Scots-Irish

[O'Callaghan]

I think the proportion of people in Northern Ireland who are Ulster Scots is not as much as a half. About a third would be closer, so probably about 600,000 out of 1.8 million. Protestants slightly outnumber Catholics there, but not every protestant is Ulster Scots. The Methodists may be of English or Welsh descent, and the Church of Ireland people may be of English or just simply Irish descent. According to the stats I have read, though, there is an almost (although not exact) 1-1 correspondence between being Presbyterian and being Ulster Scots.

So how come there are more Scotch-Irish in America than Ulster Scots in Northern Ireland? Easy, really. This is a bit like the famous statistic that there are more Poles in Chicago than in Warsaw. Many (most?) Americans are a mixture of various ethnic groups. Perhaps the same person is unlikely to be both ethnic Polish and ethnic Scotch-Irish, as they settled in different places, but I have cousins in the US mid-West who are a mix of English, Welsh and Latvian, for example. IOW, each person may count many times over for a variety of ethnic groups.

People from West Virginia have told me that they regard Methodist and Presbyterian churches as interchangeable (!), but they had no idea that the Presbyterian church is Scottish in origin or that the Methodist church was brought there by Welsh settlers. It's probable that their family trees have both Welsh and Scotch-Irish in them, along with who knows what else. Many of the miners in Appalachia are of Welsh descent, their ancestors having gone from coal mines in Wales to the same work in the new world. I remember a TV documentary showing an old disused mine in Appalachia with signs prohibiting the miners from speaking Welsh, which they pointed out as racist.

As to kilts in Ireland, they aren't worn much, other than by pipers and to some weddings, but they aren't a purely or even predominantly protestant or
Scotch-Irish preserve. Kilts were worn as a symbol of Irish nationalism, including by Patrick Pierce, who took part in the Easter Rising of 1916. Treading on dangerous ground, but I couldn't let that suggestion go unchecked.

[Gael Ridire]

My family history tells of one William O'Bryan leaving his parent's home in Ontario, Canada in the late 1850s and marrying Mary Jane Stacy at Black Hawk, Colorado on 6 June 1864, under the name of William Bryant. On immigration he dropped the 'O' and added the 't' to make his Irish surname English. This would be the end of the 'Potato Famine era.' Did he change the surname to cover tracks, or did he change the surname to hide his ethnicity? I don't know.

[MacGumerait]

Estimates vary of course, but the numbers most often sited report that in the 1790 US Census there were 160,000 individuals who claimed Scottish ancestry and 320,000 individuals who claimed "Scotch-Irish" ancestry in the US with the majority of those located in North Carolina.

In the 2000 US Census, of those who self reported their ancestry there were 4,890,000 of Scottish ancestry and 4,310,000 of "Scotch-Irish" ancestry. The entire population of Scotland was around 5,200,000 in 2010.

This helps to explain is one small way the widespread interest in all things Scottish here in the USA.

Blackrose87 ,

It is probably safe to say that a large majority of the over 4 million people here in the U.S. that identified themselves in the 2000 census as " Scotch-Irish " thought that meant they were of both Scottish and Irish descent , one side of the family was Scottish and the other side of the family Irish . I doubt most of those 4 million in the census had ever heard of an " Ulster Scot ".

My great-grandparents and grandfather ( a boy at the time ) came to the U.S. in 1910 ( along with other family members ) from Inverness , Scotland and I was of course born later on but raised by my grandparents . I'm 54 and my great-grandparents were in their late 90's when they passed and I was high school age . We all lived within five miles of each other and I got a good dose of all things Scottish growing up .

I only bring this point up to illustrate that I was raised to understand some Scottish history and my roots ( not an expert ) and I was taught that Scotch-Irish meant " Ulster Scots " as we did have some " Ulster Scot " relatives . However , I have discovered throughout my life that most Americans that identify themselves as Scotch-Irish in the U.S. ( i.e. the 4 million in the census ) think that means they are part Scottish and part Irish meaning their descendants came from two different countries , although a few did know the true meaning .

Hope that somewhat helps to answer the one question you asked regarding how Americans view the term " Scotch-Irish " .
I think most view it as being of two ancestories even though that is " technically " incorrect .

I don't know if that helps , but perhaps it explains why the term is so often used here in the U.S.

Best Regards , Mike

[Blackrose87]

I think the proportion of people in Northern Ireland who are Ulster Scots is not as much as a half. About a third would be closer, so probably about 600,000 out of 1.8 million. Protestants slightly outnumber Catholics there, but not every protestant is Ulster Scots. The Methodists may be of English or Welsh descent, and the Church of Ireland people may be of English or just simply Irish descent. According to the stats I have read, though, there is an almost (although not exact) 1-1 correspondence between being Presbyterian and being Ulster Scots.

Sorry, I meant that at the very most 1/2 the population would be scots descended. But yes, youre right, it would be mostly only the Presbyterians and free presbyterians who would consider themselves Ulster-Scots, and not the other Protestant religions.

As to kilts in Ireland, they aren't worn much, other than by pipers and to some weddings, but they aren't a purely or even predominantly protestant or
Scotch-Irish preserve. Kilts were worn as a symbol of Irish nationalism, including by Patrick Pierce, who took part in the Easter Rising of 1916. Treading on dangerous ground, but I couldn't let that suggestion go unchecked.

One of the reasons I wear my kilt is to honour Irish nationalists like Pearse, although I wouldn't say many other nationalists would do this back home. In the north especially, very few kilts would be seen at a catholic wedding, presumably due to its perceived connection with Ulster-Scots.

[Blackrose87]

It seems that a lot of North Americans use the term for your situation rather than its historical meaning.
Although can I ask, if your ancestors from Glasgow instead came from, say Paris, would you describe yourself as French-Irish?

Yes, most people would!

But how do North Americans choose which ancestry they are going to identify with? I've seen people on this forum saying their link to Scotland or Ireland, is their great great grandfather.
But that means they could have a possible 15 other nationalities which they are just as connected to as the Scottish/Irish link.

Granted that's an exaggerated case, but what makes some nationalists more 'desirable' than others? Surely anyone claiming heritage that far back, is going to have just as much or more English blood? Yet I've never heard of English-Americans.

[ForresterModern]

"It is probably safe to say that a large majority of the over 4 million people here in the U.S. that identified themselves in the 2000 census as " Scotch-Irish " thought that meant they were of both Scottish and Irish descent , one side of the family was Scottish and the other side of the family Irish . I doubt most of those 4 million in the census had ever heard of an " Ulster Scot ".". quote from MacGumerait above


Personally I would agree with Mike's above statement. Remember that the major scots-irish immigrant waves came over between 150 and nearly 300 years ago, so many generations have past since the original immigrant in any one family line crossed, in the vast majority of cases, probably more generations than were actually born in Ulster between the original plantation and the later emigration. Many subsequent intermarriages, many with other ethnicities including other true scots and irish-irish, and other ethnicities from the british isles, have led to a general melange of ethnicities in any one person's background although lines may still be traced and one or more held as one's dominant ethnicity. Honestly, even among the well educated, most Americans have very little knowledge of Scottish or Irish or British civil history beyond what we may have seen in movies like Braveheart or Michael Collins, unless they have taken a particular interest in the topic for some reason such as genealogy tracing, etc.. So I honestly doubt that even 5-10 per cent of Americans would even know the history behind Northern Ireland, let alone what an Ulster-scot or the true Scots-Irish are, despite the fact that a much more significant percentage of them likely have some scots-irish blood in their family trees somewhere. Heck, few people raised in America really understand our own true national history beyond the very basics of Columbus's voyage, predominantly British colonization, the Boston Tea Party, the generalities of the American Revolution, the basics of the American Civil War (we are so ethnocentric as to believe ours was the only one), vagaries of the settling of the american west, and then major 20th century events leading up to today. Myself included, at least until my genealogy and history curiosity bug bit and I did my own digging by prolific reading and research, something not done even by most who try to trace their genealogy.

[MacLowlife]

FM,

I am afraid you are still flattering the average American. I am guessing that Ken Burns has helped, and so did Mel Gibson and Liam Neeson, after a fashion, but in general, I wouldn't count on the average person I meet to know anything at all about American History- and I live in SC where it literally stares you in the face at every turn.

To answer Black Rose's most recent question, I believe thoughtful Americans recognize their different strains of ancestry when they are reminded of them. Most of us have one surname which has persisted- and with it that names' origins. Another folkway of the American South is a tendency to use surnames as middle names, including the practice of naming a second son after the mother's father, with the father's surname tacked onto the end. Little girls are called Mary Heyward or Anne Douglas or Caroline Salley ( A Huguenot surname, originally, not Sally, short for Sarah).

Heritage societies are another reminder. Several of the presidents of my local Saint Andrew's society have Huguenot surnames. I am not a member of the SC Huguenot society, though I know people who are, including some who are also members of the St Andrew's. We are ancestor worshippers here in SC. I have no idea what people do in California or Oregon.

I have a chart that will tell you who my great great grandfathers are ( and their grandfathers). I can recite the names of my great grandfathers and, come to think of it, they were all born here. I believe the person who is looking for a particular ethnic tie will emphasize that one, perhaps ignoring others, or simply not bothering to trace them.

I commend the Wikipedia article on the Scots Irish in America to you. It is fairly detailed and nicely annotated.

[ForresterModern]

"But how do North Americans choose which ancestry they are going to identify with. I've seen people on this forum saying their link to Scotland or Ireland, is their great great grandfather.
But that means they could have a possible 15 other nationalities which they are just as connected to as the Scottish/Irish link.". Quote from blackrose87

You hit the nail on the head. Many trace their surname lineage, others whatever is most relatively easy and available to them, others taking what they are told by older living members of the family and their memories. Shorter genealogic lines are easier to trace, longer less so and less reliably. My Wife, first generation American of full blooded Dutch immigrant parents----easy. Me, just my patrilineal surname line, 15 generations on this side of the Atlantic, another 15 or so in England, another 8 or so in Scotland (where the Forrester name itself originated), another 10 or so pre-Forrester Counts of Flanders before that, and somewhere tailing off before that to a link to Charlemagne. Several tenuous links in that long chain, especially as to any given generation's locations. But I choose to claim the Scottish as that is the location where my surname really originated, not ignoring the Flemish that preceded it or the English that followed it, or the many generations in what is now America. That is the most researched and best documented line, but not the longest on my family tree, if you believe the work done by others and their own tenuous links.

We Americans do tend to latch onto one or two national heritages, however dilute they may be, for whatever reasons we may each have-------very fashionable to be Irish around St Patricks Day, may be particularly proud of one specific famous ancestor, may have a connection to the Mayflower or the Daughters of the American Revolution or one of the colonial founders or Thomas Jefferson, documented military service in one or more of the many military conflicts on or off our continent, Founding Fathers of Virginia or some other state, descent from a native american tribe, etc... To each his own reasons for claiming certain ancestries over others.

[ForresterModern]

"I am afraid you are still flattering the average American. I am guessing that Ken Burns has helped, and so did Mel Gibson and Liam Neeson, after a fashion, but in general, I wouldn't count on the average person I meet to know anything at all about American History- and I live in SC where it literally stares you in the face at every turn.". Quote from MacLowlife


Mac, I was trying to be polite to my fellow Americans, not necessarily statistically accurate. I think we are both working along the same lines, though.

[Blackrose87]

I commend the Wikipedia article on the Scots Irish in America to you. It is fairly detailed and nicely annotated.

Very interesting article, I'll have to read a bit more about the culture and history when I have more time.
I liked the Ulster-Scots translation of the the term into 'Scotch Airish o' Amerikey'