Scotch-Irish-L Archives

From: "Carl Stevenson" <>
Subject: Re: Fw: [A-REV] Serle & Scots-Irish, a 1776 British perspective
Date: Tue, 31 Oct 2000 00:51:48 -0000

Hello Charles

Thank you for clarifying!

Carl Stevenson
----------
> From: Charles.Clark <>
> To: Carl Stevenson <>; Scotch-Irish list
<>
> Subject: Re: Fw: [A-REV] Serle & Scots-Irish, a 1776 British perspective
> Date: Sunday, October 29, 2000 8:38 PM
>
> Carl Stevenson wrote:
>
> > Hello Charles
> >
> > Sorry You lost me at that last right turn at the Isle of Man! If I
> > understand your point you state that the SI or Ulster Scot is not the
> > protestant scottish lowlander brought over and planted in Ulster in the
> > 17th century but the Celtic isles inhabitant whose ancestors went back
and
> > forth between Ireland and Scottish northland and isles? Why can't the
term
> > be a generic title instead of a brand name used to represent all Scots
who
> > settled Ulster (from both Celtic north and lowlands?)
>
> I think it essentially is, and that is really the point as I would have
made it
> if I had been a little clearer! In other words, I agree. As I understand
it,
> Scots of both highland/island, and lowland, were in Ireland,
predominantly the
> north but in fact all over, and some of these emigrated to America in the
> 1700s. a hundred years or so later, the mythmakers got to work and
claimed that
> their ancestors, ie the emigrants, were from a fairly narrowly defined
> background (ie lowland, protestant, English-speaking). It is this
assumption
> which, I suggest, "does not stand up to the statistics."
>
> If I wasn't as clear as I might have been, it was because I was trying to
> emphasise two things:
> first that the descendants of the original Scotch-Irish, ie the
> Highlanders/islanders, were a large part of the emigrating population, as
well
> as those of lowland descent
> secondly, that those highlanders/islanders were seen by the English as
the
> dominant sub-grouping, hence the use of the Scots-Irish name for the
whole lot.
> Maybe the attempt by the mythmakers to claim a lowland origin had
something to
> do with the relative status of the two sorts of Scot in the early 1800s,
when
> the myth was being formed. I mean before the romanticism was attached to
the
> Scottish Highlander by the English Royal family, with its Balmoralism
etc.
> Remember that before the creation of an independent Highland tradition,
and the
> imposition of that tradition on the whole Scottish nation, which was the
work
> of the later eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries, the Highlands
were not
> a place anyone would want to admit to coming from.
> So basically, I suppose, it's the narrowing of the tradition (by missing
out
> one of the main ingredients, ie the highlanders/islanders) that is where
the
> American version of the Scotch-Irish tradition goes wrong. Revise the bit
where
> I said the mythmakers got it 180 degrees wrong, which implies they chose
the
> wrong one of two groups, and just say that the mythmakers missed out what
was
> probably the dominant part of the main emigrant population and hence gave
an
> impression that was most of 180 degrees wrong.
> Is that closer to what you want to say, Carl?
> Charlie

This thread:

• Re: Fw: [A-REV] Serle & Scots-Irish, a 1776 British perspective by "Carl Stevenson" <>