Susan Johnson (56 page)

1
. Tradition has it that the Carres (Car, Kar, Ker, Kerr) were notoriously left-handed. A left-handed person is still called ker-handed, car-handed, or corry-fisted in the Scottish Borderland.

The stairways in the Carre castles and defensive towers built in the centuries of continual border warfare were constructed to accommodate their left-handedness.

The early peel towers, generally three or four stories, were built of stone with massive, thick walls. Built singly or attached to dwelling houses or castles, they were easily defended. The only entrance was through a double door at ground level, the outer door of iron grating, the inner one of oak reinforced with iron. The ground floor was used as a storeroom, and the upper floors were reached by a narrow curving stair called a turnpike. This stairway usually rose in a clockwise spiral so that a defender retreating up the flight had his unguarded left side to the wall and his sword arm to the outside. His attacker, coming up, was at the disadvantage with his sword arm to the wall.

In the Carre homes their stairs were built anticlockwise to accommodate their left sword arms.

2
. Queen Anne convened the Scottish Parliament in 1703 because England needed a vote of money from Scotland to pursue the war with France. The Court hoped that the Scots Parliament would vote supply for the army, and when that was accomplished, everyone could go home. But after Darien and the Massacre at Glencoe, after a century of English foreign policy that ignored Scotland’s interests, the Scots were determined to make constitutional changes.

In the summer of 1703 Parliament drafted two important Acts that would effectively transfer power from Queen Anne back to the Scottish Parliament. The most important was the Act of Security, which stipulated that after the death of Queen Anne and heirs of her body (she had none), all offices civil and military, formerly under the control of the Monarch, would in the future be appointed by the Scots Parliament. Since the dispensing of government positions and pensions was the basis of political control, England would no longer have any power in Scottish affairs.

In addition, twelve limitations on the power of the Crown were proposed that would give Scotland authority over its own government. Among them would be: that elections would be held annually; Parliament would choose its own president; royal assent to laws would be automatic; declarations of war and the negotiations of peace treaties would require the approval of the Scottish Parliament.

It was also agreed that the first meeting of the Scottish Parliament after the death of the Queen would have the power of nominating and declaring her Successor, provided that the same person not be the Successor to the Crown of England. The wording of the proposal meant that the Successor chosen by the English would be automatically excluded as Scotland’s Monarch unless Scotland’s Parliament was assured freedom.

In open defiance of the Court, the Scottish Parliament had strongly asserted the national independence of Scotland. And it kept its bargaining power intact by refusing to vote supply for the army or agree to the Succession in England.

From the English point of view, it was outright rebellion.

3
. The Wine Act of 1703 authorized the import of all wines and other foreign liquors, repealing an Act of 1700, which had prohibited French wines. The reason Queensberry introduced such a measure in the middle of a war with France was that England was desperate to raise money through import duty, and such an act would also curry favor with members of the Scottish Parliament. Appointments as collectors of import duties would mean lucrative jobs for those members of Parliament selected to fill the posts. And these men would then be beholden to the Court interests to retain their appointments. The Act was additionally tempting to the Peers and Barons of the Shires because they had the privilege of exemption from customs duties.

Most Scots approved the Act in the spirit of challenging the English embargo on trade with the enemy. While smuggling was a reality of life, and French wines had always been available, with legal importation profits would increase. And the Burghs and nobility were the major merchants of Scotland. The costliness of the cargoes in relation to their bulk gave French wine a value to the merchant that was out of all proportion to its significance in overall trade. Some observers believed it to be the main import trade of Scotland.

4
. Most authorities agree that “clan” tartans were not known before the second half of the eighteenth century. Until Stewart of Garth wrote his book on the Highlanders between 1817 and 1822, no definite statement ascribing tartans to clans, septs, and families as something analogous to heraldic insignia has ever been discovered, with the exception of that in the
Vestiarium Scoticum
, a work of more than doubtful authenticity.

The lack of reference to “clan” tartans by the bards at the time of the Jacobite Rising is significant. Nearly all of them mention the romantic appeal of the Highland dress, but not one word defines “clan” tartans.

In a range of Grant portraits at Castle Grant, for example, no tartan repeats, and none has any relationship with the
Tartan Book
patterns. All the pictorial evidence suggests that the Scottish gentleman or lady regarded the use of such patterns in his or her clothing in the same spirit that we select the material of our suiting today; he or she simply fancied a certain color and design. Nevertheless, it is reasonable to accept that certain dyes would prevail in different regions and that traditional types of pattern might be followed in various areas.

If there was any uniformity in dress of the Jacobites at the battle of Culloden, or any “clan” tartans, it would seem that one of the many accounts or descriptions of the battle would mention them. In an account published in 1749, James Ray writes that the only forms of identification were the white cockades of the Rebels and the red or yellow crosses of cloth or ribbon of the Loyalists. A fragment of Macdonald of Kingburgh’s tartan and Macdonald of Keppoch’s tartan, both worn during the ’45, are reproduced in Stewart’s
Old and Rare Scottish Tartans
, and neither conforms to the many Macdonald “clan” tartans worn today.

And, as indication of tartan as fashion rather then heraldic device, here is an ad from the
Caledonian Mercury
for October 4, 1745:

“Gairdner and Taylor, in their Warehouse at the Sign of the Golden Key, opposite to Forrester’s Wynd, Lawn-Market, Edinburgh, continue to sell, in Wholesale and Retail, at lowest Prices, all sorts of Woollen Narrow and Broad Cloths of the Manufacture of Scotland … At above Warehouse to be sold at lowest Rates, great Choice of Tartans,
the newest Patterns
, [obemphasis mine] Cotton Checks and Sarges, of which they are also Makers.”

5
. If Scotland was to join in the trade with America, Africa, and Asia on an equal footing with other European countries, it needed a company authorized by the government. In 1693 the Scottish Parliament passed an Act declaring that Scottish merchants could form companies for trading in all parts of the world. This was seen by the English companies as a challenge to their monopolies, but the Act was approved by King William, who was anxious to distract attention from the inquiries concerning his part in the Massacre of Glencoe. Since it was only an enabling Act, the King and his ministers and the English trading companies intended no more would come of it.

But in May 1695, the Scottish Parliament passed an “Act for a Company trading to Africa and the Indies.” The reaction of the English trading interests was swift; both the Lords and Commons presented a petition to the King expressing their displeasure. King William proceeded to do all he could to sabotage the Scottish Company. The English subscribers withdrew. English diplomatic pressure prevented subscriptions in Amsterdam and Hamburg. A circular letter was sent to the Governors of the Plantations instructing them to prohibit all assistance to the Scottish Company.

Thrown on their own resources, the Scottish population responded with an outburst of patriotic fervor. The full £400,000 called for was subscribed, although it amounted to half of the total money in circulation in the country. Many people invested their entire fortunes.

With English hostility the original scheme of trade with Asia, Africa, and America became more problematical, and the fatal decision was made to commit the entire venture to the establishment of a trading colony on the Isthmus of Panama at Darien. The Scots were not to know that King William would have his Ambassador virtually encourage Spain to attack the colony.

Within four years, mismanagement, English hostility, tropical disease, and Spanish attack led to the abandonment of the colony and the loss of most of the men and ships. Disaster couldn’t have been more complete or humiliating.

Darien exposed the problem of Scotland’s disadvantageous relationship with England. Constitutional change was now inescapable.

At the same time Darien impoverished the whole country. It ruined the people who invested in it, and that meant a large proportion of the members of Parliament. These legislators were now much more vulnerable to bribery than ever, and it’s significant that one of the clauses of the Treaty of Union of 1707 provided for the compensation of the shareholders in the Scottish Company.

6
. The postal service originally began as the King’s post and was gradually made available to the general public. By the end of the seventeenth century the various Masters of the Post had established postal service throughout most of Scotland. In the Post Office Act of 1695 the scale of charges for carrying a letter was set, and the use of personal carriers and express delivery was allowed beyond the services of the state monopoly.

Speed of service was, of course, of importance. Reports of English parliamentary proceedings sent from London on Saturday were said to reach Edinburgh by the following Thursday. In matters of confidentiality the postal service was held in low regard. You could almost be certain your letter would be read, so if they were going to contain any comments of a political or sensitive nature, precautions had to be taken in advance. Someone trustworthy delivered a key letter to the person with whom you corresponded with a code to interpret subsequent letters. Each prominent political figure would in the future appear as some relative or friend whose utterances couldn’t be used by authorities as an excuse for taking proceedings against you.

Envelopes were rarely used; the sheets were simply folded, secured with a seal, and addressed on the back. From August 1693 the Bishop mark began to be used by the Edinburgh Letter Office, at least for mail to England. Oval-shaped, it gave the day and the month, but not the year, of posting. On the question of cost, in 1689 correspondence from London to Edinburgh cost five shillings per letter, and from Aberdeen to Edinburgh, three shillings.

7
. In the early eighteenth century the town of Edinburgh, all enclosed within the city walls, consisted principally of one long street—Canongate and High Street—that stretched a mile long from Holyrood Palace to the Castle. From this main thoroughfare branched off innumerable side streets and alleys, all bordered by towering houses, some up to ten and twelve stories. With so many inhabitants crowded into so small an area, the disposal of garbage and refuse was a problem.

The method of disposal was systematized if not hygienic. At ten o’clock each night the filth collected in each household was poured from the windows with the warning “Gardy loo”
(Gardez l’eau)
, and passersby not fleet enough of foot would receive an ill-scented drenching. At the dreaded hour when the domestic garbage was flung out, the smells (known as the “flowers of Edinburgh”) filled the air. Citizens burned sheets of brown paper to neutralize the outside odors that penetrated the interiors of their apartments.

The dirt and ordure lay on the street all night until laborers came at seven o’clock in the morning with wheelbarrows to remove it. Worst of all was Sunday, when strict piety forbade all work, and since street-cleaning was deemed an act of neither necessity nor mercy, the refuse remained till Monday morning.

Edinburgh wasn’t unique in its unsatisfactory method of refuse disposal. London streets were equally filthy.

8
. One example of an abduction was the case of the heiress Jean Home.

When the Laird of Ayton died, his daughter, Jean Home, age eleven, was put by the Privy Council in the care of her grandmother, Countess Dowager of Home, and her cousin, Charles.

Another relative, John Home of Prendergast, applied with some others to the Privy Council on December 6, 1677, for the sequestration of the young girl from the influence of her appointed guardians. It was ordered that her grandmother, Charles, and Jean Home should appear before the Council to answer or object to the petition.

Instead of doing so, Charles and five Lairds, all but one of whom represented different branches of the Homes, decided to take the young heiress and her future literally into their own hands. In the Council’s words, “they did ride away the said night and seiz upon the persone of the said Jean and caried her away to the English bordours,” where they married her off to their seventeen-year-old nephew George.