Материал: Rethinking ethnicity, 2nd Edition by Richard Jenkins
7 Majority Ethnicity
Ethnicity is not a peculiar attribute of minorities, nor is it restricted to exotic Others. This chapter looks at a politically dominant and self-conscious ethnic majority – Northern Irish Protestants and, particularly, the Northern Irish Protestant élite – and how, during a long history of conflict, they have mobilized and manipulated ethnicity and exploited ethnic communality to their advantage. During the modern history of Ireland, Protestants have been a numerical minority within the island’s population, so this may appear to be an odd understanding of the situation.1 There are, however, three senses in which Ulster Protestants should be seen as a majority. First, they are, and have been since the territory’s creation, a majority within the six counties of Northern Ireland. Second, for most of the history of ‘English’ or ‘British’ Ireland Protestants were a political majority, in the sense that they unambiguously held power. Third, for most of the time since the seventeenth century they have been allied with – and, at least in some senses, part of – a dominant, metropolitan Anglo-Saxon majority within the British Isles (Hechter 1975).
In looking at the mobilization and manipulation of ethnicity, I am drawing on that strand of the anthropological model which emphasizes that ethnicity is a social resource, to be drawn upon or exploited in varying contexts. However, inasmuch as most anthropological studies of ethnicity in ‘Western’ societies have looked at minority situations, they have tended to underplay the salience of other factors, such as class in particular and the social construction of power relationships in general. At best, factors such as these, where they are acknowledged, are typically treated as external ‘structure’, impinging on on the people studied as more-or-less distant constraints on their lives (Davis 1975; Grillo 1980). Inasmuch as sociology has, for various reasons, moved away somewhat from class analysis during the last two decades, and anthropology has concentrated ever more firmly on ‘culture’, this blind spot has probably got worse. To understand Northern Ireland, where state and economy were constructed by and in the social relationships between a dominant ethnic group and a subordinated ethnic group, and between the local majority and an external metropolitan power, a less abstract understanding of state and economy is necessary.
Another central focus of the anthropology of ethnicity has been its concern with the maintenance of boundaries between ethnic groups. This research orientation has led to many insights, not the least of which being that ethnicity is essentially relative, its nature shifting with the contexts of its mobilization. And this chapter will maintain that perspective: ethnicity is a function of inter-group relations; in the absence of such relations and their concomitant group boundaries ethnicity is unthinkable. But most of my attention here is elsewhere: on the mobilization of ethnicity as a resource by a dominant élite, in their strategies for the internal control
94 Rethinking Ethnicity
of their own class-stratified ethnic group. Thus the focus of attention is to some extent shifted from inter-group to intra-group relationships.
In terms of the themes I am exploring in this book, this chapter is concerned with power relations, and with the interweaving of ethnicity with other social identifications, in this case, class. Together with the discussions of religion in Chapter 8 and state formation in Chapter 9, my approach is in broad harmony, even if not always detailed agreement, with the historical model proposed by Ruane and Todd (1996), in which five ‘dimensions of difference’ – religion (Catholic/Protestant), ethnicity (Gaelic Irish/Old English/English/Scottish), colonialism (native/settler), civility (barbarous/civilized) and politics (Irish-nationalist/British-unionist) – have, since the first English conquest of parts of Ireland, unfolded, interacted and played out over different time-scales and during different periods. These ways of looking at the situation offer a nuanced framework within which to begin to understand the complexities of Northern Ireland.
The foundations of modern Ulster ethnicity: the Plantation
For our purposes, the history of the Northern Irish Protestant community may be traced back to the Ulster Plantation of the first decades of the seventeenth century. Although there had been some earlier colonization of the counties of Antrim and Down by Scottish settlers, the Plantation marks the beginning of a long history that leads to the present – for they cannot yet be said to be over – ‘troubles’. Here are ‘the colonial roots of antagonism’ (O’Leary and McGarry 1996: 54–106). It was nothing less than an attempt at the wholesale deand re-population of the north of Ireland. The established inhabitants – Gaelic in language and culture, Catholic in religion, and resistant to rule from London, or, indeed, Dublin – were to be replaced by ‘planting’ Anglophone, Protestant, loyal settlers in their stead.
Originally envisaged as an essentially military adventure, to secure the hitherto rebellious earldoms of Tyrconnel and Tyrone for the English crown, the scheme acquired a commercial orientation very early on. Following an agreement between the crown and the corporation of the City of London, the latter set up a joint-stock enterprise:
to plant the country of Coleraine, and to rebuild and fortify its two main towns, Coleraine and Derry. In return, they were to receive extensive privileges, including the patronage of all churches within their territory, the fisheries of the Foyle and the Bann, and a long lease of the customs at a nominal rent. (Beckett 1966: 46)
The links of commerce thereby established between the province and the mainland set the pattern for much of Ulster’s subsequent history. However, the relative geographical isolation caused by the Irish Sea, and the differences from the rest of Ireland which I shall discuss below, were also to set a pattern for the north-eastern counties. The history of the Protestants of the province since the Plantation is a curious mixture of insularity and backwardness contrasted with varying degrees of incorporation into the political, cultural and economic mainstreams of Britain.
Majority Ethnicity 95
Throughout the rest of Ulster, the Plantation took on a similar character to that described above, either directly initiated by the government in London or encouraged by them at one remove through ‘undertakers’ or agencies such as the London Company. In Antrim and Down, however, following the government-approved dismemberment of Con O’Neill’s Clandeboye estates, the Plantation became more a matter for private adventurers. Here, in particular, the Plantation acquired a distinctly Scottish character, in contrast to the strong English influences at work further west.
As a result of this colonization there developed a series of marked differences between Ulster and the rest of the island. There one saw the development of an essentially rural and agricultural society, based on commercially oriented tenant farmers, with an intensive subsistence peasantry on the western margins. In the north-east there eventually developed, by contrast, an urban and industrial society, based in the first place on smallholdings leased from the undertakers by the colonist yeomanry and small tenantry, many of whom had a background in the textile industry then emerging on the other side of the Irish Sea (Crotty 1966; Cullen 1969; Gibbon 1975: 9–12).
One of the original aims of the Plantation, and in this its military origins reveal themselves, was the physical removal of most of the native Irish population from the best areas in the north. In this aim the Plantation failed, however, and this for at least two reasons. First, many of the colonists, in particular those holding large estates, were happy to find (Catholic Irish) tenants available on the spot and took advantage of their continued presence. Second, the Irish who were to be moved frequently resisted, as is witnessed by the planter’s need for fortified houses or ‘bawns’. The ‘final solution’ to the Ulster problem was not to work as well in practice as its architects in London had expected.
Nonetheless, although many or most of the former inhabitants remained, things had changed dramatically for them, and changed for the worse. Within twenty years, at the beginning of the seventeenth century, all of their customary rights to land and property vanished; in effect, they became aliens in their own country. A few, a very few, either retained their status or were granted new lands, but they constituted a tiny minority:
The great mass of Ulster Irish remained on their former lands, but degraded to the status of tenants-at-will. As they became increasingly impoverished, economic pressure tended to drive them out of the more fertile and into the worst lands, where their descendants are still to be found. (Moody 1974: 5)
In 1641 the fruits of this policy towards the native Irish ripened into rebellion. Led by Sir Phelim O’Neill, and spurred on by fear of a Puritan-dominated House of Commons at Westminster, the Ulster Catholics rose up in revolt. Eight years later Oliver Cromwell arrived in Dublin and by 1652 the rebellion was over. The Irish were punished severely, by confiscation of most of their remaining land and by deportation. The result of the 1641 rebellion was the consolidation of the original aims of the Plantation and the commercial domination of Ireland by the settlers, particularly in the north-east and the towns.
The end of the century saw further violence, most notably the siege of Derry in 1689 and William’s defeat of the Jacobite army at the battle of the Boyne in 1690.
96 Rethinking Ethnicity
The Treaty of Limerick in 1691 and the flight of the ‘Wild Geese’ to France signalled the final collapse of the Stuart cause. For Irish Catholics the major results of the Williamite wars were the Penal Laws of the early eighteenth century, which, although they were subsequently gradually relaxed, remained in force until Catholic emancipation was granted in 1829. In addition to the already severe restrictions on Irish trade, Catholics were excluded by the Penal Laws from the army, barred from politics at both local and national levels, and deprived of access to education. Protestant estates could not be sold to Catholics, Catholics were not allowed to lease land for more than thirty-one years and the inheritance laws encouraged the minute subdivision of Catholic-owned land. Nonconformist Protestants, those who refused to recognize the authority of the established Church, also suffered to an extent, but in the north they were somewhat protected by the ‘Ulster Custom’, informal local land-tenure arrangements which meant that tenants could sell their interest in a property and could not be evicted so long as they paid their rent.
The history of seventeenthand early eighteenth-century Ulster has two important features for this discussion. In the first place, two contrasting ethnicities were established: native Catholic Irish, on the one hand, and Ulster Protestant settlers, on the other. The latter category was subdivided or segmented into the mainly Presbyterian Scots of the east of the province and the mainly Church of Ireland (i.e. Anglican) population of English descent of the western counties, although the nineteenth century did see a significant migration into Belfast of members of the Church of Ireland.2 Although this communal and confessional distinction within the Protestant population remains important today, the ethnic cleavage has historically been – and remains – that between the native Irish and the settlers, with religion providing the main explicit boundary-maintaining mechanism. A shared Protestant ethnic identity emerged as differences between Anglicans and dissenters, English and Scots, were subsumed in the face of their more significant differences with and from the Catholic Irish.
One way to understand the salience of religion is as a consequence of the gradual decline of distinctive Gaelic Irish culture in the north. Taking such a view, religion eventually became all that was left as a cultural marker of difference between the populations. While this interpretation may have some merit, it is probably only applicable to very recent times, with the ‘cultural convergence’ produced by modernization, consumerism and the penetration of external cultural influences. A more plausible explanation – because, in fact, northern Gaelic Irish culture survived better than one might have expected: in north Antrim, the Sperrins and south Armagh until the early twentieth century – is that religion became such a key constituent of the boundary because within the north of Ireland Protestants consistently categorized their ethnic Other thus, institutionally and interactionally. From the time of the Penal Laws onwards, religion was the nominal boundary, synonymous with political disloyalty, on the one hand, and fecklessness and unworthiness on the other. This is recognized today, for example, in the local Northern Irish characterization of ethnic chauvinism as sectarianism.
The second point to note is that ethnicity in Ulster has been grounded in consequences – particularly economic consequences – since the earliest days of the Plantation. Catholics were first of all alienated from the land and eventually, via the Penal Laws, debarred from professional or political careers, further isolating