Scotch-Irish-L Archives

Archiver > Scotch-Irish > 1998-01 > 0884697216


From: Edward Andrews <>
Subject: Re: Response to Ed Andrews
Date: Tue, 13 Jan 1998 13:13:36 +0000


Shirley Norton wrote:

> Edward Andrews said: " The bright ones stayed put ( I await the flames)"
> .....................................................................
> I view the life of my Scottish
> and Ulster Scots ancestors as being one of virtual slavery. The poor
> uneducated Scotchman, Irishman, and Englishman were pitted against each
> other by the ruling class of people for the sake of power and greed. Bottom
> line!! What better way to keep the people in slavery than to keep them
> fighting; keep them scratching for a living; and to keep them uneducated!

It is nice to see that the Marxist analysis of history is alive and
well and living in Texas.
The idea that the serfs were being kept down by the Aristocracy and
kept divided to further the class interests of the Aristocracy does
not fully accord with the facts. The Scots in Ulster - which is the
proper object of this group were not poor and uneducated. they could
afford to go to America, and we know that they were educated.

> The Scotch-Irish that came to America flourished and prospered under freedom
> and opportunity and probably at a much faster rate than the ones they left
> behind in NI. Their progress and accomplishments are proof that they were
> bright , intelligent and a couragous people. Who can deny that?
> So therefore, I have to take Mr. Andrews statement with a grain of salt and
> a big smile because I really don't know where Mr. Andrews is coming from.

Part of the discussion has to be whether if they had stayed they
might not have done as well. When the emigration was at its height
there was considerable official concern at the population loss by the
Presbyterians leaving.
I was wanting to get a debate going about whether people went to
America because of the pull of the opportunities or the push of the
situation in Ulster.
Dickson (Chapter V) is very good on this.

I would like to ask Mr Andrews the following:

> 1. Why do you find it necessary (by your own admission) to make
> inflamatory statements?
Because there is always someone who will rise to the bate

> 2. To what purpose does this inflamatory statement serve?
Encourages discussion

> 3. Was this statement a personal opinion or an historical fact?
A bit of both. What happened to the ones who did not make it? How
about the ones who ended up as coal miners in West Virginia? Was -
after much hardship - their life any better than the ones who stayed
behind and ended up in the mines in Lanarkshire.

> 4. Just who were the "bright ones" that stayed put?

Ones like my ancestors.

> 5. How much access did the common man in Scotland, Ireland and England
> have during the 16th through 19th century to education, owning land,
> and opportunities to a better way of life?

In Scotland and for the settlers in Ireland (I make no comment about
the situation in England) this developed over the period. It is
impossible to try and answer, and meaningless to ask, a question
covering 4 centuries. The whole economic history of this period is
very much the rise of the middle class.
I suggest that you read any decent Economic History book.

> 6. What percentage of the land mass in the UK was owned by the ruling
> class of people? And what percentage of the population was the ruling
> class?
Of course there was a complete inequality in terms of land. The
question has to be however how was capital distributed. When you
remember that ever today 75% of wealth in the UK is owned by less than
20% of the population things have not changed much. What is the
equalivant percentage in America?

> 7. Do you equate that people of wealth, property and education to be the
> bright and intelligent ones? (same time period)
I don't see what his has to do with the discussion. I don't think
that you actually mean what you ask.
Perhaps you would like to rephrase the question. By the end of the
19th Cent those with first generation wealth and property tended to be
the more intelligent or bright, while effective education has always
been the preserve of the intelligent.
>
> 8. When did the common man start having access to education and owning
> their own land in the UK.
Right from the time of the Reformation there were educational
opportunities for the Lad o' Parts in Scotland. This tradition
continued in Ulster.

Edward Andrews
--
St Nicholas Buccleuch Parish Church Dalkeith
Visit our Web site
http://www.btinternet.com/~stnicholas.buccleuch/index.ht

This thread: