Eerie, haunting, beautiful: Scottish Psalm Singing

[beloitpiper]

I didn't realise until I actually listened to it but this is pretty well what is still the format in the "Wee Free" church here in Scotland.

The recording is from the Free Back Church of Scotland on the Isle of Lewis. The recording isn't old, so yeah it's a current practice.

[Kevlar70]

Not only is this type of 'line singing' still in practice on Lewis, but also in rural Georgia. The practice of having the first voice (the Presenter) start the psalm and then the congregation join in has developed into 'shape-note' singing which is still practiced in some communities near where I live. The similarities of shape-note singing, line-singing by some African-American churches in the south, and the Gaelic psalm singing in the Hebrides is striking.

NPR did a short piece on it, linked below:

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/s...toryId=4632964

I heard a lecture by Willie Ruff of the Yale School of Music a couple of years ago which detailed what I have written above.

[A Hay]

After reading the start of this thread and hearing the short clips on the website, I ordered SALM Vol.1.

It arrived today and I've been enjoying it this evening.
Very nice and restful.

Thanks for bringing it to our attention, beloitpiper.

Tom

[Galician]

This melody is fascinating.

It's worth noting that musical accompaniment was limited during the first millenium of Christianity. The organ was totally banned, due to its ancient connections with brothels. (Just like jazz, eh?)

In my own monastery, there is no organ; everything is sung a cappella. I know what it's like to get thirty men to harmonize!!!

Also, I couldn't tell from the clip but I wondered if the congregation was repeating what the cantor/leader was singing. That would be the usual method of song for Congregational churches in colonial New England. "Amazing Grace" can still be heard like this.

As regards the use of Gaelic by African slaves, during that same period, Cromwell's troops would routinely seize Irish men, women and youth right off the streets and roads and send them to Barbados as slaves. Almost the entire body of the Catholic clergy of Ireland were shipped off in this way at one point. I've heard it that this accounts for the Barbadian(?) accent.

[gilmore]

You might think so but it is more than likely that the Scots were slaves themselves. See this link from a thread I posted recently - http://www.dunbarmartyrs.com/

....

It's not that I think so, it's that I have read so in quite a few histories of the colonial American south.

While it may be more desireable and politically correct these days to think of Scots as slaves than as slave owners, this just wasn't usually the case here at all.

While some Scots were indeed transported here as convicts (and by far most who came here were not), they could eventually become liberated, buy land and own slaves themselves. Africans could not. However they came here, Gaelic-speaking Scots tended to be deeply religious and felt it their Christian duty to teach their ways to their Gaelic speaking African slaves, stripping them of their culture and their religion in order to civilize and convert them, saving them from the fires of Calvinist hell in the afterlife.

[beloitpiper]

It's not that I think so, it's that I have read so in quite a few histories of the colonial American south.

While it may be more desireable and politically correct these days to think of Scots as slaves than as slave owners, this just wasn't usually the case here at all.

While some Scots were indeed transported here as convicts (and by far most who came here were not), they could eventually become liberated, buy land and own slaves themselves. Africans could not. However they came here, Gaelic-speaking Scots tended to be deeply religious and felt it their Christian duty to teach their ways to their Gaelic speaking African slaves, stripping them of their culture and their religion in order to civilize and convert them, saving them from the fires of Calvinist hell in the afterlife.

Of course there were Scottish plantation owners, but the Scottish plantation owners would've spoken English. Only the poor (i.e. slaves or sharecroppers) would've spoken Gaelic as their primary language.

[BoldHighlander]

While some Scots were indeed transported here as convicts (and by far most who came here were not), they could eventually become liberated, buy land and own slaves themselves. Africans could not.

Well, that isn't entirely correct. In 1650, there were only about 300 "Africans" living in Virginia, about 1% of an estimated 30,000 population. They were not slaves but indentured servants. Some black indentured servants even went on to patent and buy land (& slaves) of their own.

It wasn't until Anthony Johnson (a black man & former indentured servant) that the first recorded instance of slavery (for a lifetime) in the Virginia Colony was established in 1654 (of course this doesn't include the practice by the Spanish further south). In a lawsuit, Anthony Johnson of Northampton County on Virginia's Eastern Shore convinced a court that he was entitled to the lifetime services of John Casor, a black man (this lawsuit created the basis for the "peculiar institution" of slavery that lasted until the American Civil War).

Anthony Johnson had been one of 20 black men brought to Jamestown in 1619 as indentured servants. By 1623, he had achieved his freedom and by 1651 was prosperous enough to import five "servants" of his own, for which he was granted 250 acres as "headrights".

You can read more about Anthony Johnson & John Casor at:

http://nichecreator.com/sample/index...wn%2C_Virginia

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Casor

It should be also noted that even up to the American Civil War there were freed blackmen who in turn became plantation owners & had numerous slaves of their own.

Sorry for hijacking the thread...

[gilmore]

Of course there were Scottish plantation owners, but the Scottish plantation owners would've spoken English. Only the poor (i.e. slaves or sharecroppers) would've spoken Gaelic as their primary language.

This just wasn't true. Read a bit of history, such as that of Cumberland County, North Carolina, and the rest of the Cape Fear River valley.

Whether they spoke Gaelic or not, it was far more likely to have been slave owners who taught their slaves to sing by lining out the hymns than fellow slaves. It was slave owners, not fellow slaves, who determined the religion of the enslaved and how it was practiced.

[gilmore]

Well, that isn't entirely correct. In 1650, there were only about 300 "Africans" living in Virginia, about 1% of an estimated 30,000 population. They were not slaves but indentured servants. Some black indentured servants even went on to patent and buy land (& slaves) of their own.

...
Sorry for hijacking the thread...

My understanding is that the period we are discussing was later than that.

[BoldHighlander]

My understanding is that the period we are discussing was later than that.

I'm not sure which time period your talking about, and I don't wish to hijack this thread further from the subject of Celtic Music, but to say that Africans (slaves /indentured servants) couldn't eventually become liberated, buy land and own slaves themselves just isn't correct (and if it wasn't for this statement I wouldn't even bother).
It did indeed occur (though I would agree that it wasn't as common as the Scots or Irish indentured servants circumstance).

Here are a couple of more links of later periods if it at all helps:

Black Slave Owners Civil War Article by Robert M Grooms
http://www.americancivilwar.com/auth...laveowners.htm

Black Slaveowners
Free Black Slave Masters in South Carolina, 1790-1860
by Larry Koger

http://www.sc.edu/uscpress/1995/3037.html

it isn't the p/c history that's being taught today, but it shouldn't be forgotten.
There are more articles etc out there on the subject, all one has to do is search.

Okay, I will not hijack this thread further