Friday, September 28, 2007
Happy Ulster Day
Haven’t seen it mentioned anywhere else, but today was quite an important day in 1912 and for a lot of families in Ulster, including mine, it is possible to have a look at what ancestors were doing on this day in history.
Michael Shilliday @ 12:35 PM
Newsletter did a piece on it in their insert today of 270 years of the newsletter. BTW I remember doing it for ‘O’ level history
Posted by on Sep 28, 2007 @ 02:08 PMTreason!
Posted by on Sep 28, 2007 @ 02:27 PMShillers, you know you prods freak me out sometimes… damn right it’s an important day and why isn’t it properly celebrated. In other countries i’m sure such a momentous act as large swathes of the population signed a covenant vowing to resist any imposed settlement on them and ultimately succeeding and said covenant effectively being the foundation stone of statehood would be properly celebrated.
Any thoughts as to why, apart from the Newsletter, it is such a low key thing…why not have it up with 12th July? is it any less significant historically?
Posted by on Sep 28, 2007 @ 02:31 PMSo let me get this straight, this covenant pledged that those who signed it would resist the democratic wish of both Britain and Ireland by any means necessary….And some unionists cant see why they are not so popular in the democratic world….hmmm….
Posted by on Sep 28, 2007 @ 02:49 PMNow it all becomes clear, unionists don’t want to be seen to betray their forefathers.
Posted by on Sep 28, 2007 @ 02:50 PMI think its unfair to brand unionists as “undemocratic”. The covenant was a document signed by unionists to protect their way of life at the time.
They saw their foothold in Northern Ireland, whether legitimate or not, as being under threat from all quarters and rendered the covenant to register their protest.
While Democracy is subject to the the majority rule, the origin of the covenant encompassed the desire to show the large support for the unionist point of view.
Posted by on Sep 28, 2007 @ 03:00 PMMaybe those who argue that Ulster and Northern Ireland are one and the same should look at the signatories from Cavan, Donegal and Monaghan. It’s a fair old list.
Did their declaration of loyalty mean anything to the Unionist establishment who left them high and dry? And will the same establishment jettison their people in West of the Bann / SE Ulster if the time comes?
Posted by on Sep 28, 2007 @ 03:09 PMWow Ulster Day for sure, where 10.73% of the Irish Population signed a document stating they would by any means (read violently) resist the will of the majority.
Truly a great day for democracy, Unionist style.
The signature count set against the Ulster population would be 29.7% if they all came from Ulster, although as is pointed out in the linked wikipedia article the very first signatory was a Dubliner, so evidently they didn’t.
“Ulster” is not a Protestant/Unionist Shangri-La it is an actual factual place, the majority population of which would disagree with this covenant, and it’s achievments, based on present day Party voting patterns.
http://www.rte.ie/news/elections2007/Donegal-North-East.html
http://www.rte.ie/news/elections2007/Donegal-South-West.html
http://www.rte.ie/news/elections2007/Cavan-Monaghan.html
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/vote2007/nielection/html/main.stm
By all means have your Union Day or some other descriptive name, but please stop hijacking Ulster as shorthand for Prodland.Posted by on Sep 28, 2007 @ 03:10 PMOops! Forgot to post my link for the Percentages back in the day…
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Census_of_Ireland,_1911
Posted by on Sep 28, 2007 @ 03:12 PMAny thoughts as to why, apart from the Newsletter, it is such a low key thing…why not have it up with 12th July? is it any less significant historically?
A lot of that is down to the present Unionist establishment, who seem to be, to a large extent, ignorant of the history of our movement…or perhaps put it this way, there is less, ahem, political capital to be made out of the struggle (led by a Dubliner) against Home Rule, than there is of a battle where the fenians were taught good and proper over 400 years ago
Posted by on Sep 28, 2007 @ 03:28 PMgotta love that the ulstermen signed the covenant (sometimes in blood) but the wee women signed something that said “yes, whatever those smart men are saying is fine with us”.
not much “evolution” of sexism still!
Posted by on Sep 28, 2007 @ 03:30 PMMy name appears 15 times. Sign early, sign often.
Posted by on Sep 28, 2007 @ 03:33 PM‘A lot of that is down to the present Unionist establishment, who seem to be, to a large extent, ignorant of the history of our movement’
Or perhaps it is of little real relevence in the 21st century. The majority in Ulster then, as now, wanted nothing to do with them
Posted by on Sep 28, 2007 @ 04:48 PMPerhaps the so called CRM of the 60s should have learned something from the ‘tribal calming’ dimension of the Covenant ....
Posted by on Sep 28, 2007 @ 04:50 PM“Wow Ulster Day for sure, where 10.73% of the Irish Population signed a document stating they would by any means (read violently) resist the will of the majority”
- does anyone spot the irony in this post being signed “unrepentent fenian bastard”?
Not that there’s an exact parallel of course. The Shinners only ever got around 2% of the Irish population to sign up for their violence.Posted by on Sep 28, 2007 @ 04:57 PMI really like the website where it is all digitally archived. There would be so many people here whose ancestors signed that document and it really brings it home to be able to see the very signatures made on that day.
Posted by on Sep 28, 2007 @ 05:06 PMWhat a day for Ireland!
Let’s all celebrate a declaration that ensured Planters would violently resist the will of their neighbours. Yee haa!
Posted by on Sep 28, 2007 @ 05:06 PMMichael, here’s a related item from the New York Times of 1892: Ulster Convention [pdf format]
Posted by on Sep 28, 2007 @ 05:11 PMinuit_g, Tony Blair might recognise the names of some of his south Donegal kith and kin: his grandparents were George Corscadden and Margaret Ann Lipsett.
Posted by on Sep 28, 2007 @ 05:19 PMNevin-
“Perhaps the so called CRM of the 60s should have learned something from the ‘tribal calming’ dimension of the Covenant ....”
Did the civil rights movement set up an armed wing and import arms? Did its cheerleaders say things such as: “There are things stronger than parliamentary majorities. I can imagine no length of resistance to which Ulster can go in which I would not be prepared to support them.”? I think not.
Perhaps if the Unionist leaders of the time who went on to run the soon-to-be-created ‘Northern Ireland’ had shown some decency towards people who weren’t of their political outlook or religion when they got their six-county administrative unit, then there would have been no need for the creation of the civil rights movement.
In terms of integrity and commitment to democracy and equality, the civil rights movement stands head and shoulders above Craig and his sidekicks- I don’t recall the Ulster Unionists being too concerned about anything other than their own narrow interests- the Protestant working class, Catholics and Southern Unionists were quickly sidelined after the businessmen from the North-East got their way less than a decade after this document was signed.
Posted by on Sep 28, 2007 @ 05:39 PM.....to be dumped when push came to shove with their fellow Donegal, Cavan and Monaghan Protestants.
Ulster is a real place, an ancient Irish province with a distinct culture.
Never to be confused with the sectarian stitch-up that is Northern Ireland.
Posted by on Sep 28, 2007 @ 05:44 PM““Wow Ulster Day for sure, where 10.73% of the Irish Population signed a document stating they would by any means (read violently) resist the will of the majority”
- does anyone spot the irony in this post being signed “unrepentent fenian bastard”?
Not that there’s an exact parallel of course. The Shinners only ever got around 2% of the Irish population to sign up for their violence. “Sinn Féin won 73 of Ireland’s 106 seats in the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland parliament at the general election in December 1918. Slightly greater than 2%.
Posted by on Sep 28, 2007 @ 06:36 PMEl Matador, I’m a little surprised that you should wish to support the cynical use of civil rights issues and the ‘tribal’ street politics of the likes of Paisley and Hume. Can I recommend A T Q Stewart’s “Narrow Ground” and the reference to sermons in stones.
Posted by on Sep 28, 2007 @ 06:42 PMpáid, I understand there have been several Ulsters over the centuries, not just the two of more recent times.
Posted by on Sep 28, 2007 @ 06:52 PMSorry to interrupt the usual partisan point-scoring, but I’d like to return to Michael Shilliday’s original point.
Wednesday’s Guardian had its usual crib from the archives at the bottom of the editorial page. As far as I can see, this is not available on line. So here goes:
The saluting of King Carson
Portadown, Wednesday evening.
Never had General, or rather King, Carson such a day as this. As the train with Edward Carson’s party approached just before noon the usual detonators on the rail fired a battleship salute.The saloon carriage was shunted round to a special platform on which half a company of the riflemen of the Portadown Unionist battalion was drawn up.
They were all armed with dummy rifles with solid wooden barrels and real triggers. A standard was lowered in salute, as is only usual before royalty, and the National Anthem was played.
Standing on the step of the carriage Sir Edward Carson graciously acknowledged his reception and addressed encouraging words to his faithful army of the clubs and lodges on whom, he said, the real work of the battle would fall. The carriage bearing King Carson, Mr F.E.Smith [and] Lord Londonderry advanced into the town. [A] parade occupied about an hour, after which the royal party withdrew for lunch. At two, His Majesty took up his position at a saluting base at the top of the main street. He witnessed a march past of Unionist clubs and Orange lodges.
Perhaps the troops from Edenderry, the lower part of Portadown, carried off the prize for military grandeur.
Their contingent had two field guns made of painted wood. This also had a full piper band in a sham military uniform. In a long experience I have never seen so shameless a travesty of royalty or of national grandeur, but neither of the King’s counsellors appeared to perceive either the absurdity or insolence of the proceedings.
Sir Edward Carson then addressed the meeting. “Are you prepared to give me a mandate and follow me to the end?” — (Great cheers.) “Next Saturday you will bind yourselves to me, and come what may you will never desert the flag. Let the flag fly in every loyal house in Ireland, England and Scotland next Saturday.” Sir Edward Carson was then presented with a blackthorn stick from North Armagh, and he promised that if he had to use it, he would use it to the best of his ability.
Mr F.E.Smith was the last speaker. He predicted that the Government had not the nerve to give the order to the British army to coerce Ulster. The populace would lynch them on their lamp-posts.
The meeting soon ended. King Carson and Mr Smith resumed their places in the Royal cortege, the sham lancers trotting before and behind, and the general troops following, with bands, the cannon, the ambulance, nurses and stalwart infantry bearing dummy rifles, all in due order.
HW Nevinson
Posted by on Sep 28, 2007 @ 07:03 PM
