Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Tzar; truth_seeker
So far as I can tell, these are early instances of "political correctness" or at least of enforced group identifications.

Plenty of ordinary Scots may have thought of themselves as "Scotch" but the intelligentsia determined that "Scotch" -- apart from the whiskey -- was a barbarous anglicism to be avoided.

In the same way, it's not easy to say just what those Ulstermen or Northern Protestant Irishmen called themselves. "Ulster Scots" or "Ulstermen" or "Scots-Irish" were heard. Some may just have thought of themselves as Irish or British. "Scotch-Irish" is mostly an American term (later "corrected" to "Scots-Irish").

35 posted on 08/13/2012 2:50:54 PM PDT by x
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies ]


To: x

In the same way, it’s not easy to say just what those Ulstermen or Northern Protestant Irishmen called themselves. “Ulster Scots” or “Ulstermen” or “Scots-Irish” were heard. Some may just have thought of themselves as Irish or British. “Scotch-Irish” is mostly an American term (later “corrected” to “Scots-Irish”).

I know from research that both colonial and Canadian “Ulster Scots” gave “Irish” for their nationality in the census and other documents.

I have some, and I have done the research. “Scots-Irish” was an American invention, as I described, and as historians have written.

“Scots-Irish” was used to differentiate the 18th century Protestants, from the later, lower status “Irish” eg. 19th century Catholics.

The long settled “Irish” were effectively saying “we aren’t like these dirty, drunken, illiterate Irish newcomers. We are “Scots-Irish.”


39 posted on 08/13/2012 3:40:09 PM PDT by truth_seeker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson