It there anything to the idea that the US is to a large degree a descendant of Scotland? It seems to me that when people talk about “real Americans”, what they are talking about are Scottish protestants of pioneer stock. If you think of an iconic American figure (cowboy, army general, US president, athlete, country singer) he probably has a Scottish name and look; and Scots are probably the one group that will never face discrimation.
I also wonder if the “conservative vs liberal” divide is not really a political thing, but actually a divide among those who have the Scottish pioneer identity (or who try to copy it) and those who do not. In my experience, people who have this background are likely to be very loyal conservatives and have no interest in debating it (they would say that the other side “just doesn’t get it”)
(Obviously, Scotland has changed since the pioneer days so I’m not trying to make comparisons to Scotland of today because I have no idea)
My family comes from England and Wales. So, you’re wrong - all the cool people are English or Welsh. Like Barack Obama. Totally Welsh - just look at that name! Look at him!
And how do you know the scottish weren’t copying somebody else’s pioneer identity, eh? Like maybe…the Welsh?
After the first few years of settlement, (and after the French and Indian War/Seven Years’ War), the Scots all went to Canada.
There was a bit of Scot “pioneering” in the central Appalachians with the occasional ethnic Scot moving into Georgia or Ohio, but the bulk of the “pioneers,” (prior to the arrival of the Irish and Germans), were English and after the Irish and Germans began showing up, the “Scot” influence was much less.
Even Daniel Boone was Welsh and English, not Scot.
I would think that Scotch-Irish (who weren’t Scots, though) descent is more prevalent than just Scots, maybe not overall but most definitely in Appalachia, the South and parts of the West. Of course lots of “English” are really part Irish or Scots, they are just loathe to admit it.
If we’re “basically” anything, we’re not Scottish but Scots-Irish. Those people were so formative to our ideas of God, work, liberty, gender, and the use of force that it’s scary to think about sometimes.
Hm. The stuff I’ve read more indicates that the Scottish influence has been massive. For example - the cowboy culture of the West came from border Scots (who may well have been expelled from Britain for cattle rustling!); the layout of many small US towns copied that of the Ulster Scots towns (I can’t find the details of this at the moment); there are the ubiquitous Masons; and the Scottish word “clan” (and firey rituals) has its own dark side of course.
African Americans are well known to have Scottish last names; also there’s this fascinating stuff-
While it’s true that the Plantation of Ulster in the 1600s did include a lot of Scots, it was another hundred years before they started coming to America in serious numbers, and quite frankly, they were no longer Scots due to interbreeding and, well, by their own choice, for that matter. Unless you’re going by some one drop rule or something.
Maybe someone else can chime in with their opinion but I’m a little skeptical of that. Even now the Ulster “loyalists” tend to have a fierce Scottish-Protestant identity (isn’t that a big part of the Northern Ireland conflict?) I don’t think that community would have been splintered apart in only a hundred years after the 1600s.
what’s wrong with the theory that different regions were settled by different European ethnic groups and developed appropriately distinct cultures and institutions? E.g. reputedly the Scandinavian people in mid-western states developed a welfare state kind of like that of Sweden as a reflection of their traditional cultural views on proper governance and society. I don’t think Detroit as we now know it could have happened if it were located in Texas.
I recommend reading Albion’s Seed for a good overview of Scottish settlement of America.
But yes, the Scots were most influential in shaping America. Those of Scottish descent are inately superior to the rest of the riff-raff that came over steerage.
I think you’re right about that to a certain extent, I agree that there can be a very strong Scots identity, when known. However, there’s also a tendency of Americans to place a bit too much emphasis on their hundreds-of-years past European ancestry, when there just really isn’t any recent connection, and in fact their “heritage” is often, frankly, apocryphal.
German is- by far- the largest single ancestral group in the U.S., an estimated 17%or about 50.5 million Americans. Cite. I don’t think anybody would qualify us as a German nation, and the Scots/Scots Irish influx was further back and numerically lesser.
In the 18th century there were many places that had strong Scottish influence- namely ethnicity of course, clannishness, dislike of the English and Germans, lots more Presbyterians (and to a lesser degree Quakers) than most places, but even then they were scattered. Mid-Atlantic and most coastal areas tended to be very English, Pennsylvania was polyglot but with German areas and English areas and Scots Irish areas. Most Scots Irish were wool and linen farmers at home and became farmers here so they didn’t influence the urban areas as much as other groups, and urban tend to influence national identity more than rural and small town does.
Plus the Scots Irish had to adapt and evolve like every other large group that came to America. You can’t grow flax in many areas of the south so they grew corn and tobacco and later cotton and other crops, and of course they bought into the slave economy in the south and and the industrial economy in the north and they generally morphed into regional Americans. A Scots Irish family in Alabama in 1840 would have had far more in common with a French Catholic family in Louisiana than with their own Scots Irish cousins in Bucks County, PA or even their cousins in the mountains of Tennessee and the Carolinas.
This is very true but there is something else that transcends numbers and economic influence - which is that the Scottish identity has seemed to supersede others as the “real American” identity. Just as an example - if running for president, anything other than a Scottish/Scotch-Irish name (including a German name, Bush and Eisenhower excepted) would be unusual. If a movie star is choosing a stage name, he would take on a Scottish name rather than a German name. (Also, how many country singers have Scottish names? All of them, I think.)
