The Non-Celtic Confederacy

[rebelatsea]

Don't forget us Welsh!

Well said sir, I'm a Wallis, derivation : A foreigner, specifically a Welshman. Wallace & Wallice are the Scottish strain,Walsh and Welch are from the same root.

 

[MattL]

I'm told that even today, there's an attitude in New England, incomers checked for background and breeding, before socially accepted. Is this true today?

Just commenting on the modern question. I can't imagine this being the case. I was born and raised in Arizona though ironically my family moved to Western Massachusetts for 3 years (Pittsfield). I don't remember seeing any of this.

I guess it's possible in high society (which I certainly was not), though high society has their own rules and acceptance criteria anyways, no matter where you go. My guess is that in upper society this could have been the case for a while depending on the communities, but likely died off in the 20th century over time.

I know it was also likely regional. Some of the most powerful New York families for example were descendants of Dutch immigrants that had been there since it was New Netherlands (and New York city was New Amsterdam). The Roosevelts are a key example of this. So in say the 19th and first half of the 20th century I'm sure being from local established families was considered good and outsiders of any sorts were met with skepticism, this is true everywhere though, just human nature.

 

[Irishtom29]

Would it not be fair to say with all the rambunctious between the Irish,Scotish and British boys and girls for practical purposes theirs not much genetic difference between them?Thank God for religious differences so from time to time they have something to fight over.
Leftyhunter

Differences in language, culture and national allegience are involved.

 

[Booner]

Absolutely spot on, I can't recall anytime in British History excluding 'ancient history' where the Brits have fought over anything other than religion, Protestant v Catholic mostly and that was only because of the Monarchy. The far right in Britain still have a tendency to claim that they are Anglo Saxon, for some reason they can't seem to grasp the idea that Britain was a melting pot of people from all over Europe, people came and people left, its always been that way. Anglo Saxon or Celtic, it makes me chuckle really, they are all one and the same.

Waterloo50,
Have you forgotten about the 300 year border war between England and Scotland? Or are you considering it a period of "ancient history"? I'm not sure I'd call the 1600's ancient history.

From-> http://www.historic-uk.com/HistoryUK/HistoryofScotland/The-Border-Reivers/

The story of the Reivers dates from the 14th century and continued through into the late 17th century. It concerns the border between the two sovereign countries of England and Scotland. In those days, this Border displayed all of the characteristics of a frontier, lacking law and order. Cattle rustling, feuding, murder, arson and pillaging were all common occurrences.

It was a time when people owed their tribal or clan loyalty to their blood relatives or families. And it was common for these families to straddle the Border.

The Reivers were the product of the constant English-Scottish wars that would often reduce the Border area to a wasteland. The continuing threat of renewed conflict offered little incentive to arable farming. Why bother planting crops if they may be burned before they could be harvested?

More at the link--and rather fascinating, too.

 

[civilken]

Facts can challenge one's perception of truth -- but, the truthiness of the Civil War's Anglo/Celtic rivalry is unassailable.

or as they would say the truth shall set you free.

 

[John Hartwell]

or as they would say the truth shall set you free.

IF that's what you're looking for. Some people seem to be afraid of it.

 

[Waterloo50]

Waterloo50,
Have you forgotten about the 300 year border war between England and Scotland? Or are you considering it a period of "ancient history"? I'm not sure I'd call the 1600's ancient history.

From-> http://www.historic-uk.com/HistoryUK/HistoryofScotland/The-Border-Reivers/

The story of the Reivers dates from the 14th century and continued through into the late 17th century. It concerns the border between the two sovereign countries of England and Scotland. In those days, this Border displayed all of the characteristics of a frontier, lacking law and order. Cattle rustling, feuding, murder, arson and pillaging were all common occurrences.

It was a time when people owed their tribal or clan loyalty to their blood relatives or families. And it was common for these families to straddle the Border.

The Reivers were the product of the constant English-Scottish wars that would often reduce the Border area to a wasteland. The continuing threat of renewed conflict offered little incentive to arable farming. Why bother planting crops if they may be burned before they could be harvested?

More at the link--and rather fascinating, too.

Quite right I wasn't being very specific, I should have said late ancient antiquity which would have covered the period of the Reivers. Great article by the way.

 

[Booner]

Quite right I wasn't being very specific, I should have said late ancient antiquity which would have covered the period of the Reivers. Great article by the way.

I knew you'd like it!
BTW, My ancestors were Border Reivers before they were removed to Ireland and became Scotch-Irish (which I think is more of an american term).

 

[Waterloo50]

My understanding regarding the Welsh immigrants, which came when researching my Williams family from Wales roots, I discovered that the major seaports of New York and Charleston would not allow "riffraff", such as immigrants from Wales, Ireland and Scotland, much less those of Asian, middle east or African descent, unless indentured servants or slaves, up until mid to late 1700's, when a Welshman came into power in Charleston. The elite British of New England would shun the likes of Celtic or Cymric "barbarians", and they naturally migrated south or west. I'm told that even today, there's an attitude in New England, incomers checked for background and breeding, before socially accepted. Is this true today?

The English, Welsh and Scottish had always had a great mistrust of each other, the reason that I'm mentioning it is because I believe that we, the English have always assumed an air of superiority over the Welsh and Scottish and most definitely over the Irish. I personally don't think that it had anything to do with being Celtic or Anglo-Saxon, it was nothing more than a recognition of borders and England being the centre of power within Great Britain. Certainly during the Victorian period cultural difference's between the various parts of Britain were more obvious than they are now, those in London who for the most part held the power had just as much of a dislike of the Northerners as they did the Welsh and Scottish, I'm pretty sure that if you look deep enough into American history you are likely to find an equal divide between those from Yorkshire, Newcastle and Liverpool. We still have a North South divide in Britain today.

 

[Waterloo50]

I knew you'd like it!
BTW, My ancestors were Border Reivers before they were removed to Ireland and became Scotch-Irish (which I think is more of an american term).

Plenty of Scots ended up in Ireland, quite a few Scottish members of my family ended up moving to Northern Ireland. The Scottish hate being called Scotch, they seem to be okay with 'Scots' but for some reason they dislike Scotch although they don't mind drinking the stuff.

 

[Pat Young]

Plenty of Scots ended up in Ireland, quite a few Scottish members of my family ended up moving to Northern Ireland. The Scottish hate being called Scotch, they seem to be okay with 'Scots' but for some reason they dislike Scotch although they don't mind drinking the stuff.

I have had the same experience.

 

[Irishtom29]

The story of the Reivers dates from the 14th century and continued through into the late 17th century. It concerns the border between the two sovereign countries of England and Scotland. In those days, this Border displayed all of the characteristics of a frontier, lacking law and order. Cattle rustling, feuding, murder, arson and pillaging were all common occurrences.

Yeah, long ago I read a non fiction book by George Fraser, the Flashman guy, about the border reivers, it was called The Steel Bonnets.

 

[Irishtom29]

The Scottish hate being called Scotch, they seem to be okay with 'Scots' but for some reason they dislike Scotch although they don't mind drinking the stuff.

I might be wrong but I have the impression this dislike is a recent thing.

 

[Waterloo50]

I might be wrong but I have the impression this dislike is a recent thing and just another excuse for them to be miserable.

You got that right.

 

[leftyhunter]

Differences in language, culture and national allegience are involved.

No doubt. I was referring to basic DNA mixing.
Leftyhunter

 

[63rdOVI]

I have been baffled for years by the photographs I've seen of some "reenactors" wearing kilts (with gray jackets and kepis) and playing the pipes at ceremonies to represent their idea of what Southern Celticism should look like. I'm pretty sure my Scotch-Irish Confederates were not into that kind of stuff during the war or after. Of course, neither were my English or German Confederates. That said, I think that current DNA research suggests that there is no real inherent genetic difference - other than cultural/tribal - between Celts, Anglo-Saxons, Germans, French, or most other European nationalities. Europeans are genetically European. The R1b y-DNA line, the most common in Europe, is found all over Northern and Western Europe as well as the British Isles and Ireland, constituting many nationalities but only one line of descent, which came to Europe from...the Pontic steppes. Any Anglo-Saxon or Celtic superiority on the Civil War battlefield is pure 19th century fantasy.

 

[63rdOVI]

Plenty of Scots ended up in Ireland, quite a few Scottish members of my family ended up moving to Northern Ireland. The Scottish hate being called Scotch, they seem to be okay with 'Scots' but for some reason they dislike Scotch although they don't mind drinking the stuff.

'Tis true. The proper term is Scot/Scottish. Although I will say that Scotch-Irish is a colloquial American term and should be used as such. It is still the preferred term of the Scotch-Irish Society of the U.S.A.

 

[rpkennedy]

I have been baffled for years by the photographs I've seen of some "reenactors" wearing kilts (with gray jackets and kepis) and playing the pipes at ceremonies to represent their idea of what Southern Celticism should look like. I'm pretty sure my Scotch-Irish Confederates were not into that kind of stuff during the war or after. Of course, neither were my English or German Confederates. That said, I think that current DNA research suggests that there is no real inherent genetic difference - other than cultural/tribal - between Celts, Anglo-Saxons, Germans, French, or most other European nationalities. Europeans are genetically European. The R1b y-DNA line, the most common in Europe, is found all over Northern and Western Europe as well as the British Isles and Ireland, constituting many nationalities but only one line of descent, which came to Europe from...the Pontic steppes. Any Anglo-Saxon or Celtic superiority on the Civil War battlefield is pure 19th century fantasy.

It's a 20th century fantasy that several historians have posited. The Southern upper classes, like their Northern counterparts, would have been quite offended if they were described a "Celtic".

Ryan

 

[leftyhunter]

I have been baffled for years by the photographs I've seen of some "reenactors" wearing kilts (with gray jackets and kepis) and playing the pipes at ceremonies to represent their idea of what Southern Celticism should look like. I'm pretty sure my Scotch-Irish Confederates were not into that kind of stuff during the war or after. Of course, neither were my English or German Confederates. That said, I think that current DNA research suggests that there is no real inherent genetic difference - other than cultural/tribal - between Celts, Anglo-Saxons, Germans, French, or most other European nationalities. Europeans are genetically European. The R1b y-DNA line, the most common in Europe, is found all over Northern and Western Europe as well as the British Isles and Ireland, constituting many nationalities but only one line of descent, which came to Europe from...the Pontic steppes. Any Anglo-Saxon or Celtic superiority on the Civil War battlefield is pure 19th century fantasy.

We had one poster a year or so ago just flat out insist that Confederates were highly gifted regal people vs the sundry and lowly WASPs. He insisted that the cause of the ACW was tied into Celtic superiority. I can't name him off the top of my head but he got a lot of replies to his thread.
Leftyhunter

 

[leftyhunter]

I have been baffled for years by the photographs I've seen of some "reenactors" wearing kilts (with gray jackets and kepis) and playing the pipes at ceremonies to represent their idea of what Southern Celticism should look like. I'm pretty sure my Scotch-Irish Confederates were not into that kind of stuff during the war or after. Of course, neither were my English or German Confederates. That said, I think that current DNA research suggests that there is no real inherent genetic difference - other than cultural/tribal - between Celts, Anglo-Saxons, Germans, French, or most other European nationalities. Europeans are genetically European. The R1b y-DNA line, the most common in Europe, is found all over Northern and Western Europe as well as the British Isles and Ireland, constituting many nationalities but only one line of descent, which came to Europe from...the Pontic steppes. Any Anglo-Saxon or Celtic superiority on the Civil War battlefield is pure 19th century fantasy.

There is a book on Amazon called"Attack and Die Southern military tactics and heritage "McWitney and Jameson. That argues Confederate soldiers died due to their brave Celtic nature. I call BS . In war people die a lot unless one side runs away. I don't see culture really playing a part one way or the other but's just me.
Leftyhunter