The Non-Celtic Confederacy

[Henry Brown]

IME the Germans, Poles and Mexicans have more in common with Celtic descendants than the Scotch-Irish do. In Chicago anyway. ;-)

do you know where the celts originated ? same area as the saxons. what were the scots-irish ? angles or germans. the mexicans might have celtic blood via the celts on the Iberian peninsula. i'm not going to research the poles.
The term English tends to be used (more-or-less) for the period after the Norman conquest (1066), when England became a single political unit. The English were a mixture of Anglo-Saxons, Celts, Danes, and Normans. Anglo-Saxon gradually merged with Norman French to become a language called "Middle English" (Chaucer, etc.), and that evolved into modern English.
an interesting question is if you are scot-irish in chicago do you celebrate saint patrick's day ?

 

[Irishtom29]

an interesting question is if you are scot-irish in chicago do you celebrate saint patrick's day ?

I don't know, I lived in Chicago for 64 years and all the Scotch Irish I met were Appalachian white Protestants with no interest in St. Patrick nor evidently in their Scotch Irish background either. I had kinsmen who'd spent time working and living in Scotland as well as Ireland before coming over but they were Catholic and their identity was solidly Irish, not Scottish.

As for the Germans, Poles and Mexicans: I was talking about an affinity between those peoples and the Irish (in Chicago).

 

[Henry Brown]

what were the scots-irish ? angles or germans.

made a mistake here. it is very complicated. first scotch is whiskey . the scots-irish are Gaelic speaking Celts. they communicated with the irish with no trouble. they simply followed the reformation as did other countries including england. so i think they have something in common .

As for the Germans, Poles and Mexicans: I was talking about an affinity between those peoples and the Irish (in Chicago).

you will have to explain this a little more for me to get it. i was making a joke with the st. patrick thing but now that i understand better it makes perfect sense that they would not celebrate st. patrick's day.
all that aside to the op's point... the scots-irish were original colonial settlers. the lowland scots were planters while the highland scots were mostly tenet farmers in poor conditions. the economical conditions in scotland required a mass migration and many lowland scots were re-settled in ireland. thus scots-irish. later this migration was re-directed to north america. many arrived through virginia and settled there and in the carolinas and georgia (many highland scots came here).
thus they were distributed throughout the south and were always on the frontier and expanding. had they been able to grow tobacco and cotton in scotland our history might have been different. the scots-irish were celts, very important to the south, and were in the south from the beginning.
antebellum southerners thought themselves the inheritors of english tradition . english and british are often interchanged and it makes perfect sense that when you hear one term you will often think of the other. we fought two wars against britian but often think of it as england. we all know that we fought against king george of england but he was king george of the united kingdom of great britian and ireland. this same confusion exists with the terms anglo-saxon and english. the anglo-saxons did not displace the celtic population of england and after generations of intermarrige there was hardly a distinction within england. anglo-saxon is used today in america to indicate the purest form of traditional **** in much the same way germany used the teutonic myth.
so if the op is saying that celts were prevalent in the confederacy and that folks are either confused or intentionally use the term "anglo-saxon" to represent the confederacy, then i agree.

 

[rebelatsea]

I may be about to confuse the "Celt" issue even further. I had an RN officer friend who came from North Wales and spoke fluent Welsh. On an official to Japan met a Spanish officer of Basque origin, not only could they after a short time talk together in their native tongues, but in northern Japan they met people of Ainu decent who could also within a couple of hours join in the conversation.

 

[Irishtom29]

made a mistake here. it is very complicated. first scotch is whiskey . the scots-irish are Gaelic speaking Celts. they communicated with the irish with no trouble. they simply followed the reformation as did other countries including england. so i think they have something in common .

The Scotch-Irish, also known as Ulster Scots were not Celtic speaking people but lowland Presbyterians who spoke English or Scots, both Germanic tongues. These people were settled in Ulster beginning in the early 17th Century after the defeat of the native Ulster elites, mainly the O'Neils and O'Donnels, by the English. The idea was these Protestant settlers would be more easily controlled than the native Irish, many of whom were driven out of Ulster west to Mayo, Sligo and such. Some even ended up in Kerry, poor souls.

I heard plenty of stories about Ulster Scots. My mother is from Lurgan and three of my grandparents are from Ulster, from Lurgan and Downpatrick. The other is from Kiltimagh in Mayo.

 

[Pat Young]

The Scotch-Irish, also known as Ulster Scots were not Celtic speaking people but lowland Presbyterians who spoke English or Scots, both Germanic tongues. These people were settled in Ulster beginning in the early 17th Century after the defeat of the native Ulster elites, mainly the O'Neils and O'Donnels, by the English. The idea was these Protestant settlers would be more easily controlled than the native Irish, many of whom were driven out of Ulster west to Mayo, Sligo and such. Some even ended up in Kerry, poor souls.

I heard plenty of stories about Ulster Scots. My mother is from Lurgan and three of my grandparents are from Ulster, from Lurgan and Downpatrick. The other is from Kiltimagh in Mayo.

My understanding is that the term Scot-Irish is post-Civil War in origin. At the time, these Protestants from Ulster who immigrated to the US referred to themselves as Ulster Scots.

 

[Schwallanscher]

My understanding is that the term Scot-Irish is post-Civil War in origin. At the time, these Protestants from Ulster who immigrated to the US referred to themselves as Ulster Scots.

some of them (still in ulster) still do

 

[Irishtom29]

In any event there's damned little Celtic about most Scots, no matter how many kilts modern ones wear, or how many telephone poles they toss.

 

[Schwallanscher]

My understanding is that the term Scot-Irish is post-Civil War in origin. At the time, these Protestants from Ulster who immigrated to the US referred to themselves as Ulster Scots.

is it just me, or why the heck does nobody discuss the reasons those scots gor 'dislodged' to ulster?

 

[Schwallanscher]

In any event there's ****ed little Celtic about most Scots, no matter how many kilts modern ones wear, or how many telephone poles they toss.

those '****' make it kinda hard to understand your post

 

[Henry Brown]

The Scotch-Irish, also known as Ulster Scots were not Celtic speaking people but lowland Presbyterians who spoke English or Scots, both Germanic tongues.

yes they were lowland presbyterians AFTER the reformation but highland and lowland scots are celtic in origin regardless of religion. are not highland scots also primarily presbyterian ? the ulster-scots had no trouble communicating with the irish and must have been bilingual when they got there . there were anglo-saxon elements in scotland but they were not scottish. the term scotch is the Americanized version that the scots do not use. these lowland scots intermingled with all other ethnic groups especially anglo-saxons and were eventually referred to as foreigners by highland scots . so by the time of the migration to ulster they were a distinct group , socially and genetically. some still had their scottish family names but others had anglicized names.
there was movement back and forth by these scots as circumstances required. they suffered persecution in england and ireland but also droughts and economic setbacks but they were recruited for the Plantation of Uslter. they were planters. they immigrated to america in the 17th and 18th centuries. they were in the south from the beginning. and they were at least partly celtic.
it occurs to me that what happened in scotland is similar to our civil war (both american but yankee and rebel, the same but also distinct) and if the celtic disposition were not so prevalent in the south we might not have had the war.

 

[Henry Brown]

now about the others:
When the Highland Scots migrated to America, North Carolina was a more popular place to settle than any of the other colonies.
The Highland Scots. ... The surnames Campbell, McNeill and Stewart, and the prevalence of Presbyterian churches are two of the legacies of Highland Scotswho immigrated to North Carolina. Highlanders are descendants of Celts who settled in the northern mainland and islands of Scotland, which is part of Great Britain.

http://northcarolinahistory.org/encyclopedia/highland-scots/

 

[RobertP]

now about the others:
When the Highland Scots migrated to America, North Carolina was a more popular place to settle than any of the other colonies.
The Highland Scots. ... The surnames Campbell, McNeill and Stewart, and the prevalence of Presbyterian churches are two of the legacies of Highland Scotswho immigrated to North Carolina. Highlanders are descendants of Celts who settled in the northern mainland and islands of Scotland, which is part of Great Britain.

http://northcarolinahistory.org/encyclopedia/highland-scots/

Most of the Scots ancestors on my mother's side were Highland and settled primarily in North Carolina. The Scots on my father's side were from Ulster and originally settled in Pennsylvania in the mid 1700's. All were Presbyterians.

 

[Henry Brown]

Scottish Gaelic or Scots Gaelic, sometimes also referred to simply as Gaelic or the Gaelic, is a Celtic language native to the Gaels of Scotland. A member of the Goidelic branch of the Celtic languages, Scottish Gaelic, like Modern Irish and Manx, developed out of Middle Irish. Most of modern Scotland was once Gaelic-speaking, as evidenced especially by Gaelic-language placenames.

It is classed as an indigenous language under the European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages.

Scots is the Germanic language variety spoken in Lowland Scotland and parts of Ulster (where the local dialect is known as Ulster Scots).It is sometimes called Lowland Scots to distinguish it from Scottish Gaelic, the Celtic language which was historically restricted to most of the Highlands, the Hebrides and Galloway after the 16th century. The Scots language developed during the Middle English period as a distinct entity.
The growth and distribution of Scots in Scotland and Ulster:
Old English by the beginning of the 9th century in the northern portion of the Anglo-Saxon kingdom of Northumbria, now part of Scotland
Early Scots by the beginning of the 15th century
Modern Scots by the mid 20th century.

Northumbrian Old English had been established in what is now southeastern Scotland as far as the River Forth by the seventh century, as the region was part of the Anglo-Saxon kingdom of Northumbria. Gaelic was the then language of the Scottish court and the common use of Old English remained largely confined to this area until the thirteenth century.
Scots includes loan words from Gaelic. it was also influnenced by norman-french and latin.

the bottom line is that all ethnic scots are descended from celts and they were distributed in large numbers throughout the confederacy.

 

[WJC]

***Posted as Moderator***
Religious differences played an important role in the founding of our country.
However, please refrain from discussing religious differences that may exist today.

 

[Henry Brown]

Most white Southerners cited British ancestry, prior to the inclusion of the American ancestry category. Confederate Major Arthur L. Rogers proposed a new altered Confederate national flag, the Blood Stained Banner, to the Confederate Senate in 1865, declaring its saltire design to represent the primary ethnic origins of the white inhabitants of the secessionist states, Scotland (Saint Andrews Cross), Ireland (Saint Patrick's Saltire), Spain (Cross of Burgundy), English Midlands(Saint Alban's Cross), and France (La Louisiane).

McPherson notes:

By 1860 the notion had taken hold in the South that Southern whites, at least those in the planter class, were descended from the English Cavaliers, who in turn were descended from the Norman conquerors, while "Yankees" were descended from the Puritan Roundheads, who in turn traced their descent from the Anglo-Saxons, who were conquered by the Normans in the eleventh century. One of the fullest expressions of this idea appeared in the leading magazine for Southern writers two months after the start of the Civil War.

This conflict, declared the anonymous author, was a contest of race…between the North and the South…. The people of the Northern States are more immediately descended of the English Puritans [who] constituted, as a class, the common people of England…and are directly descended of the ancient Britons and Saxons…. The Southern States were settled and governed…by…persons belonging to…that stock recognized as Cavaliers…directly descended from the Norman Barons of William the Conqueror, a race distinguished, in its earliest history, for its warlike and fearless character, a race, in all time since, renowned for its gallantry, its chivalry, its honor, its gentleness, and its intellect…. The Southern people come of that race.

 

[RobertP]

Most white Southerners cited British ancestry, prior to the inclusion of the American ancestry category. Confederate Major Arthur L. Rogers proposed a new altered Confederate national flag, the Blood Stained Banner, to the Confederate Senate in 1865, declaring its saltire design to represent the primary ethnic origins of the white inhabitants of the secessionist states, Scotland (Saint Andrews Cross), Ireland (Saint Patrick's Saltire), Spain (Cross of Burgundy), English Midlands(Saint Alban's Cross), and France (La Louisiane).

McPherson notes:

By 1860 the notion had taken hold in the South that Southern whites, at least those in the planter class, were descended from the English Cavaliers, who in turn were descended from the Norman conquerors, while "Yankees" were descended from the Puritan Roundheads, who in turn traced their descent from the Anglo-Saxons, who were conquered by the Normans in the eleventh century. One of the fullest expressions of this idea appeared in the leading magazine for Southern writers two months after the start of the Civil War.

This conflict, declared the anonymous author, was a contest of race…between the North and the South…. The people of the Northern States are more immediately descended of the English Puritans [who] constituted, as a class, the common people of England…and are directly descended of the ancient Britons and Saxons…. The Southern States were settled and governed…by…persons belonging to…that stock recognized as Cavaliers…directly descended from the Norman Barons of William the Conqueror, a race distinguished, in its earliest history, for its warlike and fearless character, a race, in all time since, renowned for its gallantry, its chivalry, its honor, its gentleness, and its intellect…. The Southern people come of that race.

This Southern class thing is something I disagree with. Maybe there was some truth in it in the seaboard Low Country and Tidewater regions but from what I know, at least from my own family, is that Southerners were a mobile and capitalistic bunch who from relatively humble roots migrated west as lands opened up and began farming. Some were more successful than others but none of them, and I knew their grandchildren, considered themselves anything like Cavaliers or Aristocracy. It's a ridiculous notion, an easy but wrongheaded dig that doesn't represent those people at all.

 

[WJC]

This Southern class thing is something I disagree with. Maybe there was some truth in it in the seaboard Low Country and Tidewater regions but from what I know, at least from my own family, is that Southerners were a mobile and capitalistic bunch who from relatively humble roots migrated west as lands opened up and began farming. Some were more successful than others but none of them, and I knew their grandchildren, considered themselves anything like Cavaliers or Aristocracy. It's a ridiculous notion, an easy but wrongheaded dig that doesn't represent those people at all.

I agree. I recall more than once being told in classes that Virginia (in particular) was culturally descended from Cavaliers while New England was culturally descended from Roundheads. This idea even pervaded seminars on diversity and cultural sensitivity.
My own opinion is that some southerners liked to think that they were the nobler 'breed' of Britains, far better than their Celtic neighbors. I find it intriguing that some of the works of Walter Scott were so loved by the 'upper class' of the south- novels like Ivanhoe- while others of his works dealing with Scots heritage seem to have been far less popular.

 

[OpnCoronet]

.

In my readings of primary sources from the white South, I rarely encounter the idea of a Celtic South. Typically, Southern whites refer to themselves as Anglo-Saxon.
I was prompted to post this thread because I read yet another piece by Southern whites echoing the claim of being Anglo-Saxons.

As far as any historical reference to the ACW, Anglo-Saxon was the preferred descriptive of American, by both sections. It was, of course, also, the preferred euphemism for a 'White' person, in ante-bellum America.

I believe the Irish were little more welcomed in the South than the North.

 

[Henry Brown]

This Southern class thing is something I disagree with.

this is from the Southern Literary Messenger july 1861 :
https://quod.lib.umich.edu/m/moajrnl/acf2679.0033.001/23?node=acf2679.0033.001:5&view=image

Norther n pe ople have som e very clever ide as of personal justice, they have none on earth of political and r,tionaljustice, eitherin regard to us, or any other people. They have no natural comiprehension of the science of government, and therefore, know nothing of the amenities of p olitical diplomhacy. T hey neither know how to conduct good government among themselves, nor how to deport themselves as a people, towards another people. In these matters, they are ethnologically deficient. We have then, to treat them to some extent, as an inferior ,race, presenting an admixture of force and finesse. After this manner, the Norman has ever controled the Saxon, 1861.1 21
The contest, then, now going on, is not one of mere plhysical prowess, as in that event, there would be no surety in regard to the arrangement of great philosophical principles, as the wager of battle might resultas favorablytothe Round-headas to the cavalier-to the Saxon as to the Norman. For while the Southern gentleman dues not aspire to being a shepherd, on the hills, or a vine-grower in the valley, h e yetprofesses to no superior brawniness. But he does assert his claim to all those combined attributes, that make manhood excellent, and is willing to lose his life in maintaining his assertion.