GENIRE-L Archives

Archiver > GENIRE > 2003-03 > 1047666992

From: (Nik Warrensson)
Subject: Re: What is the meaning of the term "Scot-Irish"
Date: 14 Mar 2003 10:36:32 -0800
References: <> <2wKaa.10721$> <> <> <b4i3cm$cut$>

"Sean MacLochlainn" <> wrote in message news:<b4i3cm$cut$>...
> Jim Pettit wrote:
> > It ignores the fact that Antrim and Down were settled by routine
> > Presbyterian immigration from Scotland and were thus not part of the
> > Plantations
> Antrim and Down had a private-sector plantation (ie: colonisation), the
> rest of Ulster had a government sponsored plantation. Colonisation is
> colonisation is colonisation. Next you'll be arguing that Antrim and Down
> were terra incognita.
> > ...that land ownership
> > had always been concentrated in Ireland so that the replacement of a
> > small group of landowners had little effect on the population who
> > normally leased their property
> The plantation was more than a change in landlords. It was the eradication
> of the native social system by the wholesale import and plantation of tens
> of thousands of loyal Scots and English colonists. Read the early
> seventeenth century English government state papers in which the plantation
> is discussed and it will leave you in no doubt that the government hoped
> that plantation would reduce the barbarous natives to civility, etc.
> > ... and that the Penal Laws didn't come
> > out of the blue. Each set followed a massacre of Protestants and was
> > a means of trying to prevent the old landowners from causing further
> > deaths. The laws were also indifferently enforced and didn't affect
> > the majority of the population.
> ie: your massacres were worse than our massacres. So that makes the penal
> laws OK then. Do you realise thar the penal laws discriminated against
> Presbyterians as much as they discriminated against Roman Catholics? I
> thought not.
> Sean

The Penal Laws did indeed discriminate against Presbyterians. Any
Republican who has any knowledge of Irish History will know that and
also that the leadership of the 1798 and 1803 United Irishmen
Rebellions was Presbyterian. However it is false to say that the
discrimination against Presbyterians was equal to the discrimination
against Irish Catholics.

Presbyterians were allowed to own arms, for a start. Presbyterians
were allowed considerably more freedom when it came to purchasing land
i.e. they could.

I could go on but I have established that there were at least 2
significant differences between the discrimination suffered by
Dissenters and use the Oligarch's terms.


This thread: