US Civil War Highland Regiments

[ForresterModern]

yes, that's exactly what I said. What FM said is that they landed primarily in the South.
They didn't.

actually the word I used was "arriving", not landing, and they did indeed arrive primarily in the south, no matter where they first placed foot on american soil. As a wave of immigrants they primarily settled, or arrived, in the south, via whatever route of entrance, and there had their lasting effect on aour american history. Although many or even most may have made land in Philly, they arrived at their final destination, the south, thereafter.

Just clarifying.

Apologies to the rabble for the sidebar. Back to your regularly scheduled programming.

[wvpiper]

actually the word I used was "arriving", not landing, and they did indeed arrive primarily in the south, no matter where they first placed foot on american soil. As a wave of immigrants they primarily settled, or arrived, in the south, via whatever route of entrance, and there had their lasting effect on aour american history. Although many or even most may have made land in Philly, they arrived at their final destination, the south, thereafter.

Just clarifying.

Apologies to the rabble for the sidebar. Back to your regularly scheduled programming.

Actually, to put it in it's context you said;

The Scottish ancestry was by that time fairly remote historically as most had been arriving in the US, and the South primarily, from 1700 or so on

So you see, you implied their arrival in the US was primarily in the south and how you worded it could be confusing.
I agree with the basic tenet that by the time of the Civil War, they considered themselves to be Americans and therefore wouldn't have formed ethnic regiments. It may also have had as much to do with the fact that when they arrived in America, from Northern Ireland, they were 3-4 generations removed from Scotland, and were no longer really Scottish.
Of course, as you also probably know, Ulster Scots were Lowland in origin, and didn't wear Highland garb, such as kilts and it's accoutrement.

[DWFII]

Of course, as you also probably know, Ulster Scots were Lowland in origin, and didn't wear Highland garb, such as kilts and it's accoutrement.

I'm a little out of my league here but I can, perhaps, speak to this. My ancestors--MacSuibhne...builders of Castle Sween on Loch Sween in Argyle (the Highlands, no?), and the oldest standing stone castle in Scotland...were, as I understand the term, Ulster Scots.

That said, having been forced off their lands in Argyle right after Bannockburn, they probably did not wear kilts...although from what I have been able to determine even in Ireland the clan structure remained pretty much in place until the 18th (?) century.

PS...one of the oldest (if the Scottish Tartan Authority is to be believed) tartans known is the Ulster which was purportedly found in a bog (somewhere in Ulster?) and supposedly dates to the early 1600's.

[ForresterModern]

Those of fresh or remote scottish ancestry were arriving in America and settling the south from 1700 until the late 1800's, including Ulster scots (the Scots-Irish----formerly predominantly lowland scots purposely emigrated by the English in teh late 1600s to colonize Northern Ireland), lowland and highland scots in various waves driven by various religious, social, and economic forces both before and after the Civil War. Most who arrived before around 1830 settled predominantly in the south and their kin became the backbone of the Confederate Military machine, while those that arrived later did so more in the North as labor in the industirally progressive regions there. Most of them were NOT Ulster Scots but rather first generation highland and to a lesser degree, lowland , scots driven off there lands and across an ocean to find prosperity here, and bringing with them their fresh highland traditions. That is why the Union had defined Highland units, as they were "fresh from the boat" scots so to speak, verses the long entrenched southern scots who no longer considered themselves scottish for the most part, rather brothers in arms against the tyranny of a federal govt bent on telling them how to run their lives (something I beleive scots of any type just in general don't take much of a liking to).

[macwilkin]

Post deleted; reply sent via PM.

TJW

[wvpiper]

Those of fresh or remote scottish ancestry were arriving in America and settling the south from 1700
until the late 1800's, including Ulster scots (the Scots-Irish----formerly predominantly lowland scots purposely emigrated by the English in teh late 1600s to colonize Northern Ireland), lowland and highland scots in various waves driven b

The settlement of Ulster, by King James began approx 1609. A scattered few Ulster Scots, and mainland Scots, had trickled into America, but the 'Great Migration' didn't begin in earnest until 1717.

My ancestors--MacSuibhne...builders of Castle Sween on Loch Sween in Argyle (the Highlands, no?), and the oldest standing stone castle in Scotland...were, as I understand the term, Ulster Scots.

PS...one of the oldest (if the Scottish Tartan Authority is to be believed) tartans known is the Ulster which was purportedly found in a bog (somewhere in Ulster?) and supposedly dates to the early 1600's.

James excluded Highland Scots from the plantation, he didn't like the Highlanders, and didn't want to reinforce the Celtic Irish in Northern Ireland to which he was sending the planters. That said, it's not impossible that Highland Scots would have already been there(remember the Scoti came from Northern Ireland), or ever made the move, it's a short boat ride, which could also explain the Ulster tartan (which from the sounds of it could have been anything, a plaid, a women's dress, scarf, etc)

I don't dispute Lowland shepherds may have had a tartan plaid, or even that lowland men of the time may have had plaid pants (as to the pants, I 'think' it's either in The Scotch Irish or The History of Scotland by Smout. I know it's in Webb's book Born Fighting, but he cited one of the other two books ). I do dispute that they would have worn a kilt- at least in 1609 and forward.

I still agree with the main point that by the time of the civil war,they were Americans. I also agree with the assertion they didn't like being told what to do....