An American's view of 'The Troubles'

[gaelic cowboy]

The idea of being British was invented by King James I to legitimize his crown after Queen Elizabeth I died he had been James VI of Scotland so he came up with idea of hey guys sure were all British and I am King of it ta da.

[Antagonist]

If i remember correctly, the opposants to the partition lost the civil war and Collin's side won it. De Valera was latter elected president but this had nothing to do with civil war.

Indeed, militarily the Irish Civil War was a fairly comprehensive victory for the Irish Free State (the Pro-Treaty forces) and in fact the military leaders of both sides (Michael Collins and Liam Lynch) were both killed in the closing stages of the fighting. The actual number of casualites and combatants was low by the standards of other contemporary civil wars (much like the preceding War of Independence/Anglo-Irish War, it was very much a war of guerilla actions, assassinations, and urban fighting rather than large-scale pitched battles) Subsequently much of the Republican (Anti-Treaty) political wing, Sinn Fein, broke ranks and became the Fianna Fail part, led by de Valera, which did a lot better as a political party.

The wiki article on the conflict is pretty good as far as the facts go as far as I can see. Check it.

Also, the modern Republic of Ireland did not instantly come into being in the 1920's. A very simplified course of events would be that the War of Indepencence/Anglo-Irish War ended with the Anglo-Irish Treaty, which was understandably complicated and vague, but the simplest way to describe it would be that it removed Ireland from the UK (and thus, the direct control of Westminster) and made it more-or-less a British Dominion, like Canada or Australia. Its own parliament, generally control of its own affairs except for military and foriegn policy, the Monarch still head of state etc. However, they also provided the vocal Unionists in the North-East (There were unionists throughout Ireland of course, but only there, and in some isolated political seats such as Trinity College Dublin, were they a majority) with the right to opt-out and remain part of the UK, which they immediately did. The Civil War was not fought over the issue of Northern Ireland at all (no-one in "the South" believed the Ulster Unionists could be brought round to joining an all-Ireland state, though unfortunately some advocated violent coercion) but over whether the rest of Ireland should accept the Treaty and thus become a Dominion, or fight on for absolute independence (an oath of loyalty to the British King particularly rankled) The Pro-Treaty victory meant the end of fighting against the UK government, and what is now the Republic of Ireland was the Irish Free State, a British Dominion, for the next 25 years or so. They more or less ignored Britain during this time however, and dismantled the links with Britain piece by piece. De Valera, then Taoiseach (Prime Minister) created drafted a new Constitution in the 1937 which defined the nation more clearly and further distanced the Free State (Saorstát Éireann as he would have preferred) from the UK. The Republic of Ireland itself only came into being in 1949, and this final "divorce" with the UK was surprisingly amicable (George VI's telegram to the Irish president should be on the internet somewhere, I can't find it, but the language is interesting, a bit "good luck in the big wide world chaps sorry it didn't work out eh what")

The history of Ireland is pretty damned convoluted really, but that's a very good post DC. I know as an Irish person it can be awkward (and somewhat embarassing) to hear some Irish-Americans talking as if the whole country is under occupation from oppressive British garrison troops. Or serious news coverage of Northern Ireland describe Sinn Fein as "the Catholics" and the DUP as "the Protestants" as if it's the bloody Thirty Years' War. I'm glad to see people taking an interest in Irish history and attempting to understand the true story, which of course does not fit neatly into the world-view of one "side" or other.

Antagonist

[Pannonian]

Also, the modern Republic of Ireland did not instantly come into being in the 1920's. A very simplified course of events would be that the War of Indepencence/Anglo-Irish War ended with the Anglo-Irish Treaty, which was understandably complicated and vague, but the simplest way to describe it would be that it removed Ireland from the UK (and thus, the direct control of Westminster) and made it more-or-less a British Dominion, like Canada or Australia. Its own parliament, generally control of its own affairs except for military and foriegn policy, the Monarch still head of state etc.

And they had their say when there was a change in that head of state in 1937.

Abdication of H.M. King Edward VIII: Telegrams sent to UK High Commissioners in Commonwealth countries

Asked Dominions for informal views on the alternatives. Wrote similarly to President of Irish Free State. Summary at folio 3 - all reluctantly favour Abdication. Irish Free State initially in favour of marriage without succession but only on misunderstanding of position in the UK as regards divorce.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Of course even today the UK and Ireland are not entirely seperate, just ask Banquo who signed his commission.

[Strike For The South]

wait...when did we start letting catholics in? Its funny Don, My family settled in the North Shore over 400 years ago as ardent anti-catholics, I guess we nevr understood the whole funny hat thing. Anyway they were as WASP as WASP can get I mean masnory know nothings the works. So all of you immagrants can probably trace your troubles back to me (Im not gonna aplogize) Now its ok seeing as my assorted aunts and uncles have maried out of Northern Euro-Protastent heritage (including me mum) The point is I've seen Brookline and South BOston and it really a trip. Pretty cool.

[Duke of Gloucester]

The idea of being British was invented by King James I to legitimize his crown after Queen Elizabeth I died he had been James VI of Scotland so he came up with idea of hey guys sure were all British and I am King of it ta da.

Whilst I am sure that the notion was attractive to James I, Edward Longshanks and Athelstan had thought of it before; not to mention Claudius.

[Rhyfelwyr]

Irish people are not British. The nation is called "The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland". But then, being British doesn't mean much anyway. I would consider myself to be Scottish, maybe the SNP will change things so that one day thats what I officially will be.

It doesn't matter if Irish people are not "British". The people of Northern Ireland chose to remain part of the UK, and so they have the right to do so. It cannot be claimed that the land belongs to Irish Catholics, who are no more Irish by ancestry than many of the Protestants there. They may claim the land was forcibly taken from them hundreds of years ago, but that is irrelevant now. What matters is that the people of Northern Ireland chose to remain part of the UK. The Scottish Kingdom of Dalriada was formed by Irish settlers hundreds of years ago, and that Kingdom went on to rule all of Scotland. It erased completely the once dominant Pictish culture. The Britons of Stratchclyde and the Angles of Lothian were oppresed for centuries. Yet people in the lowlands today don't talk of fighting against the Irish invaders. Many people in western Scotland seem to like to think they are Irish. The current inhabitants of Northern Ireland voted to remain in the Union, and so their wishes should be protected. With the recent talks that have been going on there, things are looking brighter for both Catholics and Protestants now anyway.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Great Britain being the big bit. Anyone who lives in these Islands is British, and that includes all the Irish. It has been fairly comprehensively proven that we are one people who just got our aristocracies replaced by different groups.

Talking about past invasions and land being taken is just divisive. Modern politicians use it to try and carve us up into different peoples. In reality life never really changed that much for the britons, they just had different rulers and administrations.

There were never more than 200,000 Saxons vs the 2,000,000 Britons in what is now England.

[Gawain of Orkeny]

Talking about past invasions and land being taken is just divisive. Modern politicians use it to try and carve us up into different peoples. In reality life never really changed that much for the britons, they just had different rulers and administrations.

Now if only people in the ME could learn this

[Rhyfelwyr]

It is not true that the people of the British Isles (not just Great Britain) have descended from one people. England has a largely Anglo-Saxon population, with some Norse influence in the north and more French influence in the south. In Scotland, the south-west was largely made up of Britons (as is Wales and Cornwall), and the south-east Angles. The north was dominated by the Picts. Meanwhile, Ireland consisted of Gaels, made up of a mixture of Basque settlers (Goidils) and Celtic settlers such as the Belgae.

Of course nowadays this should not cause divisions between these people. The cause of "The Troubles" was religiously based. Irish catholics against largely Irish protestants. Thankfully the worst of that is over, and their political leaders are beginning to co-operate again.

[Don Corleone]

When you say "French" in the south, don't you mean Norman? I don't think the Franks actually made it into the British Isles very often, and as far as I know, Great Britain hasn't seen a land invasion since 1066. I'll be the first to admit I could be wrong on this, however. (I'm not talking about Bonnie Prince Charlie raising armies and returning, I'm talking about a foreign people moving in and changing the bloodlines).

Aside from which, I believe it's Philvps' point that while sure, there were anglo-saxons, they were a minority (just the one in charge). Yes, there were Vikings and Normans, but again, minorities. The largest component of the base population of England has come from the Britons, who like the Irish, the Dal Riada (Scots) and the Picts, were originally of Celtic descent. Correct Philyp?

[Incongruous]

Whilst I am sure that the notion was attractive to James I, Edward Longshanks and Athelstan had thought of it before; not to mention Claudius.

Aethelstan never thought of a united British collective group. Simply an overlordship of the Islands of Britain. Same with Longshanks.