“a bunch of outsiders came in and stole, er, native lands…”

Ed Moloney discusses the causes of conflict in a wider interview on wbai (Radio Free Eireann) on the new role of George Mitchell in the middle east.

It’s as if like the reason why there are conflicts is because you know people are irrational and they’re like spoiled kids or misbehaved kids or undisciplined kids and you bring them together and you lecture them and you tell them this is how you can live together. You know the reason why there is a conflict in Ireland is fundamentally the same reason there is a conflict in the middle east is that a bunch of outsiders came in and stole, er, native lands….

(Full interview can be found in the above wbai link. Scroll down to RFE on Sat 24th January and click play.)

  • Mack

    It’s as if like the reason why there are conflicts is because you know people are irrational and they’re like spoiled kids…

    is that a bunch of outsiders came in and stole our native lands….

    That’s an interesting turn of phrase.

    I’d say it’s because people are closer to the rest of the animal kingdom than we like to admit. We are a territorial animal, which is why we get so competitive over “ownership” of a particular plot, in all it’s symbolism rather than share it.

    The Middle East conflict is (slightly) different as the conquest was recent – there are still refugees and people alive who were put out of their home.

    In Ireland, it’s more an abstraction (and less immediate). This was my ancestors land, or my ancestor won this land. In reality, your both here – it’s both your land now.

  • wild turkey

    Kathleen

    For the sake of context,any idea where the full interview might be available?

    Maloney seems to be saying that the natives just might have legitimate grievances regarding the theft and occupation of land, inequalities in the distribution of power and resources. Have I got this right?

    In the meantime I think I’ll re-read Cohens States of Denial.

    Cheers

  • Kathleen

    In the wbai link WT….

  • Driftwood

    I’d say it’s because people are closer to the rest of the animal kingdom than we like to admit.
    Mack
    We are animals. Apes. Pity you didn’t see ‘What Darwin didn’t know’ on BBC4 last night. Do yourself a favour and watch David Attenborough on Evolution this Sunday BBC1 9pm.
    Might explain a lot of things, including this thread.

  • Scaramoosh

    Whilst the seizing of native lands may indeed have been the catalyst that caused the conflicts, it is perhaps fairer to say that the flames that kept the conflicts going, were fed by a belief that the land in question belonged to one exclusive group.

    The Palestinians, for all of their woes, typically, prior to and after the 1948 War, spoke of driving the Israelis into the sea. They did not want to live in peace and harmony with them.

    It should also be remembered that this stance caused many on the left to run to the support of Israel, in much the same way that they ran to fight against Franco in the Spanish Civil War.

    In the context of N.Ireland, whilst there was clearly discrimination by those that held the reigns of power, it should be also be remembered that when many of the provisional leaders spoke of Brits out, that included the Unionist population.

    It all comes down to the same simple fact; nobody owns the land,and until there is some sort of accommodation between those that live on it, it will mainly be the innocent that suffer.

  • Terti

    A simple fact needs pointed out. Ownership of land is not the same as the division of sovereign states, as any landowner will be glad to hear.

    Point being, the rights and wrongs of one are not really similar to the other.

    Trying to ascertain whether Quebec, Scotland or South Ossetia should be independent on the basis of anything like the laws on land ownership would be like trying to eat orange juice with a fork.

    I would also say that equal rights in a Northern Ireland context, at least as applied to individuals (and some may argue that those are the only rights that exist), is not a political issue. It’s not political, because politics is the art or science of the controversial, and nobody actually promotes unequal rights. People use the term rights, but there was basically nothing in the GFA that established anything that would, for example, fall under the UNUDHR. Everything in it was a given to all parties in the dispute when given a peaceful context going forward.

    Also deciding on where a border should be on the basis of some kind of calculus of who are the goodies and who are the baddies is utter folly. The idea that Germany should be punished for WWI by having a load of ethnic Germans parcelled off into foreign countries would be a non-starter these days, and was idiocy at the time in retrospect. As well as punishment of individuals on the basis of their “race” for crimes they might not have anything to do with on an individual level it also inflicts punishment on descendants in perpetuity, rather like the blood libel blaming all Jews of killing Christ, simply not in line at all with modern concepts of fairness and justice.

  • “there is a conflict in the middle east is that a bunch of outsiders came in and stole our native lands…. ”

    And a white American is the guy to solve that?

  • Ulsters my homeland

    “a bunch of outsiders came in and stole our native lands…”

    The native Scots in Ulster were replaced by the Irish sometime after the Pope gave the island to the King of England. There is no historical mention of the Irish in Ulster before the 12th century. The Irish didn’t even exist as a people before that.

    St. Bernard of Clairvaux records in ‘Life of St. Malachy of Armagh’ (1094-1148) that a native in Bangor responded to the erection of a stone oratory by saying, “We are Scots, not Gauls. What is this frivolity?”

  • Clay Davis

    Radio Free Eireann’s intro music is class. Where can I get my hands on a copy of ‘Take it Down from the Mast Free Staters’?

  • Mack

    Ulsters my homeland

    Touch of historical revisionism there. The term Scotorum was a latin term for the people living in Ireland. As such the book of Armagh records a visit by Brian Boru thusly

    “Briani imperatoris Scotorum”

    – Brian, Emporer of the Irish.

    You’ll know from your Scottish history that Gaelic language and culture spread from Ireland to Scotland and the Isle of Man. That the first Kings of the united Scottish territory, although Picts, grew up in Gaelic speaking Ulster and to the disappointment of their Pictish kin, their Scotland was to be Gaelic in culture.

    There is no evidence of non-Gaelic peoples being forced out from Ulster by Gaels in the time period you mention. In fact it was from Gaelic Ulster that Gaelic culture expanded beyond the borders of our island.

    It seems to me that you have some issues around your identity, that you need to delve so deeply into the past and contradict the established history of the period. Only a lunatic would suggest that the descendants of the planters have no right to be in Ireland, you have no need to engage in such logically perversions to justify your sense of belonging to Ulster and our island. You’ll be better of, if you learn to see all our history as your history too…

  • Sarah

    Well, as one of those who’s ancestors were these “outsiders” his analysis is true (you can’t deny history). Are we still seen as outsiders however?

    “The native Scots in Ulster were replaced by the Irish sometime after the Pope gave the island to the King of England. There is no historical mention of the Irish in Ulster before the 12th century. The Irish didn’t even exist as a people before that”

    I think he was talking about the Ulster Plantations when Scottish and English citizens settled on land that was confiscated from the Irish.

  • Sarah

    As in Mr Moloney was talking about the plantations. not the dude on the comments.

  • Ulsters my homeland

    [i]“Briani imperatoris Scotorum”

    – Brian, Emporer of the Irish.[/i]

    LOL @ Mack. LOL

    According to Mack Scotorum means Irish.

  • Ulsters my homeland

    [/b]mack[/b]

    “[i]It seems to me that you have some issues around your identity, that you need to delve so deeply into the past and contradict the established history of the period.”[/i]

    I know who I am and I know how the identity Irish came about and it’s not what you or the vast majority of Irish people believe. My 12 year old understands that the Roman word for Scot does not translate into Irish, but it seems you find it difficult to comprehend such a simple task.

    “[i]Only a lunatic would suggest that the descendants of the planters have no right to be in Ireland, you have no need to engage in such logically perversions to justify your sense of belonging to Ulster and our island.”[/i]

    What planet are you on? I’ve never said anything of the sort.

  • dub

    It would be the genitive plural of Scotus, umh, therefore of the Irish. The word Irish is linked to “Ierne” and “Hibernia” and “Eire”. The Romans at one time referred to the Irish as “Scoti”. Hence the philosopher John Scotus Eriugena, the last 2 words both meaning Irish.

  • Ulster Native

    Erm…..It is a WELL known fact that ‘Scot’ is a term given to the Irish from the Romans.
    Why is this ‘difficult’ to comprehend by some?

    The Gaels of Ireland populated Scotland, hence the common Gaelic tongue, heritage and indeed blood (the same race) why is this difficult to understand by some too?

    Is it a case of blanking this out because it defies the made up history that most people who drum it into their own heads end up beliving their own drivel?

  • Greenflag

    The word Scotorum in the early 11th century meant of all the Scots and included both the Irish in Ireland -north south east and west and those ‘gaelic ‘ speaking scots across the north channel who had been in Scotland since the 5th century AD . As late as the 14th century Ireland was considered an extension of ‘home ‘ as we know only too well from the ‘ease’ with which Robert the Bruce tried to make his brother King of Ireland as part of his effort to resist English attempts to circumscribe his powers in Scotland . The Scots probably in many cases the descendants of original Dalraidans settled in East Ulster from the 12th century presumably because of popualtion expansion , scarce resources , war etc . The Great O’Neill (Shane ) took much comfort in beating the crap out of the McDonnells of Antrim as well as th O’Donnell’s of Donegal and the Maguires of Fermanagh as he strove to assert his ‘dominion’ over Ulster ( i.e the present 9 counties plus a bit extra )

    The major difference between the Scottish and English settlers of the 16th and 17th centuries and the indigenous Irish was ‘religion ‘ and sometimes ‘language ‘ . Also what made it different from earlier attempts at conquest was the handing over of ‘land ‘ to servitors and supporters of Cromwell as their ‘pay’ for rendering their services . William the Conqueror did the same in England after 1066 when he divvied up the land between all his Norman supporters and other European supporters and left 4,000 former Anglo Saxon thanes with ‘nothing ‘ apart from ‘feudal ‘ rights as villeins or serfs .

    The average Irish bonnaght or wood kern or peasant of the time did not ‘own ‘ land and neither could he bear arms just as in England.
    Irish Chieftains did not own land either in the personal sense and were seen as ‘guardians ‘ of a particular territory whose boundaries could fluctuate depending on the fortunes of a particular ‘ruler ‘ .

    Thus the Irish had no legal ‘defence ‘ against the English laws of property no more so than the American indians had or the Masia in Kenya or the ancient Gauls and Britons had in Roman times .

    Of course they may have had ‘morality ‘ on their side ? But if memory serves me right ‘morality ‘ without weaponry was worth as much then as it is today . Ask any Gazan or Palestinian or East Timoran or Zimbabwean or Darfur refugee or Ibo or low caste Indian or –the list is endless:(

  • Ulster McNulty

    Ulsters my Homeland

    “My 12 year old understands that the Roman word for Scot does not translate into Irish, but it seems you find it difficult to comprehend such a simple task.”

    You shouldn’t believe everything your 12 year old son tells you. He probably just isn’t aware that to many 8th century latin speakers a Scot was exactly what we call now call an Irish person – someone from Ireland.

    Likewise your son probably doesn’t realise that to many 17th century English speakers an Irish person was what we now call a Scot – a gaelic speakic speaking highlander.

    Also your son probably doesn’t realise that to many 11th century English speakers and an English person was what we now call a Scot – a Scots speaker from the lowlands of Scotland.

    I suggest you send your son to Gaelscoil, the Irish words (or indeed Scottish Gaelic words) for all the above names of peoples and places are in some senses more accurate and illuminating.

  • Mack

    Greenflag

    There were differences in cultural fit between those who settled during the plantation and those who came earlier, such as Somhairle Buidh Mac Domhnaill (Sorley boy – yello summer warrior / Viking) who fought with Shane O’Neill. Sorley Boy was a Scots Gael who also resisted the English efforts to plant NE Ulster.

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

    Ulsters my homeland

    Do some research, and open your mind!

    Brian Boru was born near Limerick. It is not me that equates Scotii with Irish, you are arguing against a well established historical consensus with no strong argument to support your claim.

    http://www.nationmaster.com/encyclopedia/Scotia

  • Ulsters my homeland

    [b]Ulster Native[/b]

    “[i]Erm…..It is a WELL known fact that ‘Scot’ is a term given to the Irish from the Romans.
    Why is this ‘difficult’ to comprehend by some? “[/i]

    It may be well known but it’s wrong. The Irish came later likewise the name of the island as Ireland came later, so how can they possibly have been known as Scot?

    The Irish were always trying to put the cart before the horse.

    [b]Ulster McNulty[/b]

    “[i]I suggest you send your son to Gaelscoil, the Irish words (or indeed Scottish Gaelic words) for all the above names of peoples and places are in some senses more accurate and illuminating.”[/i]

    and teach him what? that Gaeilge translates as Irish?

  • Ulsters my homeland

    [b]Mack[/b]

    “[i]Do some research, and open your mind!”[/i]

    Do some research yourself and think clearly. Like ABC, don’t start with Z and go backwards.

    From the incorrect link you provided:

    “Scotia was originally the Latin name for Ireland”

    This is false. Scotia does not translate into Ireland in any way shape or form. It’s deliberately misleading.

    “(also known to the Romans as Hibernia).”

    That’s correct.

  • Mack

    Ulsters my homeland

    At the risk of indulging your trolling. The only possible explanation I can think of that would give you any tenuous link to some form of reality would be that your definition of the term “Irish” does not encompass the early Gaels in Ireland.

    Perhaps you could put us all out of our misery and tell us who you think the “Irish” are, if you think they came later? (IIRC, the term was originally used to describe English speaking (mostly Protestants) on the island of Ireland, and did not include the Gaelic speaking majority so perhaps this is the source of the confusion?).

  • Mack

    Ah, I see you have clarified.

    “Scotia was originally the Latin name for Ireland”

    You simply reject the very notion that the term Scot ever refered to the Gaels of Ireland?

    Care to explain what the monks meant in the book of Armagh, describing Brian Boru as Emporum Scotorum?

    Care to explain why the Chronicon Scotorum relates to Gaelic history on the island of Ireland?

    From that link, care to explain what Isadore of Seville meant when she wrote “Scotia eadem et Hibernia, “Scotland and Ireland are the same country”

  • Seimi

    If you are correct UMH, which I don’t for a second believe you are, but just IF, please explain this:

    ‘The native Scots in Ulster were replaced by the Irish sometime after the Pope gave the island to the King of England. There is no historical mention of the Irish in Ulster before the 12th century. The Irish didn’t even exist as a people before that.’

    If they lived in Ireland, rather than Scotland, how can they be native Scottish? Surely native IRISH people lived in Ireland, while native SCOTTISH people lived in …wait for it…SCOTLAND!!! Do you see where I’m going here?

    Unless…UNLESS…everyone else is right and the term Scotii meant a person from Ireland, and your wrong, and maybe you need to take that history book off your 12 year old and get him to look at his maths homework or something instead…?

  • Mack
  • Mick Fealty

    Please note:

    Mr Moloney has brought to our attention a small but important mistake in the original transcription:

    You quote me as saying: “….is that a bunch of outsiders came in and stole our native lands.” I know that is not the sort of thing I would say so I checked. What I actually said was: “….is that a bunch of outsiders came in and stole, er, native lands.”

    Apologies all round.

  • OC

    As even the ancient Irish chronicles seem to indicate that the Gaels stole Ireland from someone who was there earlier, I guess the question is, at what point do we have to stop considering this?

    E.g., as the Gaels stole Alba from the Picts, do they now have to leave Scotland?

    P.S. – “Submit the word you see below:” = deal

  • Mack

    Mick – and I thought he was saying that arguement was childish… Oh well…

  • I think it is high time we had yet another learned discussion on the proper name for Derry.

    Party on.

  • Earnan

    UMH

    Besides stating that everyone else, including ALL historical sources and academicia, is wrong and you are right…please tell us briefly the history of the scottish and ulster demographics as you see it.

  • Greagoir O Frainclin

    Ulster’s My Homeland……..?

    Why is it that you continually hark on with your misconceived understandings of Irish history?

    You regularly state enormous historically inaccurate and incomprehensible blunders. You constantly seem to be trying to forge a mythical Disneyesque ‘Ulster is My Homeland’ identity denying all well known historical, cultural and archaeological facts.

  • Greagoir O Frainclin

    Ulster’s My Homeland

    BTW…Here’s another Irishman who was a ‘Scot’

    Hint: it’s in his name!

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

  • Cushy Glenn

    “a bunch of outsiders came in and stole our native lands…. ”

    See , as a Planter, I can buy that. I don’t need to pretend to be the great great grandson of a cruthin retracing the ancestor trail. Yup, my ould ancestor probably hit some perfectly harmless chap over the head and threw him on the wagon bound for Connacht, killed his wife and raped his cattle. I’m not wildly bothered though, if I’m honest. Is that very wrong?

    I will start sweating when the Irish Americans start handing back the USA to the indigenous population, and the same happens in Australia, New Zealand, Alsace Lorraine, Lithuania etc etc

  • GGN

    Folks,

    Consider one meets a person who does not believe that 1+1=2.

    That person is perfectly entitled to that view. The world is full of them.

    However, is there any point in discussing mathematics with that person?

    People are perfectly entitled to reject academia and academic method if they wish, I have a friend for example who is not religous yet believes that paleontology is nonsence.

    Thats fine by me.

  • Mack

    Cushy Glen

    Yup, my ould ancestor probably hit some perfectly harmless chap over the head and threw him on the wagon bound for Connacht, killed his wife and raped his cattle

    LOL!

  • RepublicanStones

    Fair enough the rest….but raping the cattle, does that now mean theres themmuns cattle and usuns cattle and mixed cattle?

  • runciter

    We are a territorial animal, which is why we get so competitive over “ownership” of a particular plot, in all it’s symbolism rather than share it.

    It has nothing to do with being animalistic.

    Furthermore, sovereignty is clearly not merely a symbolic issue. That much should be obvious even to the most uneducated of observers.

  • Cushy Glenn

    I’ve always said that we’d have been far better holding out for somewhere warm to plant. Imagine he Twelfth in Barbados- having some rum and a game of cricket with the local residents’ group, the field a tropical beach a hundred times more alluring than Rossknowlagh,girls in colour parties for the bands in bikinis, and no bloody silly bowler hats or tightly rolled up brollies to waste hard earned cash on.

    On a cold January day up here on the Murderhole Road I’m tempted to say ” youse can keep yer Ireland”

  • runciter

    Yup, my ould ancestor probably hit some perfectly harmless chap over the head and threw him on the wagon bound for Connacht, killed his wife and raped his cattle. I’m not wildly bothered though, if I’m honest. Is that very wrong?

    The main problem is not historical crimes, but rather the ongoing denial of sovereignty to the Irish people.

    On a cold January day up here on the Murderhole Road I’m tempted to say “ youse can keep yer Ireland”

    A strange thing for a native to think.

  • Ulsters my homeland

    I see that quite a few still don’t understand the lie of Irish history. Think of this:

    How can Scottish history be told so accurately, honesty and with a full understanding of the names of the tribes and lands with made up the Kingdom of the Scots and ultimately Scotland.

    Yet, with the Irish it’s different, the desire to seek an historical Irish ethnicity has distorted the true history of the people of this island. The Irish, unlike the Scots, can’t say when the Irish nation and people were born, because they’ve been lead to believe Irish/Ireland is historically synonymous with the island. They go as far as to tell the world classical words meant Irish or Ireland, when they clearly do not.

    The true history of the Irish people is being denied, because for some, maintaining an historic Irish ethnicity is better than accepting the Irish people and Ireland isn’t as old as once thought and an older nation of people lived on the island, the Scots.

  • Mack

    Ulsters my homeland

    Ok. There is no doubt the term Scot predates the term Irish.

    If you want your point to be taken seriously try to answer these questions below- because despite having told you my view of the past, I still have no idea what yours is. I know what you are against, not what you are for.

    1. Who were the Scots in Ireland in your opinion?
    What language(s) did they speak? What time periods did they exist from?

    2. Who are the Irish? What time periods did they exist from?

    3. What separates the early Scots in Ireland from the Irish in Ireland?

    4. Were the Scots in Ireland the ancestors of the modern Irish?

  • Ulsters my homeland

    [b]Mack[/b]

    “[i]1. Who were the Scots in Ireland in your opinion?
    What language(s) did they speak? What time periods did they exist from?”[/i]

    1- The Scots were the Scots, remember identity in relation to the name of the island hadn’t been introduced yet.
    a- As far as I know they only spoke Gaelic, but may have spoke indigenous British languages, before the Gaelic language became used.
    b- Not 100% sure what time period, but after the 12th century all mention of them disappeared from the island and strengthened in modern Scotland.

    “[i]2. Who are the Irish? What time periods did they exist from?”[/i]

    2- Don’t know who they really are, because we’re told they’re all the people of the island. I do know that the people of the island only became known as Irish sometime after the 12th century. It has also been discussed (quite intelligently) on this site that historical words Irish/Ireland originated from an ancient tribe around the cork area, who migrated from mainland Britian.

    “[i]3. What separates the early Scots in Ireland from the Irish in Ireland? “[/i]

    Time, a 12th century invasion and a new system of rule.

    “[i]4. Were the Scots in Ireland the ancestors of the modern Irish?”[/i]

    What type of question is that? (if you’re talking about the island) You should know fine well that in present times you don’t have to be considered to be Irish if an inhabitant of the island.

    Better luck next time Sherlock, lol.

  • Mack

    Ulsters my homeland

    Let me get this straight.

    The Gaelic speaking Scots lived in Ireland until the 12th Century, when upon there was an invasion by here-to-fore an unknown different and external cultural group self-styled as the Irish that forced them out of Ireland and a mass migration to Scotland where they strengthened the “Scottish” identity?

    Given that the Ulster Cycle (among many, many other historical documents) – transcribed for the first time in the 5th Century was written in Gaelic, I agree wholeheartedly that the inhabitants of the island were Gaelic in language and culture in the 12th Century.

    There was an invasion by non-Gaels with a different culture and different system of government led by a chap called Strongbow. However this is the only major invasion by an external culture during that period.

    It sounds to me that you are confused by the fact that different terms are used to descibe the same culture over a period lasting nigh on two millenia.

    Given that you agree that the Scots in Ireland were Gaels, then I submit to you that anyone with a Gaelic surname in Ireland is a direct descendant of the Gaels and thus the Scots.

    Furthermore, that by your definition the Irish were not Gaels (as they were already defined as Scots, and the Irish were different) and neither were they Normans, or English as those groups were also well defined. Given that, I submit to you that as there is no lasting societal record of this non-Gaelic, non-Anglo, non-Norman group on our island today – that this mythical group defined as the Irish by you – simply do not exist, and have never existed! The invasion you describe, not is not recorded by history for the simple reason it never occured.

    I submit to you, that the people who call themselves Irish today are by and large the ancestors of a mix of the people who you accept were called Scots (Gaels) & also the English and the Normans.

    That is to say, your definition of “Irish” is a nonsense, and therefore while I agree there is a separation of Irish and Scoti it exists only as a temporal separation (which I see you agree with). There is however a deep relationship – that of antecedant and progeny.

    Given all the above, I wonder why you feel the modern Scots are more entitled to use the term Scot, than the modern Irish? Is it because your insecurities lead you to deny a continuum of history in Gaelic Ireland while recongising the same history in Britain because it validates your sense of British identity?

  • Ulsters my homeland

    [b]Mack[/b]

    You’ve just type 439 words, and for what? Why don’t you accept the Irish identity isn’t as old as you’d like it to be? Why do you fear the truth?

  • GGN

    UMH,

    One problem with your theory is that the Gaels did not translate the word Gaedhal into ‘Irish’ – the English did that.

    Indeed, Scottish Highlanders have been refered to as ‘Erse’ until very recently in Ireland.

    Irish people, for the most part accept the translation though in modern times cultural change has disguised that somewhat.

    We are not discussing what the Irish have called themselves, rather what they have been called.

  • GGN

    should have read

    “Scottish Highlanders have been refered to as ‘Erse’ until very recently in SCOTLAND”.

  • Mack

    Ulsters my homeland

    Eh? Identities are fluid UMH. The Irish identity however encompasses and includes that Gaelic history. It does not mean that the modern Irish identity existed back then, it does mean that the history, legends, culture and language impact on the Irish identity today. Does that make sense to you?

    Perhaps the legends of Cú Chulainn and Conchobar Mac Nessa speak to your Ulster identity. If so, we’ve something in common.

  • Ulsters my homeland

    The fact remains those classical historical words which Irish historians and propaganda merchants use to claim the island was ethnically Irish do not work.

    The only plausible historical name is of a tribe in south Cork, and the reemergence of that name appears sometime after the 12th century.

    Why don’t people deal with facts? Why do they fear the truth?

  • Mack

    Ulsters my homeland

    Most would be happy to use the word Gael, which culturally I think meets your exacting standards.

    The meaning of words are also fluid, and perhaps you object to the political connotations of the word Irish being used about times long gone (and I suspect that is the crux of the matter), for most people it is synonomous with Gael when used refering to the past.

    Unfortunately, you live in a place where identities conflict and on soil where one side claim a continuum within archepelgo which others claim overrides it. I can see why you are annoyed, I guess, but like King Canute you are fighting against the tide. One of the interpretations of the word Irish is exactly what you don’t want it to mean. Unless you find away to accomodate that meaning, you are not going to have many productive conversations outside of the tiny group who think like you. In the grand scheme of things, it’s not a big deal, it doesn’t really threaten your identity, and it’s you (not everyone else) who is losing out by dogmatically taking this approach. Join the discourse with the same lexicon as everyone else.

    Let it go.

  • GGN

    “and the reemergence of that name appears sometime after the 12th century.”

    There is simply no truth in this statement whatsoever.

    Anyone who doubts that can go to the Dictionary of the Irish language and type in ‘Ireland’.

    http://www.dil.ie/

    It is a dictionary of mostly old Irish 6th-10th!

  • Ulsters my homeland

    [b]Mack[/b]

    “[i]It [u]does not[/u] mean that the modern Irish identity existed back then”[/i]

    We seem to be getting places. Now how about the Irish historians start telling the truth about when this Irish identity and even Irish Nationalism came about. Surely that would allow other cultures/histories to be included instead of it always being a Green/Irish/RC/Gaelic land.

  • OC

    And let’s not forget the Vikings.

  • Ulsters my homeland

    OC’s right, the Vikings had an influence.

  • Ulster Native

    UMH, you seem very confused….. its utterly amusing too.
    Fact is fact. History is history. Get over it.

    There is nothing of a Gaelic Ulster to be scared of. The great Gaelic and ‘protestant’ revivalists could be deemed as immensely proud of Irish Gaelic culture, who played a significant part in the revival and indeed formed Irish Republicanism- hence your flawed “Green/Irish/[b]RC[/b]/Gaelic land” statement.