asked if i was irish

[JockInSkye]

Jock in Skye, your constant references to the “English” royal family are patronising and offensive.
While the kings and queens of England, Scotland and the United Kingdom have generally lived in England since the time of James VI of Scotland, their line of succession is Scottish. The Hanovers came to the throne thanks to their descent from Charles I.
George IV might have been the first sovereign in centuries to visit Scotland, but the royals have been personally and intensively involved in Scotland since that time.

Trefor, while the English and Scottish royals have frequently married foreign royalty, there are many instances where kings of both nations have married the daughters of earls and dukes.
William I, the founder of the dynasty, married the daughter of a Count of Flanders, and was himself a bastard, offspring of a Norse duke and a publican’s daughter. (He denied being a conqueror, but acknowledged his bastardy.)
The Tudors were of royal blood because Owen Tudor, a Welsh knight, had married Queen Catherine, widow of Henry V and daughter of Charles VI of France. Owen’s sons, Edmund and Jasper, had not a drop of English royal blood. Edmund’s marriage into the house of Beaufort and his son Henry’s marriage into the house of York were what established the family on the throne.
And while Mary Queen of Scots was first married to the Dauphin, her subsequent marriages were to Scottish noblemen. James VI was the son of her cousin Lord Darnley, heir to the earldom of Lennox.
It was only during the Hanoverian and Victorian eras that such a severe emphasis was laid on marrying royalty. This was a German attitude arising from the stratification of the German nobility.
Sovereign rulers in the Holy Roman Empire could only marry into the families of other sovereigns. Under Napoleon, many of those sovereign families were mediatised – they lost their sovereign territories, but their nobiliary rank was maintained, and they continued to marry people of sovereign rank.
Marriages between royals and the lower nobility (even counts and countesses) were frowned on. It was from the Holy Roman Empire that the notion of morganatic marriages emerged: a sovereign could marry someone of lower rank, but that spouse nonetheless had to be noble, and the offspring could not inherit the throne.
However morganatic marriages are foreign to British tradition. It was because Edward VIII insisted on marrying an unsuitable partner that he was obliged to abdicate. (Wallis Simpson was unsuitable chiefly because she was a divorcee.)

In closing, Jock in Skye, the Irish regiments of the British Army only became largely Orangist after the First World War. The Inniskilling Fusiliers mutinied in India because they regarded themselves as citizens of an Irish republic.
The usage of kilts in the Irish regiments has been discussed at length elsewhere.
Regards,
Mike

I regard the royal family as English (as I am sure they would regard themselves as English), I cannot possibly fathom why you would take offense at that. And regardless of politics or religion, the vast majority of the Royal Irish Regiment in the late 19th to early 20th century were indeed made up of Ulster Scots.

[The Thing]

In closing, Jock in Skye, the Irish regiments of the British Army only became largely Orangist after the First World War. The Inniskilling Fusiliers mutinied in India because they regarded themselves as citizens of an Irish republic.
The usage of kilts in the Irish regiments has been discussed at length elsewhere.
Regards,
Mike

It was the Connaught Rangers that mutinied and only after many Irish towns and cities had been burned and many innocents killed by the Bllack and Tans and Auxilliary forces. The India mutiny was in 1920, many of the mutineers had been great war veterans and served with pride in the British Army. The Inniskillens were very Irish in their make up and recruited largely from old Gaelic areas of Ulster, Cavan, Fermanagh, Donegal, Monaghan and Tyrone. The period of the formation of the two states of Ireland is a very sad one.

[macwilkin]

It was the Connaught Rangers that mutinied and only after many Irish towns and cities had been burned and many innocents killed by the Bllack and Tans and Auxilliary forces. The India mutiny was in 1920, many of the mutineers had been great war veterans and served with pride in the British Army. The Inniskillens were very Irish in their make up and recruited largely from old Gaelic areas of Ulster, Cavan, Fermanagh, Donegal, Monaghan and Tyrone. The period of the formation of the two states of Ireland is a very sad one.

There is an excellent history of the "Devil's Own" entitled "The Devil to Pay", which deals with Daly Mutiny and the mythology that surrounds it today in the Republic. The story is much more complex than the legend.

T.

[Mike_Oettle]

Thank you, Todd and The Thing, for that correction. It was the Connaught Rangers.
Jock in Skye, my contention is not that Orangemen were not prominent in the British forces, but that other Irishmen also played their part until the Troubles in the time of the Black and Tans.
I have emphasised that the royals are culturally English. It is your constant harping on their Englishness that is obnoxious, since it implies that they have no place whatever in Scotland.
Regards,
Mike

[macwilkin]

Thank you, Todd and The Thing, for that correction. It was the Connaught Rangers.
Jock in Skye, my contention is not that Orangemen were not prominent in the British forces, but that other Irishmen also played their part until the Troubles in the time of the Black and Tans.
I have emphasised that the royals are culturally English. It is your constant harping on their Englishness that is obnoxious, since it implies that they have no place whatever in Scotland.
Regards,
Mike

Mike,

Just a slight addition to your comments: you are quite correct in your statement that up until 1922, with the establishment of the Free State, there were a number of Southern Irish regiments that served in the British Army, such as the Dublin & Munister Fusiliers, the Connaught Rangers, etc., as well as Northern Irish units -- during the First World War, the moderate nationalist John Redmond attempted to organize volunteer units for service in France, which became the 16th Division, while the Unionists served in the 36th (Ulster) Division, including a number of Orangemen.

I'll stop now and "toe the line" regarding this discussion.

T.

[auld argonian]

All right...one of my favorite old kids' cartoons from the sixties that deals with the question of "Irish-ness".

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tn3sHf9F3QA

...admittedly silly but it might bring a wee smile.


Best

AA

[JockInSkye]

Thank you, Todd and The Thing, for that correction. It was the Connaught Rangers.
Jock in Skye, my contention is not that Orangemen were not prominent in the British forces, but that other Irishmen also played their part until the Troubles in the time of the Black and Tans.
I have emphasised that the royals are culturally English. It is your constant harping on their Englishness that is obnoxious, since it implies that they have no place whatever in Scotland.
Regards,
Mike

I don't think the royal family have a place in the 21st century let alone in Scotland. But I won't enter into that discussion.

[Lallans]

I don't think the royal family have a place in the 21st century let alone in Scotland. But I won't enter into that discussion.

I assume this hasn't been the case with you, but if you had been in a position where your ethnic identity was under serious attack you might find yourself clinging to tradition more than at present.

Also, after several decades of personal exposure, the modern practice of urging people to scrap every vestige of our past starts to look to me to be postively sinister....

[McClef]

The Hanovers came to the throne thanks to their descent from Charles I.

I think you mean James I and VI here Mike. The Hanoverians descend from Charles I's sister.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elizabeth_of_Bohemia

it is the Jacobite line that descends from Charles I.

[JockInSkye]

I assume this hasn't been the case with you, but if you had been in a position where your ethnic identity was under serious attack you might find yourself clinging to tradition more than at present.

Also, after several decades of personal exposure, the modern practice of urging people to scrap every vestige of our past starts to look to me to be postively sinister....

Whos ethnic identity are you speaking of ? And how is it under attack ?