How important is the Declaration of Arbroath..

[davidlpope]

The Scottish were brought over to the colonies because they were rugged farmers, experienced fighters, who would survive in the frontier and safeguard the plantations and cities from attacks from native Americans. The Scotts (or Scotch Irish) formed the core of the militia and riflemen in the Southern War.

-- we tend to think that John Highlandman should have sided with Yankee Doodle in 1776 because of the Jacobite Rebellions, but many Highlanders sided with the Loyalists -- some due to differences between themselves and their Ulster-Scots neighbours(religion), ideas on government(A German king is better than no king) or the fact that some pledged not to take up arms after the '45.

I just wanted to second Todd's point and urge that a clear distinction be made between the Scots Highlanders and the Scots-Irish/Ulster Scots/ Irish Presbyterians/ Northern Dissenters during the Revolution, at least in North Carolina.

The Scots Highlanders were overwhelmingly Loyalists, despite the fact that many of the key Highland leaders (Flora MacDonald's husband, for one) had risen against the Hanoverians in the '45. They settled in the Cross Creek-Campbelltown area of NC (now Fayetteville) and managed to keep spoken Scots Gaelic alive in that area through the mid-nineteenth century.
The biggest engagement involving Scots Highlanders was Moore's Creek Bridge, which featured the last highland broadsword charge in history (ironic that it took place in America...).

The Scots-Irish, on the other hand, were much more inclined to the Revolutionary cause, and tended to settle in the backcounty after having traveled south from Pennsylvania and Virginia down the Great Wagon Road. Their style of guerrila warfare/ long rifle prowess/ buffer to the Native Americans/ folk culture/ music is what is often immortalized as emblematic of frontier culture (Davy Crocket, Hatfields and McCoys, etc.)

We tend to lump these groups together (as well as obliterate the distinctions between Borderers, Lowlanders, Highlanders, Islanders, etc.) as a result of a Pan-Scottish consciousness, or perhaps through American ignorance, but historically there were very clear distinctions. All that being said, I think that it's a better bet (if one is going to generalize) to say that, in the American Colonies, Highlanders supported the Crown and the Scots-Irish fought against it.

Cordially,

David

[macwilkin]

I just wanted to second Todd's point and urge that a clear distinction be made between the Scots Highlanders and the Scots-Irish/Ulster Scots/ Irish Presbyterians/ Northern Dissenters during the Revolution, at least in North Carolina.

The Scots Highlanders were overwhelmingly Loyalists, despite the fact that many of the key Highland leaders (Flora MacDonald's husband, for one) had risen against the Hanoverians in the '45. They settled in the Cross Creek-Campbelltown area of NC (now Fayetteville) and managed to keep spoken Scots Gaelic alive in that area through the mid-nineteenth century.
The biggest engagement involving Scots Highlanders was Moore's Creek Bridge, which featured the last highland broadsword charge in history (ironic that it took place in America...).

The Scots-Irish, on the other hand, were much more inclined to the Revolutionary cause, and tended to settle in the backcounty after having traveled south from Pennsylvania and Virginia down the Great Wagon Road. Their style of guerrila warfare/ long rifle prowess/ buffer to the Native Americans/ folk culture/ music is what is often immortalized as emblematic of frontier culture (Davy Crocket, Hatfields and McCoys, etc.)

We tend to lump these groups together (as well as obliterate the distinctions between Borderers, Lowlanders, Highlanders, Islanders, etc.) as a result of a Pan-Scottish consciousness, or perhaps through American ignorance, but historically there were very clear distinctions. All that being said, I think that it's a better bet (if one is going to generalize) to say that, in the American Colonies, Highlanders supported the Crown and the Scots-Irish fought against it.

Cordially,

David

Well said and spot on, David!

Todd

[MacBean]

I just wanted to ..urge that a clear distinction be made between the Scots Highlanders and the Scots-Irish/Ulster Scots/ Irish Presbyterians/ Northern Dissenters during the Revolution, at least in North Carolina.

The Scots Highlanders were overwhelmingly Loyalists.

Yes, I've read this too, but remain somewhat unconvinced, in part, because not all Highlanders were Catholic. Clan Chattan (MacKintosh, MacPherson, MacBean, MacQueen, Farquarson, and some of Davidson, Shaw, MacLean) were Highlanders but are recorded as being Episcopalean (Protestant with bishops, but not Presbyterian or Anglican). I am aware of several branches of the MacBean group who fought in the Revolution, and nearly all on the side of the Patriots. Some were Ulster Scots for sure, meaning that living near Ft.George after the Jacobite rebellions was uncomfortable, so they left for the Plantations (or perhaps there were other reasons, but there are precious few left in Scotland and an abundance of Beans in the USA).

[macwilkin]

Yes, I've read this too, but remain somewhat unconvinced, in part, because not all Highlanders were Catholic. Clan Chattan (MacKintosh, MacPherson, MacBean, MacQueen, Farquarson, and some of Davidson, Shaw, MacLean) were Highlanders but are recorded as being Episcopalean (Protestant with bishops, but not Presbyterian or Anglican). I am aware of several branches of the MacBean group who fought in the Revolution, and nearly all on the side of the Patriots. Some were Ulster Scots for sure, meaning that living near Ft.George after the Jacobite rebellions was uncomfortable, so they left for the Plantations (or perhaps there were other reasons, but there are precious few left in Scotland and an abundance of Beans in the USA).

Episcopalians are Anglicans -- Believe me, I know, because I am one. The Scottish & American Episcopal Churches are part of the Anglican Communion, and it was three Scottish "non-juroring" Bishops -- Petrie, Skinner and Kilgour -- that consecrated the first American Bishop -- Seabury -- after the Revolution in Aberdeen in 1784. Besides, it's a bit of a simplification to say Episcopalians are simply "Protestants with Bishops" -- however, I can address that inaccuracy in a PM, as it might violate forum rules.

Were there exceptions? Sure -- Hugh Mercer being the most famous example of a pro-Patriot Jacobite -- but he was an exception. David's comments are correct from a historian's POV. Remember that Episcopalians and Presbyterians did not get along just because they were Protestant; for many years, the Episcopalians in Scotland were persecuted along with their RC neighbours because the Episcopal Church was not the established church, as was the C. of E. -- the Kirk was Presbyterian. As a result, many Episcopalians openly sided with the Jacobites.

I would recommend Dr. Duane Meyer's The Highland Scots of North Carolina for an excellent study of why the majority of Highlanders sided with the Loyalists or tried to remain neutral. Fernec Szasz's Scots in the North American West 1790-1917, Colin Calloway's White People, Highlanders and Indians and James Leyburn's The Scotch-Irish: a Social History are also highly recommended reading for this subject.

T.

[davidlpope]

Yes, I've read this too, but remain somewhat unconvinced, in part, because not all Highlanders were Catholic. Clan Chattan (MacKintosh, MacPherson, MacBean, MacQueen, Farquarson, and some of Davidson, Shaw, MacLean) were Highlanders but are recorded as being Episcopalean (Protestant with bishops, but not Presbyterian or Anglican). I am aware of several branches of the MacBean group who fought in the Revolution, and nearly all on the side of the Patriots. Some were Ulster Scots for sure, meaning that living near Ft.George after the Jacobite rebellions was uncomfortable, so they left for the Plantations (or perhaps there were other reasons, but there are precious few left in Scotland and an abundance of Beans in the USA).

Fair enough, since all generalities at some point fail.

One caveat, not sure if this is your method- using surnames as a proxy for Highlander/ Lowlander/ Ulster Scots identity can be dicey, unless you know the particular history for any individual.

That being said, one comparison I've made is based on the prevalence of Gaelic-derived "Highland" surnames of the roster of Loyalists and the prevalence of non-Highland surnames of the roster "Patriots" at the Battle of Moore's Creek Bridge. I'd be a little hesitant to use this a sole proxy, without the contemporary accounts that the Loyalists were wearing kilts, playing bagpipes, giving commands in the Gaelic, etc. that are all indicative of native Highland identity, while none of this was true of the Continentals.

The rosters are available from this publisher:
http://www.loyalistsandpatriots.com/...-0-9626172-2-9
http://www.loyalistsandpatriots.com/...-0-9626172-3-7

Cordially,

David

[MacBean]

Fair enough, both responses. I think everyone would agree that Highlanders did not fight on the Patriot side in organized Highlander groups, but that in some cases, as individuals, they certainly did.

Many thanks for the references by the way. I'm amazed at how much one can read about the Revolution in the South and still find each book new and interesting.

[Foxgun Tom]

"The spirit of the Declaration of Arbroath (6 April 1320) abides today, defiantly resisting any tyranny that would disarm, disperse and despoil proud people of just morals, determined to keep the means of protecting their families and way of life close at hand."

The above is a quote! I copied ages ago I can't remember when or where from?. It may well have been written by one of our American cousins? who-ever it was I'm grateful, its a modern view and sentiment I also share!!

As a native Scot, lucky enough to reside in the land of my birth, I and many others still see "THE DECLARATION OF ARBROATH" as an important historical and unique symbol of our nationhood, it proudly declares that if the sovereign is unable to carry out the duties to the nation and its people, we! the people have the right to remove him (democracy in its infancy and in the making) eg:

"Yet if he should give up what he has begun, and agree to make us or our kingdom subject to the King of England or the English, we should exert ourselves at once to drive him out as our enemy and a subverter of his own rights and ours, and make some other man who was well able to defend us our King;"

The other significant section of the delaration that facinates a lot of Scots pertains to our origins? eg:

"Most Holy Father and Lord, we know and from the chronicles and books of the ancients we find that among other famous nations our own, the Scots, has been graced with widespread renown. They journeyed from Greater Scythia by way of the Tyrrhenian Sea and the Pillars of Hercules, and dwelt for a long course of time in Spain among the most savage tribes, but nowhere could they be subdued by any race, however barbarous. Thence they came, twelve hundred years after the people of Israel crossed the Red Sea, to their home in the west where they still live today. The Britons they first drove out, the Picts they utterly destroyed, and, even though very often assailed by the Norwegians, the Danes and the English, they took possession of that home with many victories and untold efforts; and, as the historians of old time bear witness, they have held it free of all bondage ever since. In their kingdom there have reigned one hundred and thirteen kings of their own royal stock, the line unbroken a single foreigner. The high qualities and deserts of these people, were they not otherwise manifest, gain glory enough from this: that the King of kings and Lord of lords, our Lord Jesus Christ, after His Passion and Resurrection, called them, even though settled in the uttermost parts of the earth, almost the first to His most holy faith. Nor would He have them confirmed in that faith by merely anyone but by the first of His Apostles — by calling, though second or third in rank — the most gentle Saint Andrew, the Blessed Peter's brother, and desired him to keep them under his protection as their patron forever."

Tom

[ThistleDown]

Yes, I've read this too, but remain somewhat unconvinced, in part, because not all Highlanders were Catholic. Clan Chattan (MacKintosh, MacPherson, MacBean, MacQueen, Farquarson, and some of Davidson, Shaw, MacLean) were Highlanders but are recorded as being Episcopalean (Protestant with bishops, but not Presbyterian or Anglican). I am aware of several branches of the MacBean group who fought in the Revolution, and nearly all on the side of the Patriots. Some were Ulster Scots for sure, meaning that living near Ft.George after the Jacobite rebellions was uncomfortable, so they left for the Plantations (or perhaps there were other reasons, but there are precious few left in Scotland and an abundance of Beans in the USA).

Sorry, Mark, but I don't think that any Highland Scots can be included, in numbers, in your last. That is, that by the 18C there was little or no connection between Highland and Irish Scots. I cannot speak to your D of I point with any certainlty, as I cannot speak to other things related to the D of I (US) that has -- strangely (?) -- become such an important part of this thread. I can confirm, however, that within the Clanchattan the majority of folk in the 18C were Episcopalian. I don't know of any basis for your assertion that those who lived near Fort George after 1745 chose to emigrate (presumably because of their religion, or why otherwise would these facts be related?) and to become in the process Ulster Scots.

From Petty, Strathdearn, Strathnairn and the Upper Reaches of the Strathspey -- in the decades before 1776 -- many did leave, but in the main they left for the industrial sites of the south of Scotland and England or as relatively wealthy emigrees to the Americas and elsewhere. It is not recorded that they left in numbers for Ireland. In plainer words, there were no forced clearances in Clanchattan.

Are we confusing Highland Scots with Ulster Scots here?. I assure you, they are far from being the same beings in Scotland.

[Lallans]

I'm going to throw in my three cents worth on the Scots in the Revolution question.

Ulster Scots were originally transplanted to Northern Ireland, sometimes willingly, sometimes not, from the England-Scotland Border area where they had spent the previous centuries in one of the most violent places on earth. After they were planted in Ulster, the non-Anglicans who would not convert were persecuted as dissenters (more of them were killed by the King and later by Cromwell than were the native Irish). Aside from that, also being economically exploited in Ulster they left for America in large numbers in the early 1700s, where they became known as 'the Scots Irish' (actually "Scotch Irish," but that term is passe.) So yes, they were and are QUITE different from the Scots who remained in Scotland- those folks saw their king become King of England and remained loyal to the monarchy. The Scots Irish were not accepted or treated much better in America, being generally placed or driven onto the frontier, originally to fight the Indians, so when the American Revolution started, the British reaped that whirlwind... and the Scots Irish were by that time very skilled in, and culturally attuned to, conflict. By most accounts they seem to have been the deciding factor in the Revolution if only by dint of heavy lifting. This is not to say that all Scots Irish took up the Revolutionary cause- in my family some did but many remained neutral or uninvolved because of isolation- and in what became the North Eastern USA, some of them even appreciated the British military efforts during the Seven Years (aka French-Indian) Wars, having been raided any number of times by French-led Indian bands. My area of Canada, along the border with Vermont and New Hampshire, was officially settled by immigrant Scots Highlanders, Lowlanders, and also Scots Irish, all of whom purchased cheap land from British Loyalists. And, a number of Scots Irish were already present, often thinking they were in the USA. In fact, so many Scots Irish eventually showed up that they were required to take a loyalty oath to the Crown in hopes of precluding a US takeover, which doesn't seem to have bothered many of them.

[auld argonian]

Canuck's description of the Scots Irish reminds me of the bit in Dune where the Emperor recruited his most feared warriors from a planet where life was so frickin' miserable that these guys were a) some bad-@ss dudes and b) so happy to be off that planet that they would do anything to keep from having to go back.

Another thing that I didn't realize until I started reading some other materials related to this thread is that The Articles of Confederation, the political arrangement that was drafted after the Declaration of Independence but before the Constitution, left the door wide open for Canada to join the United States if it so desired.

Just imagine....either a world full of somewhat healthier and politer Americans or a world full of stressed out and ruder Canadians...the mind boggles.

Best

AA