Were Protestants driven out of the Free State/Republic?

pedroeibar1 · 02-11-2012 12:44pm

ejmaztec wrote: »

.................They seem to have done well since.:eek:

I don't think they had any Catholics on the board of directors for decades, and I get the impression that this only changed in the last twenty or so years (no doubt someone will tell me if I'm wrong on this.)

In Ireland Musgraves has a bit less than 20% marketshare. They have sizeable operations in the UK and also in Spain, are doing well and probably will do better, as their retail model / store size is the direction retailing is going - compare with for example the decline of Carrefour and other hypermarket chains.

I would not be surprised if the Catholic / board thing is true; quite normal as Musgraves remains a family company, despite being founded about 150 years ago. It always has been a very private company, with three lines of the family – now representing about 100 shareholders - retaining about 75% of the equity, the balance being owned by senior executives & employees. On leaving the company an executive has to sell the shares back to the co; there was a court case about this 7 or 8 years ago based on an alleged share undervaluation.

A very interesting company, did a study on them some years ago; they also are a huge supporter of Irish food producers, from memory it was about 70% of all supplies at that time.

The Idyl Race · 02-11-2012 1:01pm

An Sionnach Glic wrote: »

Suspected? I'll take that as a no, so.

Gerry Newe was a Catholic, a Unionist senator, and was appointed Minister of Community Relations in Faulkner's government.

There is an interesting reference to Newe in Stormont's Hansard by Gerry Fitt in 1963.

http://stormontpapers.ahds.ac.uk/stormontpapers/pageview.html?volumeno=55&pageno=190&searchTerm=golf

An Sionnach Glic · 02-11-2012 1:32pm

The Idyl Race wrote: »

Gerry Newe was a Catholic, a Unionist senator, and was appointed Minister of Community Relations in Faulkner's government.

There is an interesting reference to Newe in Stormont's Hansard by Gerry Fitt in 1963.

http://stormontpapers.ahds.ac.uk/stormontpapers/pageview.html?volumeno=55&pageno=190&searchTerm=golf

Interesting. Thanks.

pedroeibar1 · 05-11-2012 3:36pm

A few posts back I mentioned ‘The Fethard-on-Sea Boycott’ ( Tim Fanning , Collins Press.) Had a dip into it over the w/e: good book, gives a great insight into the views prevalent in rural Ireland of 1957 and the power of the Catholic Church. Dev comes out of it well, in his role as ‘enforcer’ to bring the priests and local bishop to heel.

Some interesting figures from the Census given in the book. In 1871 there were 42k Church of Ireland farmers in the whole of Ireland. Forty years later the figure had dropped to under 30k. Between 1911 and 1926 CoI membership south of the border fell from 250k to 164k. By 1946 that figure had fallen to 125k (half the 1911 figure). In 1961 numbers had dropped to 104k or just under 3.7 of the total population.

Peregrinus · 05-11-2012 3:47pm

pedroeibar1 wrote: »

. . . Some interesting figures from the Census given in the book. In 1871 there were 42k Church of Ireland farmers in the whole of Ireland. Forty years later the figure had dropped to under 30k. . .

Well, that's interesting. Cleary we can't attribute that to discrimination by the Free State/Republic. Possibly the decline of the Protestant denominations after 1922 was, to some extent at any rate, a continuation of a phenomenon that was already established, rather than a consequence of independence.

pedroeibar1 · 05-11-2012 4:08pm

Peregrinus wrote: »

............... Possibly the decline of the Protestant denominations after 1922 was, to some extent at any rate, a continuation of a phenomenon that was already established, rather than a consequence of independence.

I agree, but the main reason for the decline (and the cause of the above-mentioned boycott) was the Ne Temere decree, which more recently was IMO rightly described by a CoI bishop as 'social genocide'.

Peregrinus · 05-11-2012 4:28pm

pedroeibar1 wrote: »

I agree, but the main reason for the decline (and the cause of the above-mentioned boycott) was the Ne Temere decree, which more recently was IMO rightly described by a CoI bishop as 'social genocide'.

Except that the Ne Temere decree was issued in 1908; it defies common sense to suggest that it can account for the decline in the number of Protestant farmers between 1871 and 1911.

To assess the effect of Ne Temere after 1908, we'd need to know what the rate of intermarriage was. To the extent that Ne Temere actually reduced the rate of intermarriage - and I think it's generally accepted that it did reduce intermarriage rates, since one of its purposes was to discourage Catholics from "marrying out" - it would in fact have tended to increase the Protestant population, I think. I think the rate of intermarriage from 1922 to the 1960s was fairly low, in which case Ne Temere would have had minimal effects on the Protestant population figures. (Its symbolic signficance, of course, would have been considerable, and I'm not discounting the significance of that.)

pedroeibar1 · 06-11-2012 12:19am

Peregrinus wrote: »

Except that the Ne Temere decree was issued in 1908; it defies common sense to suggest that it can account for the decline in the number of Protestant farmers between 1871 and 1911.

To assess the effect of Ne Temere after 1908, we'd need to know what the rate of intermarriage was. To the extent that Ne Temere actually reduced the rate of intermarriage - and I think it's generally accepted that it did reduce intermarriage rates, since one of its purposes was to discourage Catholics from "marrying out" - it would in fact have tended to increase the Protestant population, I think. I think the rate of intermarriage from 1922 to the 1960s was fairly low, in which case Ne Temere would have had minimal effects on the Protestant population figures. (Its symbolic signficance, of course, would have been considerable, and I'm not discounting the significance of that.)

I’m not arguing on the 1871-1911 period, the decline is obvious and much is probably due to land reform, the Encumbered Estates, Land Acts, etc.. A landlord moves and brings many of his old retainers with him.

However I do not easily accept your logic on Ne Temere – prior to NT it was common for the children of mixed marriages to follow the religion of the parent, i.e. boys followed that of the father, girls followed that of the mother. It was a workable ‘status quo’ until the R C Church stuck its oar in. As all children of mixed marriages were forced to be RC post NT, the school numbers in CoI schools fell dramatically and many closed due to lack of numbers. If you were CoI and wanted your children educated in your faith, you had to go to an area that had a school. That was to a city, or take the boat.

Peregrinus · 06-11-2012 2:28am

pedroeibar1 wrote: »

However I do not easily accept your logic on Ne Temere – prior to NT it was common for the children of mixed marriages to follow the religion of the parent, i.e. boys followed that of the father, girls followed that of the mother. It was a workable ‘status quo’ until the R C Church stuck its oar in. As all children of mixed marriages were forced to be RC post NT, the school numbers in CoI schools fell dramatically and many closed due to lack of numbers. If you were CoI and wanted your children educated in your faith, you had to go to an area that had a school. That was to a city, or take the boat.

We’re discussing this without data, which is perhaps unwise. But as far as I can see, Ne Temere would have had both positive and negative effects on the Protestant population.

Where, despite Ne Temere, a Protestant and a Catholic marry, then obviously the effect of the decree is that all of the Protestant’s children will be raised Catholic, rather than just half as might have been the case before. But where, because of Ne Temere, a Protestant/Catholic marriage is averted, then obviously the effect of the decree is that all of the Protestant’s children, rather than just half, will be raised Protestant. (Assuming, of course, that the Protestant who doesn’t marry a Catholic goes ahead and marries a non-Catholic.)

So, the question is, which effect of Ne Temere was greater? To the extent that it succeeded in reducing the rate of Protestant/Catholic marriages, it will in fact have tended to boost, or at least sustain, Protestant population figures. No doubt the data which would enable us to measure this effect - comparative “mixed marriage” rates before and after 1908 - exists, but I haven’t got it.

I’ve googled a bit, but haven’t found any hard data, but I have formed a general impression that in Ireland the rate of Protestant/Catholic marriages was extremely low. In 1946, for example, only 1.6% of marriages by Anglicans or Presbyterians involved a partner who was not either Anglican or Presbyterian. The number of such marriages where the other partner was a Catholic must have been even lower. Unless 1946 was anomalous, then, it’s impossible that the raising as Catholic of all, rather than half, of the children born to probably less than 1.5% of Protestants could account for the decline in the Protestant population.

Ne Temere could, though, have contributed to decline in another way, in supporting high Protestant emigration rates, at least from rural areas. If you’re not prepared to marry a Catholic and/or Catholics are generally not prepared to marry you, and you’ve met the comparatively small number of marriageable Protestants of the right age, sex and social standing who live within striking distance of you and you don’t want to marry any of them, emigration begins to look like an attractive option. The problem here, of course, is that many other factors were also sustaining high emigration rates, so it’s impossible to disentangle and measure the “marriage” motivation for Protestant emigration.

Balmed Out · 06-11-2012 8:41am

pedroeibar1 wrote: »

If you were CoI and wanted your children educated in your faith, you had to go to an area that had a school. That was to a city, or take the boat.

Plenty of CoI schools were boarding schools.

The Idyl Race · 06-11-2012 9:17am

Peregrinus wrote: »

We’re discussing this without data, which is perhaps unwise. But as far as I can see, Ne Temere would have had both positive and negative effects on the Protestant population.

Where, despite Ne Temere, a Protestant and a Catholic marry, then obviously the effect of the decree is that all of the Protestant’s children will be raised Catholic, rather than just half as might have been the case before. But where, because of Ne Temere, a Protestant/Catholic marriage is averted, then obviously the effect of the decree is that all of the Protestant’s children, rather than just half, will be raised Protestant. (Assuming, of course, that the Protestant who doesn’t marry a Catholic goes ahead and marries a non-Catholic.)

So, the question is, which effect of Ne Temere was greater? To the extent that it succeeded in reducing the rate of Protestant/Catholic marriages, it will in fact have tended to boost, or at least sustain, Protestant population figures. No doubt the data which would enable us to measure this effect - comparative “mixed marriage” rates before and after 1908 - exists, but I haven’t got it.

I’ve googled a bit, but haven’t found any hard data, but I have formed a general impression that in Ireland the rate of Protestant/Catholic marriages was extremely low. In 1946, for example, only 1.6% of marriages by Anglicans or Presbyterians involved a partner who was not either Anglican or Presbyterian. The number of such marriages where the other partner was a Catholic must have been even lower. Unless 1946 was anomalous, then, it’s impossible that the raising as Catholic of all, rather than half, of the children born to probably less than 1.5% of Protestants could account for the decline in the Protestant population.

Ne Temere could, though, have contributed to decline in another way, in supporting high Protestant emigration rates, at least from rural areas. If you’re not prepared to marry a Catholic and/or Catholics are generally not prepared to marry you, and you’ve met the comparatively small number of marriageable Protestants of the right age, sex and social standing who live within striking distance of you and you don’t want to marry any of them, emigration begins to look like an attractive option. The problem here, of course, is that many other factors were also sustaining high emigration rates, so it’s impossible to disentangle and measure the “marriage” motivation for Protestant emigration.

You don't seem to have considered oral history as a source. Here's one link, found very easily.
http://ireland.anglican.org/news/2494

pedroeibar1 · 06-11-2012 9:48am

Balmed Out wrote: »

Plenty of CoI schools were boarding schools.

That is what I am saying. If a Protestant wanted a secondary education for his/her children, it was boarding school - Portora, Newtown, Alex, Glengara (now non-denom as Rathdown but CoI influence) or move to the city/big town.

Peregrinus · 06-11-2012 9:54am

This is interesting, but it doesn’t have the kind of solid data that I’m looking for. What Dr. Neill says here is that the effect of Ne Temere was mixed. He wonders (only wonders, note) whether it impacted urban working class Protestant communities more than the Church of Ireland as a whole, says that in rural areas where the Church of Ireland had its own social structures the impacts of the decree were undoubtedly less, and says that in present times it has all but disappeared. But at no point does he actually attempt to quantify the effects of the decree on either urban or rural Protestant populations, and he doesn’t say whether the adverse effect was one of Protestants having children who were raised as Catholics or of Protestants having to emigrate to find marriage partners.

The details of marriages in Ireland are very well recorded, both by the various churches and by the state. The data on the rate of Protestant/Catholic marriages, and on whether the rate of such marriages changed after Ne Temere was rolled out, undoubtedly exists; it just doesn’t seem to have been compiled and published.

My own impression - and it’s no more than that - was the rate of Catholic/Protestant marriages was in fact extremely low. It must have been galling for the Protestant community to see the children of such marriages almost invariably raised as Catholics, but the actual numbers involved seem to me to have been small, and I am suspicious of suggestions that this played a significant part in the decline of the Protestant population. The truth is that the overwhelming majority of Protestants who had children, had children who were raised as Protestants, and the decline in the Protestant population is mostly attributable to some combination of a lower fertility rate and a higher propensity to emigrate. (And, as I’ve suggested, Ne Temere may have played an indirect role there.)

The thing is, intermarriage on any terms is threatening to a minority community. Even if the former gender-based practice prevailed, if more than a small proportion of Protestants married non-Protestants, so that roughly half their children were not raised as Protestants, over time this would have a significant adverse effect on the Protestant population. (It is precisely this phenomenon that has led to a substantial decline in Presbyterian and Methodist communities in the Republic. Anglican/Presbyterian and Anglican/Methodist marriages have always been comparatively common, and half - in fact, more than half - of the resulting offspring have been raised as Anglicans, with predictable results.)

The best demographic strategy for a minority community is usually to avoid intermarriage as much as possible. Ironically, it was precisely the object of the Ne Temere decree to discourage Catholic/non-Catholic intermarriage, and the more it succeeded in this aim the better for the demographic health of the minority, Protestant community.

pedroeibar1 · 06-11-2012 10:06am

The Idyl Race wrote: »

You don't seem to have considered oral history as a source.

It looks like an interesting book and that was a good speech by Archbish. John Neill. Some relevant snippets:-

........the stability in the rural South of the farming population (p.96). He says that in areas where there were very few members of the Church of Ireland, they did indeed go under, but notes that this was not the whole story. I quote, 'Numbers were retained, in part at least, by maintaining a social structure consisting not only of church attendance, but also of church-based social events, schools and other groups for children, for women: what amounted to a separate social structure.

I believe that this is a very telling remark - the separate social structure created an isolationism that led to alienation; the extremely nationalist and very strong RC influence in sporting bodies such as the GAA partly forced this upon the Anglican community.

......'Maintaining a base in towns seems to have been more difficult for the Church of Ireland' (p.92). As Rector of Skibbereen in West Cork some thirty five years ago, I can bear this out – there were still quite a few Church of Ireland businesses on the main street, but there were many more that had disappeared within what was then recent memory – and I doubt that there are any there now. I would feel that one of the reasons for this decline was that there was less determination to stay put in hard times in the small town communities than there was among those tied to the land in the same parishes, and that in many ways the town folk were less integrated into the wider community than were farmers who belonged in a more day-to-day manner AND there is the undoubted fact that since the social group represented by the shopkeepers went more for educational opportunity and were educated in boarding schools, with the result that they belonged in the area very loosely, and easily took the opportunity to migrate to the city suburbs.

I've made the same point above.

......The Ne Temere decree has not only virtually disappeared, but it has had a reverse effect from that which it had in previous generations – the pressure it exerted has in instance after instance had the exact opposite effect, and interchurch marriages have ceased to have a negative effect on Church of Ireland membership. He also points to the fact that returning emigrants with Anglican spouses has had some effect on numbers, as does the desirability of many Church of Ireland primary schools.

Most Irish Catholics today are nearer to the Protestant Churches in their beliefs rather than those required by Rome - instance the lack of belief in Papal infallabiity, ignoring the Church's position on birth control, abortion, regular attendance at religious services, etc.

FWIW my Anglican ancestor, son of a minister, married a Catholic in the 1700's, was disenherited and written out of the family tree!

pedroeibar1 · 06-11-2012 10:26am

Peregrinus wrote: »

T
My own impression - and it’s no more than that - was the rate of Catholic/Protestant marriages was in fact extremely low.

Cross-posted with you Peregrinus. We are broadly in agreement

Mixed marriages were actively discouraged by both sides, well illustrated in the Fethard book I mentioned above.

Peregrinus · 06-11-2012 10:29am

pedroeibar1 wrote: »

I believe that this is a very telling remark - the separate social structure created an isolationism that led to alienation; the extremely nationalist and very strong RC influence in sporting bodies such as the GAA partly forced this upon the Anglican community.

Neill's point seems to be the opposite of yours; in his view the separate social structures sustained the Protestant community (by, e.g., encouraging and facilitating intra-Protestant marriages). Where these structures didn't exist, and Protestants were integrated into larger social structures (in the urban working class environment, for example) the Protestant community tended to disappear.

What this may mean is that the decline in the Protestant community is not, as the thread title suggests, the result of Protestants being driven out of the Free State/Republic, but rather of Protestants being absorbed into the wider society, and losing their distinctiveness (including their distinctive Protestantism, obviously).

Milk & Honey · 06-11-2012 10:19pm

With regard to main street businesses, large numbers of these disappeared anyway as a result of supermarkets and chain stores and franchises. In many case children of a shopkeeper simply qualified in a profession and left their small town. The business would not support another generation and so was left to be wound up on the death or retirement of the proprietor. This happened regardless of whether it was a catholic or protestant business.

pedroeibar1 · 07-11-2012 10:17am

Peregrinus wrote: »

Neill's point seems to be the opposite of yours; .................

Not necessarily, his views can be argued several ways – particularly as we do not have concrete figures. Neill said he was ‘uncomfortable’ in commenting on ‘class’ lines and explained the disappearance of a ‘Protestant working class’. We know what happened to the landlord class and have also seen the reduction of the shopkeeper & small farmer class, albeit at a slower pace. These I maintain are a clear indication that there were different causes and outcomes by class/population segment.

A surrounding environment influences its inhabitants; the 1880’s – onward period of Land Acts, Nationalism, revolution, political & religious allegiances, sporting associations and the all-pervasive influence of the RC Church created a ‘hostile’ environment. I agree a separate ‘social structure’ will sustain a group within that environment, but only if it is very large: if the group does not have that critical mass the limited choice and options offered within the structure restrict and confine its membership and lead to a downward spiral. A widely dispersed <4% of the population could never survive unless it had political/legislative support, both of which had been eroded/withdrawn.

In brief, a minority were driven out, others were ‘married’ out and some - believing that they were unwelcome because of their beliefs/political views - left for what they perceived to be a better life.

Peregrinus · 07-11-2012 10:52am

Yes. I think the point is that if rural Anglicanism had not been sustained by its separate social structures (or by a kind of self-chosen apartheid, if you prefer) it would have declined much more quickly.

Things like the Land Acts and nationalism are only "hostile" to a group if that group is committed to landlordism and loyalism. And if that group is so committed, then that would help to explain why they might find themselves excluded from a newly-forming national identity which rejects such things.

I'm not seeking to make judgments about Irish Protestants as a class, but it's undoubtedly the case that they did pretty well under a social and political system founded on landlordism and loyalism, and it was not in their interests for that system to pass away. Given that, some degree of commitment to landlordism and loyalism is unsurprising. And given that, some degree of alienation from the new social order founded on autonomous small farmers and national independence seems inevitable.

In other words, it seems to me the the odds were stacked in favour of Protestants being somewhat marginalised in the new Ireland. Loss of privilege was always going to be unpleasant for Irish Protestants; how could it be otherwise? And no doubt they would experience that as marginalisation. And if the response was to band together for support in "separate social structures", that could only intensify their marginalisation (if at the same time making it a bit easier to deal with). So I wouldn't see their separation as resulting entirely from exclusion by Catholic nationalists; I think it also resulted from their own reaction to changes which seemed unpleasant to them, but right and necessary from our perspective.

flogging a dead horse · 07-11-2012 11:01am

Ask Kevin Myers.
His father was protestant and also a Sinn Fein suporter.
Unlike Kev who was gone in the oppositte direction of his father, to the point of writing for the Daily (Tory) Telegraph.

Ash.J.Williams · 07-11-2012 11:03am

The Scientician wrote: »

As regards employment, Protestant owned firms often explicitly sought Protestant employees. Here's an interesting article on the phenomenon.

My father (a protestant) lost all his protestant customers when he married my catholic mother. I understood why later, turns out his sister in laws uncles were dragged out of there house and shot by the IRA,(1930's i think) on trumped up accusations of storing weapons for the British. The truth was they simply fired a shot in the air to move the IRA off their land where they were drilling (not eachother)

The Idyl Race · 07-11-2012 7:57pm

pedroeibar1 wrote: »

Not necessarily, his views can be argued several ways – particularly as we do not have concrete figures. Neill said he was ‘uncomfortable’ in commenting on ‘class’ lines and explained the disappearance of a ‘Protestant working class’. We know what happened to the landlord class and have also seen the reduction of the shopkeeper & small farmer class, albeit at a slower pace. These I maintain are a clear indication that there were different causes and outcomes by class/population segment.

A surrounding environment influences its inhabitants; the 1880’s – onward period of Land Acts, Nationalism, revolution, political & religious allegiances, sporting associations and the all-pervasive influence of the RC Church created a ‘hostile’ environment. I agree a separate ‘social structure’ will sustain a group within that environment, but only if it is very large: if the group does not have that critical mass the limited choice and options offered within the structure restrict and confine its membership and lead to a downward spiral. A widely dispersed <4% of the population could never survive unless it had political/legislative support, both of which had been eroded/withdrawn.

In brief, a minority were driven out, others were ‘married’ out and some - believing that they were unwelcome because of their beliefs/political views - left for what they perceived to be a better life.

Absolutely on the money there, I think.

The Idyl Race · 07-11-2012 7:58pm

flogging a dead horse wrote: »

Ask Kevin Myers.
His father was protestant and also a Sinn Fein suporter.
Unlike Kev who was gone in the oppositte direction of his father, to the point of writing for the Daily (Tory) Telegraph.

I think you're flogging a dead horse there.

Glassheart · 10-11-2012 7:32pm

Ash.J.Williams wrote: »

My father (a protestant) lost all his protestant customers when he married my catholic mother. I understood why later, turns out his sister in laws uncles were dragged out of there house and shot by the IRA,(1930's i think) on trumped up accusations of storing weapons for the British.

Was your mother in the IRA?

HavingCrack · 11-11-2012 4:06pm

Ash.J.Williams wrote: »

My father (a protestant) lost all his protestant customers when he married my catholic mother. I understood why later, turns out his sister in laws uncles were dragged out of there house and shot by the IRA,(1930's i think) on trumped up accusations of storing weapons for the British. The truth was they simply fired a shot in the air to move the IRA off their land where they were drilling (not eachother)

Are you sure it was the 1930's and not during the War of Independence or Civil War? By the 1930's the IRA in the Free State were extremely weak and why would anyone be storing weapons for the British in the 1930's? The British had left over a decade (minimum) before that.

Jelle1880 · 16-11-2012 11:10am

LordSutch wrote: »

My Mother (Dublin Protestant) always said that once the State was created, Protestants learned "to keep their heads down" and not to speak out against the new governors for fear of being attacked, either verbally, socially or physically. Those who did speak out became known as West Brits and endured a bumpy ride, many of whom left for England in the intervening decades since 1921. As a testament to the rapid decline in Protestant numbers Dublin is now littered with empty Protestant Churches < She recalled the days when they were all full, and a substantial poportion of the population were not RC.

The 'Ne Temere' decree also played a massive part in the decline of the Protestant population.

Nowadays nearly everybody (85%) ticks the RC box on the census form. But to answer the original question, NO Protestants were not driven out of the Free State, but it did become somewhat of an alien state for for Protestants (many of whom were Unionists) for the first few decades at least.

While I wouldn't say that Protestants were driven out on a mass-scale, there were definitely instances where they were targeted by the IRA.

Cork, for example in 1921-22 saw several Protestants murdered in cold blood.

Rebelheart · 16-11-2012 9:54pm

Jelle1880 wrote: »

While I wouldn't say that Protestants were driven out on a mass-scale, there were definitely instances where they were targeted by the IRA.

Cork, for example in 1921-22 saw several Protestants murdered in cold blood.

"Protestants" or loyalists? Ah.

I have absolutely no problem with active loyalists being targeted. But I can see their interest in dressing this up as the targeting of "Protestants", as if all Protestants share their counter-revolutionary hatred for the native Irish ruling Ireland free from foreign interference.

Jelle1880 · 16-11-2012 11:43pm

Rebelheart wrote: »

"Protestants" or loyalists? Ah.

I have absolutely no problem with active loyalists being targeted. But I can see their interest in dressing this up as the targeting of "Protestants", as if all Protestants share their counter-revolutionary hatred for the native Irish ruling Ireland free from foreign interference.

Good to see you having absolutely no problem with people being murdered, because they don't share your political views.

They were Protestants, some were probably Unionists but there is absolutely no proof that they all were.

And even then, that still doesn't make it ok, but I doubt you'd understand.

jonniebgood1 · 17-11-2012 12:00am

Rebelheart wrote: »

"Protestants" or loyalists? Ah.

I have absolutely no problem with active loyalists being targeted. But I can see their interest in dressing this up as the targeting of "Protestants", as if all Protestants share their counter-revolutionary hatred for the native Irish ruling Ireland free from foreign interference.

Were they all active loyalists though? I have seen no evidence to show that they were but am open to see your suggestion. Sounds more like an excuse to me for civil war atrocities.
Wolfe Tone.
Henry Joy McCracken.
Robert Emmet.
William Smith O'Brien.
Charles Stewart Parnell.
Isaac Butt.
Robert Barton.

robp · 17-11-2012 10:49pm

Jelle1880 wrote: »

While I wouldn't say that Protestants were driven out on a mass-scale, there were definitely instances where they were targeted by the IRA.

Cork, for example in 1921-22 saw several Protestants murdered in cold blood.

Isn't there a great deal of contention on this issue and indeed in-clarity especially since the death of main historian who supported the idea Peter Harte?

fryup · 04-05-2013 6:11pm

LordSutch wrote: »

My Mother (Dublin Protestant) always said that once the State was created, Protestants learned "to keep their heads down" and not to speak out against the new governors for fear of being attacked, either verbally, socially or physicall.

southern protestants (for the most part) have always been a timid lot, too afraid to speak their mind, didn't help matters that they're clergy were spineless fuddy duddys

Susie120704 · 04-05-2013 6:19pm

Cork and in particular West Cork was quite hostile to Protestants after the War of Independence and many felt the need to leave. There are stories of intimidation to encourage their leaving but I am not aware of many murders post Independence. They were well targeted by the Old IRA during the war.
Protestants often became quite simply outbred in the Republic. In general Protestant families were quite small whilst Catholic families were quite large up to the 70s and 80s.
As a previous poster claimed many felt the need to keep their heads down in the Free State.
Many emigrated. In my grandfather's time he bought three farms, all of which were belonging to Protestants who moved to the North, which was relatively close to them.

joehig · 04-05-2013 6:21pm

The Scientician wrote: »

There seems to be an idea, due to a cursory look at the changing demographics of the Free State/Republic of Ireland, that the state actively drove out Protestants. Relevant demographic changes up to 1991 can be viewed here: http://www.wesleyjohnston.com/users/ireland/past/protestants_1861_1991.html
I've seen this idea expressed numerous times online.

Is there any truth to this? I'm aware of course that the state until recent times was Catholic Church dominated to a large degree but how did that domination impact upon Protestants in the 26 counties after independence?

Was there a significant migration out of the state by Protestants in the period? If such a migration occurred can it be rightly attributed to discriminatory policies on the part of the state? Or can this change be attributed to other factors?

To make this more into a debate/discussion, I'll pose a few other questions.

How did the southern government's policies with regard to Protestants legitimise those of the government in Northern Ireland in the period?

If the underlying hypothesis is correct, in what ways could/should the Irish government and broader society have made Protestants feel more welcome in the state?

Any suggestions of literature on the subject matter would be appreciated.

yes this is very true...like after all wars the winners persecute the losers. alot of protestant churchs were destroyed by the free state goverment in dublin city centre. (this is how gardener street dole office came into been)this is a part of our history that has been airbrushed out

Judgement Day · 04-05-2013 7:21pm

joehig wrote: »

yes this is very true...like after all wars the winners persecute the losers. alot of protestant churchs were destroyed by the free state goverment in dublin city centre. (this is how gardener street dole office came into been)this is a part of our history that has been airbrushed out

What a strange statement - any links to back it up?

Trinity Church on Lower Gardiner Street closed pre-independence http://georges.dublin.anglican.org/history.html and any other Protestant churches that closed down would have been due to dwindling numbers rather than being got at by the Free State government. How do you explain the Church of Ireland retaining its two cathedrals in Dublin while the Roman Catholic population have to make do with the Pro-Cathedral on a back street?

Judgement Day · 04-05-2013 7:24pm

fryup wrote: »

southern protestants (for the most part) have always been a timid lot, too afraid to speak their mind, didn't help matters that they're clergy were spineless fuddy duddys

Just keeping our heads down - thank you - and getting on with making the best of things.

Coles · 04-05-2013 8:44pm

Protestants have played a central role in shaping not just Irish Republicanism but also the State itself. The journey isn't complete and removing the hand of the Catholic Church from social policy will be an important step forward. There can be no such thing as a sectarian Republic.

Tordelback · 13-05-2013 8:34pm

Rebelheart wrote: »

The loyalist Anglo-Irish are as much victims as the Pied-Noir were when the French decolonised from Algeria: collaborators who were on the losing side. No more, and no less.

Staggering statement to make, when you realise that most Irish people of whatever stripe would be classed as 'collaborators' in this sense, and that armed uprisings were deeply unpopular. Your imaginary nation of implacable rebels may exist in song, but not in reality.

owenc · 27-05-2013 12:53pm

They left because the birth rate was low and they were not interested in being part of the southern country.

Ash.J.Williams · 27-05-2013 12:53pm

owenc wrote: »

They left because the birth rate was low and they were not interested in being part of the southern country.

or burnt out/threatened etc

owenc · 27-05-2013 12:58pm

Yes and probably scared. Just the same as some catholics here in Northern Ireland.

robp · 27-05-2013 7:50pm

Ash.J.Williams wrote: »

or burnt out/threatened etc

owenc wrote: »

Yes and probably scared. Just the same as some catholics here in Northern Ireland.

Not really. Those in the Big houses may have been threatened in the 2 years of the Civil war but that is not comparable to the decades of Catholic persecution in the North. Irish Anglicism was declining from 1861 to the 90s and still is the North. The two years of the civil war does not explain that. Remember there has been two Protestant presidents in the republic. Did any speak of persecution of the Protestant community. There has been population decreases of Protestants in the north as well and that can hardly be ascribed to persecution.

owenc · 27-05-2013 9:56pm

Well I was only guessing. I have never met a southern protestant, although there are a few people who I know with southern grandparents. I don't really know that much about them, they interest me, especially their lifestyle and views.

I think alot of the decrease is due to the ne temera.

Coles · 27-05-2013 10:24pm

owenc wrote: »

Well I was only guessing. I have never met a southern protestant, although there are a few people who I know with southern grandparents. I don't really know that much about them, they interest me, especially their lifestyle and views.

No shortage of happy protestants in the Republic. Some are good decent upstanding citizens, some aren't. Just like the rest.

owenc · 27-05-2013 10:41pm

Like I say they interest me.

fryup · 28-05-2013 10:57am

robp wrote: »

There has been population decreases of Protestants in the north as well and that can hardly be ascribed to persecution.

are you sure?? what about the IRA targeting protestants along the border...the kingsmill masssacre, the darkley massacre, enniskillen, teebane etc

i reckon protestants living in those parts didn't feel safe

robp · 28-05-2013 11:26am

fryup wrote: »

are you sure?? what about the IRA targeting protestants along the border...the kingsmill masssacre, the darkley massacre, enniskillen, teebane etc

i reckon protestants living in those parts didn't feel safe

Well it would be foolish to rule such possibilities out completely but the decline is still underway, even between 2001 and 2011. Is the treat of violence really so great so recently?

Madam · 28-05-2013 3:59pm

owenc wrote: »

Well I was only guessing. I have never met a southern protestant, although there are a few people who I know with southern grandparents. I don't really know that much about them, they interest me, especially their lifestyle and views.

I think alot of the decrease is due to the ne temera.

Go to Donegal and you'll find loads of Protestants(presbyterians or COI), for some reason they stuck around after 1916/22 - maybe their closeness to the border or they were far enough away from more the southerly counties so 'integrated' more with their catholic neighbours?

fryup · 28-05-2013 6:17pm

robp wrote: »

Well it would be foolish to rule such possibilities out completely but the decline is still underway, even between 2001 and 2011. Is the treat of violence really so great so recently?

ok, fair point

i think a survey was done amongst students from middle-class protestant backgrounds...the vast majority choose to go to mainland UK colleges and most decided to stay once graduated, so that could be a major factor

Coles · 28-05-2013 6:38pm

And if they have a Unionist identity then moving to Britain is perfectly natural. It's not like they would be regarding it as emigrating! Of course when they get to Britain they usually realise how Irish they actually are, particularly when there's a rugby match on!

ardmacha · 28-05-2013 11:20pm

And if they have a Unionist identity then moving to Britain is perfectly natural. It's not like they would be regarding it as emigrating!

Precisely. Many protestants had a unionist identity. Their sordid imperial project had failed in the 26 counties and they were now to be the same as everyone else. With Britain twice as prosperous as the Free State it was hardly surprising that they chose to go there, it doesn't need much analysis.

Were Protestants driven out of the Free State/Republic?

Comments