The Clearances

[macwilkin]

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

Noted military historian Don Higginbotham addresses this issue in his book George Washington and the American Military Tradition. Higginbotham suggests that had Washington received a commission in the British Army, he probably would have not joined the rebels -- granted, it's been years since my military history class where I read this book, but it made a pretty profound impression on me.

And again, you are spot on -- most of the rebel leaders were the wealthy landowners and merchants, many of whom were in debt to London, Liverpool and Glasgow firms as they tried to duplicate "the good life" of Britain in wild America. In the Hudson River Valley, the Ango-Dutch patricians, the Lords of the Hudson, were the rebels, while their tenants remained loyal. Slaves rallied to Lord Dunmore of Virginia, who promised them freedom if they would serve in a loyalist "Ethiopian" regiment.

How does this tie into the Scots? Well, most Highlanders who immigrated also remained loyal to the crown, for various reasons. The very people you would expect to rebel -- didn't.

Regards,

Todd

[MacMillan of Rathdown]

Slaves rallied to Lord Dunmore of Virginia, who promised them freedom if they would serve in a loyalist "Ethiopian" regiment.

Todd-- I must know more! Please PM me the details.
Best regards
Scott

[ForresterModern]

Well, most Highlanders who immigrated also remained loyal to the crown, for various reasons. The very people you would expect to rebel -- didn't.

Regards,

Todd

Not necessarily true. Most historians believe that many scots and scots-irish did rebel and actually made up as much as 40% of the continental army. They came to america originally seeking freedoms not allowed them in their homelands-----namely land availability to farm and religious freedom (calvinists vs british Anglican) not the least. They may not have been the actual instigators fomenting dissent and rebellion---those were the wealthy english-derived landed gentry looking after their own businesses and lifestyles, but the supporting populace and backbone of the actual army was in large part scots or scots irish.

[Makeitstop]

I am continually surprised by just how little most people I meet know about history. Particularly since I expect other college students to know the barest of essentials, and professors to know enough to carry on a conversation without unknowingly embarrassing themselves.

I know the schools I went to weren't very helpful. After moving past the sanitized, kids version (which is fine with me, as the real stories are a bit hard for your average 7 year old to handle) I moved onto schools that did not have history classes, and instead had "social studies" which contained the occasional bit of history, but for the most part was about whatever the teacher wanted to rant about. I probably learned more about their pets, kids and problems with technology than I learned about ancient history, anything in Europe before WWII or the actual contents of constitution.

The few teachers who actually taught something resembling history made the same mistake mentioned earlier in this thread, caring more about dates than either telling the story or understanding it's significance.

Things got better once I got to college, but even then there were problems. The basic history class that everyone takes here has a lot of bad information in it, and any time history comes up in other classes, their is a 75% chance that what they are teaching is demonstrably false. Luckily, these days when I object I can back up my claims with 2 minutes, a laptop and a wireless connection.

Of course, I don't know nearly as much about history as I should. I've read a bit, watched the history channel whenever possible, and looked things up whenever I came across something I didn't know, but there's still far too many gaps in my knowledge.

But at least I know more than my friends. Sure it's frustrating when I get nothing but blank stares after any reference to history, current events, or future events, but at least its good for the ego.

[Riverkilt]

What great reading...love this board.

I have a copy of a petition my four great grandfather Gray Macdonald made to Lord Macdonald April 3, 1803 pleading to stay on his rented land in someplace I've yet to locate called Peinchoinnich. Probably on the North end of the Trotternish Penisula of Skye.

He must have been successful since his son and grandson didn't sail for Cape Breton Island until 1854. My grandfather Murdoch wrote me that they were headed for Virginia/North Carolina to link up with kin but got blown off course by a storm and were so sick by the time they made land they stayed. No one's ever said if they were sailing of their own choice or were part of the last of the clearances.

Thanks for the book lists too.

Ron

[macwilkin]

Not necessarily true. Most historians believe that many scots and scots-irish did rebel and actually made up as much as 40% of the continental army. They came to america originally seeking freedoms not allowed them in their homelands-----namely land availability to farm and religious freedom (calvinists vs british Anglican) not the least. They may not have been the actual instigators fomenting dissent and rebellion---those were the wealthy english-derived landed gentry looking after their own businesses and lifestyles, but the supporting populace and backbone of the actual army was in large part scots or scots irish.

Sources, please?

You are confusing two distinct groups -- Highlanders and Ulster-Scots. The former were mostly Episcopalian or Roman Catholic in religion, the latter Presbyterian. The two groups had very little in common, and the Highlanders did not share the Ulster-Scots' revolutionary zeal. Also, Most Highlanders had no notion of republicanism that the Ulster-Scots embraced.

Sure, some Highlanders did embrace the cause, Hugh Mercer, for example, an ex-Jacobite, but most remained neutral or did fight for the crown.

You are quite correct that the Ulster-Scots did make up a huge part of the rebel forces -- one MP said, "Cousin America has run off with a Presbyterian parson, and there is nothing we can do about it". But I'm afraid I cannot agree with your claim that Highland Scots overwhelmingly embraced the rebellion.

You might wish to take a look at Duane Meyer's The Highland Scots of North Carolina, one of the best studies of Highland immigration out there.

Again, I'd love to see your sources.

Regards,

Todd

[James MacMillan]

Sources, please?

You are confusing two distinct groups -- Highlanders and Ulster-Scots. The former were mostly Episcopalian or Roman Catholic in religion, the latter Presbyterian. The two groups had very little in common, and the Highlanders did not share the Ulster-Scots' revolutionary zeal. Also, Most Highlanders had no notion of republicanism that the Ulster-Scots embraced.

Sure, some Highlanders did embrace the cause, Hugh Mercer, for example, an ex-Jacobite, but most remained neutral or did fight for the crown.

You are quite correct that the Ulster-Scots did make up a huge part of the rebel forces -- one MP said, "Cousin America has run off with a Presbyterian parson, and there is nothing we can do about it". But I'm afraid I cannot agree with your claim that Highland Scots overwhelmingly embraced the rebellion.

You might wish to take a look at Duane Meyer's The Highland Scots of North Carolina, one of the best studies of Highland immigration out there.

Again, I'd love to see your sources.

Regards,

Todd

Sources, please?

[macwilkin]

Sources, please?

Hunter, James. A Dance Called America: the Scottish Highlands, the United States, and Canada. Edinburgh: Mainstream, 1995.

Meyer, Duane. The Highland Scots of North Carolina, 1732-1776. Chapel Hill: U. of NC Press, 1961, 1987.

Moore, Christopher. The Loyalists: revolution, exile and settlement. Toronto : McClelland & Stewart, 1994.

Ray, Celeste. Highland Heritage: Scottish Americans in the American South. Chapel Hill: U. of NC Press, 2001.

Szasz, Fernec M. Scots in the North American West, 1790-1917. Norman: U. of Oklahoma Press, 2000.

Toffey, John J. A woman nobly planned : fact and myth in the legacy of Flora MacDonald. Durham, N.C. : Carolina Academic Press, c1997.

[sharpdressedscot]

Beat me to it...

[macwilkin]

One more:

Leyburn, James G. The Scotch-Irish: a social history. Chapel Hill, University of North Carolina Press, 1962, 1989.

T.