Sorry, that was supposed to be "he" was talking, not "we", and excess  
"manners", not manner.

The institution of slavery in the south was chiefly set up and  
practiced by those of English background, who wanted to copy the  
gentleman's estates they knew in England, and later the Cavaliers who  
fled following the English Civil War. And those settlers of slightly  
lower status who, with the opportunities of the New World, could try  
to set themselves up in a similar manner. First they had the white  
indentured servants, then later the slaves. Slavery was never  
popular, at times it was outright opposed, by the Scots Irish  
elements of the south. And there were other Keltic elements in the  
south, too- Welsh [Tredegar is a Welsh name], those form the "Keltic  
fringe" in England [Shropshire, etc.] and those from the northern  
borders of England and Scotland. So for many, if not most of the  
southern soldiers, when the war came it created a stirring in that  
Keltic blood to fight for their liberties, and heck, just to have a  
good fight. To them, it had nothing to do with slavery and probably  
most farm boys never knew the pro and anti slavery discussions going  
on among politicians who were a world away. And yet today all are  
tarred with the same brush.

Many did and still do see it as a clash that has gone on for  
thousands of years between the rational, disciplined Romans, Germanic  
invaders of England, mercantile north in the US, and the impetuous  
and impulsive Keltic nature. Time and again the impulsive love of  
fighting wins for the Kelt in the short run, but their lack of  
cohesion and the discipline of their enemies wins out, in the end.  
The Kelts in Europe did not unite against the Romans till it was too  
late. Boudiccea's wins against the Romans were eventually undone by  
the looting and undiscipline of her tribal warriors. In Elizabethan  
times there was a real paranoia about the mysterious, terrifying  
Scots invading them from the north; at times the Scots would go on  
forays, sometimes almost to the gates of London. And in the  
Confederacy, states would have ample supplies of one thing or another  
and never share them with other states. Lack of unity again. The wild  
side of the Kelts has always mystified and frightened the more  
disciplined cultures, who do not understand such ardor. The Germans  
united, defeated the Roman legions in the Teutoberg Forest in a  
brilliantly executed plan, and were never occupied by the Romans. The  
border with Germany became the Roman frontier. Not so with the Kelts.

And what do the conquerors do? Deny the history of the conquered,  
stop teaching it in their schools to their children, suppress or even  
outlaw the speaking of the native tongue [look at what happened in  
Wales and Britanny]. There is nothing new under the sun.

Nancy

-------
I was never lost, but I was bewildered once for three days.

--Daniel Boone



On Mar 1, 2007, at 10:35 AM, Sunshine49 wrote:

> I was once discussing this with an LPC originally from up north,  
> and he remarked on the 'phoniness' of southerners [we was referring  
> to whites], of their excess manner that covered up so much and I  
> told him my thesis  <<snip>>

To subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe, please see the instructions
at http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-hist.html