33 Comments

• hammerclaw | May 07, 2013, 08:47 PM EDT

  To be Scotch-Irish is often to be confused. Generations pass, and our little sojourn in Ulster is ofttimes forgotten and all that some families remember is the Scottish part of their heritage.

• joycean | Jan 08, 2012, 09:05 AM EST

  Well the Scotch-Irish certainly are welcome in this country. Without them, there wouldn't be a United States.

• citizen69 | Jan 08, 2012, 06:21 AM EST

  @Gearoid: I understand and i am not arguing that those factors are reason for Ulster to be separate. All i'm saying is that people have no right to say that those of Ulster-Scottish descent do not belong here as if they are a foreign race from a far off land. They are not.

• Gearoid4 | Jan 07, 2012, 07:29 PM EST

  @Citizen69. Point taken. There can be little argument about the cultural links between Scotland and the northern part of Ireland which involves settlement as you say going back to a site found near Mount Sandel, Co. Derry. But this does not obscure my larger point that because one part of one's country has experienced close interaction with another country in close proximity, does not mean that it should be considered as a separate unit from it's own country.

• citizen69 | Jan 07, 2012, 05:26 PM EST

  @Gearoid: I agree with most of what you say but going on archaeology evidence Ireland was the last land mass in Europe bar one to be settled by humans (the last being Iceland). The earliest known human settlement in Ireland is Mount Sandel in county Londonderry, Ulster. It's most likely these settlers came from Scotland. They would have been descendants of the Iberian migrants you speak of who first went to England, onto Scotland and then into Ireland. Britain and Ireland share the same ancestors. A few remote areas of western Ireland have a higher concentration of basque markers as they didn't come into contact as much with later waves of migrants/invasions but generally Irish & Scottish share the same dna profile. But the people of Scotland & Ulster have always interacted. As far back as the Battle Of Moira king Congal of Ulster had an allied army of Ulstermen, Scots & Picts fighting against the High king of Ireland. And even long before the existence of the Ulster & Scottish kingdom of Dalaradia there is evidence of connections between the two areas. The neolithic Court Cairn graves of 6000 years ago are most highly concentrated in South west Scotland & North East Ireland showing a common culture and shared beliefs.

• Gearoid4 | Jan 07, 2012, 03:50 PM EST

  Citizen, Ulster was the last redoubt for ancient Irish culture before it was vanquished by the Tudor conquest of Elizabeth 1. Most of the place-names there are ultimately derived from the Irish language. Because Scotland is only separated by a narrow Channel does not make the northern part of Ireland a dependency of it. I admit that a lot of interchange has happened between that part of Ireland and Scotland in terms of people and goods over a 1,500 year period. There are pockets of Ulster marked by this Scottish influence in terms of genealogy, culture and dialect But the underlying bedrock which marks the region is the ancient Irish Gaelic language and culture which repeated colonial incursions tried to completely wipe out but these influences are still with us. The ethnic lineage of Munster people is very similar to the one of thousands of people in Ulster as the basic DNA markers of the Irish population has not changed since the arrival of migrants to Ireland's shores from Iberia at least 5,000 years ago. Indeed the Basque population is the nearest people that the Irish share an ethnic affinity with.

• Pittsburghkid | Jan 07, 2012, 02:36 PM EST

  Pittsburgh is the Scotch-Irish capital of the world like Boston is the Irish capital of the world, and New York is the Jewish capital of the world. Being of Irish and Scotch-Irish blood, I understand the relationship between the Irish and the Scotch-Irish. Actually the Irish mixed very well with the Vikings, and the Normans very well. Of course their was some blood shed, but intermarriage occurred, and the Vikings and Normans became Irish. But not with the Scotch-Irish and the Irish, because of religion.

• joycean | Jan 07, 2012, 01:17 PM EST

  ciaradexy, This is an American Census, not an Irish one. In this country, people self-identify.

• citizen69 | Jan 07, 2012, 12:36 PM EST

  @ciaradexy: What, i wonder, do you think gives you the right to decide if someone is Irish or not? What about the Celts that planted/invaded Ireland to the detriment of the natives, are they Irish? The Gaels own writings talk of various invasions of Ireland before their people arrived. But your attitude typically demonstrates what i was referring to in my last post. Scots & Irish have been migrating across the narrow 13 mile channel for thousands of years. Historically, people of Ulster have had more in common with their Scottish cousins than their Munster ones. Belfast is closer to Ayr in Scotland than it is to Dublin, and in historic times was quicker and safer to travel to. In terms of genetic ancestry there is little or no difference between an Ulster planter & and Ulster 'native'. If 400 years isn't long enough to be identified with a land then there are no white Americans, Canadians or Australians.

• joycean | Jan 07, 2012, 09:12 AM EST

  Despite the headline, Scotch-Irish ARE included in this table as a sub-category under IRISH. I think this may have been done for political reasons. The number of "Irish" went down between 1990 and 2000. Adding Scotch-Irish to Irish increases the number. I imagine Irish-American lobbiests and politians want the highest number they can get.

• ciaradexy | Jan 07, 2012, 09:10 AM EST

  Scotch Irish is an American term. These people were British and were planted in Ireland to the detriment of the natives. They should NEVER be referred to as irish.

• citizen69 | Jan 07, 2012, 07:27 AM EST

  Quite a lot of mixed-up history here. The Gallowglass were Scottish mercenaries who fought for whomever could afford them. Irish chieftens hired them to fight other Irish kingdoms as well as the English, and Anglo-Normans also hired them to to protect their lands from Irish tribes. @Cillowen: The Scots-Irish didn't take-over Derry/Doire and change it's Name. They built the city of Londonderry from scratch on the opposite bank of the river Foyle from the original Doire which was little more than a monastic settlement. @seanmelourne: One of the reasons the Scots-Irish (ulster-scots) don't feel comfortable describing themselves as Irish is because a lot of Gaelic Irish never regarded them as "real" Irish as they never assimilated into Gaelic culture or adopted Catholicism. Today you only describe them as irish when it suits.

• Murph46 | Jan 07, 2012, 05:55 AM EST

  Wikipedia is the most wrongly quoted source of history,you can submit data to Wikipedia as history and they will publish.As mercenaries it is often seen that a group comes in under one cause,because they are mercenaries they are subject to radical change sometimes battling each other as they fight for a new and "more lucrative" cause, history is replete with such happenings.After arriving and seeing the deal,they would literally switch side,it is this faction that did this .If you reread my post I refer to such luminaries as Cromwell because he is so well known as a butcher and there is little space to develop chronology in these posts.Anyone who cites Wikipedia as their only source stands to be refuted by other sources.Check out veracity of Wikipedia.

• Morninghours | Jan 07, 2012, 02:25 AM EST

  Murph46, I've read a totally different history on the Gallowglass, specifically, that they fought as mercenaries FOR the IRISH chieftains and Kings, not to kill the Irish. In fact, bringing Gallowglass mercenaries into Ireland was a major factor in containing the Anglo-Norman invasion of the 12th century, as their ranks stiffened the resistance of the Irish lordships, or so says Wikipedia. In the 16th century, the flow of Gallowglass mercenaries into Ireland was such a threat to English occupation that Queen Elizabeth I took steps against them in 1571 – around 700 of them were executed after the first of the Desmond Rebellions. I suggest reading the "Gallowglass" entry in wiki. It puts their involvment with Ireland at 13th through 16th centuries. And since Cromwell's invasion was in the mid-17th century, it appears doubtful the Gallowglass were there to "kill Irish," as you claim.

• Springfield9 | Jan 06, 2012, 11:16 PM EST

  Well, it's a silly label and only heard in the US. During the 19th Century people with Irish names who were Protestant wanted a method to identify themselves. "Scotch-Irish" was it. True enough, it can be traced back to Scotch Planters in Ireland. However it's great utility was to distance yourself from Papists.

• Murph46 | Jan 06, 2012, 08:38 PM EST

  Johnnyh Since I've already written a book on Irish History and thoroughly researched it,tell me my mistakes your smartness.

• johnnyh1970 | Jan 06, 2012, 08:04 PM EST

  My goodness Murph46 just where did you study history. Your not one of those who read a Tim Pat book and took all the mistakes and inaccuracies at face value are you. From your post I'm not even sure you could locate Ireland on a map.

• joycean | Jan 06, 2012, 06:10 PM EST

  Looking at the numbers, The category is "Irish or Scotch-Irish" 37,926,777. The Subcatogories are "Irish" 34,669,666; and "Scotch-Irish" 3,257,161. The last two numbers add up to the total, "Irish." This, BTW is the 2010 Census; the next will not be taken until 2020. So Scotch-Irish are tabulated. This is one of the oldest groups, however, and probably includes a lot of people of mixed ancestry. There is a separate category, "American," 19,975,875, which might be more appropriate for people whose ancestry is mixed. My husband usually uses that one because his family has been in this country since the 1600s and includes English, Welsh, African,American Indian, and Irish.

• Murph46 | Jan 06, 2012, 05:54 PM EST

  Look up the term Gallowglasses,these were the Scots mercenaries brought in to kill Irish,and chase those out of their properties that didn't have the taxes to pay such luminaries as Cromwell.They were recruited for their massive size and ferocity.Some received the very lands that they intimidated the defenseless Irish out of.Thus Scots-Irish after they assimilated.

• cillowen | Jan 06, 2012, 05:25 PM EST

  The divide and conquor techniques of the long term occupier has muddied things with great effect. Brilliant Saxon, the people of the world should know it being so. The term Scot Irish was for Mother England Planted Ones. Brough in from Scotland. Wonder if England's planted Orange boys call themselves Scot-Irish. Those in Derry planted did a name change calling it Londonderry the plaice wher the come from, watcher kock, cor blimey. Scotland got its name from St. Columba, founder of the monastery at Iona island from whence he spread christianity to those wild characters on the 'ighland and beyond. Ireland was referred as Scotia, Scotia Major to be precise and the name of Alba (real name for the land which became Scotland, was Scotia Minor.) Setting out to christainize Scotia Minor souls was Irish prince, St Columba, who was the real magilla, a Scot from northern Ireland a name the Picts or whatever their name were adopted perhaps when he became their patron saint. They later would claim St Andrew as their patron saint - it had to do with the reformation no doubt.

• seanomelbourne | Jan 06, 2012, 04:48 PM EST

  Using the term "Scotch Irish" is as silly as saying "viking Irish".Protestants from the north with an Irish ancestry 200yrs. old or older only use the term to distinguish themselves from Catholics.I wonder why Irish Catholics with a scottish ancestry do not refer to themselves as"Scotch Irish" They (the so called Scotch Irish) resent their Irish ancestry.

• rhunter67 | Jan 06, 2012, 01:04 PM EST

  So according to the government, not only do Scots-Irish not exist anymore, but all Hispanics are the same ethnic group too. Sure, they may be the same RACE and all have some Spanish descent, but each Latin country is different. Have you ever referred to a Cuban as a Mexican? Second, that's funny I did not have the opportunity to refer to myself as anything but "Caucasian, non-Hispanic" on my census sheet. By that logic, there are likely way more than 34m Irish-Americans.

• ciaradexy | Jan 06, 2012, 12:40 PM EST

  Theyre British. They were planted in Ireland and so werent welcome here.

• Murph46 | Jan 06, 2012, 12:06 PM EST

  So right Joan Scotch -Irish is half McNaughtons ,And half Jameson's in a tumbler. Although a Celt,I'll still prefer 100% Irish-Jameson's

• citizen69 | Jan 06, 2012, 12:05 PM EST

  It seems pretty strange to me that in a Politically Correct world were a person can claim their gender as Gender X people are denied the right to proclaim their heritage!

• joan1954 | Jan 06, 2012, 11:56 AM EST

  While this is on Scots-Irish, here in Texas Irish numbers are a little low because children of Mixed Irish and Mexican blood (and there are many of those) list themselves as Hispanic even if they have Irish surnames. I chuckle at the use of the word "scotch" which is actually the whiskey, Scots is the nationality. So it should be Scots-Irish and, yes, it was used to differentiate the difference between Presbyterian Irish and Catholic Irish in the 19th century.

• Murph46 | Jan 06, 2012, 11:44 AM EST

  Wit ya all the way Kilgara-Barry Sotero -one time only!

• carrickcourt | Jan 06, 2012, 11:31 AM EST

  The Scotch-Irish silliness did not begin until the late 19th Century. Before then people of Irish Ulster Scots ancestry just considered themselves to be Irish. The Scotch-Irish identity started as an attempted to separate people of Irish Scots Presbyterian identity from Irish people of Catholic identity. There are amazing numbers of people of Scotch-Irish ancestry in the USA who do not know of their Scotch-Irish/Ulster Scots ancestry. My favorite book on the Scotch-Irish/Ulster Scots is "The Scotch-Irish - A Social History" by James G. Leyburn, which may or may not still be available.

• Searlit | Jan 06, 2012, 11:28 AM EST

  Everyone deserves a right to their own heritage.

• ironjustice | Jan 06, 2012, 10:58 AM EST

  McNaughton I've always been told is Scottish and now my sister tells me it may not be Scottish at all. I've been told I may have Quaker in me too. Hennessy could even be French. I thought the Irish all started out as escaped slaves ? Or they were commonly put into slavery ? I can't quite remember which. ;)

• markjmills | Jan 06, 2012, 10:11 AM EST

  Gee...I wonder why more than 10% of the US population will suddenly be 'disappeared' under this administration? Wrong skin pigment, no doubt, under the most racist presidency in US history. Kilgara, you're right - this kakistocracy must be relegated to the one-term dustbin...and then begins the long years it will take to repair the damage these crooks and boodlers have perpetrated.

• kilgara | Jan 06, 2012, 09:48 AM EST

  It is readily apparent that Obama and company are no friend to Irish-America.Another reason. among many , how important it is that we mobolize to make this con-man a definite one-termer.

• donal1951 | Jan 06, 2012, 09:33 AM EST

  I have Irish and Scottish ancestry with a little Scots-Irish thrown in for good measures. But I have friends in the Southern USA who consider themselves Scots-Irish, whose Protestant ancestors came from Ulster in the 18th century. To deprive them of an official heritage is wrong and, while the United States is not officially part of the peace process, is a blow to it. As the story points out, it could have an effect on tourism from Northern Ireland as well.