well the everyday speech of both Scotland and north east Ulster I know that no-one talks like that.

Milesian
Tuesday, September 20th, 2005, 11:11 AM
[IMG]http://www.lowcountryboys.com/images/LCB-Map-5-lrg.jpg


That map is pretty misleading. For a start, there is no single "Scots" stretching over Northern Ireland and part of Scotland. Within Scotland itself, you have Doric being spoken in Grampian (which seems to have some SCandinavian and even Pictish influence), you have the Fife people speaking a more lilting dialect, the Lothian people have a somewhat stronger dialect again, and the Glaswegians have a brogue which is obviously influenced by the Irish accent of the north. So-called "Scots" is also spoken in the regions where "Gaelic" is indicated. In fact there are no monoglot Gaelic speakers, it is just that these areas likely have the highest concentration of bilingual speakers. The Hebrides more than Sutherland and other areas marked though. In addition, the "Scots" spoken in Northern Ireland is pretty archaic and peculiar. In fact when speaking to some of them of a certain political persuasion,they seem to attempt to pepper their sentences with more and more Scottish sounding words (or words they percieve to be) in an attempt to sound more Scottish-like themselves. The result is that they sound like something out of a Burns poem or a parody of what foreigners think Scots sound like, rather than the normal everyday speech of the Scottish people themselves. Perhaps I'm just being cynical though. Anyway, It's debatable whether you could term it is the same dialect as that spoken in Scotland itself.. Even worse, the people from Grampian region are often difficult to understand. Not just their accent, but their use of words which are peculiar to them can make then incomprehensible to other Scots at times. I would think someone from N.I. would be lost in conversation with them much of the time.

In addition, the colour coding would make one think that the "Gaelic" of Scotland was seperate from the "Irish" of Ireland. In fact the former is simply a dialect of the latter. Although treated officially as a seperate language (which is fair enough in the interests of national pride), linguistically they are still close enough to be able to be treated as either. The Irish of Donegal is as close to Scots Gaelic as it is to the Irish of the rest of the country, The relationship between the various kinds of Gaelic are complex and interwoven.

Lastly, I would note that it seems to show Irish as not being spoken in Northern Ireland. That would seem strange considering that the Irish language has the highest rates of growth there.


One would think that there might be a political agenda with some of these maps and posts
Perhaps Dr. Dami should have done a bit more research. Leaving the University of Geneva to do some field work might have been a good idea ;)

Appalachian
Sunday, December 4th, 2005, 05:36 PM
So let me get this straight:

You're trying to tell us that the map is faulty because Ulster Scots and Doric don't count as the same language due to the fact that they're spoken on different islands. Then you want to tell us that the map is again faulty because Irish Gaelic and Scottish Gaelic are essentially the same language, despite the fact that they're spoken on different islands.

http://img530.imageshack.us/img530/6395/blah0fh.gif

Wayfarer
Sunday, December 4th, 2005, 06:06 PM
That map is pretty misleading. For a start, there is no single "Scots" stretching over Northern Ireland and part of Scotland. Within Scotland itself, you have Doric being spoken in Grampian (which seems to have some SCandinavian and even Pictish influence), you have the Fife people speaking a more lilting dialect, the Lothian people have a somewhat stronger dialect again, and the Glaswegians have a brogue which is obviously influenced by the Irish accent of the north. So-called "Scots" is also spoken in the regions where "Gaelic" is indicated. In fact there are no monoglot Gaelic speakers, it is just that these areas likely have the highest concentration of bilingual speakers. The Hebrides more than Sutherland and other areas marked though. In addition, the "Scots" spoken in Northern Ireland is pretty archaic and peculiar. In fact when speaking to some of them of a certain political persuasion,they seem to attempt to pepper their sentences with more and more Scottish sounding words (or words they percieve to be) in an attempt to sound more Scottish-like themselves. The result is that they sound like something out of a Burns poem or a parody of what foreigners think Scots sound like, rather than the normal everyday speech of the Scottish people themselves. Perhaps I'm just being cynical though. Anyway, It's debatable whether you could term it is the same dialect as that spoken in Scotland itself.. Even worse, the people from Grampian region are often difficult to understand. Not just their accent, but their use of words which are peculiar to them can make then incomprehensible to other Scots at times. I would think someone from N.I. would be lost in conversation with them much of the time.

In addition, the colour coding would make one think that the "Gaelic" of Scotland was seperate from the "Irish" of Ireland. In fact the former is simply a dialect of the latter. Although treated officially as a seperate language (which is fair enough in the interests of national pride), linguistically they are still close enough to be able to be treated as either. The Irish of Donegal is as close to Scots Gaelic as it is to the Irish of the rest of the country, The relationship between the various kinds of Gaelic are complex and interwoven.

Your post is actually quite misleading. Scots is a collection of closely related dialects, Doric being one dialect of Scots and Ullans or Ulster Scots being another dialect. Having divergent dialects is a common feature of perhaps every language in the world.

Of course no single Scots is spoken, the map doesnt claim that it simply shows the distribution of speakers of that language and not a break down of its various dialects, as England is also shown in the same colour yet England as many more and greater divergent dialects than Scots.
If you want a break down of the various Scots dialects check out this thread
http://forums.skadi.net/showthread.php?t=40774

Its quite disturbing that you as an Irishman living in Scotland seem to have such a disparaging view of the local language.

Appalachian
Sunday, December 4th, 2005, 06:15 PM
http://img186.imageshack.us/img186/7332/ulssclt8ab.jpg

Wayfarer
Sunday, December 4th, 2005, 06:34 PM
Just across the Irish Sea
Stirs a heart of Loyalty
Raised in Honour and in dignity
Drives a will to keep us British free
Not alone are we on this journey
For in a land just across the sea
Is a hand that reaches out in friendship
And a bond thats lasted centuries

And it''s hands across the water
Reaching out for you and me
For Queen, For Ulster and For Scotland
Helps to keep our Loyal people free
Let the cry be "No Surrender"
Let no-one doubt this Loyalty
Reaching out to the Brave Red Hand of Ulster
Is the hand across the sea

Appalachian
Sunday, December 4th, 2005, 07:31 PM
http://www.theulsterscots.com/scotlandflag%20and%20symbolsmap.jpg

“I love Highlanders, and I love Lowlanders, but when I come to that branch of our race that has been grafted on to the Ulster stem I take off my hat in veneration and awe.”

--Lord Rosebery

Wayfarer
Sunday, December 4th, 2005, 07:55 PM
http://cain.ulst.ac.uk/mccormick/photos/no1299r.jpg

The writing on the mural says

"Through Famine and Frost,
poverty and persecution,
the Ulster-Scots People
emigrated to the four corners of the earth.

Ulster-Scots can be found
from the Americas
to Australia – ordinary folk,
yet extraordinary achievers.

Our incredible story
is seldom told.
Discover it for Yourself"


Ulster Scots are extraordinary and wonderful folks. Despite what they have to put up with the cry of No Surrender is loudly heard.
I am proud to call them my kin, my Fowk.

nurnberg
Monday, December 5th, 2005, 07:34 AM
The ‘Flight of the Earls’ in 1607

and there, effectively, is where Irish history basically ends in the sense of an Irish 'kingdom' with the potential to assert itself as a leading European nation producing European leaders.

nurnberg
Monday, December 5th, 2005, 08:04 AM
Lastly, I would note that it seems to show Irish as not being spoken in Northern Ireland. That would seem strange considering that the Irish language has the highest rates of growth there.

Well, there are antecedents to that which seem to be overlooked. If such were actually the case then we would not see Douglas Hyde and the Gaelic "resuscitation."

Did 1923 Irish immerse themselves in the Gaelic language ?
You must know the answer to that, Milesian.

Number Native Gaelic Speakers in Ireland: 55,000 (1.4 percent)

Number of Disabled - "Cross disability is a generic term that describes a broad range of disabilities, including those that are physical, emotional, intellectual and mental. It is estimated that there are almost 400,000 people with such disabilities in Ireland, equivalent to almost 10 per cent of the total population."
(source: PWDI People with Disabilities Ireland)

what does this all mean in the end?
That, for whatever reason, the 20th century "Irish" [whatever that is supposed to represent in light of the diverse ancestral components of the island] were not serious about the language from the very beginning and merely employed it as either separatist propaganda or as a communications code for military purposes. The number of authentic native Gaelic speakers seems to be quite low.

Imperator X
Monday, December 5th, 2005, 07:45 PM
Kind of funny how the Loyal Ulster Scots use the Red Hand as a unifying symbol, when originally the "Red Hand" was a symbol of the native Irish Clan of O' Neal i.e the native Irish clan that was booted off of the land by the English in the first place and then settled by Loyal Scots.

Appalachian
Monday, December 5th, 2005, 08:34 PM
Kind of funny how the Loyal Ulster Scots use the Red Hand as a unifying symbol, when originally the "Red Hand" was a symbol of the native Irish Clan of O' Neal i.e the native Irish clan that was booted off of the land by the English in the first place and then settled by Loyal Scots.

False.

Firstly, there is no such thing as a "native Irish clan," as the Irish themselves were invaders from Iberia who drove the Picts and Brythonnic Celts already inhabiting the island into small corners of it and back across the sea to the British mainland.

Secondly, there is no irony in the Ulstermen's use of the Red Hand, as it was not only Ulster Scots and other Ulster Britons, but also many of the Gaelic Irish living in Ulster, who chose to resist 'Home Rule' and assert their democratic desire to remain part of the United Kingdom (http://forums.skadi.net/showthread.php?p=347165). The overwhelming majority of the people of Ulster still assert that desire, despite decades of brutality and terrorism by those who would discard the democratic will of the majority and force the rule of Dublin upon them.

The Red Hand has, over the centuries, become much more than a symbol of the O'Neills. It has become a symbol of Ulster, and since the majority of the people of Ulster choose to resist Irish rule and maintain their status as citizens of the UK, it is an apt symbol for Ulster Unionism.

Imperator X
Monday, December 5th, 2005, 09:43 PM
Using that logic you could make the assertion that there are no true indigenous populations, after all most Europeans at some point migrated from central Asia. (:o

It is still a symbol of O' Neill, the Catholic O' Neills which did not look kindly upon Cromwell, why would they after they had been displaced and slaughtered by him?

Appalachian
Monday, December 5th, 2005, 10:16 PM
Using that logic you could make the assertion that there are no true indigenous populations, after all most Europeans at some point migrated from central Asia. (:o

The point is that the Gaels drove many of those who inhabited the land before them across the channel to the mainland and absorbed some others. Those who migrated across the channel to Britain returned in successive waves over the centuries beginning long before the plantation of Ireland. For at least 1,500 years, from the return of Congal Claen to the coming of the Gallowglass to the Plantation of the Ulster Scots, Britons have returned to claim their place in Ulster.

Additionally, the lines have become so blurred that to speak of Gaels vs. 'foreigners' in the current context is meaningless. This is especially evident when one considers that some of the leading figures of the 'Republican' movement, such as Gerry Adams and Bobby Sands, have English and Lowland Scots family names.


It is still a symbol of O' Neill, the Catholic O' Neills which did not look kindly upon Cromwell, why would they after they had been displaced and slaughtered by him?

No, it was a symbol of the O'Neills, most likely adopted before they were Christianized by the efforts of the Briton known as Patricius and even before the Normans brought Ireland's traditional Christianity fully under the sway of the Church in Rome. Once more, over the years it has become less a symbol of the O'Neills (who no longer exist as a political entity) and more a symbol of Ulster itself. Since the overwhelming majority of Ulstermen have expressed the desire to remain in Union with Great Britain, that symbol of Ulster is a de facto symbol of Unionism.

And instead of harkening to Cromwell, himself no friend of the Ulster Scots (having planned to forcibly relocate them from Ulster to the south of Ireland) in this thread about the connections between Ulster and Scotland, you should be harkening to Edward the Bruce, who was invited by the O'Neills themselves to come from Scotland in order to assume the title of King of Ireland in 1315.

Appalachian
Wednesday, December 7th, 2005, 01:51 AM
A Kist O Wurds -- Ulster Scots Radio on BBC Northern Ireland



Fair faa ye tae a kistfu o yairns, music, wittens an crack, aa gien ower i the Ulster-Scotch leid wi Conal Gillespie.

Welcome to a chestful of stories, music, news and crack presented in the Ulster Scots tongue by Conal Gillespie.


Listen here (http://www.bbc.co.uk/northernireland/radioulster/shows/kist_o_wurds.shtml).

Imperator X
Wednesday, December 7th, 2005, 02:47 AM
Once more, over the years it has become less a symbol of the O'Neills (who no longer exist as a political entity) and more a symbol of Ulster itself.

Read hijacked.

Appalachian
Wednesday, December 7th, 2005, 03:39 AM
Read hijacked.

http://img236.imageshack.us/img236/6977/violin9av.gif

Haplotype I
Wednesday, December 7th, 2005, 05:12 AM
Cultural affinities between Ulster and the western coasts of Scotland probably extend back to at least 8000BC

Good to see some fighting blood on here. I agree 8000 BC at least.

What I've noticed recently from McDonalds Y Chromosone DNA Haplotype studies this year is that the I Haplotype perhaps originated, mutated and became the I Haplotype, right on the Islands, our Islands.

So multiculturalist Jews who say we all came from the Middle East are probably very wrong indeed.

Especially when we factor in early Man, what has been called Archaic Homo Sapiens....in the Islands, going back 450,000 years.

Great to see the Fighting Ulster spirit here. Lets remember the Romans never successfully fought us, so our I Y-Chomosone Haplotype remained intact.

Wayfarer
Wednesday, December 7th, 2005, 09:38 PM
It is still a symbol of O' Neill, the Catholic O' Neills which did not look kindly upon Cromwell, why would they after they had been displaced and slaughtered by him?
The Red Hand is a symbol of the region of today's Ulster and not of one clan or family. Its origins are unknown but go back at least 2500 years.
The Red Hand is found in the arms of the McCartans, O'Donnellys, O'Dunlevys, and McGuinnesses as well as the O'Neills.


Read hijacked.
Since the O'neills only adopted the provincial symbol of the Red Hand in the 16th century then if anybodies hijacked the symbol its the O'neills. ;)

The legend of the Red Hand goes that the leader of a war party to first touch the land with his right hand was promised that land. The winner who was left handed cut off his right hand and threw it on to the land.

Some people claim that the legend refers to the Milesians however there is absolutely no evidence for this and it is just an assumption.

Because of its ancient and forgotten origins then it must originate thousands of years in the pagan past.

To sum up, the Red Hand of Ulster is an ancient pagan symbol whose ownership belongs only to the land of Ulster.

Vestmannr
Wednesday, December 7th, 2005, 09:54 PM
The Milesians landed at Howth, just outside of what is Dublin today - I think there is compelling evidence to consider Dal Riada (Ulster, the Western Isles and Highlands, and the Rhinns of Galloway) on its own terms as 'Conn''s land, vs. Mog (the rest of Ireland to the South) or Eastern 'Pictish' Scotland, or Southern Scotland.

Haplotype I
Thursday, December 8th, 2005, 05:50 AM
The Red Hand is a symbol of the region of today's Ulster and not of one clan or family. Its origins are unknown but go back at least 2500 years.
The Red Hand is found in the arms of the McCartans, O'Donnellys, O'Dunlevys, and McGuinnesses as well as the O'Neills.


Since the O'neills only adopted the provincial symbol of the Red Hand in the 16th century then if anybodies hijacked the symbol its the O'neills. ;)

The legend of the Red Hand goes that the leader of a war party to first touch the land with his right hand was promised that land. The winner who was left handed cut off his right hand and threw it on to the land.

Some people claim that the legend refers to the Milesians however there is absolutely no evidence for this and it is just an assumption.

Because of its ancient and forgotten origins then it must originate thousands of years in the pagan past.

To sum up, the Red Hand of Ulster is an ancient pagan symbol whose ownership belongs only to the land of Ulster.

Yes the Red Hand. It was two brothers of one Clan who wanted to claim a hereditary piece of territory with a castle on it. They were rowing towards shore, the Clan and beautiful Clan eligible women, with golden hair flowing in the wind and beautiful white skin, where following in row boats as well, watching to see who had the most guts and courage of the rival brothers, the one that was tiring from the rowing, stopped, cut off his hand, and threw it with his remaining hand 200 feet to the shore and claimed the land.

That -- is the Ulster fighting spirit. We have that blood in us! Even Today!

Imperator X
Thursday, December 8th, 2005, 07:06 PM
Fair enough, but it is only a matter of time before the Cathy-licks outbreed the Loyalists and Ireland is unified. Though I fear by that time, Eire shall be overrun by outlanders, multiculturalism, and social decay, resulting from their political apathy and new found wealth from the Euro and technologies sector.

Wayfarer
Thursday, December 8th, 2005, 11:03 PM
Fair enough, but it is only a matter of time before the Cathy-licks outbreed the Loyalists and Ireland is unified. Though I fear by that time, Eire shall be overrun by outlanders, multiculturalism, and social decay, resulting from their political apathy and new found wealth from the Euro and technologies sector.
Its not a matter of who is in the majority or minority. So what if Catholics, i assume thats what you mean by cathy-licks, might become a majority?
Whats important is cultural rights and the freedom for all communities to practise there culture without restriction and prejudice. Northern Ireland has come a long way.
A catholic majority does not mean a Unified Ireland. Thats a typical misconception among folk who share your ignorant thinking.
Factors that need to be taken into account is that
1) Not all catholics support unification with the RoI
2) Unionist will still be a large minority
3) Economically the North is too different from the South
4) The fear from all sections of Northern Irelands communites of hegemony from Dublin
5) The UK wont just give up the province
6) The RoI most likely will not want the North
7) Cultural rights of Gaelic, Ulster Scots, Catholic and Protestants are better garanteed in the North than in the Republic
8) Ulster is becoming more Atheistic and Agnostic, i cant remember the source from this but is based on censuses in the Province that showed that non religious folk are increasing, in some counties as much as 20%. Includes people from both catholic and protestant backgrounds.
9)There is also a third option of an Independant Ulster. Quite popular among factions of both the Catholic and Protestant communites.

Im sure there are other factors too that isnt readily on my mind this moment.

The situation is obviously far more complex than you think. IMHO :) i think it is wise to refrain from forming an opinion on a matter you know little or nothing about.
There seems sometimes like there is this romantic image of Catholic Irish as being brave valiant victims in this. Despite the fact the terrorist murderers cold bloodedly kill innocent civilians including wee bairns, catholic and protestants.
I have much greater respect of the opinions of the likes of Milesians and other Nationalists/Republicans whose opinions i might not share but at least they know what they are talking about.

Taking sides is not going to solve the problems, rather a fair platform for Ulster where all communities are free to practise their traditions and where no community has fear of oppression or prejudice regardless if they are in the majority or not.



Oh a ban on religion should also be a good thing too :D

Appalachian
Thursday, December 8th, 2005, 11:51 PM
There seems sometimes like there is this romantic image of Catholic Irish as being brave valiant victims in this. Despite the fact the terrorist murderers cold bloodedly kill innocent civilians including wee bairns, catholic and protestants.


Just as ridiculous is the myth of "English oppression" and accusations of "imperialism" in Northern Ireland. This rhetoric is convenient for propagandists and makes for entertaining Hollywood movies or conversation over drinks at the Sixth International, but it has little historical or truthful basis, in that England has repeatedly been prepared to hand Ulster over to the Irish, but the Ulstermen themselves have resisted this fiercely and insisted on maintaining their status as a nation separate from the Irish.

We see the pattern repeated again and again, from the days of 'Home Rule,' the Free State, and the Ulster Covenant (http://forums.skadi.net/showthread.php?t=43856) right down to the modern day's capitulatory power-sharing agreements and subsequent Loyalist backlash.


Hear the measured beat of Ulstermen marching
Through the green fields and streets of the towns
Called up to arms by bold Edward Carson
To stand for the red hand and crown

These were the seed of mighty Cuchulain
These were the sons of Congal Claen
Determined that Gael and rogue should not rule them
And England, if need be, withstand

Those were the days of Ulster's defiance
Those were the days of passionate strife
Those were the days when England denied us
And Ulster stood for her life...

nurnberg
Friday, December 9th, 2005, 05:48 AM
Fair enough, but it is only a matter of time before the Cathy-licks outbreed the Loyalists and Ireland is unified. Though I fear by that time, Eire shall be overrun by outlanders, multiculturalism, and social decay, resulting from their political apathy and new found wealth from the Euro and technologies sector.
Proving once and for all that the premises of said petty nationalism were not authentic.

What can one say of such character,
as evidenced when they discovered that the entire cultural expression in the form of cuisine could be based on a single tuber.

nurnberg
Friday, December 9th, 2005, 06:02 AM
Just as ridiculous is the myth of "English oppression"...but it has little historical or truthful basis, in that England has repeatedly been prepared to hand Ulster over to the Irish, but the Ulstermen themselves have resisted this fiercely and insisted on maintaining their status as a nation separate from the Irish.
You have hit the nail on the head there, although it is doubtful any "Irish" would agree with you.

For a salient example one should look at the photos of 1969 Northern Ireland's Roman Catholics serving tea to the British soldiers who were protecting them.

The essence of the propaganda is an attempt to shift the conflict from an internal intra-"Irish" one to that of an external inter-national one.

Such was part of an overall worldwide resurgence of Bolshevism and Internationalism across all European territories. Did the Irish manifestation of such have any true derivation from the alleged thousand year conflict? Little or none at all.

One need only examine documentation of the negotiations 1922-1923.
Or examine what the "Saiorse Stat" became post 1923, basically a satellite of Britain, which was all it was equipped to be since the "Flight of the Earls" in the first place.

The entire 20th century charade has been disgusting.

Imperator X
Wednesday, January 11th, 2006, 12:57 AM
Must I remind you all that William Wallace, the Scots freedom fighter was tortured to death and had his head impaled on London Bridge. (A typical punishment for treason, although Wallace never once swore fealty to an English king.) <--Rebut before moving on to my latter inquiries, so that I may be better informed.

So the Scots King James married into the English royal line and enjoyed ruling Great Britain for a while, has there been a true Scots sovereign enthroned since?

What about the recent dissolution of the Royal Scottish Regiment?

Are you positing that there have been no incidence of Massacres of the Irish by the English? What about 1/3 of Irish pop. dying during the reign of Elizabeth I.

English oppression, a myth? The assertion is laughable.

Haplotype I
Saturday, January 28th, 2006, 07:36 AM
When we look at Geography, the Tyne-Solway Isthmus is the narrow stretch of land that ancient Druid tribes inhabited between Scotland and Britain.

It was this geographical narrowness that prohibited large migration of genes and genetic culture north into Scotland. It is what separated, ethnically and in genes, Scotland from Britian.

When I check back on my Scottish Ancestors, I see a VERY STRONG Norweigan genetic line.

Somerled was a Norwiegan-Scot-Pict. Large parts of the costal regions of Scotland and Ulster are Blond, Blue eyed Norweigans and we are proud of our Norse Viking Pict fighting blood.

My Blood steams when I hear we Ulster Scots don't have definition. Look at a map of the Forth-Clyde Isthmus it's very narrow between Glasgow and Edinburgh.

Tacitus (writing c.AD98) regards all the country north of the Forth-Clyde line as Caledonia, and, because of the narrowness of the isthmus which separates the Forth from the Clyde (and because, at the time he was writing about, it marked the boundary between Roman occupied and unoccupied Britain), he says it "might be called another island."

Even the Roman historians drew the line between the "Caledonians" and the "Britons". There were two Ninth Roman Legions, one of them 50,000 strong disappeared 80 miles north of Edinborough. The Legions were erased from Roman Historical records. You don't want to mess with the Sons of Somerled.

We Ulster Picts are form the Druid worlds.

Imperator X
Saturday, January 28th, 2006, 09:57 PM
Must I remind you all that William Wallace, the Scots freedom fighter was tortured to death and had his head impaled on London Bridge. (A typical punishment for treason, although Wallace never once swore fealty to an English king.) <--Rebut before moving on to my latter inquiries, so that I may be better informed.

So the Scots King James married into the English royal line and enjoyed ruling Great Britain for a while, has there been a true Scots sovereign enthroned since?

What about the recent dissolution of the Royal Scottish Regiment?

Are you positing that there have been no incidence of Massacres of the Irish by the English? What about 1/3 of Irish pop. dying during the reign of Elizabeth I.

English oppression, a myth? The assertion is laughable.

Following up on this my previous post.

The reason why the Ulster Scots and Scots hide behind the all-encompassing term "British" is because they realize that if they didn't have the support of the English they would've been toast. The fact of what happened to William Wallace just shows that the English have been violently antagonistic to the Scots in the past, and King James' ascent to the British throne is just a cowardly compromise.

Like the Edward was told in Braveheart, "Get ready, you are about to get your ass kissed by a king."

I know this took place long before official union in the 18th century, but the sentiment still holds up.

Oswiu
Sunday, January 29th, 2006, 03:10 AM
Must I remind you all that William Wallace, ...
Must you?
:yawn
Why, with the illustrious pedigree you claim for yourself, do you go around under an Indian avatar, and giving out Hindu slogans?! Knocks me sick.

Anyway,
Speaking of old British-Irish contacts, I though I'd mention the Fir Domnann of Old Ireland, who are obviously the same as the Dumnonii of Devon, and Damnonii of Caledonia.
And the Fir Bolg might well be the Belgae of SE Britain and NE Gallia.
Cuchullain's real name was Setanta, inviting many curious parallels with the Setantii tribe of NW Britannia, centred around the Mersey [formerly Seteia], and associated in Welsh legend with the great sea farer Seithennin.
St Brigid of Ireland is none other than the Bride of the Hebrides, the Brigindo of Gaul, the Goddess for whom the Brigantes of Leinster and Northern Britannia were named, as also the same tribal name in Galicia in Hispania, the river Brent in London, the town of Breganz on the Alpine Bodensee... ad infinitum!
And things worked the other way, too. The Lleyn Peninsula of North Wales is named after the same Laginn that Irish Leinster was.

When we look at Geography, the Tyne-Solway Isthmus is the narrow stretch of land that ancient Druid tribes inhabited between Scotland and Britain.
Eh?! What are you talking about, Man? Druids were a priesthood, not a kind of tribe, and in any case, they were found everywhere in the British Isles, as well as on the Continent.

It was this geographical narrowness that prohibited large migration of genes and genetic culture north into Scotland. It is what separated, ethnically and in genes, Scotland from Britian.
Give over! It wasn't an ethnic barrier before OR after the Roman period! The regions around Carlisle and Glasgow were steadfast Welsh speaking areas even into the last millenium. Even Edinburgh was until the Northumbrians made their presence truly felt in the 8th and 9th Centuries!
After the Welsh faded away in the hinterland of Edinburgh, the area became an integral part of Anglian Bernicia, why do you think the capital has an English suffix? The narrowness of the isthmus never hampered this. I've actually walked across the isthmus - and it's not that narrow, let me tell you! Took me days, and my feet didn't half hurt.

My Blood steams when I hear we Ulster Scots don't have definition. Look at a map of the Forth-Clyde Isthmus it's very narrow between Glasgow and Edinburgh.
Mine too [the blood!] but I fail to see what the Antonine Wall has to do with this.
Ulster settlers were drawn from many regions of mainland Britain, never mind Scotland. Even considering the majority Scotch element, many if not most of these were from the Borders, around your first narrow isthmus! THey are living proof that this isthmus was no barrier to geneflow.
See the evidence of the spread of Border names on BOTH sides of the border;
Armstrong;
http://cetl2.geog.ucl.ac.uk/output/GBnames_CETL223165412461904.png
http://cetl2.geog.ucl.ac.uk/uclnames/Map.aspx?name=ARMSTRONG&year=1881&altyear=1998&country=GB&type=name
Lamb;
http://cetl2.geog.ucl.ac.uk/output/GBnames_CETL223165412461936.png
http://http://cetl2.geog.ucl.ac.uk/uclnames/Map.aspx?name=LAMB&year=1881&altyear=1998&country=GB&type=name
Bell;
http://cetl2.geog.ucl.ac.uk/output/GBnames_CETL223165412462124.png
http://cetl2.geog.ucl.ac.uk/uclnames/Map.aspx?name=BELL&year=1881&altyear=1998&country=GB&type=name
Elliot;
http://cetl2.geog.ucl.ac.uk/output/GBnames_CETL223165412462154.png
http://cetl2.geog.ucl.ac.uk/uclnames/Map.aspx?name=ELLIOTT&year=1881&altyear=1998&country=GB&type=name

Even the Roman historians drew the line between the "Caledonians" and the "Britons". There were two Ninth Roman Legions, one of them 50,000 strong disappeared 80 miles north of Edinborough. The Legions were erased from Roman Historical records. You don't want to mess with the Sons of Somerled.
That legion later reappeared in the Near East. And that would be the MANY TIMES GREAT grandfathers of Sorley!

We Ulster Picts are form the Druid worlds.
Everyone on the Atlantic seaboard is, near enough!

By the way, if you like Somerled, then check out the attachment;

Haplotype I
Sunday, January 29th, 2006, 05:27 AM
Must you?
:yawn
Why, with the illustrious pedigree you claim for yourself, do you go around under an Indian avatar, and giving out Hindu slogans?! Knocks me sick.

;

It makes me sick too. An Indian in a turban just doesn't seem Germanic.

Seems fishy to say the least.


Must you?
Eh?! What are you talking about, Man? Druids were a priesthood, not a kind of tribe, and in any case, they were found everywhere in the British Isles, as well as on the Continent.

Haplotype I the Druid Proto-Celt Gene. The Druids were a genetic ethnic race for probably tens of thousands of years. The earliest Latin historians and Greek historians talk about the Druids. So there is no evidence older than that that proves otherwise. Greek historians made a difference between Druid and Kelts, what was is still being understood. It was hereditary, thus racial and genetic based. Look at MacDonalds 2005 Y-chromosone Haplotype study. Haplotype I could very well be the true native gene of the North Europe area. Iceland, Sweden, Scotland have high rates of it. And I think, if I have read the Tables right, Haplotype I is the ancient Druid, proto-Celt gene.

The ancient Germanics at Goseck were probably not Druids, they may have pre-dated Druids and in fact I think the Goseck people spread wisdom to the west that became some of the Druid learnings. The Druids may have come, as a gene-type, a thousand years after the Goseck people. The Druids were in the west, they were not fully Nordic or central European, but of course there must have been marriages between Germanics and Druid from Scotland.

DNA testing of skeletons from 6,800 year old Druid graves will be the only way to begin to get real, solid, dates and genetic groups of the Druids.




Give over! It wasn't an ethnic barrier before OR after the Roman period! The regions around Carlisle and Glasgow were steadfast Welsh speaking areas even into the last millenium..

The Clyde-Forth Isthmus was a constrictor on tribal migration from the south. There are no complete racial and genetic barriers, but there are impediments, such as the Clyde-Forth Isthmus and the Mediterranean, which obstruct racial tribal passage, and as such they are barrier and increase genetic and racial segregation.

http://clan-maccallum-malcolm.3acres.org/maps/map.jpg

Clyde-Forth Isthmus divides Scotland from England. At the lower third of the White of Scotland, you can see how close Glasgow and Edinburgh are, each are on rivers, the Forth and the Clyde. Between these large inlets is the Isthmus what over the course of tens of thousands of years, only one tribe could hold, it was that narrow. Thus, since tribes married mostly within their tribe area, no racial mixing occured because of that Isthmus.

Now of course the smarter tribes developed ships and sailed around starting in 7,000 BC. We Picts and Scots are a Sea and Ocean water culture, we've been like that for the last 12,000 years.

Here is a map which shows the constriction of the land. Of course any bright Pict worth his and her salt, can of course, sail right around it.

Germanic Influence North of the Clyde-Forth Isthmus. This is why we have Racial definiton. True Ancient Picts (Scots) have very high Norweigan blond and blue eyes and later Scots-Picts had genes brough in from Northern Germany and Prussia with the sailing trade.

So you see there is much more genes from Norway and Germany above the Clyde-Forth Isthmus than below it. This is what is truly remarkable about the Old Scotland before the British invaded it, lol, or tried to.

Imperator X
Sunday, January 29th, 2006, 08:02 PM
My original points have still not been addressed. William Wallace... Name another Scot on the British throne besides King James I. The only Welshman I could name would have been Henry VII. Then his son Henry VIII and then Elizabeth, but through each generation the Welsh diminished more and more.

Hinduism is a link to the ancient traditions of the mediterranean in particular. The paradigm is the same. Folk practices in India and in the Greco Roman worlds were very similar. Throughout history cults of foreign deities have spread well beyond the borders of their homeland. Isis' cult went from Egypt to Greece, then to Rome, and then to Gaul, Germany, and Britannia. The cult of Anatolian Cybele spread from Phrygia to Rome, and then on to Gaul. The examples of the spread of foreign deities in antiquity are near endless.

Hinduism is the only pagan faith which has been able to preserve itself in such a great number for so long. It has resisted the advance of Christian and Islamic zealots. My avatar is of Shivaji Maharaj the saviour of the Hindu dharma. His armies repelled the onslaught of the Mughals who were intent on sacking India and converting all the Hindus to Islam.

The saying goes "If not for Shivaji, we would all have been converted."

Jai Hindusthan!

Oswiu
Sunday, January 29th, 2006, 09:42 PM
Haplotype I, much of what you say is unorthodox to say the least! I won't deal with it now, though. Druids vs Kelts. Hmm. I get most of my lore from C19th authors, to tell the truth - and they were far more versed in Classical literary criticism than anyone could imagine being now, and none of them read it the way you describe. Where are you getting it all from, can I ask?
AS for Isthmuses, you sidetracked me a bit with the Solway Tyne isthmus [which isn't even really an isthmus, as it's a solid thick neck of land, really, and a continuation of the land around it.
I do agree a little more with your characterisation of the Clyde Forth one, but even there [and I've driven up the Loch Lomond road many a time], one can't FEEL the narrowness especially. A Lothian ruler millenia ago could easily have invaded Fife by boat The original Scots came from the West across the sea, and Gaelic colonies were established eventually on both sides of the isthmus, as it never faced them!
I'll have to read up on all the Y chromosome stuff I've accumulated over the years, before I dare to discuss the I haplotype thing, though I fear you're grievously mistaken on that score. I dimly remember reading of its Balkan/Near East origin, and how 'Neolithic Wave of Advance agricultural revolution' saw it sweep northwards, separating the two major varieties of the R haplotype into Western and Eastern areas. I don't know how the Clyde Forth line can have any impact on this.
Geology certainly wakes up past that point though - the hills really shoot up!

My original points have still not been addressed. William Wallace... Name another Scot on the British throne besides King James I.
Name an Englishman since 1066! [Except Oliver ;) ]

Hinduism is a link to the ancient traditions of the mediterranean in particular.
The duty of a man of Northern European stock who wishes to reconnect with his ancestors' preChristian past, is to learn what he can of the Northern religions. From that point of view, Mediterranean spirituality with its Pelasgian and Etruscan flavour is as much a foreign distortion of any original IE religion as Hinduism is.
Do you honestly believe that a lot if not most of the more philosophical parts of Hinduism are NOT the unique product of the insertion of a small number of Central Asian IEans into a radically different new tropical world of Dravidians and Munda?
Even if we choose to discount the idea of substrate influence from the aborigines of the sub continent [which I am prepared to do to some extent], then there is still the highly likely possibility that Aryans themselves [B][I]innovated in India.

The paradigm is the same. Folk practices in India and in the Greco Roman worlds were very similar. Throughout history cults of foreign deities have spread well beyond the borders of their homeland. Isis' cult went from Egypt to Greece, then to Rome, and then to Gaul, Germany, and Britannia.
Where it was promptly forgotten after the introduction of Christianity.
Hinduism is the only pagan faith which has been able to preserve itself in such a great number for so long. It has resisted the advance of Christian and Islamic zealots. My avatar is of Shivaji Maharaj the saviour of the Hindu dharma. His armies repelled the onslaught of the Mughals who were intent on sacking India and converting all the Hindus to Islam.
The saying goes "If not for Shivaji, we would all have been converted."
Jai Hindusthan!
Shivaji was obviously a great and righteous man, and worthy of our objective respect. But he's nothing to do with US. Geopolitical considerations allowed IE religion to survive on the far periphery of its original territory, but to assume it hadn't suffered [okay - 'undergone'!] significant distortion and independent evolution on the way there is madness.
Consider if Christianity was obliterated everywhere in the world except in Utah, and then thousands of years later the mestizo population of the former First World all began aping Mormonism in an effort to ressurect their ancient heritage! And the English who invented Mormonism had only been out of England for a few generations! Good comparison, no?
Hm, seems to me on a little reflection, that hardly any religion survives on its original turf, or in a form that would be approved of by its founders. The big exception is Islam I suppose. That nasty new Superbug of religious disease. :thumbdown
Gods Help Us!

Wayfarer
Sunday, January 29th, 2006, 10:08 PM
and King James' ascent to the British throne is just a cowardly compromise.

I know this took place long before official union in the 18th century, but the sentiment still holds up.

So the Scots King James married into the English royal line and enjoyed ruling Great Britain for a while, has there been a true Scots sovereign enthroned since?

Name another Scot on the British throne besides King James I. The only Welshman I could name would have been Henry VII. Then his son Henry VIII and then Elizabeth, but through each generation the Welsh diminished more and more.
you make it sound like the English just gifted the English throne to him. I told you before that it is wise to refrain from forming an opinion on a matter you know little or nothing about.
King James VI never married into the English throne nor was it given to him, he inherited the throne because of strange archaic royal laws. He was in line to the English throne because his mother was the granddaughter of Margaret Tudor. In line before him were the children of Henry VIII.
King James may have been a wanker who would rather see his own mother (Mary Queen of Scots) killed so he could take over both thrones, but he was a good diplomat and tactician who gained alot of allies in England to support his claim despite being Mary Queen of Scots son and being of a different house to the ruling house in England. In 1603 he succeeded the English throne thus ending the rule of the Tudor dynasty and united the two thrones under the Stewart dynasty.
You ask if a true Scot as ruled ever since, well since the Stuarts were a Scottish dynasty then Scots would have ruled the British throne until 1714. Thereafter no Scot nor even an English monarch has ruled even to this day. ;)



My original points have still not been addressed. William Wallace...

The fact of what happened to William Wallace just shows that the English have been violently antagonistic to the Scots in the past


Must I remind you all that William Wallace, the Scots freedom fighter was tortured to death and had his head impaled on London Bridge.
What is your point?

Like the Edward was told in Braveheart, "Get ready, you are about to get your ass kissed by a king."
Braveheart is a bad work of fiction pretending to be history. A good film but none the less historically wrong. Anyway the Battle of Bannockburn where Scotland gained its Independence was in 1314, King James VI united the thrones in 1603, they are two unrelated events.


What about the recent dissolution of the Royal Scottish Regiment?
What about it? This has nothing to do with "English opression" since many English regiments are being merged too. It is the result of New Labours anti-British policies. Just take a look at the map of British Regions drawn up by this government. It in no way reflects regional identity, history or culture. It looks like some stupid beauracrat in Whitehall got a pen and drew across a map of the British Isles cut across England somewhere around the centre and called all of England to the north of the line the North, drew another line to divide the North in two and called them the North East and teh North West, another line dviding the South, callin it the South East and the South West, then dividing the central region and calling it the East Midlands and West Midlands. Is it any wonder the "Northern Assembly" was rejected by the folks there? Not because they didnt want one but because the region is so badly defined it didnt reflect their regional identity in the way the Scottish parlaiment and the Welsh and N Irish Assemblies do.
Anyway as for the mergin of the Kings Own Scottish Borderers with the Royal Scots, its not going to happen ;).

Haplotype I
Monday, January 30th, 2006, 07:50 AM
Hinduism is the only pagan faith which has been able to preserve itself in such a great number for so long. It has resisted the advance of Christian and Islamic zealots. My avatar is of Shivaji Maharaj the saviour of the Hindu dharma. His armies repelled the onslaught of the Mughals who were intent on sacking India and converting all the Hindus to Islam.

The saying goes "If not for Shivaji, we would all have been converted."

Jai Hindusthan!

I'm terribly sorry, but Hinduism has nothing to do with Ulster Scots.

Haplotype I
Monday, January 30th, 2006, 07:54 AM
Where are you getting it all from, can I ask? ...


Oh well, most of it is from Aristotle. Seems to be somewhat of a well reputed source, he is held with some degree of regard in some circles.

As for Mr. Hindustani, I totally agree....God Help us!:)

I'm just not sure what I can offer him in terms of direction. South maybe?

Oswiu
Monday, January 30th, 2006, 05:21 PM
Jai Hindusthan!
That's a bit daft. Hindu is a PERSIAN word, borrowed into the Muslim Urdu speech. It's derived from Sindh, a native name for the Indus, and is the source of Greek 'India'. Shouldn't an Indophile rather use the term Bharat?
Sitting comfortably on the other side of the Atlantic, you should at least try to have some sympathy for those of your cousins who are still here, and have to suffer the hordes of Hindu invaders taking our jobs, homes, and towns. How would you feel if a Briton were to adopt all the trappings of Mestizo Central American culture, and then chide his transatlantic kin for not doing so? Too good for Woden, are ye?

ANYROAD,

Does anyone know when this Ulster Scots term first came into use? Are the descendants of English and Welsh settlers too mixed in to counter the rather blanket description?

Have any genetic studies examined the populations in Northern Ireland?

Æmeric
Monday, January 30th, 2006, 11:08 PM
Are the descendants of English and Welsh settlers too mixed in to counter the rather blanket description?


I think it covers the descendants of the English & Welsh settlers also. Most persons of Ulster Protestant descent simply call themselves Irish or American. Most live in parts of the U.S. were there are few Irish-Catholics or any Catholics for that matter. Also there were Irish Protestants from other areas of Ireland other then Ulster who came to British America/the United States. The terms Ulster-Scots or Scots-Irish is mostly used by historians or genealogists.

Imperator X
Tuesday, January 31st, 2006, 01:14 AM
That's a bit daft. Hindu is a PERSIAN word, borrowed into the Muslim Urdu speech. It's derived from Sindh, a native name for the Indus, and is the source of Greek 'India'. Shouldn't an Indophile rather use the term Bharat?
Sitting comfortably on the other side of the Atlantic, you should at least try to have some sympathy for those of your cousins who are still here, and have to suffer the hordes of Hindu invaders taking our jobs, homes, and towns. How would you feel if a Briton were to adopt all the trappings of Mestizo Central American culture, and then chide his transatlantic kin for not doing so? Too good for Woden, are ye?

Actually there are instances in the Vedas where the exact term "Hindu" is used. If you must see a case for yourself, I can get back to you on this one. Most of your "invaders" are Muslim Pakistanis and Bangladeshis, nice try. I never advocated all of white Britain adopting Hinduism, though I would not feel agitated if they did. I would be disturbed however if they converted to Islam.

Imperator X
Tuesday, January 31st, 2006, 01:25 AM
Do you honestly believe that a lot if not most of the more philosophical parts of Hinduism are NOT the unique product of the insertion of a small number of Central Asian IEans into a radically different new tropical world of Dravidians and Munda?
Even if we choose to discount the idea of substrate influence from the aborigines of the sub continent [which I am prepared to do to some extent], then there is still the highly likely possibility that Aryans themselves [I]innovated in India.

Most of the acharyas who influenced and developed later Vedanta philosophy were South Indian and very well could have been Dravidians.


Islam... That nasty new Superbug of religious disease. :thumbdown
Gods Help Us!

Aye, verily, on this point at least, we agree.

Oswiu
Tuesday, January 31st, 2006, 02:52 AM
Most of your "invaders" are Muslim Pakistanis and Bangladeshis, nice try.
You think I'm not aware of that or summat? And even if we got rid of them, there'd still be perhaps a million Indians to get shot of too. Politics aside, racially speaking they're as much a threat.

Most persons of Ulster Protestant descent simply call themselves Irish or American. Most live in parts of the U.S. were there are few Irish-Catholics or any Catholics for that matter. Also there were Irish Protestants from other areas of Ireland other then Ulster who came to British America/the United States.
http://www.plakaty.ru/i/plakats/medium/1584.jpg
Forgive me!
I meant in Ulster itself. Funny to think, though, that the majority of Ulster Scots by descent probably DO live in America! The same probably holds true for my Irish surname. What a disturbing thought.

Here's some other Soviet posters, on the Northern Irish question. Hmmm, I wonder what side they're gonna be on...
http://www.plakaty.ru/i/plakats/medium/1141.jpg
Do not suppress "Ol'ster" (sic)!
For the people of Ulster, it gets worse day after day.
The Conservatives try to bind them tighter and tighter, showing their true nature.
But this people, as ever, struggles to achieve its civil rights.
http://www.plakaty.ru/i/plakats/medium/1660.jpg
The English pin.
on the hat = Colonialism.
on the chunks of land = Northern Ireland, and the Falklands.
***
Commie bastards.

Haplotype I
Tuesday, January 31st, 2006, 06:17 AM
Ulster Scots are a genetic Clan blood group that crosses the islands between WSW Scotland and N. Ireland.

The British just came and put a name on an area of land so-called Northern Ireland.

Ulster Scots are in pockets of heavy and thin genetics depending on how they have bred with the native recent (last 3,000 years) Irish and and European genes in the American nation.

Purity of Ulster Scot genetics is found in those with stong will power and fighting blood and a love of the cold water.

Ulster Scots, by blood stretch from the Scottish MacDonald clan territory across many islands to the Antrim Co. territory in Ireland.

Ulster Scot blood is the genetics of the Red Hand.

And I'll tell you one thing, True Ulster Scots absolutely hate the British and the Orangemen have nothing to do with real Ulster Scots.

Ulster Scots have been actively involved in fighting the British for the last 300 years.

Æmeric
Tuesday, January 31st, 2006, 04:19 PM
And I'll tell you one thing, True Ulster Scots absolutely hate the British and the Orangemen have nothing to do with real Ulster Scots.

Ulster Scots have been actively involved in fighting the British for the last 300 years.
The Ulster Scots living on the frontier were the most ant-British segment of the American population at the time of the War of Independence. Andrew Jackson was an Ulster Scot & he was famous for his hatred of the British.

Oswiu
Tuesday, January 31st, 2006, 04:28 PM
Ulster Scots are a genetic Clan blood group that crosses the islands between WSW Scotland and N. Ireland.
Er?! No.
'Scot' used to mean 'Irish raider' [kind of like a Gaelic 'Viking' if you like], and is from an Irish word that meant 'wanderer' or the like. As time went on, the name stopped being used by the Irish who had stayed at home, and came to be applied only to the descendants of those who had colonised Britain, mixing with the Picts, Welsh and English to make a new Kingdom of Scotland. Feelings of kinship with the old Irish remained, but were severely disrupted by Norse activity for several centuries. The Hebrides were very heavily settled from Norway, as any glance at the place names will tell you, but Ulster remained solidly Gaelic and free from Scandinavian influence [far more so than many places in the south of Ireland, funnily enough - geography and the resultant lack of decent harbours had a role to play here, as well as perhaps the secure position politically, as well as the more traditional and warlike spirit of the O'Neills in comparison with the men of Leinster and Munster] And thus both Gaelic sides of the Irish Sea went their own way, politically and culturally. The peripheries of each where they were close to each other felt this less so, but the centralising forces on both islands were strong enough to overcome this.
The settlement of Ulster from the 17th Century onwards did involve a number of Highlanders 'returning' to the lands whence their 5th Century forefathers had come, but I believe the majority of the settlers were from elsewhere in Scotland [and less so England and Wales], i.e. the Borders.
They would have largely been descended from the mixture of Briton and Angle that occured in the northern Bernician province of the Northumbrian Kingdom, having little Gael in them, except for some elements drawn from the Hiberno Norse settlements of Galloway and Cumberland. Men of the Borders [and they were from both sides of it, though there was no clear ethnic divide] were thus only 'Scots' in terms of political allegiances, i.e. Germanic Bernicians owing loyalty to the Scottish Crown due to the latter's successful conquest of the area in the 10th Century. [Of course, there's nowt wrong with that, as people in my western part of England don't have as much AngloSaxon in them as they think!]
The continuum between Northern Irish Gael and Highland and Island Gael has thus been broken several times in history, and it would be incorrect to view them as one "clan blood group" as you say. There IS some shared blood, but it's probably not the greater predominant part.

The British just came and put a name on an area of land so-called Northern Ireland.[QUOTE]
Our Government had to do this to prevent civil war.
[QUOTE] Ulster Scots, by blood stretch from the Scottish MacDonald clan territory across many islands to the Antrim Co. territory in Ireland.
I have friends on the Isle of Skye who would disagree with this! One even lives in walking distance of Armadale Castle, the seat of the Clan.

Ulster Scot blood is the genetics of the Red Hand.
Partially, yes. But it is also the blood of the Gododdin, of Rheged, of Strathclyde, of Norge, and Cyning Ida's Angles of Bebbanburh

And I'll tell you one thing, True Ulster Scots absolutely hate the British and the Orangemen have nothing to do with real Ulster Scots.
Ulster Scots have been actively involved in fighting the British for the last 300 years.
Eh? How's that? Why do they fly our flag more than mainland Britons do?!
I hate to divide things on religious grounds, but sometimes other words fail me, so; The Catholics in the Six Counties are partially descended from people who immigrated there from the rest of Ireland in response to the industrialisation of the 19th Century. Not all, however. Perhaps most of them [and it's gonna be nigh on impossible to separate them out now] did not, and are the direct descendants of the men and women who lived under the O'Neills and King Conchobhor. But these people don't call emselves 'Scots'! Some of them mixed in with the Protestant newcomers, and these would associate themselves with the term Ulster Scots if pressed on the matter, though in my experience "Ulsterman" is far more common a word for it.
As for fighting the British, well, there was a bit of this under the United Irishmen of 1798 [my Y chromosome left Ireland in this exact year!] but Protestant Irish have been loyal ever since. I should add, as well, that Catholic Ireland has been far more loyal than many agitators would have you believe - my Tipperary Great Uncle, for example, fought in the Battle of Britain - and not in the Luftwaffe!!! Many other Irish Catholics did likewise, and a fair few are serving in the British Army as we speak.
I know it's very fashionable these days to "fight the British" but get your facts right, please!

And about your Haplotype I being from this general area, look at my attachments, and see how far it penetrates into India and even Siberia! It's a very old haplotype, and relates to a very early period of the colonisation of Eurasia. It's very high in frequency in Gotland [the island off Sweden in the Baltic Sea], and in Serbia, and in UTTAR PRADESH in INDIA of all places! It's not from around the Irish Sea. Much of its presence around the latter might be best attributed to Norse settlement. Don't forget to honour Odin, as well as the Red Hand!

Oswiu
Tuesday, January 31st, 2006, 05:43 PM
Sorry, I forgot the attachments about the Y chromosome haplogroups! Here they are;

#1, I = purply pink

#2 & 3, = pink

#4, left = light blue, right = pink.

Oswiu
Tuesday, April 25th, 2006, 11:28 PM
In response to post 43 above;


Actually there are instances in the Vedas where the exact term "Hindu" is used. If you must see a case for yourself, I can get back to you on this one. Most of your "invaders" are Muslim Pakistanis and Bangladeshis, nice try. I never advocated all of white Britain adopting Hinduism, though I would not feel agitated if they did. I would be disturbed however if they converted to Islam.

See this attachment;
http://forums.skadi.net/attachment.php?attachmentid=50337&d=1138581180

OneEnglishNorman
Wednesday, July 19th, 2006, 11:34 PM
The Ulster Scots living on the frontier were the most ant-British segment of the American population at the time of the War of Independence. Andrew Jackson was an Ulster Scot & he was famous for his hatred of the British.

Andrew Jackson hated the British government, not the British.

He didn't walk around the White House all day muttering "I am an Ulster Scot and I hate the British".

OneEnglishNorman
Wednesday, July 19th, 2006, 11:36 PM
BTW Oswiu is correct, a lot of Scots are of northern English extraction, especially the border areas and especially Ulster Scots and especially Ulster Scots in the USA.