Spanish in Ireland

Cecil's Columns/Staff Reports
21

The Cathaginians never seem to have ruled all Spain – only the coast. The earliest historical record we have of a majority population is of the Celtiberians, related to the Gauls, although there are archeological records of an older Iberian culture, with a language that does not seem to be related to any known language. (I cannot find an explicit statement that this includes Basque, but seeing that I find the two listed right next to each other on a list of language isolates, I can only assume that it’s been tried.)

This is all uncontroversial stuff you can find in the Britannica, etc…

Britany is called “Britain the Less” because British refugees from the Saxon invasions settled there starting in the 5th century. The people there still speak a Celtic language related to Welsh and Cornish, despite many years of persecution by the French.

On another subject, although the union of England and Scotland is the long-term result of King James VI of Scotland inheriting the English crown from Queen Elizabeth I of England, and becoming King James I of England, the actual Union of the Parliaments, a hundred years later, was definitely an English takeover of Scotland. Until then, they had simply been two countries with a shared monarch. Scotland had just been thoroughly Enroned by a scheme to start a colony in Panama, and needed a bailout, while England wanted to be sure that when Queen Anne died, and King James VI/I’s direct line with her, Scotland would choose the same distant – and Protestant – cousin that England did. So the Scottish Parliament was – ahem! – convinced to vote itself out of existence in return for some seats in the Parliament in London. A few years ago, Scotland got its own Parliament back, although the Parliament in London is still solely responsible for foreign affairs and the military; all along, however, Scotland has continued to be a quasi-independent country with its own laws, no matter which parliament passed those laws.

The original United Kingdom of Great Britain became the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland a hundred years later; at the same time, the Cross of St. Patrick was added to the Union Jack. In the 20th century, it became the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.

22

I guess I should have used one of these: :wink: I was joking about Lesser Britain. Honest!

My point about the invasions, especially the Moors, is that the Spanish are a relatively modern people. (Said the American:D ) If there is any peoples from Spain had a significant influence on the Irish gene pool, then it would have to be someone like the Beaker people - waay more than 2000 years ago, and before Celts arrived in Ireland. (Sorry for the improper use of “Gauls” earlier, I have no idea why I typed that.)

But, I have a question. How did Hannibal get permission to march from the coast of Spain across the Alps and into Roman lands? Yeah, I know, he had a big army, but it took the Romans hundreds of years to counquer the peoples in between.

23

That’s why I hate this friggin language. Too many words that are supposed to mean the same thing but don’t.

jjimm, far be it for me to argue with someone who actually lives there, but this site disagrees with you.

http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/uk.html

According to this site, Great Britain is used interchangeably with United Kingdom. Also, Ireland is split into two entities - the northern corner being part of the UK and the rest of the Island being a separate country.

Of course, that site is hosted by the CIA, so obviously they’re lying. :wink:

I just checked my Encarta Encyclopedia CD. Oops, it matches your description. Apparently a lot of people haven’t gotten the update that Great Britain /= United Kingdom.

So I may have been wrong, but I was well supported in being wrong.

Though I do note that Northern Ireland is part of the UK, but Ireland is not. This seems at odds with your comment

Unless I’m misunderstanding you.

24

Er, where does it say that? It says that the full name of the country is the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. “United Kingdom” and “Great Britain” are no more interchangeable there than “three” and “four” would be interchangeable in the phrase three and one make four.

I don’t understand the problem you’re having with the concept. Northern Ireland may be (temporarily :)) part of the UK, but it is not part of Britain. It could therefore be called United Kingdomish, if such a word existed, but it is therefore not British. Seems simple enough to me.

25

Perhaps I’m misreading earlier usage, but in the summary section they use the term Great Britain when talking about the whole country. Or so it appears. Unless perhaps they’re using a historical meaning in that context.

However, on the second point you’re incorrect. Look at the part I excerpted.

So it is proper to call Northern Ireland British. Just not English. And not Great British.

26

Well, I would disagree that “Britain” is a proper term for the entire nation. It depends on the context though. If you’re referring to it as a political creature (e.g. “Britain supports the US against Iraq”) that’s probably ok because the British Government actually always is entirely from Britain (the major parties do not stand candidates in Northern Ireland). But as a geographical term Britain is usually used to refer only to Eng/Scot/Wales and not to the whole UK.

I’ll add that I have heard some people (chiefly NI unionists) use the terms “Britain” and “UK” interchangeably, but I have never heard this thing about “Great Britain” not being acceptable in this situation where “Britain” would be. I’m quite curious as to where the authors of your encyclopedia got that little nugget from.

27

Waitaminute… I had understood that “Britain” was synonymous with the entirety of the British Isles (Great Britain, Ireland, and all those other smaller islands in the vicinity), regardless of political affiliation.

And Irishman, that encyclopædia article (or at least, the portion you quoted) does not, in fact, refer to anything as simply “Britain”. It does refer to a nation titled “The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland”, and to its earlier name of “The United Kingdom of Great Britain” or simply “Great Britain” (which strictly speaking is the island, not the nation, but the borders of the two were synonymous at the time).

28

You thought “Britain” was synonymous with “Ireland”? :eek: :eek: :eek:

Incidentally, most people on this island object to the term “British Isles” as well. Yeah, it’s “only” a geographical term, yadda yadda yadda. It still implies that Ireland is British, which it ain’t.

29

Why don’t you guys discuss home nations sports teams now? That’s a nice one to argue over too. :slight_smile:

I am eligible to play for Antrim / Down, Northern Ireland, Ulster, Ireland, Great Britain & NI, or the UK. Depending on the sport of course.

Football (soccer) has a Northern Ireland team, and a Rep. of Ireland team. All home nations have separate teams.
Rugby has province and county teams and international Ireland team drawing from all 32 counties. All other home nations have separate teams.
Hockey has province and county teams, a GB team which NI citizens can play for, and an Ireland team for the 26 counties not including NI. And all the rest…

Talk about getting sidetracked from the OP. ::shakes head::

30

Just to join in the fray though, here’s a site giving a reasonable breakdown of this little bit of the world…

31

Now that y’all have that settled.

Can Ireland be called Spanish?

Oh, and BTW since nobody ever really got the story told.
The Spanish in Ireland according to legend. How much fact is involved, if any, who knows.

Gaedelas Glen, a descendant multi…ggrandson of Noah on Japeth’s lineage was Grecian born in Albania. He was a Captain in the Egyptian navy and supposedly married a daughter of the Pharaoh. When Egypt was at war w/ Rome Gadelas loaded his ships w/ family, friends, soldiers, livestock…basically all he could haul and left the Mediterranean. He eventually wound up in Spain and remained there for a few years.

Gadelas still searched for a country of his own and eventually found the British Isles. He brought his “tribe” to Ireland and settled there. He had grown sons and their families by then as well. This is where the Milesian king stories come in…I’d have to go back to my research to recall this part accurately.

Gadelas of course was Gaelic and brought this language w/ him when he came. Being from the Mediterranean, he had the advantage of technology and military training, so it was just a short while before he had his own little kingdom. It grew in time and expanded to Scotland where the kingdom later became known as Gadel-way.

Supposedly years later when Roman soldiers confronted these Galleweigens, they were met with similar “modern” tactics and weaponry. As a result, a wall (Hadrian’s?) was built to keep these “barbarians” out of occupied Roman territory. Folks this is from memory, so don’t be too critical.

The legend’s pretty cool if you’re interested. Why, Ireland has no snakes is part of it as well. Supposedly when Gadelas was young he was bitten by a poisonous snake. The staff of Moses was used to cure the bite, (see the Jewish connection) Gadelas had a green scar on his arm the rest of his life where the snake bit him. He ultimately went to Ireland and part of the cure/miracle was that no snake could exist where Gadelas did.

Another interesting part of this legend is that Gadelas himself is found in different cultures history. (Irish,Scots,Spain,Egypt,Greece,Hebrew) As is his supposed wife/mother Scota. Now I realize that this is myth/legend/history? but I’m inclined to believe many folklore have some truth hidden in them. Especially when you find the same story told in different parts of the world.

anyway…that’s what I’ve discovered regarding the Spanish in Ireland. At least the first wave!

32

Okay, in the CIA site’s use of Great Britain I was incorrect, as it was referring to a time when the borders of the country matched the borders of the island.

Chronos, if you are referring to the Encarta excerpt, one of us is really confused. I’ve quoted twice and even bolded the second time the use of the word Britain to mean “the whole of the UK”. Yes, the full name is “The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland”, but Britain is a shorthand.

ruadh, the link provided by Aro confirms that usage.

And note that’s a UK site no less, so it’s not just an American conspiracy. :wink: Me, I think it’s you Irish who just don’t want to use the word Britain in any way lest you find yourself coopted into their country when you’re not looking. :wink:

Waxing philosophical for a moment, I think the reason for people commonly using Britain, British, Briton, and Brit to refer to the whole in this manner is that they are more elegant and easier to use terms than United Kingdomer, UKer, UKite, person from the UK, etc. So maybe it was a collective practice of extending an historical usage. Perhaps not 100% correct, but along the lines of us being called Americans (as if that doesn’t apply to Canadians).

Okay, now back to Spanish Irish.

t-keela said:

This part

is enough for me to throw it out.

33

A lot of people living today claim to be able to trace their ancestry back to the bible. The idea that someone may be related to persons in the bible, (whether it be true or not, even if you don’t believe that biblical figure ever existed) this should not be the basis for exclusion.

MoF it was expected at one time for Royalty to be able to show this genealogy.

Besides, it’s a legend, no one asked you to believe it. I just thought it actually had something to do with the OP and was interesting as well. Believe any, all, or none…makes me no difference. I like history (esp. Irish) and folklore is a part of that history (esp. Irish).

Peace