The Clearances

[MacMillan of Rathdown]

There are three things often overlooked when discussing the "Clearences" or the "Famine".

The first has been touched on, and that was the Europe-wide failure of the potato crop. Not just in Ireland, or Scotland, but throughout the whole of Europe the crop drastically failed. Millions more starved in Europe than in Scotland and Ireland combined.

The second thing that is often overlooked, and in my opinion this "omission" is usually politically driven, is the fact that there was no government system of welfare relief anywhere in the world at that time. The whole of Europe relied on Christian compassion, and unfortunately there just wasn't enough to go around. The wealth of Scotland and Ireland was centered in the cities, and it was to these cities that the hungry masses dragged themselves in the hopes of finding food and employment.

As cities became overcrowded the hungry were turned away. The question was, "where to go?" In the case of the Irish many went to England and Scotland; according to the the 1851 Census, nearly 20% of the population of Glasgow was born in Ireland. The same was true for Dundee on the opposite side of the country. Cities in Britain, such as Liverpool, were also flooded with a tidal wave of Irish. According to the most reliable estimates, more Irish went to Britain than left for the New World.

And what of the Scots?

Crop failures and a shift in land ownership away from the Lairds and into the hands of London based "Companies" forced many rural Scots into the cities in what became a desperate hunt for work, with the native-born Scots and recently arrived Irish competing for the same scant opportunities to earn enough to feed their families. Something had to give, and it was these recently displaced Scots who moved to the New World. Plenty of work and free land for farming drew them like a lodestone to the opportunities across the vast oceans of the world.

The last thing that many people overlook when discussing the root causes of the mass migrations from Ireland and Scotland in the first half of the 19th century are the two things that always seem to be with us: War and Taxes.

I recently read a report by the Internal Revenue Service indicating that the top 10% of wage earners in the United States now pay 60% of the total income taxes received by the US government. The same was true in Great Britain at the beginning of the 19th century. The land owning class accounted for more than 50% of all tax revenues received by the government (the rest was derived from tariffs, duties, and import taxes).

To recover the costs of the war in America, as well as the Napoleonic wars, the British government cranked up the taxes on the land owners until finally they reached the breaking point. Faced with the dual spectres of bankruptcy and land seizure, many land owners leased their estates in Scotland to "companies" based in London and Liverpool who agreed to meet the tax burden and pay a stipend to the Laird, after deducting their administrative costs. (The same happened in Ireland where estates were leased or sold to "Gombeen" men, merchant-speculators in Dublin, Cork and Limerick.)

While this sounded good to desperate, cash strapped landowners, it became a license to steal for the Companies. And steal they did. By structuring payments to the landowners as "loans" they were quickly able to encumber the estates with so much debt that they were able to force the "sale" by the owner for mere pennies on the pound.

Once they were in possession of the land, the Companies were in a position to turn a profit, something they didn't hesitate to do, even if it meant the wholesale eviction of those who tenanted the land. Which, to hear the telling of it, makes Thomas Dixon Jr's novel of the re-construction of the post-civil war South seem positively enlightened.

But then the "telling" of anything always seems to be more widely received than the actual facts of the matter. As long as we are humans, we will be given to passion more than reason.

[gilmore]

I'd like to point something out. When somebody's ancestors did something that hurt the world or people in it, people tend to want to forget it ever happened. Sure, we can't erase it but we can learn from it. And not everything in history was about inventions or people discovering things or places, people died! Last year as part of our education we had to watch "Roots," it's a story of an African slave and his new life on the plantation, after we watch it our teacher proposed a good question (Not word for word): "Should we learn about things like this, even if it is very graphic?"

I am very surprised to read this.

It has been conclusively shown that at two separate points, Alex Haley hit brick walls in in his research and could go no further in tracing his ancestry. So, he took liberties with the facts and started tracing families' ancestries that were not his own.

This is fairly well-known in genealogical circles. I am sure that if you Google, you can find the details.

"Roots" is an interesting read, and it tells a story that comports with a narrative that some would like to believe, but much of it is fiction, not fact, so I am surprised to see it taught as if it was history.

[macwilkin]

I think Scott's post just won the gold star for this thread.

I recently read a report by the Internal Revenue Service indicating that the top 10% of wage earners in the United States now pay 60% of the total income taxes received by the US government. The same was true in Great Britain at the beginning of the 19th century. The land owning class accounted for more than 50% of all tax revenues received by the government (the rest was derived from tariffs, duties, and import taxes).

I bring up a similar point in my classes when I teach about the Revolution, Scott. What the "radical patriot myth" of American history fails to mention is that the taxes in Britain were much higher than what the colonists were paying.

The myth also fails to mention the fact that the taxes imposed on the colonists were to pay for the previous war, the Seven Year's war, in which thousands of British troops were sent to North America to protect those same colonists from the French & their Indian allies. In Parliament's view, why shouldn't the people being protected pay their fair share?

Regards,

Todd

[Nick the DSM]

not sure if anyone posted this

dont forget the hebride clearances. pretty much kicked everyone out, making them move to Ireland, Canada and such. i think it was because they wanted to use the land for industrial purposes, but i cant remember.

[JS Sanders]

Nick,
The Hebrides were cleared along with much of the Highlands and the inhabitants replaced with sheep and sometimes deer for sportsmen. Over 40,000 were evicted on Skye alone.

I spent a good portion of a trip to Scotland there. The Outer Hebrides look much like the moon in places, only wetter.

It's bleak and the hills are little but scorrie covered, but as Buzz Aldrin described the moon's surface, it's "magnificent desolation".

Slainte,
steve

[Nick the DSM]

Nick,
The Hebrides were cleared along with much of the Highlands and the inhabitants replaced with sheep and sometimes deer for sportsmen. Over 40,000 were evicted on Skye alone.

I spent a good portion of a trip to Scotland there. The Outer Hebrides look much like the moon in places, only wetter.

It's bleak and the hills are little but scorrie covered, but as Buzz Aldrin described the moon's surface, it's "magnificent desolation".

Slainte,
steve

thats what i meant...i think.

[MacMillan of Rathdown]

Todd,
Thanks for the kudos!

I've always found it interesting that many of those agitating for "revolution" at the time of the founding of the United States seem to have been millionaire land owners, shipping tycoons, and politically powerful lawyers/legislators. Now it is a matter of fact that from the establishment of the Jamestown Colony in 1608 until the Declaration of Independence in 1776 not a single gentleman in the whole of the North American colonies was elevated to the peerage, and only one (!) received a knighthood.

I can not help but wonder if a liberal sprinkling of coronets and k's (as was the case in Ireland during the same period) might not have forestalled the eventual rupture that occurred between the colonies and the Mother country?

And had the revolution failed, do you suppose that we would now be wringing our hands over the Great North American clearances? Perhaps from our home in Barbados or elsewhere in the Empire?

Scott

[ThreadBbdr]

Guys, we need to start a book list of recommened reads.

Here's what I have so far

Prebble, John "The Lion in the North"

Prebble, John "Highland Clearances"

Webb, Jim "Born Fighting: How the Scots-Irish Shaped America"

Fischer, David H. "Albions Seed: British Folkways in America

More? pros and cons?

Note: Links are to Amazon and Amazon.uk

[Sheep In Wolf's Clothing]

OOHHH another book list!!
I'll add:
John Prebble Mutiny about the of the highlander regiments between 1743 and 1804

John Prebble Glencoe Title says it all

John Prebble The Kings Jaunt About the 1822 visit of George IV to Scotland

J.D. Mackie A History of Scotland A good general history of Scotland book

Jenni Calder Scots in Canada I really liked this book because a good deal of the book dealt with the Scots that settled in my area of Ontario. I can drive to many of the towns mention in the book in under 45 minutes. (most of these towns have Scottish place names!)

And finally any book by David R Ross. He is more of a common mans historian and I have really enjoyed his books. I highly enjoyed his book Desire Lines His Website : http://www.davidrross.org/

I am looking forward to more book suggestions!
Sara

[Pleater]

The reason for the monoculture of potatoes which made the blight so devastating is that it enabled families to survive on far smaller areas of land than would be required of they were growing - for instance - grain.

The potato produces a large amount of food from a small plot, it can be kept for long periods, it does not require processing - no miller to pay, and it can be cooked easily on a domestic hearth or simple camp fire - no baker to pay, and it will suport life - it has vitamins and if eaten whole, which was quite common, a family would stay healthy.

In areas where vines were grown the use of copper solution to deter blight was bound to be discovered - Boreaux mixture was sprayed onto vines to prevent mildew - so potatoes being grown alongside would be likely to get a covering too, and then there would be the possibilty of the whole field showing blight and dying off, except for the strip alongside the vinyard - the reason eventually was realised, and the technology and chemicals to protect the potatoes were already available.

However - the number of vinyards in Ireland and Scotland in those days was probably about zero, so the situation of grapes and potatoes growing alongside eachother would never occur.