The Best Rant I've Read In A Long Time

by **chiggerbit** » Mon Jan 23, 2006 1:45 pm

So, Scotland got more room for those valuable sheep, and America got (just to name a few of Scotch descent): Thomas Jefferson Patrick Henry Samuel Findley Breese Morse Andrew Carnegie Thomas Alva Edison Washington Irving Alexander Hamilton Woodrow Wilson General Henry Knox General Winfield Scott (whose grandfather fought at Battle of Culloden) John Witherspoon Saint Elizabeth Ann Bayley Seton Soooooo ~ahem~ just what was it you Scots did with all those sheep after all the good genes left? Anyway, thanks!

by **finishedqq** » Mon Jan 23, 2006 3:52 pm

Ronald Reagan visited my home town because his ancestors lived here. He might have just been lost and thought he was in Montana. John Witherspoon was pastor of Paisley Abbey before making the huge mistake of becoming President of Princeton College. "just what was it you Scots did with all those sheep after all the good genes left?" The sheep moved into the crofts the people left behind and lived happily ever after. Cannibals don't eat sheep as you know.

by **chiggerbit** » Mon Jan 23, 2006 6:57 pm

<blockquote>Quote:<hr>Cannibals don't eat sheep as you know.<hr></blockquote> Of course not, hun. Then what would they have had left to use for sex? <img src=http://www.ezboard.com/images/emoticons/roll.gif ALT=":rollin">

by **finishedqq** » Mon Jan 23, 2006 8:38 pm

"Of course not, hun. Then what would they have had left to use for sex? " Sorry, it is illegal for Scottish sheep to practice bestiality unless they are registered satanists or in the armed forces.

by **Iroquois** » Mon Jan 23, 2006 8:55 pm

The kilt was a multi-purpose piece of cloth that, I believe, originated with the Ui Niall (aka O'Neil) dynasty clans that spread from the north of Ireland in about the 10th century CE. It was everything from a ground cover to a rain poncho, but was not so much a garment as something that you wore over your clothes. In the case of one of these Gaelic clansmen, that was a long shirt. And, as if this really meant anything, the Scots were already "mutts" long before they emigrated to the US and mixed with the wretched refuse of the rest of the world. Besides the Irish clans and the patchwork of groups that likely included remnants of previous stone-age cultures as well as others that employed a Celtic language, there were Roman settlements (which was itself a Cosmopolitan culture) in southern Scotland followed by Angles, Saxons, and other newcomers from the continent. Next came heavy infusions of Scandinavians during the Viking years. Then, later more descendents of the Angles, Saxons, and Brits from the south of the island made their way north as the English kings began to dominate their neighbors. Edited by: <A HREF=http://p216.ezboard.com/brigorousintuition.showUserPublicProfile?gid=iroquois@rigorousintuition>Iroquois</A> at: 1/23/06 5:55 pm

by **finishedqq** » Mon Jan 23, 2006 9:16 pm

I don't really care one way or the other, my ancestors were Irish and the flow betwen Scotland and Ireland is the real mixture. However I really think you are exaggerating the influx of other races a bit. They were warriors who didn't actually settle like the Romans and Vikings. The Angles and Saxons only populated the south east as far as I know. To illustrate, the sectarianism of Northern Ireland (and western Scotland) is actually between South Western Scots planted there and the native Irish. I think there are rough racial differences between them still physically and in temprement. The sectarian jokes tell you that, red hair is an Irish, catholic thing for example. In Scotland generally there are wide differences, TV has levelled everything but even now I might find it very difficult to understand accents from 30, 40 miles away if they were very strong. A guy from newcastle (England, 150 or so miles away) spoke to me the other day and until he made a gesture of 'cash machine', I hadn't a clue what he said at all.

by **heyjt** » Mon Jan 23, 2006 10:45 pm

Aye, for what it's worth my family heritage is Scots/Irish also, and I have been known to drink and fight... As far as not understanding accents, I have friends from Texas that rattle off: --Ya'allwannacokacolasumpin? That means "Can I get you some kind of beverage"?

by **Iroquois** » Tue Jan 24, 2006 12:18 am

I don't believe I am exaggerating the influx of different peoples at all. For example, in the case of the Vikings. Scotland was a primary area of settlement outside of Scandinavia. They were far more prolific there, I understand, than even in Ireland which owes the founding of most of its cities to the Vikings. From: <a href="http://www.visitscotland.com/library/vikings?view=Standard">www.visitscotland.com/lib...w=Standard</a> <blockquote>Quote:<hr> In Scotland, the invasions and settlement of Vikings from Scandinavia were one of the country's most formative influences.<hr></blockquote> What's more, the primary peoples of pre-Viking Scotland were not even the Scots, as the name generally refers to the Irish who settled about the 5th century on in the southwest of Scotland separated from the rest of the island by the mountains, they were the Picts. And, good luck trying to make a case that they were any one culture or physically identifiable group that any serious anthropologist would accept. They were more likely a patchwork, unified initially only by their opposition to the Romans. The sectarianism that you point to is between two groups that share a whole lot of ancestry, both cultural and biological, underscoring that race is a social construct, not the other way around. A case in point, you say that sectarian jokes imply that red hair is a trait of Catholic Irish, but according to wikipedia's entry on red hair at <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_hair">en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red_hair</a> Scotland actually has the highest percentage of red heads in the world. And, speaking of warriors, remember that they tend to leave a lot more than battle scars behind when they raid a land. But, I would not limit the influence of Angles and Saxon peoples that comprised much of the English armies over the centuries of English invasion and conquest to just that of warriors. Like many conquerers, they stayed to claim lands and either imported their own families or obtained wives locally. And, more than likely many more groups than the few I mentioned did far more than raid Scotland over the past many hundreds of years as well. Ireland, I happen to know a great deal more on, and its cultural history also contradicts the idea of an Irish race as a biologically real thing. But, I'll have to save whatever I'd have to say about that for another time.

by **robertdreed** » Tue Jan 24, 2006 1:24 am

My guess- the Picts originally had a high admixture of Berber, from North Africa. They were of course called "Picts" because they were so heavily tattooed, a practice which is still widely resorted to by some North African peoples today. The Berbers also have the bagpipes. The Picts are, at least partially, my clan descendants, if the genealogies are to be believed...if so, I find it interesting that I have so little use for tats, especially on females. ( But if you're going to do it, symettry would be appreciated. ) Another left-field guess- tattooing originally caught on as a method of sun-screen. I have zero historical evidence to substantiate this hypothesis. As to the original Scots, one popular theory asserts that they were originally from Ionia- eastern Turkey-Phoenicia-Cyprus-Aegean Isles- seagoing peoples who fled the conquering Persians about 400BCE. They fled to the Emerald Isle- well-known to the Phoenicians for the copper mines that assumed such importance at the advent of the Bronze Age- and raped and pillaged through Ireland until they were eventually defeated in battle by the aboriginal Irish, which led to them fleeing Ireland and resettling that murky fog-shrouded bracken wildland across the Irish Sea, Scotland. They eventually ran into the Picts, raped and pillaged some more, and wiped out their culture- if not their entire genetic legacy. "Mongrels", indeed...part eastern Mediterranean, part Pict, part Irish, part Norse, part Celtic...plus who knows how many other "lost tribes." It's enough to give a Scot like myself second thoughts on lecturing other peoples for behaving badly. Or for not having much in the way of verifiable history. You'd think we were all painting ourselves blue and running around naked in the not too distant past...well, we were, actually. The Romans did manage to record that much about our ancestral customs. ( Actually, I'm only part-Scots. Which is somehow fitting, I suppose. ) With all that, don't confuse me with being a "self-hating Scot." We're brilliant and good-looking and well-made, and we toss lumber around like matchsticks...well, at least some of us, anyway. And our music is great... Edited by: <A HREF=http://p216.ezboard.com/brigorousintuition.showUserPublicProfile?gid=robertdreed>robertdreed</A> at: 1/23/06 10:49 pm

by **Iroquois** » Tue Jan 24, 2006 2:04 am

Nothing, as far as I know, is certain about the Picts not even why they were called the "Picts". It could have been from a Roman word based on either tattoos or body painting, or it could have been based on a name one of the tribes of the people they encountered called themselves. In either case, the name was likely assigned to many different tribes who came to Scotland from different places during different periods who were possibly only first united in their resistence to the Romans. As for the Scots, I tend toward the idea of them being just an extension of the Iron age Irish culture into the isolated pocket of land in the southwest corner of Scotland. I had understood the "invasion" was very slow, taking a couple of hundred years, and possibly even non-violent. But, I'm pretty limited in my sources of information on the subject. Most of what I know is from "The Age of the Picts" by W. A. Cummins. I'd certainly be interested to know about any other good books on this subject.

by **sceneshifter** » Tue Jan 24, 2006 5:45 am

[font face=helvetica color=blue size=4]for doing the job you are doing, for you and your partner, even if one of you is a housewife or two of you students You dont like the sound of a family income of $75,000 a year for what you are doing? You dont like the sound of not being forced to go off and be cannonfodder in rich men's wars? You dont like the sound of not having any tyrants trampling you? You dont like the sound of receiving as much respect in the paypacket as anyone else at all?[/font]

by **finishedqq** » Tue Jan 24, 2006 9:48 am

The Vikings raided the coasts and islands of Scotland. particularly the northern isles. Yes the name Scots was originally Irish and at that time Scotland was part of the British Kingdom connected with Arthurian legend . Dumbarton Castle was the 'capital' apparently. Was it known as Strathclyde ? I once knew the history quite well but I've forgotten to be honest and don't much care any more. "As for the Scots, I tend toward the idea of them being just an extension of the Iron age Irish culture into the isolated pocket of land in the southwest corner of Scotland" I think that's right. I also studied archaeology (for 1 year and not exactly by choice) , the professor was an Arthurian expert who wrote popular books on the subject and had us climbing hills in weather you wouldn't believe to see more or less nothing. My recollection of bright red hair was that it was almost all catholics. I have reddish hair too but I wouldn't count that. The Scots in Northern Ireland were mainly from Ayrshire and reputed to be quite large and solid (like Ian Paisley). It isn't really possible to tell them apart because like Glasgow they have to ask what your school was to find out your religion.

by **marykmusic** » Tue Jan 24, 2006 11:24 am

It was QEI who started killing off the Irish people and replacing them with loyal Scots, considered harder workers. This continued for a long time... that's the origin of the Scots-Irish and how the "a" got dropped, from the "Mac" in front of the clan names to "Mc." After a few generations, the "Mc's" dominated northern Ireland and changed the religious balance there, also bringing their Protestantism with them. Something like that, anyway. --MaryK

by **finishedqq** » Tue Jan 24, 2006 11:48 am

Yes I think you're about right, my name was actually a corruption because the English people who registered the Scots couldn't spell the Scottish names. It is a very common protestant northern Irish name now. "harder workers" That is one of the racial differences I was referring to but thought better not to mention. Because my father adopted his surname and my mother was catholic Irish I guess that's I'm not one of the hard working Scots !!! In fact I'm almost certain both parents had southern Irish heritage, one grandparent was Scottish.

by **Iroquois** » Tue Jan 24, 2006 8:55 pm

You were pretty much on the mark, MaryK. Though the first major invasion of Ireland from England began in the late 12th century with the Norman knights, the Plantation of Ulster than took place in what is now Norther Ireland followed the Irish rebellion called the "9 Years War" which was during the reign of Elizabeth I. She died before the policy was enacted, however. Though, perhaps she did transfer some lands to loyal subjects from her island during her reign as well as this was not an uncommon policy for England. However, the Plantation of Ulster was heavily promoted and much larger than other attempts to displace the Catholic Irish with loyal Protestents, mostly from SW Scotland, due to the fierce resistence the English had previously faced in those six counties of Ulster. Something many don't know about this period in Anglo-Irish relations, the Pale was a fortified area around Dublin where the kings of England were able to maintain control during the resurgence of the Gaelic Irish in the centuries after the Norman failed attempt at conquest. The phrase "beyond the pale", then, is a reference to part of Ireland under native rule. That's why I never use that phrase, at least the way most do.

The Best Rant I've Read In A Long Time

Re: bottom end

president

Re: president

sheep

Re: kilts and Scots

mixed ?

Scots/Irish

Who were the Scots?

Re: Who were the Scots?

Re: Who were the Scots?

what? You dont like the sound of US$15 an hour...

vikings etc

Re: vikings etc

Re: vikings etc

Re: vikings etc

Who is online