How to keep the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland?

JJohnson

Banned
I have a question that will play into a larger timeline: how do we keep all of Ireland in the United Kingdom as one united government within the overall United Kingdom?

And as a separate, maybe related, how can the Irish language achieve a higher level of success on the island as a whole? I don't know about majority language status, but at least 20% or better would be good.
 
Depends on the POD & all that, but I'd say after the Great Famine, the best bet would be Home Rule before the 1910s & WWI.
 
I have a question that will play into a larger timeline: how do we keep all of Ireland in the United Kingdom as one united government within the overall United Kingdom?

And as a separate, maybe related, how can the Irish language achieve a higher level of success on the island as a whole? I don't know about majority language status, but at least 20% or better would be good.

You can kill two birds with one stone by having the Monarchy decide to translate the bible and common prayer book into Gaelic, surely that would cause more of the Irish to convert to the state (Irish that is) church.
 
I have often wondered why the Danes were so much more successful at integrating Catholic Norway into Protestantism and their realm, and besides the conclusion that the English in Ireland were sometimes just being dicks for the sake of it I feel that if England had gained secure control of Ireland earlier relative to religious turmoil, it might have succeeded using the gentler Danish methods. Or it could have stayed Catholic, I suppose, either works. Either is a start, removing a lot of the reason for the outright contempt of the Irish, which should also work in favour of their language.

This is probably going to be the case in the foreseeable future of Ed Thomas Fight and be Right, with Ireland, England, Scotland, and Wales all belonging to a socialist state carved out of the remains of the British Empire and the Irish Workers' Republic undertaking language promotion with all the energy of the 20s USSR, but possibly that wasn't exactly what you were thinking of. ;)
 
Granting Catholic emancipation at the start of the union would likely do it, as Catholics were quite enthusiastic for it until George III stuck his nose in.

He lost Britain both Ireland and America. What a great monarch!
 

Ak-84

Banned
Even afterwards, Catholic empancipation would come a generation later. I think until circa 1850's, Unionist parties won most of the seats in Ireland.

I think the latest POD, is the implementation of Home Rule. Have it implemeted by the time WWI comes around. That, and somehow prevent the British Establishment from losing its collective wit. The actions in Ireland alientated the, mostly-want-to-stay-a-part-of-UK Irish and got independence on the agenda.




Similarly, and at the same time, the British managed to lose their popularity in India, real fast
 

Falkenburg

Monthly Donor
Catholic Emancipation is the crux of the matter. The earlier the better.

Repeal of the Union and later Home Rule gained momentum from the perception that the Westminster Parliament could not (or would not) deliver a just and equitable settlement.

Ideally one would want to overcome Papal opposition to the Orange/Hanoverian Succession.
Some sort of political (if not religious) reconciliation would lessen Protestant fears of Catholicism as a 'Jacobite Fifth Column',
consequently removing the impetus for Test Acts and Penal Laws.

This has implications for the chances of successful Emancipation as an intrinsic part of the 1800 Act of Union.
It could even, depending on the degree of reconciliation, remove the need for Emancipation in the first place.

Were this to be the case, it seems to me, the Union would have a more robust foundation.
Constitutional redress would be shown to be effective and 'Irish' political aspirations could be channeled into constructive engagement with the Westminster Parliament
(as opposed to the obstructionism and sectional maneuvering that characterised OTL).

From there it strikes me as highly plausible that Ireland would be a happy participant and partner within the United Kingdom, rather than a reluctant indentured servant.

Falkenburg
 
Ideally one would want to overcome Papal opposition to the Orange/Hanoverian Succession.
Some sort of political (if not religious) reconciliation would lessen Protestant fears of Catholicism as a 'Jacobite Fifth Column',
consequently removing the impetus for Test Acts and Penal Laws.

I don't think you'll lessen the fifth column fear as long as Catholic France remains Britain's primary enemy, regardless of what the Pope thinks.

I think it's as simple as a more liberal or more apathetic King - parliament already backed emancipation.
 

Falkenburg

Monthly Donor
Fair point.

However, removing the domestic antipathy towards Catholicism in general (and Irish Catholicism as the most visible manifestation of that) would transform the environment in which public life is conducted.

A less dogmatic Monarch might well enable Emancipation with Union but would not draw the poison from the political bloodstream.

Negating that provides the most solid basis on which to build a Union that lasts (IMO).

Falkenburg
 
You can kill two birds with one stone by having the Monarchy decide to translate the bible and common prayer book into Gaelic, surely that would cause more of the Irish to convert to the state (Irish that is) church.

An interesting idea; Gaelic speakers in Scotland would be pleased as well (or is the Scottish dialect too different from the Irish?). I imagine that this translation would be for use in Anglican and other Protestant congregations. I find it unlikely that the Crown would presume to authorize such a translation for use in Catholic congregations and even more unlikely that Rome would approve of it.
 

JJohnson

Banned
Catholic Emancipation is the crux of the matter. The earlier the better.

Repeal of the Union and later Home Rule gained momentum from the perception that the Westminster Parliament could not (or would not) deliver a just and equitable settlement.

Ideally one would want to overcome Papal opposition to the Orange/Hanoverian Succession.
Some sort of political (if not religious) reconciliation would lessen Protestant fears of Catholicism as a 'Jacobite Fifth Column',
consequently removing the impetus for Test Acts and Penal Laws.

This has implications for the chances of successful Emancipation as an intrinsic part of the 1800 Act of Union.
It could even, depending on the degree of reconciliation, remove the need for Emancipation in the first place.

Were this to be the case, it seems to me, the Union would have a more robust foundation.
Constitutional redress would be shown to be effective and 'Irish' political aspirations could be channeled into constructive engagement with the Westminster Parliament
(as opposed to the obstructionism and sectional maneuvering that characterised OTL).

From there it strikes me as highly plausible that Ireland would be a happy participant and partner within the United Kingdom, rather than a reluctant indentured servant.

Falkenburg

Interesting turning point there, Falkenburg. I was reading up a little on Catholic Emancipation in the UK, something I had never learned in school before.

As one possible change, instead of taking until 1829, perhaps a much quicker Emancipation, going on William Pitt's promise for one in the Act of Union, would help here? What might it entail? And theoretically, what would the modern UK look like with a united Ireland within it?
 
An interesting idea; Gaelic speakers in Scotland would be pleased as well (or is the Scottish dialect too different from the Irish?).

Until the 18th century, the bardic literary language of Gaelic Scotland was Irish - well, an old-fashioned standard of Irish, but so was literary Irish. The first successful vernacular Scots Gaelic bible dates from that time - there was one published in London in 1690 but nobody noticed) - and before that time, Gaelic-speaking congregations generally did use the Irish bible, which dated from early Stewart times, IIRC. They finished one testament before the other.

I honestly don't know on what basis is was used, but I do seem to remember that the problem was that since the Irish weren't Protestant, you couldn't get Irish-speaking Protestant clergy, and since their weren't Irish-speaking Protestant clergy...
 
You can kill two birds with one stone by having the Monarchy decide to translate the bible and common prayer book into Gaelic, surely that would cause more of the Irish to convert to the state (Irish that is) church.

They did, as part of a project to win the still largely Irish speaking population over to protestantism. It didn't work however - the Irish stayed Catholic and continued to use the Latin bible.
 
I like the idea sombody suggested a while back (it might even have been me, I forget) of turning a significant minority of the Irish protestant (or more likely calvanist) while Henry VIII is still catholic, he naturally persecutes the new alien religion cermenting the identification of Irish nationalist = protestant. Come the big divorce scandal England goes protestant but H will still be persecuting the non Anglican Irish, Edward is more radical protestant and dials back, Mary persecutes everyone, Liz lets everybody alone (so long as they promise not to revolt).

End result is an Ireland much like Scotland hanging with England so they don't hang seperately.
 
Greetings!

I am a Long time lurker and first time to post.

It is my understanding that it was the famine and the National Schools that cut down the number of Irish speakers. If there was more aid from the British when the famine was occurring and thus fewer fleeing Gaelic speaking refugees could help.
 

wormyguy

Banned
Simply have the UK remain Catholic in the first place (although that might lead to problems with Scotland).
 
Top