It was not a famine. Ships loaded with ,food left Dublin to Liverpool every day. It was not a lack of food but the failure to distribute it to those in need
The London Times [...] when the exodus was most pitiful, screamed with delight in one of its editorials, 'They are going! They are going! The Irish are going with a vengeance. Soon a Celt will be as rare in Ireland as a Red Indian on the shores of Manhattan.' It was a convenient extermination.
I do apologise it was a great video but I do get annoyed when it isn't explained as to why the Irish became so dependent on the Potato. This was actually an act of Genocide. I'm English by the way.
The political order caused the starvation. Read my post above. Dependence on one crop was conjured by legislated religious persecution and colonial theft, and butter, pork, beef and root vegetables were exported under armed guard to satisfy the Whig government's dogmatic laissez faire economic policies. The whole topic should be taught not as 'a blight killing a crop for Irish people', but as government neglect to the point of death by starvation of 1 in 24 British subjects, by dint of their religious and ethnic profile. That's much more evocative.
I thought this video was going to be about the Kingdom of Dál Riada, a kind of ancestor state to the first Scottish Kingdom, Kenneth McAlpine' Kingdom of Scots and Gaels. 'Scottus' and 'Scoti' were initially the names for Irish people, then Gaelic speakers generally, as they migrated into post-Roman northern Britain. Scotia was a Latin word for both areas combined, with Robert the Bruce referring to Scotia Minor (Scotland) and Scotia Major (Ireland) as late as the 1300s. Gaelic (Gaidhlig, derived from Middle Irish) was the court language of Scotland for two centuries before being replaced, in turn, by Anglo-Norman French, Scots (the Anglic dialect often confused for a form of English) and, finally, English itself. In short; Irish people shouldn't have any guilt for migrating to a country their offshoots literally founded, and which is named for them. The end. Tell that to Rangers fans, with their 'the famine's over, go home' songs.
Oh how I wish I could find more answers and the history about how and what boat my Nana came over on from Ireland. She never spoke of it I just know she was a young girl around 11 at the time on her own.
Hardly given during the same period 8 million perished in the Provence of Madras in India alone whilst the British Government DOUBLED the grain EXPORT from India to England. The famines although a natural occurrence were increased in their devastation by the decisions made by the British Government.
There were 12 famines of more than 500,000 deaths in the years of the British East India company and of the Raj, a 250 year span. There was only one under the Mughals, a similar length of time, and there has only been one, caused by the Pakistain-Bangladesh war, in the subcontinent since. This video fails to mention exploitative colonial political orders as the root of famine. It's a travesty.
Oxford dictionary definition of “immigrant” , “a person who comes to live permanently in a foreign country”, the Irish were part of a nation called the United Kingdom, they were probably the most reluctant members of the UK too ,the never immigrated to Scotland, they quite simply moved from one part of the UK to another to seek refuge from Londons catastrophic handling of the famine , also 25 % were Protestant Irish and bore Scottish names so they were akin to Scotland anyway, I don’t know why this immigration myth has perpetuated so long who does it serve? I can only surmise that even in this day and age an immigrant is synonymous with “something bad” due to a massive influx of illegal immigrants over the years, using the term immigrant for the Irish even after a 180 years come across as not only a historical inaccuracy but somewhat disparaging !
Hi Andrew, thanks for this. That is definitely an oversight on my part and you raise an important point. Some of the school textbooks still refer to the Irish as one of the four main 'immigrant' groups and I think this is where I got the term from. I'll make sure to correct this shortly! It certainly wasn't meant as a term of disparagement.
@@willhawkins9806 All good mate, great video, sorry I wasn’t having a go at you, I was just trying to point out a major misconception I see all the time about the Irish going to Scotland and England during the famine, thanks for going to the trouble of making the video and replying to my comment.
@@andrewheaney6858I’ve been pointing this out for years, that the Irish weren’t immigrants to the United Kingdom, they were part of the United Kingdom. This fact is constantly ignored, I guess it doesn’t suit the narrative.
Well said! I hold ancestry on both sides and know my family's history due to all the chronicles they left for family after them and my own learnings on the subject. Godspeed
Awful video. Stop spreading the Malthusian lie - and British curricular canard - that Ireland had "too many people" at the time. Check population figures and land areas. The population of Ireland was roughly 8 million in the 1841 census, and that of Britain 18.5 million, so a little under a third of the total . The land areas? Ireland is roughly 84,000 km squared, and Britain about 206,000 km squared, so a little under a third of the total. The idea that Ireland was "overpopulated" comes from the notion that it had little arable land (ie for grain), as well as the stereotype of Gaelic Irish catholics as idle and unproductive, but the truth is that Irish conditions are ideal for pasturage, which was the main traditional agricultural activity and provided a greater proportion of meat and milk products in the traditional diet than was the case in the English diet. This pasturage had largely been confiscated by a settler-colonial elite in the Cromwellian and Restoration period - Cromwell used land to pay his largely English-composed veteran army brigades in Ireland, since the London exchequer was near bankrupt, and sent the expelled tenants to live on the poorest tracts of land in the country. The figure of the population doubling in a century is wildly misleading and out of context. Ireland's population had dropped by between 12 and 25% (some historians claim a higher figure) due to battles, massacres, crop burning, plagues and starvation during the period of the Wars of the Three Kingdoms (ie the wars between Royalists, Parliamentarians and the Irish Confederacy in the 1600s) and between 13% and 20% of the population died again in a famine in the 1740s, one largely caused by adverse weather (bitter winter cold and spring drought). So a doubling in population was in line with recovery from two massive demographic setbacks. Furthermore, the British (ie, island of Britain) population in 1747 is hard to define since the first census was in 1801, but from birth and death records a rough figure of about 7.8 million is discernible, meaning that *the population of Britain had more than doubled in a century* if it was over 18 million in 1841, as the census records. Moreover, during both the famine of the 1740s and the starvation of the 1840s and 50s, British economic control of the island meant that along with linen, cured beef and pickled or salted butter were the main Irish exports. Meat products had constituted 36% of the diet even in the 1740s, meat protein had become rare in the diet during the Great Hunger of the 1840s and 50s, and the Gaelic speaking rural working classes had been deliberately penurised by the centuries-long anti-Catholic Penal Laws, which banned primogeniture for Catholics, and made them split holdings between sons, creating smaller and smaller areas for subsistence farming. On top of this, ownership of boats was restricted under the Penal Laws, and by the 1840s, they were in the ownership, largely, of the settler elite (so fish and other seafood could not be caught by the majority). The result? Total reliance on a single crop for a third or more of the population; the potato, which grew densely in poor soil and was nutritious compared to competitor foods planted in a similar small acreage. Where was all that butter, beef (and by 1847, live pigs) being exported to? British cities. Britain, as an island, could not feed itself by the 1820s and became a net food importer, not because of a lack of arable land (a whopping 36% or more of English land is arable, compared to 6% of Irish land), but because more and more people left the land to become involved in a profitable industrial economy, an industrial economy, by the way, which was off limits to everyone in Ireland, barring its Protestant-majority extreme north, since education was not provided in Gaelic and had been banned for Catholics - even in English - for over a century, until the 1820s. The only public education offered even after the 1820s - with the collusion of the Catholic church and the state, it should be noted - was in English, which between a third and 40% of the population could not speak to a functional level. Food had become a product colonial subalterns were employed to produce, from Caribbean salted fish to Irish beef, and this made up the shortfall while British elites grew fat on the profits of working class-derived manufacture in rapidly expanding cities. Mentioning the "famine" in Ireland in the 1840s without mentioning political factors, particularly the Penal Laws and the ethno-religious profile of the vast majority of landlords (who were Anglo-Irish protestants, often absentee and at study or play in London and surrounds, and thus incapable of responding to their tenants' needs, when not outright hostile to them) is a joke version of history. I'm glad you never became a teacher, and sad that secondary students will be watching this. It's a deliberate obfuscation of the truth. The English history curriculum is tragic.
@@Occident. They depended upon it because of the banning of primogeniture in inheritance for Catholics under the grossly discriminatory Penal Laws, meaning that Irish catholics had to subsist on smaller and smaller plots of land or sell up to an alien caste of foreign landlords. Or, in simple English; a farmer couldn't leave all his land to one son, and the other sons couldn't acquire a profession because education was officially off limits to them. No teaching. No law. No politics; all illegal, and very few craft trades were open to non-English speakers.
*Checks map* Ireland has not been part of Britain or vice versa since there was an ice age land bridge between the two. No, Ireland was part of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland from 1801 until 1922. Part of it, Northern Ireland, remained. It baffles me how many British people use these terms interchangeably.
@@johnmckiernan2176either way these people were still relocating to a different part of the same country so not technically immigrants in the true sense such as we have today
@@JohnAnderson-ss9vn State, not country. No legitimate Irish political authority ever decided to join the UK without either coercion or bribery. Even Grattan's Dublin parliament - totally unrepresentative of the population, btw - was bribed to abolish itself. This lack of representation is ultimately both the cause of the famine and of Irish independence, which has turned out to be a very fine idea.
There are a few people named Henry Hardcock who have been mentioned in historical records. One Henry Hardcock was a major in the British Army during the Napoleonic Wars. He was promoted to major on February 24, 1812, and served in the 99th Regiment of Foot. He was later promoted to lieutenant colonel on May 14, 1815. Another Henry Hardcock was a clergyman in the Church of England. He was born in 1784 and ordained in 1808. He served as curate of St. Mary's Church in Nottingham from 1810 to 1813, and then as rector of St. Peter's Church in Leicester from 1813 to 1849. He died in 1849. It is not clear which Henry Hardcock is mentioned in your search results. The Army List entry you linked to refers to a major in the British Army, but it does not give any other identifying information. It is possible that this is the same Henry Hardcock who was a clergyman, but it is also possible that it is a different person. Without more information, it is impossible to say for sure who Henry Hardcock is. However, the two people mentioned above are the most likely candidates.
It was not a famine. Ships loaded with ,food left Dublin to Liverpool every day. It was not a lack of food but the failure to distribute it to those in need
The London Times [...] when the exodus was most pitiful, screamed with delight in one of its editorials, 'They are going! They are going! The Irish are going with a vengeance. Soon a Celt will be as rare in Ireland as a Red Indian on the shores of Manhattan.'
It was a convenient extermination.
I do apologise it was a great video but I do get annoyed when it isn't explained as to why the Irish became so dependent on the Potato. This was actually an act of Genocide. I'm English by the way.
The political order caused the starvation. Read my post above. Dependence on one crop was conjured by legislated religious persecution and colonial theft, and butter, pork, beef and root vegetables were exported under armed guard to satisfy the Whig government's dogmatic laissez faire economic policies. The whole topic should be taught not as 'a blight killing a crop for Irish people', but as government neglect to the point of death by starvation of 1 in 24 British subjects, by dint of their religious and ethnic profile. That's much more evocative.
Also, it was not a great video. It contains a whopping Malthusian lie. Read my response above.
I thought this video was going to be about the Kingdom of Dál Riada, a kind of ancestor state to the first Scottish Kingdom, Kenneth McAlpine' Kingdom of Scots and Gaels. 'Scottus' and 'Scoti' were initially the names for Irish people, then Gaelic speakers generally, as they migrated into post-Roman northern Britain. Scotia was a Latin word for both areas combined, with Robert the Bruce referring to Scotia Minor (Scotland) and Scotia Major (Ireland) as late as the 1300s. Gaelic (Gaidhlig, derived from Middle Irish) was the court language of Scotland for two centuries before being replaced, in turn, by Anglo-Norman French, Scots (the Anglic dialect often confused for a form of English) and, finally, English itself.
In short; Irish people shouldn't have any guilt for migrating to a country their offshoots literally founded, and which is named for them.
The end.
Tell that to Rangers fans, with their 'the famine's over, go home' songs.
Brilliant, can't wait to see more content from this channel. So helpful for students and teachers alike!
Thanks Jade! Much appreciated!!
Oh how I wish I could find more answers and the history about how and what boat my Nana came over on from Ireland. She never spoke of it I just know she was a young girl around 11 at the time on her own.
Where did she travel between?
Hardly given during the same period 8 million perished in the Provence of Madras in India alone whilst the British Government DOUBLED the grain EXPORT from India to England.
The famines although a natural occurrence were increased in their devastation by the decisions made by the British Government.
There were 12 famines of more than 500,000 deaths in the years of the British East India company and of the Raj, a 250 year span. There was only one under the Mughals, a similar length of time, and there has only been one, caused by the Pakistain-Bangladesh war, in the subcontinent since. This video fails to mention exploitative colonial political orders as the root of famine. It's a travesty.
Oxford dictionary definition of “immigrant” , “a person who comes to live permanently in a foreign country”, the Irish were part of a nation called the United Kingdom, they were probably the most reluctant members of the UK too ,the never immigrated to Scotland, they quite simply moved from one part of the UK to another to seek refuge from Londons catastrophic handling of the famine , also 25 % were Protestant Irish and bore Scottish names so they were akin to Scotland anyway, I don’t know why this immigration myth has perpetuated so long who does it serve? I can only surmise that even in this day and age an immigrant is synonymous with “something bad” due to a massive influx of illegal immigrants over the years, using the term immigrant for the Irish even after a 180 years come across as not only a historical inaccuracy but somewhat disparaging !
Hi Andrew, thanks for this. That is definitely an oversight on my part and you raise an important point. Some of the school textbooks still refer to the Irish as one of the four main 'immigrant' groups and I think this is where I got the term from. I'll make sure to correct this shortly! It certainly wasn't meant as a term of disparagement.
@@willhawkins9806 All good mate, great video, sorry I wasn’t having a go at you, I was just trying to point out a major misconception I see all the time about the Irish going to Scotland and England during the famine, thanks for going to the trouble of making the video and replying to my comment.
@@andrewheaney6858 Not to worry pal! You make a good point and I appreciate the feedback.
All the best,
Will
@@andrewheaney6858I’ve been pointing this out for years, that the Irish weren’t immigrants to the United Kingdom, they were part of the United Kingdom. This fact is constantly ignored, I guess it doesn’t suit the narrative.
Well said! I hold ancestry on both sides and know my family's history due to all the chronicles they left for family after them and my own learnings on the subject. Godspeed
Awful video. Stop spreading the Malthusian lie - and British curricular canard - that Ireland had "too many people" at the time.
Check population figures and land areas. The population of Ireland was roughly 8 million in the 1841 census, and that of Britain 18.5 million, so a little under a third of the total . The land areas? Ireland is roughly 84,000 km squared, and Britain about 206,000 km squared, so a little under a third of the total.
The idea that Ireland was "overpopulated" comes from the notion that it had little arable land (ie for grain), as well as the stereotype of Gaelic Irish catholics as idle and unproductive, but the truth is that Irish conditions are ideal for pasturage, which was the main traditional agricultural activity and provided a greater proportion of meat and milk products in the traditional diet than was the case in the English diet. This pasturage had largely been confiscated by a settler-colonial elite in the Cromwellian and Restoration period - Cromwell used land to pay his largely English-composed veteran army brigades in Ireland, since the London exchequer was near bankrupt, and sent the expelled tenants to live on the poorest tracts of land in the country.
The figure of the population doubling in a century is wildly misleading and out of context. Ireland's population had dropped by between 12 and 25% (some historians claim a higher figure) due to battles, massacres, crop burning, plagues and starvation during the period of the Wars of the Three Kingdoms (ie the wars between Royalists, Parliamentarians and the Irish Confederacy in the 1600s) and between 13% and 20% of the population died again in a famine in the 1740s, one largely caused by adverse weather (bitter winter cold and spring drought).
So a doubling in population was in line with recovery from two massive demographic setbacks.
Furthermore, the British (ie, island of Britain) population in 1747 is hard to define since the first census was in 1801, but from birth and death records a rough figure of about 7.8 million is discernible, meaning that *the population of Britain had more than doubled in a century* if it was over 18 million in 1841, as the census records.
Moreover, during both the famine of the 1740s and the starvation of the 1840s and 50s, British economic control of the island meant that along with linen, cured beef and pickled or salted butter were the main Irish exports. Meat products had constituted 36% of the diet even in the 1740s, meat protein had become rare in the diet during the Great Hunger of the 1840s and 50s, and the Gaelic speaking rural working classes had been deliberately penurised by the centuries-long anti-Catholic Penal Laws, which banned primogeniture for Catholics, and made them split holdings between sons, creating smaller and smaller areas for subsistence farming. On top of this, ownership of boats was restricted under the Penal Laws, and by the 1840s, they were in the ownership, largely, of the settler elite (so fish and other seafood could not be caught by the majority). The result? Total reliance on a single crop for a third or more of the population; the potato, which grew densely in poor soil and was nutritious compared to competitor foods planted in a similar small acreage.
Where was all that butter, beef (and by 1847, live pigs) being exported to? British cities. Britain, as an island, could not feed itself by the 1820s and became a net food importer, not because of a lack of arable land (a whopping 36% or more of English land is arable, compared to 6% of Irish land), but because more and more people left the land to become involved in a profitable industrial economy, an industrial economy, by the way, which was off limits to everyone in Ireland, barring its Protestant-majority extreme north, since education was not provided in Gaelic and had been banned for Catholics - even in English - for over a century, until the 1820s. The only public education offered even after the 1820s - with the collusion of the Catholic church and the state, it should be noted - was in English, which between a third and 40% of the population could not speak to a functional level. Food had become a product colonial subalterns were employed to produce, from Caribbean salted fish to Irish beef, and this made up the shortfall while British elites grew fat on the profits of working class-derived manufacture in rapidly expanding cities.
Mentioning the "famine" in Ireland in the 1840s without mentioning political factors, particularly the Penal Laws and the ethno-religious profile of the vast majority of landlords (who were Anglo-Irish protestants, often absentee and at study or play in London and surrounds, and thus incapable of responding to their tenants' needs, when not outright hostile to them) is a joke version of history. I'm glad you never became a teacher, and sad that secondary students will be watching this. It's a deliberate obfuscation of the truth. The English history curriculum is tragic.
Population does not mean famine... That's utter nonsense. If your going to do a video like this at least explain why the Irish depended on the potato.
They depended on it because of Poverty.
@@Occident. They depended upon it because of the banning of primogeniture in inheritance for Catholics under the grossly discriminatory Penal Laws, meaning that Irish catholics had to subsist on smaller and smaller plots of land or sell up to an alien caste of foreign landlords. Or, in simple English; a farmer couldn't leave all his land to one son, and the other sons couldn't acquire a profession because education was officially off limits to them. No teaching. No law. No politics; all illegal, and very few craft trades were open to non-English speakers.
they could hardly be described as immigrants as ireland was part of britain at that time
*Checks map* Ireland has not been part of Britain or vice versa since there was an ice age land bridge between the two. No, Ireland was part of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland from 1801 until 1922. Part of it, Northern Ireland, remained. It baffles me how many British people use these terms interchangeably.
@@johnmckiernan2176either way these people were still relocating to a different part of the same country so not technically immigrants in the true sense such as we have today
@@JohnAnderson-ss9vn State, not country. No legitimate Irish political authority ever decided to join the UK without either coercion or bribery. Even Grattan's Dublin parliament - totally unrepresentative of the population, btw - was bribed to abolish itself. This lack of representation is ultimately both the cause of the famine and of Irish independence, which has turned out to be a very fine idea.
It was a part of UK which Ireland was
Peel of England🇬🇧😭
There are a few people named Henry Hardcock who have been mentioned in historical records. One Henry Hardcock was a major in the British Army during the Napoleonic Wars. He was promoted to major on February 24, 1812, and served in the 99th Regiment of Foot. He was later promoted to lieutenant colonel on May 14, 1815.
Another Henry Hardcock was a clergyman in the Church of England. He was born in 1784 and ordained in 1808. He served as curate of St. Mary's Church in Nottingham from 1810 to 1813, and then as rector of St. Peter's Church in Leicester from 1813 to 1849. He died in 1849.
It is not clear which Henry Hardcock is mentioned in your search results. The Army List entry you linked to refers to a major in the British Army, but it does not give any other identifying information. It is possible that this is the same Henry Hardcock who was a clergyman, but it is also possible that it is a different person.
Without more information, it is impossible to say for sure who Henry Hardcock is. However, the two people mentioned above are the most likely candidates.
😂😂😂😂😂😂😂 delighted