[a / b / c / d / e / f / g / gif / h / hr / k / m / o / p / r / s / t / u / v / vg / vm / vmg / vr / vrpg / vst / w / wg] [i / ic] [r9k / s4s / vip / qa] [cm / hm / lgbt / y] [3 / aco / adv / an / bant / biz / cgl / ck / co / diy / fa / fit / gd / hc / his / int / jp / lit / mlp / mu / n / news / out / po / pol / pw / qst / sci / soc / sp / tg / toy / trv / tv / vp / vt / wsg / wsr / x / xs] [Settings] [Search] [Mobile] [Home]
Board
Settings Mobile Home
/his/ - History & Humanities

[Advertise on 4chan]


Thread archived.
You cannot reply anymore.


[Advertise on 4chan]


AMA about Irish History from around 600-1990.
>>
File: EX1XQ7PX0AAvkKq.jpg (270 KB, 1242x999)
270 KB
270 KB JPG
On this day in 1922, the National Army took the city of Waterford from the Anti-Treaty IRA during the Irish Civil War.
>>
>>11587940
What happened from 600 until the first brits arrived?
>>
>>11587940
Why didn't Ireland ever emerge as a united state like England or Scotland until way after British occupation?
>>
>>11587940
What's your opinion of Jack Lynch and Charles Haughey
>>
how united was the high kingdom and why didn't it get more centralized like Scotland or England?
>>
File: 1626734575923.jpg (141 KB, 1429x540)
141 KB
141 KB JPG
>>11587940
Why did the Irish let their language die?
>>
>>11587977
same reason languages like Egyptian and Sumerian died out, Irish wasn't the language of the ruling class and the commoners had little use of it when things went to shit
>>
>>11587952
>7th Century
In 697 there was the Synod of Birr, the end result of a century of development in law. In it was the Cáin Admonáin, a set of new laws designed to protect non-combatants and their property during times of war. Essentially a very early "geneva convention" applied across all of Ireland.
>8th Century
Lots of Irish missions travel to Britain and Europe to spread Christianity.
>9th Century
Vikings! Lots of settlements and a lot of raids against the Irish who were totally unprepared. It slowed down for a while, and a big rivalry kicked off between north and south when the Uí Néill-a powerful dynasty group in the north-found themselves challenged by the Eóganchta, a similar group in the south.
>10th Century
Shifting powers and alliances, more Viking settlements. Centralisation efforts begin by some, leading to the collapse of the Eóganachta and the rise of the Dál gCais, a very powerful militarised clan lead by Brian Boru-who went on to unite the island.
>11th Century
Brian Boru's kingdom shatters, more fighting between Kingdoms but no more foreign threats. A new High King makes good friends with the King of England, Harold Godwinson, and helps his sons try retake England when the Normans take it.
>12th Century
Normans.

Happy to elaborate on any of those.
>>
>>11587993
Languages like Israel or the reformation of the Turkish language post-Ottomans prove that you can reconstruct a language based on a historic one and successfully embed it into the whole population. Really it just seems like most Irish couldn't be bothered to do it, and they didn't want to sacrifice their strong economic and cultural ties to Britain.
>>
>>11588001
>Languages like Israel
I meant Israeli Hebrew here obviously.
>>
>>11587955
Irish inheritance law was devastating to centralisation efforts; it was nigh impossible to retain a united realm for more than 1 or 2 successions. This was starting to get fixed in the early 11th Century but was then ruined by-guess what-a succession crisis. By the mid 12th Century there was an undisputed High King and arguably a united realm, but the Norman Invasion happened before it could be consolidated.
>>11587965
>the High Kingdom
If you refer to a High King's power, it depends on the King. Brian Boru for example was quite centralised; he reformed the Church system in Ireland to tie north and south together due to common cause for Brian and his heirs to stay in power. He built a lot of roads and fortifications in Munster to strengthen his base, too. But as I said, it shattered before they could reform it.
>>
>>11587977
>>11588001
>most Irish couldn't be bothered to do it
Correct. They had more pressing concerns. Add to this the fact that unlike some other places with successful revivals, Ireland had an entire population that already spoke one language and all of its institutions/media in that language too.
>didn't want to sacrifice their strong economic and cultural ties to Britain
That was never really an intention, with or without revolution. Ireland and Britain were always to be linked in some way.
>>
>>11588001
Israelis reformed their language because jews spoke a gorillion native languages and they needed a common language that didn't favour one group
the turkish ideas were the result of a national hero and autocrat who was willing to barn parts of turkish culture and believed in crazy language theories

neither are really comparable to the very poor but democratic ireland after the war


>sacrifice their strong economic ties with britain
may I ask if you have some strong opinion on ireland, uk or their relations
>>
>>11587999
Appreciated and checked anon. Very good.

Did somehow Vikings assimilate with the Irish people or they formed another chaste?

And what do you think about Thomas Cahill book?
>>
>>11588009
What was wrong with the succession laws? Frank-style "split everything up between the inheritors"?
>>
Why were the Irish always such jew tier backstabbing cunts?
>>
>>11587940
Why did you not go out fishing or grow other crops
>>
>>11588024
>Did Vikings assimilate?
Yes, mostly. They also did form their own sort of society, mostly due to their occupations as traders in the ports they founded while settling Ireland. After enough time they were largely just lumped in with the rest of the Irish, but there were some interesting results. One example is the Gallowglass, the result of Hiberno-Norse family warriors. These originated in Gaelic parts of Scotland, but wound up in Ireland and stayed there.
>>11588025
Yes, sort of. But even worse. For example, let's take Kingdom A. Within Kingdom A, there are 3 Petty Kingdoms. Within those, multiple clans. Every single one of those titles is *elective*, from a council (quite a large one) made up of those related to the current holder.

If you are the favoured electoral heir to a title, you are the Tanáiste (the system is called Tanistry). So every single inheritance of any title was a clusterfuck to try and get your heir selected. So when the King of lots of land dies, there was essentially an instance of political conflict (or several small duels/assassinations) between brothers, cousins, uncles, etc.
>>
>>11587940
What was the relationship between Rome and Ireland?
>>
>>11588066
By Rome I mean Ancient Rome not catholicism
>>
>>11588029
>go out fishing
Fishing takes time to learn, and equipment to do. Not everyone had that, nor had they the time or resources to drop what they were doing to go and do it. Fishing also required permission, with potential punishments for trying it. Fishing also isn't possible along all of Ireland's coastline. The fishing industry in Ireland was also deliberately under-developed by Britain to prevent competition.
>grow other crops
They did. But centuries of inept colonial rule and extremely negligent attitudes from Irish/Anglo-Irish landowners meant that most Irish tenant farmers barely scratched by, mostly being paid in potatoes or eating what little they could grow. The potato itself was shilled en masse by the aforementioned landowners and aristocrats to make money.

The Famine was a direct result of the fucked up land situation.
>>11588066
>>11588071
Barely there. Some findings have suggested that Romans may have set up a trade post of some kind in a few areas, but it didn't last long and certainly wasn't of much priority. Most agree that the general attitude was that they got to England and decided that it was enough.
>>
Why are the Irish such a proud and useless people?
>>
>>11588081
So they didn't even send an explorer or a diplomat to Ireland? The island is not that far
>>
>>11588098
Ireland at the time was extremely heavily wooded and full of bogs. Traversing it was a nightmare, let alone while surrounded by hostile raiders. As for diplomats, there's nothing to find. The tribes at the time were loose, and few if any would have been worth sustained contact with.

They may have traded with Ireland (slaves in particular) or something similar, and Roman coins have been found around Ireland-though they were likely taken back from coastal points as opposed to by Romans themselves. The Roman Empire did send a bishop to Ireland at one stage to help spread Christianity, but he was very unpopular.
>>
File: TW16-2.jpg (170 KB, 333x500)
170 KB
170 KB JPG
>>11587940
What is your favorite piece of Irish cuisine?
>>
>>11588125
Barmbrack will always be a favourite. Champ is also delicious and easy to make big quantities of. Also Kerrygold butter :^)
>>
>>11587940
why do people today protend dal riata came from ireland?
>>
>>11588153
>why do people pretend dal riata came from Ireland?
The vast, vast, vast majority of people haven't a fucking clue about Dal Riata. Most who do use it as a LARP to pretend Ulster Scots Unionists have ancient claim to Ulster.
>>
>>11588064
>the result of Hiberno-Norse family warriors
>originated in Gaelic parts of Scotland
hmmm
>>
File: bolg.png (1.43 MB, 5404x3932)
1.43 MB
1.43 MB PNG
>>
Why didn't they ate fish during the famine?
>>
>>11588172
>Hiberno-Norse
That was a mistake on my part, happened due to me talking about Norsemen in Ireland! The term for those I refer to is usually just Norse-Gaels. "Gallowglass" comes from the Irish for "foreign warrior", as they were associated with a Norse background (and Vikings were called foreigners.)
>>
>>11588186
Is this funny to you?
>>
>>11588191
just jk
>>
>>11588186
See >>11588081
>>
just how interlinked was scotland and ireland historically?
>>
>>11588206
Many kings of Scottish ethnic origin ruled much of Northern Ireland for a long time and even during the life of Robert the Bruce Antrim was still owned by the Bruce family.

In the 1100s kings in Scotland started pretending to be Scottish instead of Pictish and so they are called Scots instead of Picts in foreign languages but in Gaelic they are still called Albannach.
>>
>>11588206
Not enormously. In early Ireland there was for example Dal Riata, a polity that spanned parts of Western Scotland and northeastern Ireland, but there wasn't much of a relationship. The Irish of course helped spread Christianity to much of Scotland, and Robert Bruce's brother Edward invaded Ireland at one stage after being invited to become High King. But beyond that, not an enormous amount of political links beyond some common lineage.
>>
>>11588064
Here's a fun fact, Andalusian muslims thought Ireland was the home of the vikings.
>>
>>11588230
You've vastly understated the extent of the connection imo. The documentary evidence is quite clear that both the Scots and the Irish at least at the time of the Bruce invasion saw themselves as the same people, with Ireland as 'Scotia Major' and Scotland as 'Scotia Minor'. The Scots identified as a daughter nation of the Irish, rightly or wrongly.
>>
>>11587940
What's the worst that could have happened if Ireland called Britain's bluff on the Anglo-Irish treaty? Genocide? Decades of low intensity guerrilla warfare island-wide? Sectarian massacres on a bigger scale?
>>
>>11588244
>saw themselves as the same people,
They didn't.
Most Scots saw the Irish as completely uncivilised savage people then. Bruce only stated that in an attempt to convince Irish lords to accept his brother as King of Ireland.
>>
>>11588244
I don't mean to vastly do so, I'm aware of some links here and there but in practical terms-ie how much the happenings in Scotland/Ireland affected the other, the truth is there isn't much. The shared people thing is as close as it gets, but again, it was in a very specific context.
>>
>>11588257
The IRA get obliterated and descend into REAL guerrilla warfare. Home Rule situation is implemented but notions of republicanism are kicked back harshly. Sectarian massacres would arguably be avoided because the Ulster Unionists wouldn't have so much to cry about.

Decades of low intensity warfare perhaps, but it'd end in defeat as Irish politics moved on as it was clearly ready to do.
>>
Is the Irish language really making a vcomeback?
It would be cool if it did but I don't dare hope
>>
>>11588292
Yes and no. As is always the case, non-linguists don't care to learn a language that doesn't benefit them commercially. But it won't be dying any time soon. Northern Ireland ironically is the place it'll likely be properly revived from.
>>
>>11587940
Do people in the Republic even want Northern Ireland? Has a century of partition left people indifferent or feeling 'other'? I always got the impression that people in Ireland looked down their nose at their Northern brothers and sisters, maybe that's just the effect of the media.
>>
>>11588301
Plenty of concerns about it, but it's unlikely they'd be enough to prevent people voting blindly for it. You're right though, people in the south look down on the north. It's a known phenomenon known as "southern hypocrisy", where they get outraged and shocked by IRA campaigns during the Troubles but then treat IRA campaigns in the 1920s as heroic and grand.
>>
>>11588292
It's alive and it will stay alive, but it's never going to play a major role in Irish life again. You need to either teach it as a career or speak it every day in a Gaeltacht community or with your own friends and family to keep it refined and refreshed. A lot of people on both sides of the border will study it in school right up until 18 and take Oral and written exams, then literally never really use it again aside from fundamentals.
>>
File: combine_images (5).jpg (1.09 MB, 1143x1729)
1.09 MB
1.09 MB JPG
>>11588258
as much as Scots try to retcon it away, Scotland was an Irish colony. Scotland means 'Irishland'
>>
>>11588336
No, it really wasn't. I am Irish, I know a great deal about Irish history, and Scotland was not an "Irish colony" and to suggest it was simply implies that you're entirely ignorant of both Scottish and Irish history.
>>
>>11588336
>Scotland was an Irish colony.
Completely impossible and not a single Irish book mentions this but LARP on
>>
>>11588341
take it up with Hugh Trevor-Roper (English) and the authorities he cites, and also with all academic historians who are not Scots chauvinists
>>
>>11588029
Plenty of food was being grown during the famine, it’s just that the native Irish weren’t allowed to eat it
>>
>>11588098
the puny Roman FEARS the mighty Hibernian
>>
>>11588363
>>11588363
no. it was more the fact the alba nation completely stopped rome
>>
>>11588354
I don't mean colony in the modern sense of course but the ancient sense of having been settled by a certain people who gave it its culture
>>
>>11587940
What was their agriculture like? Is it true that they were pastoralists?
>>
>>11588354
Ah yes, Trevor "history is what we imagine it to be" Roper. Ancient or even medieval movement of peoples of same or similar culture does not a colony or colonisation make.
>>11588372
That also doesn't make sense, because there's also evidence of Gaels travelling into Ireland via northern Britain. So does that therefore make Ireland a Scottish invention? Stop applying anachronistic concepts to things to suit your narrative.
>>
>>11588372
it was never settled by anyone from ireland.
not a single irish annal records this.
>>
>>11588380
Yes, basically. They did have tillage crops; cereal crops have been grown in Ireland for thousands of years. But the difference is that cattle were a source of prestige and of wealth, so a great deal of culture (and sometimes politics) was based around the ownership/stealing of cattle. Often in order to improve one's standing, a potential heir would launch a cattle raid on a rival neighbour kingdom.
>>
>>11588383
is calling Magna Grecia a Greek colony anachronistic to you? because that was the ancient term for it. Scotland is the Irish version of Magna Grecia
>>
>>11588423
please show evidence for the colony.
please explain how scottish gaelic ogham stones back then contain forms older than the origins of the dal riata colony.
>>
>>11588423
No, but calling Scotland an Irish Colony absolutely is because;
>Scotland, the Kingdom, was not created by Irish colonists
>No tribe, kingdom, overkingdom or other polity "colonised" any of what became Scotland, instead it was a broad movement of people or some with dynastic ties
>There's evidence that some Gaels were in parts of Scotland before any were in some parts of Ireland

You are reaching in an enormous manner, and making it up as you go along.
>>
>>11588433
>instead it was a broad movement of people
theres no record of any movement of people from the time
>were in parts of Scotland
no. all of what had anything to do with scotland spoke gaelic previously.
>>
>>11587940
Is there a current high-king pretender to the Irish throne? Maybe someone descendant from the flight of the earls?
>>
>>11588292
It’s gaining popularity as a second language, and it won’t ever fully die, but it’s not going to become a primary language at any point. Ironically enough, brexit has made Ireland the only fluently-speaking English nation in the EU, which is economically beneficial (which is all that matters these days)
>>
>>11588370
this is romanoid propaganda
>>
>>11588433
>... since the Scots were reduced from their An . 500 . exile by Fergus the Second did ever call Ireland Scotland the greater. They will not find any of trust: the name of Scots being long appropriated to the COLONY reduced from thence, and long extinct among the Irish.
John Spottiswoode, History of the Church of Scotland, 1668.

Here's a seventeenth description of Scotland as an Irish COLONY you hysterical basedjack. The word has a long history and shouldn't trigger a short circuit in your brain because of its association with modern colonialism.
>>
>>11588494
Mate. It's phonologically impossible Gaelic in Scotland came from Ireland.
And even further how did Gaelic come from Ireland when Pictland completely dominated Dal Riata for all it's history?
>>
>>11588494
>It will not follow that because we have derived our COLONY from the Irish that we have derived the name of Scoti from them.

George Mackenzie, A Defence of the Antiquity of the Royal Line of Scotland, 1685
>>
>>11587940
1. Is it possible to say that the specificity of the development of Ireland in the Middle Ages was caused by its insignificant impact on the Roman civilization? That is, the Irish Specificity was a consequence of the least Romanization of Ireland of all the Celtic lands.
2. In the literature, I met the opinion that the specificity of the institutions of Irish society (more broadly: the Celts of the British Isles) is a manifestation of a strong pre-Celtic substrate.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goidelic_substrate_hypothesis
That is, the island Celts differed greatly in their customs from the continental ones, for example, in Galia, Central Europe or the Galatians of Asia Minor, because they took over a lot from the previous population.
3. Recommend literature (I can read English but not Gaelic) on the history of Ireland from 600 to the beginning of British rule (this is kind of the middle of the 17th century). Something like this introductory but with a good scientific level. I have collected a collection of historical chronicles like "Annals of Ulster" (pritn 1887) and so on. But diving into them right away is difficult.
4. Can Anglophones read Irish names and titles correctly? For example: "Gilla Críost Ó hÉicnigh". I see in Gaelic the palatalization of consonants (familiar to us, the Slavs) is quite developed, but the Anglophones do not immediately understand this. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palatalization_(phonetics)
>>
>>11588450
Also wandering about the Travellers (irish gypsies) abd whther they had any interesting roles in medieval, pro-england ruked, Ireland
>>
>>11588511
>>11588494
>>11588433

>Fergus, say the Irish antiquaries, was second husband to Erica, daughter of Loarn, Brother to Fergus, who carried the first COLONY into Scotland.

Edward Stillingfleet, Origines Britannicae, Or The Antiquities Of The British Churches, 1685
>>
>>11588532
>1685 is a contemporary source
>>
>>11588522
Fucking sausage fingers... "pre-england ruled"
>>
>>11588532
>>11588511
>>11588494
>>11588433

>The Irish were the ancient and principle Scots, and the Brittanick Scots a colony derived from them.

John Bramhall, The Works of the most Reverend Father in God, John Bramhall, 1677
>>
>>11588577
weird you keep ignoring getting your argument dissolved
>>
>>11588585
I'm not concerned with getting into the minutae of Pictish history with a Scottish autist. I just want to humiliate the Irish guy who acted like a shrieking schoolmarm for calling Scotland an Irish colony when this was the exact language used by the Scots themselves at least four hundred years ago
>>
>>11588609
you arent very intelligent.
but how did ogham stones in scotland have language that was extinct in ireland before ogham was written there?
>>
>>11588646
All I'm trying to do here is show that the traditional and orthodox interpretation of Scottish history is that the Scots were a daughter race of the Irish. I can't fight you in the arena of Ogham archaeology because I don't know anything about it. You may have recolutionised the field but I am unable to debate you

One more:
>The Scots, a COLONY of the bordering Irish intruding amongst and conquering the Picts, or Britains, all other names worn out, the whole are now accounted Scots.
Robert Morder, Geography Rectified: Or, A Description Of The World, In all its Kingdoms, 1693
>>
>>11588683
No you aren't. You deliberate posted things to try and push you own view of history that is completely unsupported.
And it wasn't the "orthodox" view until the 12th century since the Scottish kings pretended to be Irish in order to annex Ulster.
>>
>>11588695
Would you say the same as you have said to me all the seventeenth century English and Scottish antiquarians I have quoted?

>And it wasn't the "orthodox" view until the 12th century since the Scottish kings pretended to be Irish in order to annex Ulster.

You've tacitly admitted that it is the orthodox view from the 12th century at least. But what about Bede, who wrote in the eight century? Is it a coincidence that the English, Irish and Scots all agreed on an opinion of the Scots' origins? Your hissy-fit is what annoyed me. I don't begrude the Scots their patriotism. And yes I am aware I am petty and autistic.
>>
>>11588577
>>11588532
>>11588494
All of these are from the 17th Century, when the main information they had regarding the topic was Bede's entirely imagined theories about Irish colonisation of Scotland.

Brian Boru was called "Emperor of the Scots" by a single writer at one stage too. The reason? Fanciful nonsense based on few and far between concepts of some sort of united Gaelic polity. Similar to when it reared its head with Bruce.
>>
>>11588731
>But what about Bede
Since when was Bede Scottish?
Bede misunderstood the history.
All the records in Ireland show no invasion.
All of them just list Fergus a king went over to take control of the Dal Riata kingdom.
Completely impossible since Dal Riata was annexed into Alba by Kenneth MacAlpine
>>
>>11588741
Fanciful nonsense that the English, Irish and Scots all agreed on? Why is it that the Scottish Gaels have a vast body of folk poetry shared with the Irish set in Ireland? Why is their a place in Scotland called Ath-Fhodla or 'New Ireland'? Why is it that Irish bards in Scotland would write exhortations to Scottish chiefs encouraging them to 'return home' and claim the Irish high kingship? It's very hard to believe that this is a result of Bede just making something up that stuck.
>>
>>11588771
In Ireland there was the q sound in words such as maq
ogham records this sound
ogham stopped being used in ireland around 500ad
the dal riata kingdom seems to have emerged around 500ad
in 800 ogham starts being used in monument stones in scotland
these contain the q sound

so how does the scottish gaelic contain a sound which not used for 300 years in ireland but appears commonly across all of pictland.

and further. why does scotland contain not a single native O' name despite them being common across the whole island of ireland?

you cant win this fight.
>>
>>11588081
>Fishing also required permission, with potential punishments for trying it.
"Mama, we are starving! Can we get some fish?"
"No ya wee shite, you'll get me in trouble! Just keep starving."

What a brainlet point.
>>
>>11588771
>agreed on
Any agreement that did happen was based on inaccurate information. There were Gaels in both Ireland and in Scotland. It is not surprising that they share mythologies and poetry and in some cases law seeing as there is some obvious overlap.
>Ath-Fhodla
Isn't that referencing the god, not the island?
>It is hard to believe that its just Bede making stuff up and it sticks
No, it really isn't. What actually happened is that Bede had a theory-which was wrong-and Scottish Gaels and Irish Gaels had some cultural overlap, for obvious reasons. Bede then became a source for later historians-many of them English-despite being wrong.

All of this has long been put to bed. We'll never know the *exact* nature of the earliest movements of Gaels between the British isles but we know that the creation of "colonies" was simply not the case. And even if we were to pretend it was true, the notion that therefore Scotland is some creation of "Ireland" is totally, totally bonkers.
>>
>>11588380
Up until the mid 8th century Ireland's agri-economy was largely based on cows and dairying yes

From the mid 8th century to the early 9th century there's a shift to include other animals and arable farming

This diversication also leads to a shift in settlement type from 'flat' ringforts surrounded by a bank and ditch to the less defensive raised raths and unenclosed settlements

t. reading this book rn
>>
>>11588810
>"Fuck permission, I do what I want"
>Steal fishing equipment
>Get arrested
>Family starve anyway
Assuming of course that you live near a place where you can fish, and are able to obtain the equipment, and are able to actually successfully catch fish, and that the fish you catch is enough to sustain your family for a famine that lasted several years.

If you actually take the "why didn't they fish" meme seriously, YOU are the retarded one
>>
>>11588816
he's right the name probably does mean "new ireland" but its a very weak argument if you're basing a huge migration of a single place name
>We'll never know the *exact* nature o
we sort of do.
all gaelic in britain comes from belgium
>>
>>11588827
>Assuming of course that you live near a place where you can fish,
If you live in a place like that, yer gonna know how to fish Spergsalot.
>>
>>11588843
No, that isn't the case. Every single person in coastal villages in England don't know how to fish. The fishermen do. Maybe their sons. The majority of Ireland's population were not fishermen, and those who were had a lack of equipment and boats because-as was mentioned-the industry was deliberately neglected to avoid competition to Britain.

You are a retard.
>>
crazy that retard has shut up once he gets faced with actual evidence
>>
>>11588816
We don't know the exact nature of the earliest movements of Anglo-Saxons in Britain earlier but we don't deny that they created 'England'.

Where has this long been put to bed? What modern scholarship debunks the traditional interpretation of Scottish history shared by all the British nations?

Fodla was a a goddess (not a god) or poetic synonym or symbol for Ireland.

If the Gaels were mutually indigenous to Scotland and Ireland we'd expect their mythology and historical literature to share scenes equally between the two countries but their heavily weighted towards Ireland.
>>
>>11588907
>but their heavily weighted towards Ireland.
they arent.
you need to stop schizoing out
and start reading real history like this >>11588798
but you wont
since you hate scots with all your heart
>>
>>11588923
>>11588907
I'd be genuinely interested (not being sulky or petulant) in academic history which refutes the Irish origin of the Scots. If you could recommend something worthwhile I'd be grateful. I don't hate Scots any more than I hate Irish because I see them as the same thing
>>
>>11588907
Edward Williams Nicholson published Keltic Researches
he completely proves Scottish gaelic did not derive from ireland but colonists from europe.
yet you deny reality.
>>
/his/ now has an autist who passionately hates the Irish, and claims that they are English, and another autist who hates the Irish, claiming that the Scottish are also Irish.

How does one tiny island cause so much seethe?
>>
>>11588954
I genuinely do want to know where Bede's theories of the origins of Scotland are refuted
>>
>>11588941
"The Highlander, as we call him—the Albanach as he calls himself in his own Gaelic—is, indeed, in the vast majority of cases simply the modern Pict, and his language modern Pictish. To suppose that the great free people from which he is descended were ever conquered by a body of Irish colonists, and that the language he speaks is merely an Irish colonial dialect, are delusions which, I hope, no one will regret to see finally dispelled."
>>
>>11588990
>of the origins of Scotland
Bede lists the origin of Dal Riata not Scotland.
>>
>>11587940
How tf do you get off?
Take this nonsense somewhere else.
>>
>>11589045
What?
>>
>still ignoring posts that have evidence
utter state of this cunt
>>
>>11589065
I'm still reading around. From what I can tell the idea that Scottish Gaelic didn't come Ireland is a fringe view academically
>>
>>11589076
please tell me the king from dal riada that made pictland speak gaelic
>>
Can we ever have a thread without this retard showing up

>>11589076
It is
>>
Liam Mellows was trans.
She liked to dress in women's clothes.
And never married.
>>
Mental how there's no proof Gaelic in Scotland came from Ireland
>>
>>11587940
Hey i got a week to go around the island in september ,any must see /His/ sites , first day we are trying to do the hill of tara.new grange area then heading to mayo for a few days then working our way counter clockwise the rest of the way back to dublin
>>
>>11588741
In calling himself emperor of the Scots he was calling himself emperor of the Irish because Scot was the term for Irishman. Think John Scotus Eriugena, Sedullius Scottus etc.

>Fanciful nonsense based on few and far between concepts of some sort of united Gaelic polity. Similar to when it reared its head with Bruce.

This is a weird way to talk about your own country. You don't have to be a patriotard but you sound disdainful. Most countries would envy a national identity that precocious and assertive
>>
>>11589347
*being called emperor of the scots he was being called emperor of the irish
>>
>>11587940
Why didn't the Irish colonize Persia?
>>
>>11588153
Because it did
>>
>>11587940
what is the % of irish people with scandinavian ancestors?
>>
>>11587940
why didnt the Irish fly the eagle into Mordor?
>>
>>11589595
So how did Gaelic spread from there if it was dominated by Pictland for its whole history
>>
>>11589347
It was penned by Máel Suthain, a close friend of Brian's. In this case, Brian was named "Imperator Scotorum" based mostly on sheer fantasy invented by Máel Suthain (who also made up his own terms for the Kingdom of Munster and other titles) as we went along.

My point is you have to understand that a lot of old writings are either entirely constructed based on a single individual's theories or inventions, and these can often form the basis for historical study.
>weird way to talk about my own country
No, it isn't. There is no history behind some sort of united Irish-Scottish realm, and only sporadic instances of a united "identity."
>>
File: stare.jpg (40 KB, 800x450)
40 KB
40 KB JPG
>Israel can revive a dead language used for exclusively religious purposes within a few years
>Irish can't even be bothered to mantain a language with actual living speakers
>>
>>11591835
You have an annoying habit of reacting with indignation to implications you've read into things. because Scotland is agreed to be colony of Ireland in the ancient sense (a land settled by Irishmen who determined its ethnic character) doesn't mean anybody is saying there was an ancient Irish superstate which oversaw and organised a deliberate "Plantation of Ulster" type colonisation of Scotland
>>
>>11587940
Can you provide us with a list of contemporary works that provide a structured assessment of Irish history?
>>
>>11588798
>so how does the scottish gaelic contain a sound which not used for 300 years in ireland but appears commonly across all of pictland.
Because they were different dialects that lost the sounds at different times. English preserved hw- at the beginning of words until very recently, while German lost it 700 years ago, and Swedish 300 years ago.
>>
>>11591884
Not OP but I'll say the most important thing in reading Irish history is not to be confined to books written in the post Irish Historical Studies period. The older Irish historiography is derided by the current regime of historians but it's actually more truthful in most respects. MacNeill, Lecky, Prendergast, Alice Stopford Green are all worth reading. the hardcore nationalists have their own slant but they include real material excised from the sanitised standard academic texts which are keen to underplay the darker aspects of British history in Ireland. I'm not saying that modern academic revisionist history is all a unionist-liberal conspiracy (though a lot of it is), just that wide reading in all corners and periods of Irish historiography is necessary. Ireland is a hard country to understand
>>
>>11589271
If Gaelic in Scotland did not come from the Irish, then that means that the Irish and the Picts were exactly the same people ethnically. I’ve never heard an academic express this view.
>>
>>11591841
The Israeli situation was very very different from the situation in Ireland. They had Jews arriving from all over Europe and the world who all spoke different languages, so it was necessary for them all to adopt a common language. Hebrew, being a language which was sacred to all the Jewish people fit the bill. Ireland already functions as an English speaking country, which suits us quite well economically so there’s no impetus to learn another language. There is no defence though for how the gaeltacht areas have declined so rapidly since Irish independence. It can only be said that for most Irish people, material economic concerns were of more importance than matters of culture.
>>
>>11587940
What happened in 599?
>>
>>11591984
OP BTFO'D
>>
File: 1626951760000.png (157 KB, 751x179)
157 KB
157 KB PNG
>>11591954
>exactly
As much as the Saxons and Angles
>>
File: file.png (856 KB, 736x994)
856 KB
856 KB PNG
Will there ever be another like him?
>>
>>11592101
no
>>
>>11587940
I'm not sure if 600 is early enough for this, but what do we know of pre-christian religion in Ireland? I remember trying to find information on paganism in the british isles prior to the viking invasions, and found very little.
>>
>>11592101
He is an overrated bureaucrat
>>
File: file.png (1.27 MB, 968x645)
1.27 MB
1.27 MB PNG
>>11588186
heres ur fishing grounds bro

Also, even if you live in an area where the coast isn't just a cliff face, you'll need, at minimum, a boat, rod, and bait, maybe you can build the boat and rod yourself if you're very good at building things, but bait's gonna cost money, money you, as a recently impoverished farmer just don't have.
>>
>>11592241
>overrated
In some regards, vastly underrated in others. He was no soldier, but he was extremely talented.
>bereacrat
>collins
Collins was the most anti-bureacrat man in the government
>>
>>11591875
You're the one projecting national identities that wouldn't calcify for hundreds of years into the past like some balkan shitflinger.
>>
So I know Henry the 8th had a lot of dealings with Ireland as the reformation happened, but did Henry the 7th do anything of note?
>>
>>11592272
>bro just because the picts called themselves Albannach doesn't mean they have anything to do with modern gaelic
>>
>>11591875
I'd like to clarify that >>11592272 is not me.

In response to >>11591875, I don't agree at all with the idea that Scotland is defined by Ireland in its ethnic character, I only think the influence is Gaelic. Seeing as Gaels moved between Britain and Ireland long prior to either Scotland/Ireland being seen as polities, I think it's pointless to try and talk of colonies.
>>
>>11587940
Why did "Irishness" supersede most things in the island? I understand Irish itself died out but how did a place with so many invaders with their own languages, cultures and identities die out, even the native celtic/gaelics were very divided never uniting or co-operating to the point of absurdity (You could argue the scots or manx are the only gaelic celts who kept an identity other than irish let alone keeping theirs) and the various invaders of anglo irish, vikings, yola, fingallians and normans etc. all had their own thing yet mutted into the generic "Irish" identity making Ireland feel more like a colonial new world country if you get what I mean instead of an ancient nation, so why did it mutt together? it can't just be conquering or size because there's plenty of places where nothing of the sort happened.
>>
>>11592290
Actually followup question: did Ireland have any significant impact on the War of the Roses?
>>
>>11592272
Scotland is literally named after the ancient name for the Irish. the Latin word 'Scotia' migrated from meaning Ireland to Scotland over the course of the model ages. I don't know why these facts make you so hysterical
>>
>>11592303
Mostly circumstantial.
>Vikings
Norse invaders settled, they didn't conquer. These settlements eventually fell under the jurisdiction of various Irish kings, and before long they shared a faith too. There simply wasn't enough Norse influence, so it blended with the Gaels.
>Normans
A more interesting one. Normans assimilated with the Gaels too, but were discouraged from doing so by England. This lead to a divide between new English settlers and the "Old English" Normans, who were Catholic and had long lasting roots in Ireland. Then the introduction of Protestantism into the mix helped to gel the various groups in Ireland together cohesively in opposition to the new English colonisers and conquerers.

Being cut off from the rest of Europe also helped.
>>
>>11592299
>>11592315
I wrote this reply before seeing seeing your followup and explanation. I don't think a nation needs to be a nation state to be a self-identifying nation. That said I think Ireland was less different from other countries than most thinl. if you translate "high king" as king the whole society loooks less weird
>>
>>11592329
But you also have to remember that the very concept of "High King" is mostly applied retroactively as prior to the 8th or 9th Century I don't believe there was any legal bias for it in Ireland. Generally anyone named as "High King" of Ireland (or really just King of Ireland at all) prior to the 800s is either a mythological figure or has the title applied after the fact as propaganda. Misunderstandings of the relationship between the Kingship of Tara and the role of High King have also lead to confusion.
>>
>>11592356
>But you also have to remember that the very concept of "High King" is mostly applied retroactively as prior to the 8th or 9th Century

True, but the term high king was reserved exclusively for the island of Ireland, which shows the Irish in theory regarded their island as a united nation. this idea was stable for centuries. at the very least this shows a precocious national identity
>>
>>11592247
He's like the Henry Ford of the Irish revolution. He had no super-special talent himself but he was good at organising people, in a sense. But it was thanks to this organisation of people that helped the Tan war in the end.
>>
>>11592369
I'm not so sure, since a lot of Irish mythology and folklore regarding "Ireland" is more about the island itself rather than a nation. It wasn't the notion of a realm, but rather just the location various groups resided in. The idea of an Irish High King-ie, a realm of Ireland encompassing all of Ireland and ruled by a single individual-originated in the 8th or 9th century I believe. Certainly an old basis for a "nation" I agree, but I see people having fanciful notions of it stretching far, far further back than that when it simply never did. Or at least, there's no historical or legal basis for it to have.
>>11592388
He was very good at organising people, but he was also quite adept at finances. You are correct however-his organisational skills were hugely influential in the War of Independence, and are likely the reason it became seen as a "War" at all.
>>
>>11592408
The gaelic tribes used to believe in a single Irelnd, or even a single gaelic people beyond ireland but later drifted away from eachother and each tribe got thouroughly convinced of their own uniqueness and nationhood before Irishness to emerge later, if after independence back in the 1920's Irish people started showing nationalism in their counties instead and balkanised into 32 republics instead of a single 32 county republic and then united in 2000 would you bitch and moan about Irishness not existing before 2000 because of the brief stint of county nationalism and dismiss previous irish nationalism as propoganda and fanciful notions because that's what using the brief period of tribes, kingdoms and provinces separatism and identities to dismiss how ancient irishness really is, is doing.
>>
>>11592408
>Certainly an old basis for a "nation" I agree

As long as you recognise that I'm happy. I'm impatient with the idea that Irish national identity is somehow a consequence of the Norman invasion
>>
>>11592315
Scotland is called Alba in Gaelic not Scotland
>>
>>11587940
Why did Trinity College vote for Unionist candidates?
>>
>>11592508
there was a gaelic national identity sure, but if thats true the modern nationalism should be ireland, scotland and isle of man as a single nation, if you exclude scots and manx you might as well divide ireland into five protestants and have munster, meathe, connacht, ulster, osraighe and leinster as separate nations, it's either all of gaeldom or all the provinces as their own nations.
>>
>>11592535
Filthy yank hands typed this post
>>
>>11592535
There no relationship between Scotland and Ireland and everyone in man is english
>>
File: 1608217380850[1].jpg (250 KB, 1200x800)
250 KB
250 KB JPG
why ireland is a failure 101

1: stuck in the iron age and constantly cattle raiding each other, this left them open to invasion but unfortunately it was not enough
2: "ireland" did not even exist as a single unified polity besides vague semi-mythical dark age warlords until the English created the Kingdom of Ireland and Irish parliament for them
3: despite papist depredations and corruption and the conversion of other Celts to reformed or protestant churches, the irish are easily manipulated and continue to allow catholic priests to molest their children, unwilling to seek justice due to their belief in papal infallibility
4: "ireland" did not have an enlightenment like Scotland, it did not participate in modernization, the best and brightest preferring to leave for better and brighter things, eastern and southern europe are now their peers in IQ
5: once they had the potato populations exploded, ignoring warnings of agronomists against monocropping or malthus about the encroaching catastrophe
6: despite being attached to the enormously successful Britain, unlike the Scots they had little interest in participating in it and building fortunes for themselves and their families
7: against their better judgment, Britain was coaxed into granting them liberty as they did Canada, New Zealand and Australia with cries of woe and appeals to guilt, the powerful "irish" elite then immediately seized control, becoming horrendously corrupt and exploiting the helpless underclasses, "ireland" was uncharacteristically stagnant and poor for the north Atlantic until the 90s
8: it was Thatcher who would eventually smash the IRA and corruption
9: their recent economic success came solely from selling out to multinational corporations and becoming a tax haven
10: their culture is still centered around general thuggishness, drinking and ignorance, bleak, depressing and directionless, it easily yields to others
>>
>>11592534
Trinity was full of Unionists. Its always been associated with British rule. To this day people who go there instead of University College Dublin are mocked as Westbrits.
>>11592535
There is 0 precedence for a nation encompassing Ireland, Scotland and the isle of mann.
>>
>>11588098
the thing is that except Parthia, Roman conquered everything they could. By which I mean they found a group of people with a city and declared defensive war against them. They took over the city, killed half of the nobility, latinized the second half, enslaved whoever couldnt run away and let the tax collectors plunder the land for centuries. It work great until they run out of enemy cities. What was left were bogs like Germany, Ireland, Scotland or nomads living in plains. Esentially, Ireland would be just another money sink like Britain.
>>
>>11592594
Scotland isn't very boggy.
Scotland had large stone fortresses after agricola.
Eventually the romans were so terrified of the Abannaich they payed them tribute
>>
>>11592574
it was a weird trip for me to find out that scots are like this irl and not just on 4chan. you subsist off hatred
>>
>>11592640
>ayo you wuz irish n shiet
>>
>>11592313
I can answer that from an English perspective. Ireland, to the English crown, was an absolute clusterfuck of a territory, which was regarded as a white elephant to govern - while being an honour, it was such a mess of ancient blood feuds, treaties and obligations that it was regarded as more trouble than it’s worth to be in charge of. It’s why Richard of York was assigned there, as a known malcontent. He would be given a high position which would keep him incredibly busy until Henry VI grew up and became an amazing king like his father. Except Henry VI peaked in competence at age 5, so Richard came back across St. George’s Channel, sniffing for power.
>>
>>11592986
interesting that the Anglo-Norman Irish were strong Yorkists because of this
>>
>>11587940
Everytime I see the idea of a celtic union or something similar brought up most people call the person uniformed and the idea of that unrealistic. Was there ever a time in the past when celtic identity was unified, or, at the very least celts felt an inclination towards their brothers. Is there any historical pretext for pan-celtism?
>>
>>11593339
The celts used to be all of Europe and Anatolia, it's the same reason people seethe about all other pan nationalisms and pan ethnicities because native americans or pan africanism etc. they don't like natives teaming up and forming their own thing because it'd carve up their own country and have people in their countries co-operate and prefer other nations than theirs, England doesn't want natives carving up their country and abandoning their culture and anglification losing a lot of influence in land that used to be their territory ditto for the french but much moreso since the frogs are infinitely more centralist than anyone else. It will never happen because all the celts were colonised and cucked into self hating suicidal freaks destroying all their culture attempting to become their colonisers
>>
>>11587940
>from around 600-1990.
Does Ireland really have no ancient/classical history? When the Romans were right next to them for centuries? Why?
>>
>>11593458
>ancient/classical history
O'oga hit MacBooga with a stick, MacBooga hit O'oga with a rock, all of Irish history from 5000BC-499AD,

in 500AD they were christianised and stopped eating eachother
>>
>>11593458
Ogham, the earliest bit of irish script was based on Latin I believe (the structure?, been a few years since i read anything about the language)
>>
>>11587940
Did Celtic Christianity have any meaningful deviations from the mainstream form that was practiced on the continent?
>>
>>11588066
Sorta there but more or less peaceful. They thought about invading but decided it was not worth it and the Irish were cool. Romans and Irish hung out in the one Roman fort and the Irish didn't care what they were doing in Britain. Friendly but remote Celts to the Romans that had nothing they wanted, would be considered a costly waste of time to conquer, and pleasant people the Romans didn't want to fight. Irish were mentioned to be mainly artists (those were the most curious and affable Irish that mostly interacted with them) so they thought it would be better to just leave them alone.
>>
>>11593715
No, it was the same Catholicism as in all europe with only minor aestethic differences due to poverty making every costume building and hairstyle a worse imitation of the continent, a cargo cult really.
>>
>>11588206
Not super linked. Much more linkage between the Welsh and the Irish.
>>
>>11592534
They are a protestant school
>>
>>11592551
Maybe culturally at this point the the Manx are genetically Norse.
>>
>>11592574
Imagine being bitter towards the Irish as a Scot when the English nobles still deprive so many Scots of their own land through exploitative holdings which leave rural scots at their mercy to this day.
>>
>>11593715
Yes in that there was still a belief in fairies an the like with people being much less concerned with demons. The Druids mostly converted to Christianity willingly and thus brought many of their ideas into it. The Celtic cross is a combination of the symbol of the god Sol and the cross showing their recognizing them as the same entity.
>>
>>11593793
Seethe the Irish suck, the gaels are dead and so is the gaelic/irish language(s) while scots and english are thriving stay crying paddy. British forever.
>>
>>11593793
>when the English nobles still deprive so many Scots of their own land through exploitative holdings
What total bullshit lmao. Stop trying desperately to drag Scots into your victim complex you seething cuck.
>>
>>11593793
>deprive so many Scots of their own land through exploitative holdings
this doesnt happen
>>
>>11593816
>>11593839
>>11594378
So you're saying the small folk phenomenon wasn't and isn't real? Sure. I guess failing to attain freedom pushes the sour grapes mentality.
>>
>>11594390
>the small folk phenomenon
whats that
>>
>>11594392
sounds like a schizo trying to make midgets sound supernatural, lol. Britain forever.
>>
>>11588001
Not just Britain, but the diaspora in America as well
>>
>>11588137
>kerrygold butter
My man. Its even getting popular here in the states.
>>
>>11593043
I actually found a website discussing that recently
https://www.libraryireland.com/HullHistory/Geraldines1.php
>>
>>11594419
Scotland is a Anglo-Gaelic nation. The Scots ought to love the English and Irish as a child loves both its parents and yet many Scots hate them both. Why?
>>
>>11587940
the irish have a permenant victim complex and as a ation have decided that if they have any failingss, they can just blame the english
>>
>>11591975
cope and seethe
>>
>>11595547
Where's the seethe? lol he's saying the Irish chose and prefer being English speaking and why Israel wanted to revive Hebrew, dumb scot.
>>
>>11587940
what kind of underwear did women wear back then?
>>
>>11595530
I've been to England and Ireland and this isn't true in the slightest
>>
>>11595813
loincloths
>>
>>11588798
>ogham stopped being used in ireland around 500ad
that is a lie

the majority of inscriptions are from c.400-600 AD
>>
>>11593809
Belief in fairys was still round during the 1960s kek
>>
File: 546534.png (266 KB, 816x954)
266 KB
266 KB PNG
Didn't think this would still be up. Have another Irish patriotic song.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J_KEcfmHeN0
>>
File: p00167881-1600.jpg (327 KB, 1600x900)
327 KB
327 KB JPG
>>11597381
One of the nicest things about Ireland in my opinion is the strange connection to very old folklore still around. In lots of villages there will usually be an elderly community or even just a tradition of telling kids to stay away from a certain tree or river or area which will have some specific name and supposed supernatural history behind it. The Fairy Circle thing is still very common in Ireland, although it is certainly more just to spook kids.

Cutting turf is another pretty old tradition is the use of peat to heat homes, and lots of rural families have an annual tradition of going out onto their land to cut turf, often with the help of other family members of friends. Nothing like it.
>>
>>11595813
they didn't lad
>>
>>11597381
still around now. You can't read Yeats and not believe in fairies
>>
File: banner_of_the_blueshirts.jpg (272 KB, 2048x1365)
272 KB
272 KB JPG
ON THIS DAY IN IRELAND
>1933
The Army Comrades Association (ACA) is outlawed by the Fianna Fáil government. The ACA was founded by Ned Cronin, an Irish Army Commandant and veteran of the Irish War of Independence. It was designed for veterans of the Irish Revolution who took the Pro-Treaty side of the Civil War to come together to oppose the IRA. The ACA became known by various names (such as the National Guard) but are best known as the "Blueshirts" due to their blue uniforms. After Eoin O'Duffy-another revolution veteran and previous police commissioner-was invited to lead the ACA, it was reformed into a movement resembling a fascist militia, taking inspiration from Mussolini. They were banned in 1933 at around 10,000 members, when they were planning an enormous parade to commemorate the death of Michael Collins and several other key revolutionaries. The march-which was feared to be similar to a "March on Rome"-was banned along with the ACA, as the government feared the army would side with the Blueshirts in an attempted coup d'etat.
>>
>>11597433
Wait, so they cut turf up and then burn it?
How does the dirt burn ?
>>
>>11598724
It's Peat. It's created in dirt by decaying plants, so its generally found in bogs. It isn't exclusive to Ireland, but Ireland does have a tradition of collecting it known as "cutting turf."

It's absolutely fucking terrible for the environment to burn, though.
>>
>>11598724
I'm not sure how it works but it's far superior to wood. We get turf for Christmas every year and it burns hot for many hours. Longer than wood. It just takes slightly longer to start burning.



Delete Post: [File Only] Style:
[Disable Mobile View / Use Desktop Site]

[Enable Mobile View / Use Mobile Site]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.