忠诚与异议:1853年后斯特拉斯佩的改善与清除

IF 0.3 Q2 HISTORY
F. Bardgett
{"title":"忠诚与异议:1853年后斯特拉斯佩的改善与清除","authors":"F. Bardgett","doi":"10.3366/NOR.2021.0232","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Although Strathspey experienced many of the same trends – agricultural ‘improvement’, enclosure of commons, creation of deer forests, emigration – present elsewhere in Northern Scotland during the nineteenth century, the region was not a flashpoint for unrest. Careful management on behalf of the ruling family, the earls of Seafield, who were the hereditary chiefs of Grant, the local clan; a consistent policy preference to work with existing farming tenants, and a traditional paternalism, all contributed to social stability. The region was not exempt from protest against the impact of the considerable programme of ‘improvement’ pursued from 1853. There were accusations of ‘depopulation’ and ‘clearance’ in Strathspey, but the influence of those who benefitted from the changes, together with the intrinsic and pervasive authority of the Seafield estate, confined discontent to the constitutional channels opening up as the century progressed. Strong expressions of loyalty to the Seafield proprietors were also a feature of the times. Aspects of this narrative of mutual loyalty are examined, and then the spectrum of reaction to improvement and clearance, the growing lobby for land reform, and the experience of depopulation. Although the influence of the Strathspey factor, John Smith, was important in channelling public discourse, a dilution of estate authority as the century progressed is recognised. The article seeks to broaden perceptions of the history of the Highlands by considering a region of the Gaidhealtachd outwith the far North and the North-West.","PeriodicalId":40928,"journal":{"name":"Northern Scotland","volume":"12 1","pages":"1-32"},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2021-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Loyalty and Dissent: Improvement and Clearance in Strathspey after 1853\",\"authors\":\"F. Bardgett\",\"doi\":\"10.3366/NOR.2021.0232\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Although Strathspey experienced many of the same trends – agricultural ‘improvement’, enclosure of commons, creation of deer forests, emigration – present elsewhere in Northern Scotland during the nineteenth century, the region was not a flashpoint for unrest. Careful management on behalf of the ruling family, the earls of Seafield, who were the hereditary chiefs of Grant, the local clan; a consistent policy preference to work with existing farming tenants, and a traditional paternalism, all contributed to social stability. The region was not exempt from protest against the impact of the considerable programme of ‘improvement’ pursued from 1853. There were accusations of ‘depopulation’ and ‘clearance’ in Strathspey, but the influence of those who benefitted from the changes, together with the intrinsic and pervasive authority of the Seafield estate, confined discontent to the constitutional channels opening up as the century progressed. Strong expressions of loyalty to the Seafield proprietors were also a feature of the times. Aspects of this narrative of mutual loyalty are examined, and then the spectrum of reaction to improvement and clearance, the growing lobby for land reform, and the experience of depopulation. Although the influence of the Strathspey factor, John Smith, was important in channelling public discourse, a dilution of estate authority as the century progressed is recognised. The article seeks to broaden perceptions of the history of the Highlands by considering a region of the Gaidhealtachd outwith the far North and the North-West.\",\"PeriodicalId\":40928,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Northern Scotland\",\"volume\":\"12 1\",\"pages\":\"1-32\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-05-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Northern Scotland\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3366/NOR.2021.0232\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"HISTORY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Northern Scotland","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3366/NOR.2021.0232","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HISTORY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

尽管斯特拉斯佩经历了许多与19世纪北苏格兰其他地方相同的趋势——农业“改进”,公地圈地,鹿林的创造,移民,但该地区并不是动荡的爆发点。代表统治家族,西菲尔德伯爵的精心管理,他们是当地氏族格兰特的世袭首领;一贯倾向于与现有佃农合作的政策,以及传统的家长式作风,都有助于社会稳定。从1853年开始实施的大规模“改善”计划对该地区的影响引发了抗议。斯特拉斯佩有"人口减少"和"清仓"的指控,但受益于这些变化的人的影响,以及西菲尔德地产固有的、无处不在的权威,将不满限制在了随着世纪发展而开放的宪法渠道上。对海田主的强烈忠诚也是那个时代的特征。对这种相互忠诚叙述的各个方面进行了考察,然后是对改善和清理的反应范围,对土地改革的日益增长的游说,以及人口减少的经历。尽管斯特拉斯佩因素的影响,约翰·史密斯,在引导公众话语方面很重要,但随着世纪的发展,人们认识到地产权力的稀释。这篇文章试图通过考虑Gaidhealtachd与遥远的北部和西北部的一个地区来扩大对高地历史的认识。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Loyalty and Dissent: Improvement and Clearance in Strathspey after 1853
Although Strathspey experienced many of the same trends – agricultural ‘improvement’, enclosure of commons, creation of deer forests, emigration – present elsewhere in Northern Scotland during the nineteenth century, the region was not a flashpoint for unrest. Careful management on behalf of the ruling family, the earls of Seafield, who were the hereditary chiefs of Grant, the local clan; a consistent policy preference to work with existing farming tenants, and a traditional paternalism, all contributed to social stability. The region was not exempt from protest against the impact of the considerable programme of ‘improvement’ pursued from 1853. There were accusations of ‘depopulation’ and ‘clearance’ in Strathspey, but the influence of those who benefitted from the changes, together with the intrinsic and pervasive authority of the Seafield estate, confined discontent to the constitutional channels opening up as the century progressed. Strong expressions of loyalty to the Seafield proprietors were also a feature of the times. Aspects of this narrative of mutual loyalty are examined, and then the spectrum of reaction to improvement and clearance, the growing lobby for land reform, and the experience of depopulation. Although the influence of the Strathspey factor, John Smith, was important in channelling public discourse, a dilution of estate authority as the century progressed is recognised. The article seeks to broaden perceptions of the history of the Highlands by considering a region of the Gaidhealtachd outwith the far North and the North-West.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
11
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信