Customer Reviews

The Scotch-Irish: A Social History

5 star:		(11)
4 star:		(6)
3 star:		(1)
2 star:		(3)
1 star:		(2)

 

 

This book is a classic. I'm thankful it has been reprinted! The author's observations are even handed and well documented. He presents a comprehensive overview of a people, their geography and their faith - spanning centuries. Sheds light on the Scotch Irish role in the Revolutionary War, settling the American frontier, the spread of the Presbyterian Church in America and much much more. This is a fair, good humored account, written warts and all. The author is not unsympathetic nor uncharitable toward these people, and does an excellent job of communicating their humanity, and showing some of the factors for why they did what they did. I am indebted to the author's dedication and scholarship and enjoyed his footnotes immensely. Having puzzled through why my earliest Scots ancestor was recorded as coming from Ireland, I was greatful to have the fog lifted. He picks up many nuances in this account, down to pet phrases I heard from the lips of my own grandfather 40 years ago. As someone with Scotch Irish ancestors who were devout Presbyterians and who settled in western Pennsylvania, my life has been enriched by this account. My only regret is that it is not hardbound. I am amazed that I had never heard of this book. I found this book quite by accident, but highly commend it to you.

This book insightfully examines the creation of a unique Scotch-Irish cultural identity in Northern Ireland within the borders of the Ulster Plantation, the plantation where the seeds of the sectarian Troubles were sown in the early 1600's.

Millions of Americans with Scottish surnames are actually of Scotch-Irish descent... the descendants of poor Scottish farmers who were given the opportunity to cultivate small parcels of ground on captured lands in Northern Ireland starting in 1610. This book is the story of the eviction of native Irish people from ancient family farms, and the exploitation of impoverished Scots who were used to tenant the confiscated properties. The Irish were sent to remote reservations, and some became embittered outlaws who lived beyond the Pale, the boundary of the Ulster Plantation. The Scots persisted and developed a distinct culture, not Scotch and not Irish, then were evicted by their British landlords within three generations.

Ma! ny of the displaced Scotch-Irish emigrated to the Colonies, and populated the dangerous ground along the frontier. Others stayed and became the ancestors of the Unionists, a broad classification which includes the Protestant paramilitary enemies of the IRA.

"The Scotch-Irish: A Social History" provides a fundamental lesson in the long term effects of ethnic cleansing and shows why towns like Belfast, Derry and Enniskillen will likely continue to bleed from within; as well as displaying the elemental survival struggles which hammered the raw fortitude of our Scotch-Irish ancestors into a pioneering spirit.

A must read for students of Irish, Scottish or American history, which, you will see after reading this book, are seemingly irrevocably intertwined.

Professor Leyburn left a valuable legacy in this volume. A niche of American history is covered that sadly, frequently goes overlooked. The Scotch-Irish are a substantial part of the U.S. population. Thankfully Dr. Leyburn told some of the story and it wasn't lost. He tells us in the foreword, "Histories of Scotland rarely devote more than a paragraph to the departure of thousands of Lowland Scots to Ireland in the seventeenth century." It is significant to Americans because "they came, two hundred thousand strong, to the American colonies in the eighteenth century."

They enthusiastically supported the American Revolution (as in significantly caused it to happen) and thought of themselves as "Americans" rather than Scotch-Irish.

This book covers their migrations, their lifestyles, the dominant element of the Christian religion in their society. It is informative, and to me, inspirational.

Leyburn and the Scots-Irish
Leyburn's book (1962) is now "the grand old man" of Scots-Irish historiography, having easily displaced Henry Jones Ford's "The Scotch-Irish in America" (1915) - a book that was the previous generation's best study of the subject. Leyburn was one of the earliest authors to seriously investigate the Scottish background of the Scots-Irish, and did a wonderful job of not overpraising or overly denigrating the Scots-Irish (as a number of previous authors had done). Unfortunately, his book has an important flaw: he did not think very highly of Scots in general, and compared them unfavorably with their more successful (in modern terms) English cousins just about every chance he got. In other words, he did not understand the anthropological concept of culture at all; he was a historian after all, and largely a very good one. However, there is more to understanding the Scots-Irish than documents and written records, as is explained more fully below.

Scots-Irish Historiography
One of the most interesting aspects in Scots-Irish studies is how different schools of thought have risen and debated each other over the course of the last century and a half. There are four primary schools of thought. 1) The Ancestor Worshipper historians were the first to investigate the subject and brought a huge amount of forgotten information to the public eye between circa 1850 and today. Their primary limitation was that they believed that every great thing accomplished by Americans - representative government, education, religion, etc - had their origins with Scots-Irish traditions and heritage. These authors included those included in the volumes published by the Scotch-Irish Congresses, Charles Hanna, Ford, Maude Glasgow, W.F. Marshall, Wayland Dunaway, Rory Fitzpatrick, Billy Kennedy, and many others. 2) The Irish Catholic Historians wrote in strong reaction against the Ancestor Worshippers, saying that the Scots in question originally came from Ireland (which is historically accurate), so it was really Ireland that was responsible for so many great American ideas and traditions. These authors included John Francis Maguire, Thomas Hamilton Murray, Joseph Smith, John C. Linehan, Michael J. O'Brien (long associated with the American-Irish Historical Society), Kerby Miller, and others. The bitter warfare between these two schools over cultural origins itself caused a reaction amongst mostly academic scholars of the subject by about 1950, when 3) the Pragmatist Historians arose. These authors - who included T.W. Moody, Leyburn, R. J. Dickson, E.R.R. Green, E. Estyn Evans, M. Perceval-Maxwell, Raymond Gillespie, Maldwyn Jones, Kenneth Keller, and many others - believed that debates over culture did not matter, and that only the facts of written history should be investigated and reported. The Pragmatists probably did more than any other school to bring forgotten documents in Ireland and America to light. However, their disdain for cultural origins left a big opening for those who disagreed and thought that culture (in the anthropological sense of the word) did indeed matter, and the 1970s witnessed the rise of 4) the Celtic Thesis Historians. These writers believed that Celtic culture survived into modern times in rural areas of Britain and Ireland, and that despite the loss of nationhood among the Scots and Irish, this culture was transmitted to North America through the emigrations of the Scots-Irish in the 18th and 19th centuries. These authors included Grady McWhiney and Forrest McDonald (the originators of this viewpoint), Ellen Shapiro McDonald, Rodger Cunningham, Leroy Eid, Michael Hill, and to a lesser degree David Hackett Fischer and Bernard Bailyn. Today all four of these schools of thought are still in existence, and their adherents continue to publish books on the Scots-Irish. One author alone combined the best from all four schools in his treatment of the subject, and eliminated the worst, making him worthy of especial mention - especially since he is really the only author that cannot be pigeonholed. David Noel Doyle's "Ireland, Irishmen, and Revolutionary America" (1981) was a much needed synthesis when it appeared. Today a new synthesis combining the best from all four schools - and the many books and articles published in the last 25 years - is once more needed. Scots-Irish historiography is a fascinating study in itself, and deserves much serious attention from future authors. Let us hope that the subject is studied and debated for a long, long time, and that a new synthesis and historiographical study is out there waiting somewhere in the wings!

This is the first book I've read about the Scotch Irish and seems to be the accepted standard on the subject.

Professor Leyburn explains in his introduction that his book is "a social history of the Scotch-Irish. In this day of specialization, a social historian who undertakes to recount the life of people through three centuries and in three countries knowingly risks his scholarly head. Experts in Scottish, Irish, and American colonial history can only regard him as...ignorant of the finer points within their special fields. Scottish history is full of old controversies...Irish history has been so turbulent...few of its events is agreed upon." And Leyburn accomplishes this in only 330 pages. He divides his book into three parts:the Scot in 1600, the Scots in Ireland, the Scotch-Irish in America.

Being a southerner with Scotch-Irish roots in Tennessee, I was upset early on when Leyburn stated that Teddy Roosevelt's and others' claims that the Scotch-Irish were hardy, honorable folk was overblown. (Teddy's mother, Eleanor's grandmother, was a native Georgian, hardened, undoubtedly, by the Civil War's trials, Sherman's fiery footprints, amongst other things). Some of the trials of the Ulster scots in war and life and the deprivations they had to endure reminded me of the 40 day siege of Vicksburg, MS and the resiliency demonstrated by its citizens during the civil war. However, later on in the book, Leyburn's careful reasoning convinced me that he was more realistic. What stirred my thinking was Leyburn's comments in Chapter 16 when he states "political opinion and activity among the Scotch-Irish varied enormously from place to place. The whole mythology concerning this people rests upon a false assumption:that all Scotch-Irish thought alike. Why should they? They had come from different social classes back home; they entered America during six decades of remarkable fluctuation in ideas; they lived in colonies whose policies, attitudes, Indian problems, and progress toward stable institutions diverged widely." One can validate that statement easily by simply surfing the web and looking at the politics of numerous U.S. presidents with Scotch-Irish roots and see the "divergence" Leyburn speaks of.

I do believe, however, that Teddy Roosevelt's assertion that some Ulster Scots, Scotch-Irish, did play a pivotal role in early American history has many proofs. In Pennsylvania, as Leyburn recounts, in 1764, Ulster Scots pushed for equal representation within the state which was dominated by the minority quaker population concentrated around Philadelphia. That issue was one which the Scot felt most keenly following the Union of the crowns in 1707 accomplished during Queen Anne's reign; in parliament, Scots nobles were unfairly outnumbered by their English counterparts, see Paterson's History of Ayrshire.

I do believe some of these simple, biblically literate peoples, did desire a better country, and considered it their God-given task to try to make it a reality. The Baptists in Virginia, James Madison's state, were a significant force behind the freedom of religion/separation of church and state movement; ONE I FIRMLY BELIEVE MUST BE MAINTAINED! Just look at the bloody history of Christian Great Britain 300 years before the Revolutionary War; events that brought persecuted immigrants to the U.S. in the first place. The stuff seminarians don't study!

If you are an American doing geneaological research on your Scotch-Irish roots this is the resource book to get. I must add, too, if you have French Huguenot roots, they might have resided in Northern Ireland, in Ulster, before coming to America. I thought Leyburn was mistaken when he referred to Alexander Hamilton as an Ulster Scot. I know for a fact (court records) that his Hamilton ancestors were Scots from Ayrshire on the western coast of Scotland. That portion of Ayr, however, is extremely close to Northern Ireland, just a hop, skip, and a jump away! Alexander Hamilton's mother was French Huguenot, possibly her ancestors left Ulster to settle in Nevis, West Indies. Leyburn's statement is therefore correct again. Chapters 12 and 13 cover the conditions prompting immigration and the actual areas of settlement in colonial America of Scotch-Irish. Many people have been researching my Hamilton ancestors for years and can't get past 1780. Many of Leyburn's analyses are correct I believe.

A New Ireland by John Hume is on my books to read list about the 1998 Good Friday peace accord. Another book highly recommended to me is The Triumph of the Laity: Scots-Irish Piety and the Great Awakening, 1625-1760 by Marilyn J. Westerkamp. Hopefully, that book will give me a better understanding of my ancestors' background.

I gave the 5 star rating because I believe the subject matter warrants further study and is relevant for today. Truly understanding Ulster's history, (I believe), the conflicts, the circumstances and the social make-up of Northern Ireland itself, at distinct times in its history, is essential to the peace process there.

This book is, without a doubt, simply the best, most comprehensive, well researched, readable history I have ever come across. I have learned so much from Mr Leyburn's book. He not only covers the origins of the Scots/Irish who helped build colonial America, he also gave me a thorough education in the foundation of the "troubles" that still consume Northern Ireland. Whether you're a scholar, or just researching the world of your ancestors, this book is a must read!

Although originally wirtten decades ago, this is still the definitive work on the subject. His understanding of the sociology and history is so intensely accurate and rigorous that you can see modern Texas in the formative culture of 16th century borderer Scots, the principal ancestors of the Southern U.S. population as well as the Northern Irish Protestant population. Readable and fascinating and not too academic. Especially interesting is his observation that the Scotch-Irish, in their travels from Scotland to the frontier of the USA, tended to stay one step out of reach of the Renaissance and Enlightenment, while remaining devoted sons of the Reformation.

Book contents: foreword - 2pp, table of contents - 4 pp, text -344pp (including 5 maps), timeline of Scotland - 3pp, notes -16pp, bibliography - 19pp, and index - 5 pp.

Overall the book was very good, particularly for someone like myself who wasn't certain his roots were Scotch or Scotch Irish. It was well researched.

The maps of America were not particularly helpful. It was not immediately clear how they fit into the colonies as a whole, and it was sometimes difficult to picture migration patterns. There were no arrows on the maps or other indications of patterned settlement or movement to complete the text descriptions.

The timeline was helpful, but it was only of Scotland up to 1690. A timeline for the Scotch Irish from 1610 forward would have been more germane.

The book first covers Scottish culture prior to the migration of Lowland Scots to Northern Ireland. Then in 1610 King James of England opened Northern Ireland, aka Ulster, to both English and Scottish settlers at the expense of the native Irish. This act set the stage for the current strife and political separation of Northern Ireland.

Through four generations, the Scottish settlers in Northern Ireland became culturally separated from the Scotland of their origin. Then many of them immigrated to America in five great waves between 1717 and 1775, entering colonial America primarily through Pennsylvania and migrating south through the Virginia valley. Initially, these people were commonly referred to as Irish. The term "Scotch Irish" was later invoked to distinguish them from the Irish immigrating to America from the southern part of Ireland.

The lives and contributions of the Scotch Irish in America are described. Separate identity of the Scotch Irish essentially ends with the American Revolution, after which these people meld into the overall cultural fabric of the United States.

An excellent treatment of the migration of the Scotch Irish to America, their essential role in the American Revolution and the history of their changing religion from Presbyterian and Methodist to Baptist.

Pros: Works extremely well as a general study, is written in a way that will appeal to several different kinds of audiences.

Cons: Is too absorbed with presenting the national character of the Scotch Irish.

This book really gives such a full understanding of the Scotch-Irish people. This is largely because it takes into account their full experience -- it begins by showing what life was typically like in Scotland for the people who would later come to be called "Scotch-Irish". It suggests reasons for why they came to Ireland and shows how their experiences in Ireland both changed and did not change them. It details their experience in Ulster and only then turns to their journey to America and their experiences there. Leburn does a particularly good job of showing how the Scotch-Irish contributed to American frontier culture.

The book is also very well written. It has enough meat to it to appeal to people who have read a bit on the subject while still being explanatory enough for those who haven't. One would think that a book that covers such a broad topic would barely touch on specifics, but Leyburn does a very good job of focusing the chapters so that the book gets quite detailed at times.

However, there is a niggling concern that I had many times while reading this book. Despite Leyburn's apparent dislike of the idea of a Scotch-Irish "race", he seems very intent on assigning them national personality traits, both good and bad. Leyburn presents the Scotch Irish as hard working, hardy, stubborn, religious, uncivilized, independent, and brutal. He seems to want to pigeonhole an entire people into this vision and he immediately dismisses any evidence which contradicts it or which would provide a more complex picture. This does not, by any means, destroy my enjoyment of the book, as this attitude only shows up at times and seems completely absent at others. It is, however, very pervasive in a few of the chapters.