Celts Betrayed The Irish?

[Anglo-Celtic]

Anglo-Saxons rarely bothered the Irish. There was a raid that was condemned by Anglo-Saxon clergy and leaders. Irish pirates raided British coasts too. They were pretty much like other groups back then, but they're often singled out for hatred.

The Normans mixed with the Welsh before they conquered Irish regions. The Tudors had Welsh roots. Cromwell (real surname was "Williams") did too. The man, most responsible for Irish deaths during the Famine, was Cornish.

Is it unfair to blame Anglo-Saxons, especially since they experienced abuse from Normans too? That's not to mention the fact that Irish clans fought and killed each other for hundreds of years. It was fellow Celts who were responsible for much to most of Irish people's woes. Why do historians never mention this?

"The real evil with which we have to contend with is not the physical evil of the Famine but the moral evil of the selfish, perverse, and turbulent character of the people" - Charles Trevelyan (Cornish)

[JamesBond007]

This breaking down of people into different ethnicities,genders,races is a capitalist trick.

Very few people are Irish or British etc...only the bourgeoisie strictly are.

Capitalism is to blame for the Irish famine and nothing else. Karl Marx said Capitalism takes different historical forms : mercantile, agrarian, industrial, Monopoly, financial, imperial and so on etc...

[Creoda]

Anglo-Saxons or English? Anglo-Saxons mixed with Britons and had become the early English by the time of Alfred/Athelstan, nothing after that should be laid at the feet of the 'Anglo-Saxons', and certainly nothing after the Normans subjugated the English in 1066. The Anglo-Normans (and Cambro-Normans) then subjugated the Welsh and Irish, and all of the Isles (bar Scotland for a few centuries) was brought under the yoke of the Norman descended elite with it's seat of power in London, which evolved into the modern English and then British state, the rulers of which not speaking English again formally until the late 14th century. The English 'nation-state' really began again after Henry VI lost his French possessions in the 15th century. Tudors had Welsh origins but all of the high nobility in England, Wales and Scotland at that time were heavily Norman/French (Robert the Bruce etc).

People who seriously cling to centuries old grievances are contemptible anyway. Everyone in the British Isles has been heavily intertwined for so many centuries in a way that anti-Unionists and anti-English often choose to ignore. Largely under foreign elites too, Normans, Plantagenets, William of Orange, Hanoverians. Scottish Stuarts inherited the English crown in 1606, which laid the way for political Union 100 years later, and fomented the Ulster Plantations, the last remaining festering sore on Irish-British relations. Talk of Anglo-Saxons and Celts in this context is infantile and anachronistic.

[Anglo-Celtic]

Anglo-Saxons or English? Anglo-Saxons mixed with Britons and had become the early English by the time of Alfred/Athelstan, nothing after that should be laid at the feet of the 'Anglo-Saxons', and certainly nothing after the Normans subjugated the English in 1066. The Anglo-Normans (and Cambro-Normans) then subjugated the Welsh and Irish, and all of the Isles (bar Scotland for a few centuries) was brought under the yoke of the Norman descended elite with it's seat of power in London, which evolved into the modern English and then British state, the rulers of which not speaking English again formally until the late 14th century. The English 'nation-state' really began again after Henry VI lost his French possessions in the 15th century. Tudors had Welsh origins but all of the high nobility in England, Wales and Scotland at that time were heavily Norman/French (Robert the Bruce etc).

People who seriously cling to centuries old grievances are contemptible anyway. Everyone in the British Isles has been heavily intertwined for so many centuries in a way that anti-Unionists and anti-English often choose to ignore. Largely under foreign elites too, Normans, Plantagenets, William of Orange, Hanoverians. Scottish Stuarts inherited the English crown in 1606, which laid the way for political Union 100 years later, and fomented the Ulster Plantations, the last remaining festering sore on Irish-British relations. Talk of Anglo-Saxons and Celts in this context is infantile and anachronistic.

It's just Anglo-Saxons because they're used as shorthand for the English. You pretty much backed my point about the Normans. They oppressed both the Anglo-Saxons and the Irish. The Cambro-Normans were like the Ulster Scottish in some ways.

I agree that extreme dichotomies are lame. It's hard to fight culture and entertainment, as well as historical mythos, though. You feel like a salmon swimming upstream. Maybe you could call it "Braveheart Syndrome".

I just found it worth noting that people reflexively think of the historical villains as Anglo-Saxon. I'd bet that the vast majority of people don't know that Cromwell and the Tudors had Welsh roots. They reflexively group them with the "evil" Anglo-Saxons. I hope that makes sense.

You see permutations of this in other historical eras. Irish natives and Norsemen both fought against Brian Boru, although the number evidently was overstated per some newer sources. Individuals, descended from Gaels, were Protestant terrorists in the '70s. The nuances don't match the narratives.