The Ulster Museum controversy (9)

In Northern Ireland we have two indigenous or autocthonous minority languages, Irish and Ulster-Scots.  They are part of our linguistic heritage and both of them have contributed to our placenames and to the Ulster dialect that most of us use every day.  An awareness of the influence of both languages in Ulster can contribute to better understanding, good relations and a shared future.

However in the section of the Ulster Museum entitled 'Plantation to Power Sharing' there is a marked difference in the treatment of the two languages.  At one point the relationship between the Gaelic language of Scotland and the Gaelic language of Ireland is highlighted and there is an opportunity to hear Gaelic being spoken.  Unfortunately there is no corresponding acknowledgement of the influence of the Scots language in Ulster and no opportunity to hear Ulster-Scots being spoken. 

The Ulster-Scots language has been excluded and I really do not understand why it was decided to accommodate one minority language in this way and yet exclude the other.  What possible reason or explanation could there be?

The United Kingdom government, including the Northern Ireland Executive, is committed to implement the European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages.  In Northern Ireland the two recongised minority languages are Irish and Ulster-Scots and under Part 2 of the charter there is a requirement to 'take resolute action to promote' the languages.  Indeed my department chairs the Interdepartmental Charter Implementation Group on the implementation of the charter. 

Surely the exclusion of the Ulster-Scots language from this exhibition is a breach of the obligation to 'take resolute action'?

Zoneball

Children from a number of schools in Belfast took part in a recent football competition in the Spectrum Centre on the Shankill Road in Belfast.  The competition was organised by the Belfast Community Sports Network and each school represented a country taking part in the World Cup. 

The children taking part, both boys and girls, were from different school sectors, and from the North and West of the city. 

They had a thoroughly enjoyable time and also learned something about the country they were representing.  In addition there was a strong message about having a healthy lifestyle.

A great Ulster rower

Sports Minister Nelson McCausland congratulates Olympic hopeful Alan Campbell on winning a silver medal at the opening World Cup regatta of the season held at the weekend in Slovenia. Alan, from Coleraine, has been selected for the Great Britain and Northern Ireland London 2012 rowing team. Alan was back home today to launch 'Goldmark' which is a London 2012 Inspire project. Goldmark is a dynamic volunteer initiative designed to promote and recognise sports volunteering among young people aged 16-24.

The Uster Museum controversy (8)

One of the most obvious omissions in the Ulster Museum is the Hamilton & Montgomery settlement in east Down, which began in May 1606, the year before the Flight of the Earls and several years before the official Plantation of Ulster.  Thousands of Lowland Scottish families migrated to Ulster in the years that followed, providing the foundation for the later Plantation of Ulster.

Sir James Hamilton and Sir Hugh Montgomery were the 'founding fathers' of the Ulster-Scots and yet there is no mention of them.   Their settlement was 'the dawn of the Ulster-Scots' and yet it is omitted from the museum story.

In his book The Narrow Ground, the respected historian Dr A T Q Stewart said:

Hamilton & Montgomery... did not wrest a fertile, cultivated and prosperous region from Gaelic proprietors. They came instead to a country devastated by war and famine... they created the bridgehead through which the Scots were to come into Ulster for the rest of the century...

It is the eastern Scots plantation, old and new, which is the real Plantation of Ulster … When we try to establish a relationship between the Plantation of Ulster and the existence of Northern Ireland in the twentieth century, we must be aware of certain ambiguities and some imponderable factors. The distinctive Ulster-Scottish culture, isolated from the mainstream of Catholic and Gaelic culture would appear to have been created not by the specific and artificial plantation of the early seventeenth century, but by the continuous natural influx of Scottish settlers both before and after that episode ... Immigration from Scotland was fairly continuous for centuries before 1609, and was a fact of geography rather than a fact of history.

What explanation can there be for the omission of the Hamilton & Montgomery settlement?

Anyone seeking information on the Hamilton and Montgomery should visit http://www.hamiltonmontgomery1606.com/ which was researched and written by Mark Thomspon and Dr John McCavitt.

The Ulster Museum controversy (7)

One of the disappointments in the refurbished Ulster Museum is the way in which the Ulster-Scots community and Ulster-Scots culture have been airbrushed out of the exhibits.  This was one of the issues I raised in the letter which I sent to the trustees of the museum and which has now been leaked to the media.

The omission of the Ulster-Scots dimension of Ulster history was also identified by Mark Thompson, the former chairman of the Ulster-Scots Agency, on 31 October 2009 on his own blog, Bloggin fae the Burn, at  http://clydesburn.blogspot.com/   He made a passing comment on the Troubles section and then added:

But of FAR bigger concern to me is the Ulster-Scots component.  Why? Because there isn't one.  This cannot be an accident.  Museum people spend a lot of time, and money, considering what artefacts to show and how to display and interpret them.  Therefore, there has been a purposeful decision to exclude a meaningful Ulster-Scots dimension from the new Ulster Museum.  For all of the 21st century interior design and graphic design (both of which are excellent), I'm very disappointed to say that the Ulster Museum can be added to the list of those institutions still trapped in a medieval Anglo-Irish mindset. 

I have visited the Ulster Museum several times and have yet to find even the term Ulster-Scots on any of the exhibits.  Yet that term was first used as far back as 1640 to describe the people who had come across from Scotland.  How can anyone justify excluding the term entirely from the Plantation to Power-Sharing section of the museum?

The Ulster Museum controversy (6)

During the course of the Seven Days programme on Radio Ulster yesterday, there was several very significant comments by Richard Warner, who was formerly a curator in the Ulster Museum. 

He said, 'Nobody who is a properly trained museum curator, let's say in the history of Northern Ireland, is going to ignore the Orange Order. The Orange Order will be put there within the display. It is part of what formed Northern Ireland. There has always been reference to the Orange Order in there. The balance may or may not be right, according to other views. It has always been seen by the curatorial staff in the Ulster Msueum as a very important part of Ulster history.'

The Ulster Museum reopened on 22 October 2009, after a major refurbishment, and just a matter of days before the opening there was no representation of the Orange Order at all!  The cursory reference that is there now was inserted in the last few days, when it was pointed out to the museum that they had ignored the Orange Order.

Yet Richard Warner states that, 'Nobody who is a properly trained museum curator, let's say in the history of Northern Ireland. is going to ingore the Orange Order.  It has always been seen by the curatorial staff in the Ulster Museum as a very important part of Ulster history.'

Yes the Orange Order was included in the Ulster Museum story before it closed.  Why then was it that just days before the Ulster Museum reopened the Orange Order had been airbrushed out of the story?  That is a question that requires an answer.

Earlier in the programme Richard Warner also spoke about museums 'using objects to illustrate the story they are telling.'  That comment is particularly relevant to the Orange Order because there are no Orange Order artefacts in the exhibition.  The museum has artefacts in its stores but they not in the exhibition for the public to see.

The fact is that in the last few days before the Ulster Museum reopened a single board was added with five or six sentences about the Order.  That board was added as an afterthought and that is why it looks like an afterthought.  It was possible to add a single board with text on it but without redesigning that part of the museum there was no space to add a cabinet with Orange artefacts.

The fact that it was an afterthought is highlighted by the stark contrast with the adjacent displays on the Irish Volunteers and the United Irishmen, where there are a number of cabinets with artefacts.

The Ulster Museum controversy (5)

I have just listened on BBC iPlayer to the Seven Days programme on Radio Ulster. The programme, which was broadcast yesterday, included a discussion on the Ulster Museum and the contributors were Christopher Stalford (DUP councillor), Richard Warner (archaeologist and a former curator in the Ulster Museum), Daniel Jewsbury (artist and co-editor of Variant) and Deirdre Nelson (Independent councillor in Ballymena).

Deirdre Nelson was critical of my position and said, 'The Orange Order is now, whether people like it or not, a minority organisation within Northern Ireland. It also has its own very well equipped museum up at Schomberg House. If the Orange Order wants to promote and portray its history, they have a museum.'

This is a bizarre argument from the Ballymena councillor. Yes there is a interesting display of Orange artefacts at Schomberg House and the Orange Order plans to develop a museum located in Schomberg House and Loughgall but that does not justify the exclusion of any Orange Order artefacts from the Ulster Museum.