In a message dated 6/7/02 7:32:36 AM Pacific Daylight Time, AMERICAN-REVOLUTION-D-request@rootsweb.com writes: Hi: I noted Arthur McGinley's re the Scotch-Irish (Scots Irish). I have a friend who lives in Northern Virginia who tells me it is now Scots-Irish. My poor mother would have been insulted. She considered herself Scotch Irish. Someone once pointed it out to her that "Scotch" was a whiskey and she was "Scots Irish." She got very upset with thar person who only meant well. And yes, there were Highlanders in Northern Ireland. One of my mother's ancestors was a Highlander and was in the Battle of the Boyne. He later came to Lancaster Co., PA about 1717 and he had grandchildren that fought in the American Revolution. According to my mother, there was no love for England in her Scotch-Irish family. By the way, I do not consider the terminology "Scotch Irish" as an insult. I'm proud of it. Some of the best soldiers in the Revolution were Scotch Irish. Annie > : Fri, 7 Jun 2002 09:39:57 -0400 > From: "The Dour Celt" <mcginley@chartertn.net> > To: AMERICAN-REVOLUTION-L@rootsweb.com > Message-ID: <009c01c20e28$dd7f8dc0$7fbb9f18@chartertn.net> > Subject: Re: [A-REV] Scots Irish > Content-Type: text/plain; > charset="Windows-1252" > MIME-Version: 1.0 > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > > > Please explain the difference in these terms. I do not understand > why Scotch-Irish > > would be an insulting term: > > > > "The term "Scotch-Irish" (later made politically correct to > "Scots-Irish")" > > I was told by the historian for Clan Gregor that many Gregors moved > first to the Lowlands and then to Ulster after the Order of Fire and > Sword placed on them by James VI/I. So there were some Highlanders in > the bunch who moved to Northern Ireland and were eventually called > Scotch-Irish in the United States and Ulster Scots in Northern > Ireland. > > The lady also said that the difference in terms is some modern day > folks being uppity. If you read the old records, especially in > Pennsylvania, they called themselves Scotch-Irish. > > Arthur McGinley > mcginley@chartertn.net > amcginle@tusculum.edu > - -------------------------------------------------------------------- > ----------------------- > I have always regarded the forward edge of the battlefield as the most > exclusive club in the world > -- Sir

At 11:05 PM 6/21/2002 -0400, you wrote: >In a message dated 6/7/02 7:32:36 AM Pacific Daylight Time, >AMERICAN-REVOLUTION-D-request@rootsweb.com writes: > >Hi: I noted Arthur McGinley's re the Scotch-Irish (Scots Irish). I have a >friend who lives in Northern Virginia who tells me it is now Scots-Irish. My >poor mother would have been insulted. She considered herself Scotch Irish. >Someone once pointed it out to her that "Scotch" was a whiskey and she was >"Scots Irish." She got very upset with thar person who only meant well. >And yes, there were Highlanders in Northern Ireland. One of my mother's >ancestors was a Highlander and was in the Battle of the Boyne. He later came >to Lancaster Co., PA about 1717 and he had grandchildren that fought in the >American Revolution. According to my mother, there was no love for England >in her Scotch-Irish family. By the way, I do not consider the terminology >"Scotch Irish" as an insult. I'm proud of it. Some of the best soldiers in >the Revolution were Scotch Irish. > >Annie For the last two days, I have been in attendance at the XIV Ulster American Symposium being held in York County SC. I had already made myself a mental note that I would need to post to the list modifying/correcting a view that I have expressed several times on the list, and it regards this very matter. Two speakers (one in a 20-minute presentation, and another in a prepared paper he shared with me) refuted the idea that Scots Irish is the more appropriate term, or that it has a more solid historical basis. The speaker acknowledged that the use of Scots Irish is gaining ground due to its being promoted very energetically and very vocally by those, for reasons not explained (or perhaps not known), who have made it their cause to replace the term which has been used (without attracting much interest) for 3 centuries. I have said on this list several times that the term Scotch Irish came into use in the US during the 1800s by the descendants of the Protestant Irish immigrants to differentiate themselves from the Catholic Irish who began to immigrate in substantial numbers at that time. It was pointed out that this idea originated with a single person who promoted its acceptance vigorously. It was acknowledged that the term Scotch Irish was used much more frequently with its having gained this additional significance, but examples were shown that it had been used for 2 centuries prior to the time, which the negates the idea that it was an "American invention". It was noted that the campaign to change the term from Scotch Irish to Scots Irish is not being made by the descendants of those descended from these folk, but by others. If one wishes to foster good relations with a people, it is considered diplomatic to refer to them by the name they have chosen for themselves. E.g., black Americans, currently favor being called Afro-Americans, and few, if any, make it their purpose to call them otherwise, certainly none who wish to gain their good will. [I have often made this point in regard to the use of the terms rebels and tory. If one desires to foster good relations with those favoring a certain viewpoint, it is simple diplomacy to call their group by whatever name *they* prefer (which will be one having positive connotation, e.g., loyalist). Not doing so (using one with a negative connotation, e.g., tory) intentionally or otherwise, sends the signal that one places no value on maintaining a positive dialogue with those holding a different viewpont. -jr] A number of notable reference books, from both sides of the pond, were named which use, refer to, and acknowledge the term Scotch Irish. Few if any were found which defined the newer term. The speaker injected a bit of humor by suggesting, that following the logic of those promoting the term Scots Irish, that we should also adopt the use of "Scots Tape" and "butterscots pudding" which was well received by a mixed audience of SI descendants and visitors from N. Ireland. I heard no opposing viewpoint from anyone, and this audience is blessed with many with the credentials to be considered credible had they chosen to do so. New subject: I got mixed responses on what the 18th century SI immigrants would have called themselves. The Irish viewpoint seemed to favor there calling themselves "Scots", while Americans seem to favor the idea that they called themselves "Irish". I had been of the opinion that they called themselves "Irish" but I will state such less emphatically in the future. I asked one learned Irish lady what were the probabilities of there being intermarriage between Protestants and Catholics of the SI before there emigrating to the colonies before the Rev War. She seemed of the opinion that it could have happened, but not a very high percentage, but that they would have been quickly assimilated into one group or the other since there was "no middle ground". New subjects: Several speakers had made the point that the SI were found on both sides during the Rev War. There has been a good deal of discussion on immigration to the colonies and its motivation. It seems that at first the they were "pushed to emigrate" but as time went on, they were "pulled" by the economic opportunity. Gotta go or I'll be late for today's session. John Robertson