Started By
Message
2
Posted on 7/26/14 at 8:04 am to Tiger the Hutt
quote:
This whole thread is full of shite. You talk about "SEC people" and it's all about German, Irish, Italian... how about the people that actually make up a majority of our rosters; you know, non-white people? If "SEC people" were just what y'all have talked about, we'd be getting our butts kicked like it was pre-1970 all over again. We all known the SEC dominates in football, and it ain't because of Anglo-saxons. Just remember that when you talk about SEC people.
shutup German
Posted on 7/26/14 at 10:04 am to Harry Rex Vonner
I'm not sure if you are being serious. If you are, you butchered the central Texas genealogical story.
Posted on 7/26/14 at 11:56 am to Guava Jelly
Alabama peeps are from their dad, and dad's sister. Roll Tide. 
Posted on 7/26/14 at 12:07 pm to bbvdd
I'm French, Spanish, Croatian, and German from south Louisiana, Scottish from North Carolina, and English from Virginia. I have some serious issues.
Posted on 7/26/14 at 2:41 pm to calitiger
75% German, 25% Irish
You guessed it, after a few drinks world domination ideas start popping into my head.
You guessed it, after a few drinks world domination ideas start popping into my head.
Posted on 7/26/14 at 2:43 pm to SouthdownsTiger
We're all African, or maybe Middle-Eastern, when you get down to it.
Posted on 7/26/14 at 2:50 pm to AgCoug
quote:
We're all African, or maybe Middle-Eastern, when you get down to it.
True, but North Africa or Middle East would be more accurate, strictly speaking.
Posted on 7/26/14 at 3:34 pm to bbvdd
quote:
What's the percentage of people in LA that still claim to be of French origin? I would imagine most are in the southern part?
Well Louisiana has two main waves of French heritage. First were the French from French Colonial days but then came the Acadians who were basically expelled from Eastern Canada by the Brits. The Spanish held Louisiana at the time of the Great Expulsion and they were happy to welcome more Catholics and in fact helped transport them. For their part, the Brits weren't too happy about the constant resistance to British rule by the Acadians, their Catholicism, or the French taking our side in the revolutionary war and they deported many just to be rid of them. The Acadians established themselves in S. LA or "Acadiana" and are the forefathers of the Cajuns, Cajun French (language) which developed independently there, and Cajun culture.
The Acadians also settled in Luisiana (much of the areas in the US that have strong French heritage that hasn't been forgotten - like Mizzou but really more than half the US in terms of land mass - a land mass even larger than the Louisiana Purchase and places like LA, MO, and Maine probably have the most notable/remembered heritage in terms of the sheer amount of people and wide influence, though Maine's Acadians and general colonial French heritage (along with the rest of New England's) is due to proximity to Eastern Canada and interaction with French traders, trappers, etc. and goes back pre-expulsion/migration).
I know, history junkie alert, but the more you know.
This post was edited on 7/26/14 at 3:42 pm
Posted on 7/26/14 at 4:13 pm to Phat Phil
Google Scots-Irish and find out more about the Scots-Irish. The Scots-Irish are well represented in every state that has an SEC team.
Posted on 7/26/14 at 4:34 pm to Prof
quote:
I know, history junkie alert, but the more you know.
Good stuff Prof..
My ancestors moved to Louisiana from Colorado, fresh from Germany mostly, in anticipation of the petro-chemical boom down here.
Posted on 7/26/14 at 4:43 pm to SouthdownsTiger
i know the birmingham area has a large Greek contigent. My neighbors on both sides were Greek, and i know the owner of the Fish Market is, too
Posted on 7/26/14 at 5:13 pm to SouthdownsTiger
quote:
Good stuff Prof..
My ancestors moved to Louisiana from Colorado, fresh from Germany mostly, in anticipation of the petro-chemical boom down here.
Thanks. I've grown really fascinated with our collective heritage, partly because we focus so much on the war with Great Britian that a lot of people have it in their heads America is primarily British, partly because the Scots-Irish (who absolutely had enormous influence) have become so hyperfocused on in the SE that everyone else is kinda forgotten about, and partly because I don't know my own family's history.
Even with E. TN it amazes me that despite so many places being named by and after the French that we've just kinda forgotten that influence. We tend to remember the German heritage a bit more but we forget the French. Plus there's just so many others that contributed. We even forget our enormous native american influence (this despite the fact that the very name of our state "Tennessee/Tanasi" comes from the Cherokee and that Tanasi was located in E. TN and settlers and Cherokee lived in peace for most of our history or that some were never forced out of E. TN via the Trail of Tears/expulsion or that even today you can find arrowhead and native american sites all over E. TN) and the fact that especially in E.TN there was tons of intermixture and interaction - people got along and lived together for ages. We developed so much from the intreplay from various white ethnic groups, black folks, and Indians it's crazy and even that's leaving some out. Most have no idea that Hernando de Soto was the first European to set foot here. And we're just an example of this kind of thing.
Culture never develops in a vacuum and ethnicity and even some of the harsher color lines never stopped folks from exchanging culture in both directions. I mean to me I think we all own the cultures of America to some degree - we wouldn't be who we are without every single group. Even if we don't share blood in an ethnic sense, we do share culture and all that went into developing it.
This post was edited on 7/26/14 at 5:33 pm
Posted on 7/26/14 at 5:37 pm to SunHog
That's amazing about French in the Carolinas and West Virginia. I understand why the New England has a lot of French speakers, because there are a lot of Quebecois/French Canadians in those states. And of course Louisiana and Mississippi I guess due to proximity to Louisiana. But West Virginia, that's something.
Posted on 7/26/14 at 5:52 pm to Prof
quote:
especially in E.TN there was tons of intermixture and interaction - people got along and lived together for ages.
I would go that far. The early settlers into ETN were not very welcomed by the Cherokee and other tribes. When they started to arrive in large groups in the 1780's it violated a treaty the tribes were told would not allow them for the most part. Dragging Canoe fought and attacked white settlers until his death. And lets not forget Andrew Jackson was not to fond of the tribes either. By the mid 1800's peace finally settled but more so out of fear for the Native Americans.
Posted on 7/26/14 at 5:55 pm to maine82
In SW VA about an hour east of Bristol I had family settled in the area in 1600's and they were all French. Most of the German migration started in the mid 1700's
Posted on 7/26/14 at 6:09 pm to Prof
quote:
Culture never develops in a vacuum and ethnicity and even some of the harsher color lines never stopped folks from exchanging culture in both directions. I mean to me I think we all own the cultures of America to some degree - we wouldn't be who we are without every single group. Even if we don't share blood in an ethnic sense, we do share culture and all that went into developing it.
Well said and I couldn't agree more.
I've studied Louisiana's history somewhat and I'm quite proud of how progressive it was towards issues such as slavery back in the day. Sure, there was the huge cotton plantation industry but all in all it was also the most progressive of the confederate states in terms of treatment of blacks and minorities.
Quite possibly because there were just so many groups of people at play in the population, to accept diversification wasn't as much a choice as a fact of the times.
Posted on 7/26/14 at 6:28 pm to TideWarrior
quote:
I would go that far. The early settlers into ETN were not very welcomed by the Cherokee and other tribes. When they started to arrive in large groups in the 1780's it violated a treaty the tribes were told would not allow them for the most part. Dragging Canoe fought and attacked white settlers until his death. And lets not forget Andrew Jackson was not to fond of the tribes either. By the mid 1800's peace finally settled but more so out of fear for the Native Americans.
Dragging Canoe was a war chief who got most of his support from the Chickamauga. He was at odds with other Cherokee in terms of warmaking. The Cherokee weren't singularly led. As to Jackson... he left a lot E. TN Cherokee alone - Cherokee NC was established at the behest of whites who didn't want them banished.
Jackson's motivations for removal of the Cherokee had more to do with the Gold Rush in Georgia than is commonly noted. It's one of the reasons that the southernmost part of E. TN as well as Georgia had so much removal.
ETA: Of course, I do agree it wasn't always all peace and roses - nothing was back then but for the most part things were good for a LOT longer than they were bad. BTW, I may be counting back a lot longer than you as well. I'm talking ever since we had white settlements.
This post was edited on 7/26/14 at 6:38 pm
Posted on 7/26/14 at 6:43 pm to UFownstSECsince1950
quote:
This is why I love florida, and why it's better than arkansas, mississippi, alabama, louisiana, kentucky, tennessee, etc etc
Florida is for vacationing, no one really wants to live there except for old folks from the north
Posted on 7/26/14 at 6:59 pm to SouthdownsTiger
quote:
Well said and I couldn't agree more.
I've studied Louisiana's history somewhat and I'm quite proud of how progressive it was towards issues such as slavery back in the day. Sure, there was the huge cotton plantation industry but all in all it was also the most progressive of the confederate states in terms of treatment of blacks and minorities.
Quite possibly because there were just so many groups of people at play in the population, to accept diversification wasn't as much a choice as a fact of the times.
Louisiana has TONS to be proud of on that count. Sure it wasn't equal but it was very much better than most and in NOLA even slaves had what I'd call human rights that were actually enforced when people found out there was abuse. It can't ever make up for slavery (nothing can and it's something that condemns the entire US) but being better and having several classes of free blacks is something to def. be proud of.
Oddly enough, the first completely abolitionist paper in the US was started here in E. TN and in the lead up to war we were considered the freest soil in the entire US to speak openly of abolition. The Amish were a big part of the reason why. Lincoln himself made us a priority as we were considered occupied by our own state (the rest of the state was very different) and of course we were well known for our views and attempts to secede from the secession.
Aside from the extreme NE (think Bristol) and the extreme SE (think Chattanooga), virtually all of E. TN was not only pro-Union and by a LANDSLIDE but we were reviled by the rest of the South for having too 'liberal' policies when it came to blacks and whites interacting socially. Many a minister, even in Bristol, railed against us.
Also like LA we had tri-racial groups (some even migrated to LA for larger communities). It's kinda weird and neat, imo, that these two spots so far away from one another that had far more progressive policies than just about everyone else (even the North which had issues all its own).
This post was edited on 7/26/14 at 7:03 pm
Page 8 of 9
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News