Sizergh Gardens

It turned out to be sunny and quite hot for northern England as we began the guided tour of Sizergh Gardens, which for many people may have greater appeal than the castle itself.

I can't claim to remember too many details about its horticulture, but our stroll through the garden was a pleasant experience.

Our guide mentioned that like most great gardens, Sizergh is planted to provide different blooms as seasons change.

Over the centuries, the gardening philosophy itself has adapted with different generations.

According to the guide book Jay gave me, "The oldest part of the garden is the terraced lawn that extends south-westwards from the house, bounded on one side by a brick-faced fruit wall and on the other by a stone retaining wall."  The brick wall was built in 1739.

I would guess that in medieval times, the practical Stricklands would have used gardens for growing food almost exclusively, and of course raising "stirkes" (cattle) rather than ornamental flowers.  Much of the garden today remains dedicated to herbs, fruit and vegetables.

Regardless of whether they indulged in croquet and flower gardens before the mid-18th Century when the lawn was laid out, they would have undoubtedly been forced to cut back on frivolity when Parliamentarians made Oliver Cromwell essentially a dictator of England following the execution of King Charles I, for whom the Stricklands sacrificed so much to defend.

Despite paying substantial fines that put the family deeper into debt, the Stricklands managed to hold onto their ancestral home.

Upon Cromwell's death, King Charles II returned from nine years in exile in France to claim his throne in 1660.

The Stricklands tied their fate to the Catholic younger brother of King Charles II, who himself had no sons.  When Charles II died in 1685, that younger brother became King James II.  He was married to Mary of Modena, princess of very Catholic Italy, and soon Protestant plots sprung up to depose him.

When King James II had a Catholic son in 1688, Lady Strickland was present, indicating how close they were.  She was honored to be named Under-Governess for the Prince of Wales, who would be King James III, if all went well.

Concern over a now very Catholic dynasty prompted the Anglican (Protestant) opposition to encourage Mary, the older sister of King James II, and her husband William of Orange (Orange is in modern day France near Avignon), who already ruled what's now known as the Netherlands, to usurp the crowns of the British Empire from James II and Queen Mary of Modena.

The coup worked, and while William and Mary turned out to be benevolent rulers, that was a disaster for the Stricklands, who subsequently followed King James II and Mary of Modena into exile in France.   King Louis XIV of France also considered William of Orange a threat, so he generously accepted the deposed monarchs and their entourage as his guests at his Chateau of Saint-Germain-en-Laye until they could re-claim the crown.

This contingent of British royal ex-patriots became known as Jacobites.

While the Jacobites were never destined to rule the British Commonwealth again, the Stricklands returned to their ancestral home in the Lake District, which had been cleverly protected by putting it in trust with two of their servants rather than allowing it to be seized.

The Strickland family's love for the exiled monarchs is revealed by the treasured portraits of the Stuart family members still on display in Sizergh Castle.

Decades later, Francis Strickland, who as a younger brother was never in charge of Sizergh Castle, joined the Stuart Court in exile in Rome.  Francis was one of only seven men present with "Bonnie Prince Charlie" in Moidart, Scotland, when the disastrous Jacobite Rebellion kicked off.


The Strickland family somehow managed to navigate through all the political intrigues of the centuries with one dramatic comeback after another, returning to true prominence by the 20th Century.

In the 20th Century Baron Gerald Strickland (1861 through 1940), was a Member of Parliament of the United Kingdom but also had an international career that included stints as Governor of the Leeward Islands in the Caribbean, Tasmania, Western Australia and New South Wells, as well as Prime Minister of Malta, the Mediterranean island nation where he was actually born and died.  He did return to Sizergh Castle periodically, including on one occasion when a newsreel was filmed.

When Great Britain's top marginal tax rates reached 99.25% following World War II, however, the family couldn't pull enough strings to avoid turning the estate over to the National Trust in 1950.

That gambit, however, allowed Sizergh Castle and the Strickland family history to be preserved for posterity while still allowing his ancestors to reside there with the government caring for the castle and gardens.  All factors considered, not a bad deal.

Muddling Back to Walter: How Genealogy Can Be Both Confusing and Boring

The further back into the past we trace, the more difficult it becomes to verify predecessors accurately.

Information can be quite sketchy, especially for women, who usually give up their maiden names at marriage.  That's why most people focus initially on following the surnames of their own parents.

Uncle J. Edwin Stickland and Granddad Julius E. Strickland

The first Strickland of our line born in America was Matthew Strickland II of Virginia.  Of that, I am fairly certain.

His father, Matthew Strickland I (1627-1699), was a minor member of a prominent family in England, which should make it easy to trace him back using publicly available records, right?  Even with that advantage, there's immediately confusion about his parents.

In fact, looked at another way, there's confusion about which Matthew Strickland was the one who arrived in Virginia.  He presumably is different from another Matthew Strickland who arrived in Maryland about the same time.  That there are two Matthew Strickland's seems quite logical, considering there are conjectured to be two family branches leading to Matthew I, but some people claim there to have been only one Matthew Strickland of that generation who arrived in America, possibly having gone back to England and then returned to a different port.

The father's last name was definitely Strickland.  I'm just using easily available sources which to some extent are democratic, in that researchers make their best guesses, eventually beating a path in what had once been a wilderness of possibilities in which subsequent generations often name their own children with names of ancestors.  With many sons of the same surname who move away to seek their own fortunes, they may not even realize that they sometimes gave the same names to children in different branches of the same generation.

A significant contingent on Geni.com says Matthew I's  most likely parents were Jacob Strickland (1590-1635) and Amy Salvin (1605-1635).  I didn't find too many details about their lives, beyond the fact that they had three children and apparently both died in the same year, when Amy was only 30 years-old.

For a young woman to lose her life during childbirth wouldn't have been unusual in those days, but that wouldn't account for Jacob's passing in the same year. What might have happened at that time to cost them both their lives?

As you may remember from Thanksgiving in first or second grade, the ship named Mayflower brought the Pilgrims to America to escape religious persecution in 1620.

In 1621, the Thirty Years War broke out in earnest in Central Europe.  Catholics and Protestants fought among themselves within countries like England (primarily Protestant) and France (primarily Catholic) over religion. Ken Follett, in his historical novel A Column of Fire, does a masterful job portraying the level of animus leading up to this period.  Claiming Jacob and Amy died for their religious beliefs might be a stretch.

In 1629, Jacob's half-brother John immigrated to Salem, Massachusetts, so perhaps Jacob's family was being persecuted like those original Puritans.  Then again, perhaps he was on the Catholic side of things, which would seem more likely due to history involving the more prominent branch of Stricklands.

The Stricklands of Sizergh Castle were staunch Catholics, supporting the Jacobite cause to put Bonnie Prince Charlie on the throne of England decades later in 1745.

By then, our branch had long since immigrated to the United States, and they were Protestants in subsequent generations.  A major promise of America was religious freedom, so I have no idea which side of the violence might have killed Jacob and Amy, if indeed that happened at all.  They also might have died of some disease.

Perhaps an easier explanation is that their dates of death aren't accurate.  If they both died in 1635, however, then it brings about the question of what happened to their children?  Matthew Strickland Senior would have been only eight years-old at the time, but he would eventually pay his own way as well as finance passage by others to America.  At least some of his substantial land holdings of over 3,000 acres in America came as a result of transporting other immigrants.

If both of his parents died when he was a boy, then perhaps Matthew I moved in with a rich relative.  What about Jacob's father?

Sir Thomas Strickland, National Trust Images, Sizergh Castle

Sir Thomas Strickland (1563-1612) was already dead.  He had been a Member of Parliament, which sounds promising.  According to a bit of history, Sir Thomas was also something of a scoundrel.  He frittered away much of his family wealth on high living in London, where he had a gambling habit.  Incidentally, he was a Protestant, but his second wife was a Catholic.

On closer examination, the half brothers and sisters of Jacob seem to have been married both before and after him (in which case Jacob might have been a bastard), which might fit with the scoundrel story. That kind of makes the religious fervor leading to death less likely, although I guess that could skip a generation here and there.

I like that story better than the Wikitree version, if only because of Sir Thomas being a rascal.

Wikitree, however, offers an alternative lineage.  According to Wikitree, Matthew I's father was not Jacob at all.  Edward Arthur Strickland III is speculated to be his father.  It further goes on to say that Edward III (1596-1661) might have been married to Elizabeth Binnes or possibly Elizabeth Basse, or maybe both.  Elizabeth was a popular name at the end of the Elizabethan Era (1558 to 1603)

Anyway, going back three generations, each was successively named Edward Arthur Strickland, with II living from 1576 to 1626 and his father only from 1551 to possibly just long enough to impregnate his wife in 1575.  Then again, perhaps his dates of birth and death are inaccurate.  The first Edward Arthur Strickland was the son of William Strickland (presumed about 1530-1590), but a theory I have would have him born in 1538, possibly implying only two generations of Edward Arthur Strickland. Not much is known about any of these folks.

However, Walter Charles Strickland Esq. (1516-1569) is listed as the father of both the scoundrel Sir Thomas Strickland (1563-1612) and William Strickland (1530 or 1538 to 1590), who in turn was the father of Edward Strickland I.

So, basically, it could be Jacob from Thomas from Walter (three generations), versus Edward III from Edward II from Edward I from William from Walter (five generations).  However, Walter's wife Alice Tempest Strickland gave birth to William and Thomas 34 years apart, making me wonder if there might have been another step between the generations (i.e., Walter Jr. born when Alice was 20, with Walter Jr. who then fathering at age 28 a son named Thomas).  Based on the way names became popular and showed up within the same families so frequently, it isn't a huge stretch to think Walter II could have married a different woman also named Alice.

As I said, it is all rather muddy, but somehow, we end up at Walter Charles Strickland Esq., where the family tree seems more specific again.  At that step, I again come back to Alice and William, though as I said either of these two branches might be correct, and of course it's also possible that neither is right.

Here is info from Wikitree for Matthew Strickland I:

Matthew Strickland Sr.
Born 24 Jan 1639 in Kendal Lake, Westmorland, England

DESCENDANTS
Father of Joanna Strickland, Thwaite Strickland, Elizabeth (Strickland) Boon, James Strickland, Joseph Strickland, William Strickland, Samuel Strickland, John Strickland and Matthew M Strickland II
Died 5 May 1696 in Isle of Wight Virginia


Matthew Strickland Sr. settled in the Southern Colonies in North America prior to incorporation into the USA.

Most researchers show that Matthew immigrated from England to the colonies in the latter part of the 17th century. Some show that Matthew was the son of Edward Strickland and Elizabeth Basse and others show he was the son of Jacob Strickland.
Biography

Matthew Strickland in about 1639 in England. His parents are disputed, and no solid proof has been located to link him to the correct parents.

The exact date of Matthew's immigration is uncertain, but the first record of him in Isle of Wight, Virginia was in 1678. On September 26, 1678, he received a land grant of 902 acres for transporting 18 people to the colonies. In 1680, he patented 1,803 acres of land in Isle of Wight.

There is a dispute among researchers whether a Matthew Strickland living in Maryland around the same time frame is the same Matthew Strickland from Isle of Wight or a different person. In an article written by L.C. Strickland in the Strickland Scene, he believes that there were two Matthew Stricklands. The possessions of Matthew Strickland of Calvert County, Maryland were inventoried after his death in November 1691. No heirs were mentioned. Matthew Strickland of Isle of Wight was still alive during this time, and his date of death is thought to be in 1696. We know that he had died before August 1699 due to the fact that there was a division of his land on this date. His son Matthew inherited all his father's land and shared it with his brothers William, John, Joseph, and Samuel.[1]

Matthew Strickland married Elizabeth. Her last name is disputed. Some sources say that it was Loreen, and others say Elizabeth Loreen married the Matthew Strickland from Maryland. Matthew and Elizabeth had at least 5 known children: Matthew, John, Samuel, William, Joseph, and Elizabeth. These have been proven to be their children through land deeds.


On 6 Jun 1687 Matthew Strickland gave a power of attorney to John Brown to execute a deed to William Evans "by reason of my nonability to travel to court held for this county the 9th if this instant June". This power of attorney was witnessed by Richard (RB) Booth and Elizabeth (S) Strickland.

On 6 Jun 1687 Matthew (X) and Elizabeth (E) Strickland of the Lower Parish deeded to William Evans of the Upper Parish for 4,000 pounds of tobacco in cask 800 acres in the Lower Parish between the main Swamp of King Sal and Beaver Dam Branch adjoining William Collins (from a tract of 902 acres patented by the said Strickland on 26 September 1678, of which ao2 acreas hd been leased to Thomas Jones for ninety-nine years on 6 November 1682. Witnessed by John Brown, Richard (RB) Booth, and Robert (R) Lawrence.

1699 -DIVISION OF LANDS, Isle of Wight Co., VA, August 4(or 9) ---Deed Book 1, page 302-303

To all persons whom these present shall come, Matt Strickland and William Strickland, sons of Matthew Strickland, late deceased, have made, concluded and agreed for a division between them and either of them, and their heirs forever. Decided and bounded as followeth, I, the said Matthew Strickland, doth give and make over my whole right and title for me and my heirs unto him and his heirs forever, a piece of land whereon my father lived at beginning of the Horse Swamp, S)S running up the Horse Swamp to the Gum Branch, thence running up the said Branch to Col. Pitts line, Sos running the line unto the Plantation whereon the said Matt Strickland deceased dwelt, now all the land above the forementioned, Branch joining unto -------- Plantation and also all the land that lieth on the South side of the Horse Swamp. Now I, the said Matthew Strickland, doth give one hundred and fifty acres of land at the Old Plantation unto my brother John Strickland and his heirs forever and never to go out of the name of ye Stricklands;

This appears to be a disclaimer to the English "Primogenture" law which was passed in 1631. This law established that the eldest son should inhereit any title and land of the father, and if the eldest died without issue, then the land and title would go the next eldest son, etc. Here, Matthew Jr. clearly disclaims his right to the entire land holdings of his father and chose to share with his brothers. Just to add - this was a great gesture on the part of Matthew Strickland, Jr.

Also, ye said Matthew Strickland, doth give one hundred and fifty acres of land unto my brother Sam Strickland and his heirs forever and never to go out of the name of ye Stricklands, lying at the head of Watery Branch, joining upon Arthur Whitehead; Next, all the land above the forementioned Branch and only the south side of the Horse Swamp, the said Matt Strickland doth given unto my brother, William Strickland, and his heirs;

And the said Matt Strickland doth give unto my brother Joseph Strickland, one hundred and fifty acres of land lying upon the Blackwater between my Plantation and the line of M. Woodwards being on the (most of the rest is illegible, but it seems to speak about "defrauding" and if defrauded, "shall forfit his own part according to these articles to him or them that shall be defrauded" then something about the 150 acres to John Strickland, and then "of a piece of land joining upon the Black Pond at the head of the Horse Swamp, bargained, and sold from me, Will Strirckland unto Arthur Whitehead".) Witness of our hands and seal this 4th (or 9th ?) Day of August in the year of our Lord God, 1699. Signed "M" Strickland.

Witnessed by Barnaby MacKinney, ackowledge at a (illegible) for ye Isle of Wight County, Virginia by Mathew Strickland and WIlliam Davidson

Maloney, Hendrick & Others - J. H. Maloney

1706 - Isle of Wight Co., VA - Deed Book 2, p. 47

Maria Theresa and the Habsburgs, Pt. 4: Bavaria

It was the Duke of Bavaria, Charles Albert, who succeeded Maria Theresa's father Charles VI as Holy Roman Emperor, breaking the Habsburg succession streak that had started fifty years before Columbus discovered America.

Charles Albert, a Prince-Elector of the Holy Roman Empire, had a very good claim to becoming Emperor over his cousin Maria Theresa's husband, Francis Stephen.

Charles Albert was also the son-in-law of a Holy Roman Emperor, Joseph I, who himself was a Habsburg.

Joseph I was Charles VI's older brother and had actually preceded Maria Theresa's father as Emperor.

Charles Albert's great-great-grandfather was Habsburg Emperor Ferdinand II, just as was the case for Maria Theresa, whereas Francis Stephen was Ferdinand II's great-grandson.

So, while Charles Albert, who became Holy Roman Emperor Charles VII, was officially from the House of Wittelsbach, you can see that even this short detour from the House of Habsburg succession didn't stray too far from those bloodlines.

The biggest difference came down to the Pragmatic Sanction of 1713, which allowed Maria Theresa to inherit the Habsburg kingdoms and prohibited dividing those lands and thereby diluting the Habsburg holdings.

Charles Albert never signed the Pragmatic Sanction of 1713, because he realized it edged out his claims to Habsburg kingdoms in favor of Maria Theresa and her husband Francis Stephen.

Emperor Charles VI had spent his lifetime gathering signatures for the document that allowed Archduchess Maria Theresa to inherit his kingdoms, undivided, but in fact he had years earlier signed a contradictory Mutual Pact of Succession written by his father, Emperor Leopold I, when the senior line of the House of Habsburg, King Charles II of Spain, died without a direct male heir.

That Mutual Pact of Succession specifically gave the heirs of Joseph I, not Charles VI, precedence in claims to the family leadership if neither had a son.

Enough Prince-Electors agreed with this legal argument to elect Charles Albert King of the Romans, and the Pope subsequently crowned him Holy Roman Emperor Charles VII.

Shortly after Charles VII's coronation as Holy Roman Emperor, Maria Theresa's Austrian troops, now revitalized under her firm, resolved leadership, counterattacked to capture most of his Bavarian holdings.

In short, Charles VII and his allies had overplayed their hands, expecting Maria Theresa to fold, but she drew to her own strengths instead.

While militaristic Prussia fielded an impressive army roughly equal in size to that of the Austrians at the time Maria Theresa came to the throne, Austria was a much larger country with far greater resources.

Prussia itself had 2 million citizens versus 16 million in Austria.

In addition, as mentioned earlier, Hungary had sent 60,000 troops to supplement Austria's 82,000 soldiers.

While France was also a powerful ally to Charles VII, the French motivation was primarily to cause trouble for Great Britain's allies so as to weaken their long time enemy elsewhere.

Great Britain's King George II, however, was actually born and raised in northern Germany and was also a Prince-Elector of the Holy Roman Empire, so he wasn't going to just sit idly by and let the future of Europe be decided without him.

Realizing French power would increase if Maria Theresa lost power, King George II not only sided with Austria diplomatically but actually sent troops and personally commanded an Anglo-Allied army to help turn the tide.

However, in late 1744 Prussia and France managed to reclaim Bavaria for Emperor Charles VII.

In a rapid twist, Charles VII died three months later at the age of 47, and Maria Theresa's husband Francis Stephen succeeded him as Holy Roman Emperor nine months after that, taking the name Francis I.

As the War of Austrian Succession continued, France became involved in attempting to remove King George II from the British throne by assisting the Jacobite movement to re-instate the Stuart line in Great Britain and crown Bonnie Prince Charlie as their King.

This pulled King George II's attention back to his homeland.

By 1748, France and England decided to resolve a lot of their spats all over the world with the Treaty of Aix-la-Chapelle, which among other things confirmed King George II's House of Hanover succession in both the UK and Germany and allowed Maria Theresa to keep most of her Habsburg holdings, but notably allowing Prussia to keep Silesia.

Spain and Italy also received some scraps of Habsburg territories, but for the most part, Maria Theresa came out on top in the War of Austrian Succession.

Maria Theresa would continue to refer to Frederick the Great of Prussia as "that evil man," but the reason France and England allowed Prussia to keep Silesia was the realization that Prussia could be a powerful ally, so neither wanted to be the one to antagonize Frederick by taking away his conquest.  Perhaps more to the point, at the outset of the War, Frederick had offered to recognize Maria Theresa as legitimate heir to the House of Habsburg if she would let Prussia keep Silesia.

Nonetheless, just as in the twentieth century's World Wars I and II, Great Britain's side clearly won in Europe, which must have made the unexpected loss to their American colonies 35 years later all the more shocking.

Within a few years after the Treaty of Aix-la-Chapelle, America would become a major battleground for France and Great Britain in the French and Indian War, during which young colonial George Washington gained battle experience as a British officer.

In Central Europe, however, Empress Maria Theresa had successfully reclaimed what she considered her family line's rightful position, which she would pass on to her children, two of whom would go on to become Holy Roman Emperors.

All photos in this post are of Regensburg.

Isle of Skye and Its Sheep

Sheep by road to Dunscaith Castle

"As for the Highlanders, I comprehend them all in two sorts of people: the one that dwelleth in our mainland that are barbarous, and yet mixed with some show of civility; the other that dwelleth in the Isles and are all utterly barbarous." ---King James VI of Scotland



Dunscaith Castle Ruins

Clan MacLeod's Dunvegan Castle  is a sharp contrast to Dunscaith Castle, the ancestral home of Clan MacDonald.

Dunscaith has a far lovelier natural setting than Dunvegan, though I recognize that preferring more greens of trees and pastures to the brown hues of moorelands is a personal bias. The fact that Dunscaith is in ruins, however, cannot be denied.

Sheep On the Road to Dunscaith Castle

As we drove the deteriorating one lane road to Dunscaith, sheep wandered aimlessly across the road in our path. What might have once been family farmland is now overgrown. 

Beautiful, to be sure, but also a feeling of something lost.

Footpath to Dunscaith

We hiked along a rugged path to the gorgeous site that held ancient rubble. 

Amy reached the castle before me and was teetering on a six inch edge of what I assume used to be a bridge over a hallway, but the wood had rotted away centuries earlier.

Amy Enters the Castle

Taking hand holds where she could on the wall of eroded boulders, she made it across, to my relief.

Jay took an equally perilous way, climbing higher to a ledge a foot wide where he stood and walked across, leaping down at the other side.

I took a third route, on the opposite side from Amy where I thought I could get a better hold of the top of the five foot wall, wondering as I edged along how I would get back if I fell and broke my legs.   

Jay Takes a Picture of Amy Atop the Castle

The fall would have been over twelve feet to jagged rocks, and for Jay actually another five feet more.

We made it safely to the panoramic view atop the castle, imagining what it would have been like as a seat of power hundreds of years ago. We gazed at the loch by which the stone outcropping was perched and surrounding pastures, taking it all in.



Jay's Picture of Amy Atop Dunscaith Castle

Unfortunately, we found no other way back down, so back we went to creep along the edges, grasping the rock wall. Jay had his 35 millimeter camera dangling from a strap around his neck, and he realized trying to protect it made either climbing back up to the wall he walked across or edging along the narrow ridges even more perilous. He sat the camera on top where he walked previously, and then creeped along the edge. Then he jumped back on the wall, walked over to where the camera was, leaned down to pick it up, and then walked backwards across the wall. We were all happy he made it back without breaking his crown and laughed about his double derring-do to protect his camera.

Back to history, Clan MacDonald had absconded from Dunscaith about 100 years before the Jacobite Uprising of 1745, so it wasn’t backing the wrong side that cost them this particular castle. In fact, at one time, Clan MacLeod had won and occupied Dunsquaith, but the MacDonalds took it away. The tides of history don’t always flow in the same direction.

Based on the Glenfinnan Monument to Highlander loyalty to Bonnie Prince Charlie and his quest to have his family line restored to the throne, you might well assume some longstanding mutual admiration. The Highlanders undoubtedly felt Scottish pride when King James VI of Scotland, the son of Mary Queen of Scots, became King James I of England, but as the quote above indicates, he viewed them with the sort of contempt that often seems to be leveled at the modern day Tea Party by those in the American government.

Mary Queen of Scots

King James V’s daughter, Mary Queen of Scots, on the other hand, would have preferred to live out her reign in the Loire Valley had her husband, King Francis II of France, not died as a teenager. She was not thrilled to be forced to return to Scotland after having lived in splendor on the continent.

Nonetheless, life goes on. Mary married her first cousin, Henry Stuart (Lord Darnley), and they soon had a son, James. A few months later, Lord Darnley was murdered, and Mary was imprisoned and forced to abdicate, based on specious charges, to their son, James VI of Scotland, who at the time was 13 months old.

James VI grew up under royal guardianship with a considerably different mindset than his namesakes who spoke Gaelic as at least one of their languages and respected Highlanders, who at the time were the majority of the population of Scotland.

James VI proclaimed Highlanders to be crude and terribly flawed.

He derided Gaelic as “Erse,” or Irish, and as such foreign to Scotland. He proclaimed it as a cause for Highlander shortcomings, and Parliament tried to abolish it as a language.  Essentially, Highlanders were treated worse than illegal aliens in their own country, where their direct ancestors had lived throughout history.  Apparently by the time of the Jacobite Uprisings, these insults were forgotten.

King James I of England

King James VI of Scotland became King James I of England, and though he wanted to combine the crowns, that would not come until later.  He did, however, rule England and Ireland as well as Scotland under separate crowns in what became known as the Jacobean Era.

Despite what he said about Highlanders, he wasn't all bad.

We all know of at least one accomplishment. The King James English translation of the Bible was completed under his watch.

Under his rule, the Golden Age of Elizabethan Literature continued, with the magnificent literary contributions of William Shakespeare.  James was an excellent scholar himself, writing several books.  And in an age without Fox News, perhaps the Highlanders never knew what he really thought of them.

Following plenty of succession drama, his ancestor King James II (King James VII of Scotland) was replaced by his half-sister Mary and her husband William, leading to the Jacobite Rebellions.

In 1689, they declared that Catholic King James II (aka VII) had “deserted” the kingdom and proclaimed that no Catholic could ever again become king, because “it hath been found by experience that it is inconsistent with the safety and welfare of this protestant kingdom to be governed by a papist prince.”  This more than any particular action by any James probably spurred Highlanders to the Jacobite cause.

While some Highlanders like the MacLeods were loyal to the official government and curried favor, Highlanders in general were held in contempt as backwards and worthless by the elite in the new government, a belief stoked by Highlander support of the Jacobite Rebellions. It’s natural to paint enemies in an unflattering light.



"The Commons" Painting of the Highlander Clearances

However, the government also knew that Highlanders had proven themselves to be the most loyal, tough and gallant soldiers of the British military.  

Because they were such valiant warriors, the government justifiably feared they may rebel again after the '45 Rebellion was suppressed, and so when Bonnie Prince Charlie skirted off to France in 1746, the Parliament passed the Act of Proscription designed to crush the clan system. This basically put teeth in the Disarming Act of 1715 which had not been strongly enforced.

The Dress Act made it illegal to wear a kilt or tartan in Scotland, with the only exception being for soldiers in the Black Watch Regiment of the British Infantry (Royal Highlanders), which still does to this day.

It also made it illegal for anyone in defined parts of Scotland to keep and bear any “broad sword or target, poignard, whinger, durk, side pistol, gun, or other warlike weapon." Obviously this stands in stark contrast to the U.S. Bill of Rights which asserts the right for law abiding citizens to keep and bear arms, and the framers of the Constitution undoubtedly knew about this precedent.

Farm With Pastureland Near Dunscaith Castle

Around the same time that the Jacobites struggled to regain the throne for their Catholic King, other big changes were afoot.  

In the era of clans, “crofters” worked the lands controlled by the clan chiefs very much like share croppers. These small farms produced enough food to allow the farmers to feed themselves and provide some excess to the clan. Starting in the 16th Century, the Scottish Government began requiring clan chiefs to come to Edinburgh once a year to post a bond for the people under their control.  

Each generation, clans grew larger and more like towns than families, which made clan chiefs feel more like landlords and tax collectors than father figures. They started finding that raising livestock and droving herds to sell in the lowlands was more profitable and easier than handling landlord problems and collecting the estate's share from the crofters.

Talisker Distillery on Isle of Skye

With the advent of the industrial revolution and excitement about immigration to the colonies, some of the more industrious risk-takers left the family farms to seek fortunes elsewhere, either in city factories or claiming lands of their own to farm in the Americas or Australia, but the change wasn’t happening fast enough for clan chiefs and others seeking to maximize profits.

Adam Smith’s Invisible Hand was forced into an iron glove.

Clan MacLeod “experimented” with clearing out crofters starting around 1732, and what became known as the Highland Clearances shifted into high gear in 1762.  Clan chiefs brought in factors and other outside experts in sheep farming from the lowlands to help increase efficiency.  

Some clans found it easier to sell out completely, allowing other landholders to become more powerful.

On the Scottish mainland, the Duke of Sutherland came to own 1.5 million acres in the Highlands, and the level of his wealth can be described in a quote from Queen Victoria upon visiting his estate. “I have come from my house to your palace.”

Painting of the Highlander Clearances

Needing more grazing lands, landowners evicted crofters, sometimes burning their thatched roofs to hasten their departures. This forced population exodus was euphemistically called “necessary improvements” by wealthy landlords.

Families were left to freeze and starve without their means of livelihood. Immigration to the colonies seemed the best choice for most, and there are now more descendants of Highlanders in North America than in Scotland.

In 1840, 30,000 non-English speaking Highlanders were forced to move to Glasgow, where very few spoke Gaelic, to work in factories.  Not all could find jobs in the city.



Portree Harbor

As Americans on holiday, we drove from the ruins of Dunscaith in our Fiat 500L several generations after the Clearances, and sheep looked at us as if to ask what we thought we were doing on their roads. There still seem to be more sheep than people on the Isle of Skye.

We meandered into the village of Portree, which still survives as a central marketplace,  and we visited the Talisker Distillery, indicating the whiskey industry has prospered.  Tourism certainly now plays a huge role in the economy, but most of the island is sheep country. It’s a lovely place to visit, but I don’t think I’d want to live there.  

On the Statue of Liberty, which has become an international symbol for welcoming immigrants to the USA, there’s a bronze plaque featuring “The New Collosus” by American Poet Emma Lazarus, including this excerpt:

"Keep, ancient lands, your storied pomp!" cries she
With silent lips. "Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"

A Welcome Sight for Displaced Hihglanders in the USA

These words were not an invitation to a welfare state but a challenge to prove the class systems of the old world was wrong in pushing them out of their former homelands.

In the long run, the Clearances proved to be a blessing for future generations of Highlanders who grew to their potential under our freedoms, as well as for America, which benefited from their strengths.

Before moving on, let’s consider an alternative viewpoint of the Highlander situation. We can understand why the emerging British Empire gradually uniting England and Ireland with Scotland would require assimilation of Highlanders. They certainly didn’t want to simply put up a wall like the Romans when they saw a sort of manifest destiny for their mainland to be united similar to that expressed by the western expansion of the United States from the original 13 colonial states.  

Statue of Economist Adam Smith In Edinburgh

Modernization in all its forms, including science, technology and economics, was coming regardless of whether the Highlanders preferred to stay in feudal times or not. Feudalism relies on subservience rather than freedom, and freedom leads to greater happiness and prosperity in the long run.   

Squabbles and outright battles among clans were counter-productive, and like it or not, those who want to be successful in business in Western Civilization speak English, not Gaelic. 

As the old saying goes, you can’t make an omelet without breaking a few eggs. And man does not live by haggis alone.

Dunvegan Castle on the Isle of Skye

Dunsquaithe Castle Ruins on the Isle of Skye

While driving through the Highlands gives a feel of the beauty, openness and vastness of nature, not unlike our Rocky Mountain States, the Isle of Skye definitely has a different feel, more like civilization plowed under.

It’s not Planet of the Apes, and make no mistake, it is lovely, but Skye can’t escape its history, and even pre-history.

Pre-historic hunter-gatherers occupied the land from about 7000 BC. About 500 A.D., Gaels began arriving from Ireland, though collaborative records are scarce.

Cascades in Dunvegan's Walled Garden

Scandinavian Vikings arrived and basically took over.  The Gaelic language continued to be used by at least some of the population through the era of Norse control, which ran from Viking invasions in about 900 until Norway signed away its power with the Treaty of Perth in 1266, following an essentially non-decisive war.  Norway's new king simply decided to devote energies elsewhere.


It should be noted that during this time that Norway controlled Skye, Scotland still had kings, including a young King Duncan I who was killed by his kinsman MacBethad, giving William Shakespeare inspiration for a play loosely based on that history, “MacBeth.”  

King Alexander III, who signed the treaty Norway, was the grandson of King Alexander I MacUlliam, mentioned in regard to MacQuillans in Northern Ireland.



Dunvegan Castle

The clans became powerful in independent Scotland.  With a semi-feudal society, clan chiefs held sway over large sections of land where their family members lived, toiling the land, raising livestock, working as artisans and, when necessary, battling other clans. The clan chief accepted both authority and responsibility for his clan members. Disney’s Brave does a good job painting the general time period.

The most powerful clan on the Isle of Skye was Clan MacLeod, who trace their heritage back to Leod, younger son of Olaf the Black, the Norse King of Mann. Their ancestral home, Dunvegan Castle, has been occupied by the Chiefs of Clan MacLeod for over 800 years, making it the oldest inhabited castle in Scotland. 

We enjoyed strolling through Dunvegan Castle’s Walled Gardens, a fairy land quite different from the surrounding moorlands outside its high walls. It’s definitely not well-manicured and controlled, like formal gardens we’ve come to expect at palaces in Europe or those at local museums, but like Scotland itself, it’s a bit more rough around the edges and slightly overgrown. It adds to that charming, otherworldly feel.




Jay and Amy on Seal Boat With Dunvegan Castle In Distance

There’s also a relaxing seal boat ride, which is only available to those who purchase admission to either the Castle or the Gardens, and again it is not that Disneyesque type of experience but rather rough around the edges and natural, with absolutely no narration of any kind, much less any Jungle Boat jokes.

Among illustrious past guests, Dunvegan Castle lists Sir Walter Scott, Queen Elizabeth II and Flora MacDonald. As you’ll recall, Flora MacDonald gained honor in Highlands lore by helping Bonnie Prince Charlie escape, but her visit to Dunvegan should not be interpreted as some longstanding alliance with Clan MacLeod.

To the contrary, Clan Donald and its Clan MacDonald spinoffs challenged Clan MacLeod for Skye supremacy over the centuries, so it’s not surprising that Clan MacLeod provided 700 troops in support of the government against the Jacobite challenge. As we know in retrospect, that proved to be the right side of history, helping Clan MacLeod to maintain its wealth and power on Skye.


Seals in Natural Environment by Dunvegan Castle

While the 19th Century began with Clan MacLeod building its walled garden paradise, most of the Isle of Skye and the rest of the Highlands suffered hard times due to the Clearances and other factors. 

After exploring Dunvegan Castle’s grounds, we settled back into Driftwoods Bed & Breakfast.  We stayed there for two nights, so we would have plenty of time to explore the regions outside the garden walls where a different reality unfolded. 


As the only guests of the house, we had exclusive use of the second floor's two bedrooms, kitchenette and TV room, with only our hosts on the other floor. It was quite comfortable, and each morning, our hostess Rachel prepared toast and coffee to go along with an assortment of cereal and fruit, plus a few deli meats and cheeses.