So, some unionist politicians have taken offence at US Congressman Richard Neal’s use of the word ‘planter’ when referring to unionists in Ulster, and this reveals a festering sore that goes to the heart of division in these six counties. The term ‘planter’ is an historical term and dates back to the early 17th century plantation of Ulster with English and Scottish Protestant settlers.
At that time Ulster was extremely Gaelic and a constant sore to the English who were unable to control the province. The English monarchy therefore developed a plan to ‘plant’ the entire province with English and Scottish Protestant settlers. To this end they would take all the Catholic owned land and give it to Protestants from northern England and southern Scotland.
The teaching of this, and other areas of Irish history, is very different in Protestant and Catholic schools almost giving us two versions of the history of this island. In fact, many state schools shied away from the teaching of Irish history in the classrooms or kept it to a bare minimum of selected topics with which they felt safe. This has led to many of the problems between what could be called the green and orange versions of Ulster’s history and the way in which the story is perceived.
In more recent years a curriculum has been established which necessitates the teaching of Irish history in years eight to 10. The Plantations is a unit taught in Year 9 but as in most episodes of history it is open to interpretation. Protestant children, for example, may be taught that this was done to protect and enhance the Protestant faith in Ulster, while Catholic children may be taught it as the English taking the land from Catholics to give it to Protestants to de-Gaelicise the province.
So, it quickly becomes obvious how two different and opposing versions can be meted out to unsuspecting 12-year-olds, who then proceed to make their own assumptions based on the way they were taught.
One glaringly obvious outcome of the plantation was that Catholics had their lands taken from them and this was then given to English and Scottish Protestants who promised to not employ Catholics on the land. Clearly the Protestants who took up this offer were ‘planted’ on the land just as crops are planted, thus the term ‘planter’ came into being as the best description of these people.
Now current unionists and Protestants may not like this term, as the truth of such actions may not show their ancestors in a very favourable fashion.
However, it is the widely accepted version of what happened then and the current Protestant population can be dated back to this time. In the same light the current Catholic population can be traced back to the Gaels who had their lands taken off them unjustly.
The overall picture of the English involvement in Ulster, and indeed the entire island of Ireland, is controversial to say the least.
SEAN SEELEY
Craigavon, Co Armagh
Planted in Ulster rooted in Ireland
Discussion of whether people should use the term ‘Northern Ireland’, instead of ‘the North’ or ‘the Six Counties’, constitutes more manufactured unionist indignation, in this case from Ian Paisley jnr (May 25).
Unionists are not wedded to ‘Northern Ireland’, historically. In the 1950s the unionist regime sought to delete the word ‘Ireland’ from the territory’s official title.
No alternative was found. ‘Ulster’ was out since three counties outside Northern Ireland are in Ulster. ‘West Briton’ was unsuitable also since Northern Ireland is not in Britain, it is in the UK. Unionists were and are stuck with being Irish, irrespective of how British they feel.
Unionist terminological indignation is a post-Troubles phenomenon with a political purpose.
It was not always so. When he welcomed Sean Lemass to Stormont in 1965, ill-fated unionist premier Terence O’Neill said: “Welcome
to the north.” The leader of the Orange Order during that decade referred to the Six Counties. The British monarch used the same term inaugurating the territory in the 1920s.
Unionist harrumphing at US Congressman Richard Neal’s use of the term ‘planter’ (a term once celebrated by unionists) is part of the same phenomenon. During the 1950s and 1960s, unionists bemoaned the fate of white British ‘kith and kin’ in Kenya, Rhodesia and South Africa, planters all. A transition to a non-planter unionist perception of themselves and the world around them shows that identity is not fixed. Rejection of the term and a view that it is insulting may indicate a gradual if not entirely conscious shedding by unionists of a planter political identity.
The value of Irish identity is that it inclusively absorbs those who live on the island of Ireland, including unionists.
As unionists are rooted in Ireland and have a valuable contribution to make to this island’s future, this makes a united Ireland more and not less likely. We are all planted here.
TOM COOPER
Dublin 2
Crossing line of acceptability
Cartoonists can often reveal truths and highlight hypocrisy better than any columnist, however the depiction of unionists by Ian Knox (May 27) in my view crossed the line of acceptability.
The Irish News is of course perfectly entitled to publish such offensive material but in doing so presents a diverse community in a disparaging way. I doubt that other minority groups would have been depicted in such an unfavourable manner in the pages of your newspaper.
The issue of controversy over the use of the description of planters to describe the unionist community was a proper matter for analysis; the depiction of unionist (including moderate unionists who took offence at the term) as tattooed skinheads was not.
Some unionists will be deeply offended by the cartoon – far more will find the depiction as revealing of how unionists are regarded by a paper whose readership is overwhelmingly nationalist.
JONATHAN BUCKLEY MLA
DUP, Upper Bann
Gun smoke replacing chalk in US classrooms
As yet another mass shooting at an educational facility is logged, will the stranglehold of the firearm strap ever be broken in America or indeed in Ireland? Is firearm ownership a sign of arrested development in a person’s character? Needing the weight and power of a firearm to show society that they exist and that they have the power to take life.
Mixing firearm ownership with a fractured mental state of mind is a recipe for unleashing pain and death.
To be in a state of mental disharmony and with legal access to a firearm is a slow motion walk to a graveyard.
There is much currency in the claim that those who enjoy killing animals for fun have mental compassion infertility in respect of having an urge to inflict death on a non-human creature.
This ecosystem of animal abusers, who through legal or illegal avenues, give expression to their desire to inflict pain and death in a prolonged fashion on animals, is a viable threat to our society.
Gravediggers will never be idle so long as the firearm culture exists. Amidst a fusillade of bullets we reflect knowing that small coffins are the heaviest.
JOHN TIERNEY
Dublin 1
