Proscription of bagpipes after 1745

[Seoras Guinne]

Folks,

John Gibson's book on Highland Piping presents, in my view, a compelling case that piping was never proscribed via the disarming act in the highlands after 1745.

This seems to run counter to some of the piping lore (quicunque vult...) that's been handed down in certain quarters, and I was curious to know whether others have found Gibson's arguments sound, or whether his revisionist point of view needs revising.

Best,

Seoras

[Ken MacKenzie]

Since Gibson backs up his statements with the actual text of those acts in question, I would suggest that he has the definitive say on the matter.

The archaic terminology of the act takes a bit of slogging to get through but no where could I find any clause or section that supports the long-held belief that GHB were banned.

Such are the ways of folk lore...

Ken

[Matt Buckley_dup1]

Originally posted by Seoras Guinne:

John Gibson's book on Highland Piping presents, in my view, a compelling case that piping was never proscribed via the disarming act in the highlands after 1745.

This seems to run counter to some of the piping lore (quicunque vult...) that's been handed down in certain quarters, and I was curious to know whether others have found Gibson's arguments sound, or whether his revisionist point of view needs revising. I'm a big Gibson fan. In the 5 years since his first book came out, no one has been able to challenge the research. And others have signed on to Gibson's conclusions, e.g. William Donaldson.

[Rafe]

While the great highland bagpipes may not have been specifically banned, I suppose it’s possible that some law enforcement officials in remote areas didn’t have a crystal clear understanding of the all aspects of the disarming act, and they could have acted to keep the pipes from being played. From the locals’ point of view, whether a law is written down is less meaningful that whether it’s actually being enforced. It’s easy enough to imagine something like that happening. Perhaps that’s where the belief that the pipes were banned came from, if they were being banned in fact, though not in law.

I confess to not having studied this bit of history at all. I’m just suggesting the idea.

[Pete Walen]

I think it FAR more likely that the banning of the pipes was absorbed into the Fakelore/Brigadoonery stuff and became so ingrained that "everybody" knew it to be true. Just like Washington cut down the cherry tree and threw a silver dollar across the Potomac.

The overwhelming evidence is in support of Gibson. His book simply put it in the public view.

Most of the folks I know who deny the claim also talk proudly about what clan they belong to. One guy told me all about it at the Alma games a few years ago - with a nice thick Kentucky accent.

Ah well...

[Seoras Guinne]

Folks,

So what do we do with the knowledge that the pipes, very likely, were never proscribed after 1745?

This seems to tie into a question I have concerning the role of this forum.

Do we use this forum as a "staging area" to educate other pipers?

I certainly don't want to try to convince a 2m tall, 20 stone piper in the beer tent that the bloody Sassenachs likely never burned the pipes of Seumas dubh mac Tormod ban mhic Sean ruadh, his distant ancestor, not to mention that his clan association probably has roots as stable as Burnham Wood.

So, how do we make what is likely to be the truth more widely known?

It only hurts the reputation of the instrument if misinformation continues to be handed down.

Best,

Seoras

[Iain Sherwood]

The matter of proscription of the pipes comes from a court ruling in Manchester against a Highlander who claimed exemption from the treason charge in the '45.

The judge ruled that since no clan ever went into battle without a piper, the pipes themselves could be considered a weapon, and the man in question had no exemption as a 'non-combatant musician.'

[Matt Buckley_dup1]

Originally posted by Rafe:

While the great highland bagpipes may not have been specifically banned, I suppose it's possible that some law enforcement officials in remote areas didn't have a crystal clear understanding of the all aspects of the disarming act, and they could have acted to keep the pipes from being played. From the locals' point of view, whether a law is written down is less meaningful that whether it's actually being enforced.... Perhaps that's where the belief that the pipes were banned came from, if they were being banned in fact, though not in law.
Gibson addresses the enforcement aspect in some detail. The research thus far fails to reveal a single instance in which any official banned, de facto, the pipes. The pipes simply were not banned, de jure or de facto.

[Seoras Guinne]

Iain,

from your post, it's not clear to me whether you're familiar with John Gibson's discussion of this event.

Gibson's take on it is that this was an isolated incident. While it may be cited in support of the proscription position, it doesn't seem to have set a widely followed precedent.

I apologize if I've misinterpreted what you wrote.

Best,

Seoras

[Matt Buckley_dup1]

Originally posted by Iain Sherwood:

The matter of proscription of the pipes comes from a court ruling in Manchester against a Highlander who claimed exemption from the treason charge in the '45.

The judge ruled that since no clan ever went into battle without a piper, the pipes themselves could be considered a weapon, and the man in question had no exemption as a 'non-combatant musician.' Gibson discusses the ruling in Manchester in great detail, and suggests that the ruling has been substantially misread and misunderstood. He argues that Reid was convicted, not because he was a piper, but because he participated in treasonous activities. The fact that Reid was a piper, and therefore possibly playing a "weapon of war", was redundant to the essential fact that Reid was engaged in illegal activities. In other words, he would have been convicted even if he didn't play the pipes.

[Ian Robertson]

I think Matt's is a good summary of Gibson's commentary on the Reid trial--the remarks of the judge have always struck me as essentially rhetorical, and shouldn't have led us astray for so long. To the extent that traditional gaelic piping did decline after the '45, this can be attributed to the disintegration of traditional gaelic society--but not to some mythical ban on piping... The real story is much more interesting and much more depressing.

Ian

[Iain Sherwood]

Reid's position was that he was a non-combatant, and should have been accorded status as such, similar to the status of a medic, or a hired musician in the Regular establishment. Other than drummers, musicians in the British Army were hired as such by the officers commanding the individual regiments, and did not serve as soldiers. As Reid and his co-defendants were not accorded the benefit of counsel, each man had to make the best defense possible in a bad situation.

There were many Jacobite sympathisers in Scotland and in England who were never brought to trial, or even charged.

The wholesale trial of the Manchester prisoners was one of the worst cases of jingoistic jurisprudence of the '45 aftermath.

Interestingly enough, by the early 1900s army pipers WERE serving as stretcher bearers (medics) and did so all through WWI, running across No Man's Land wearing white smocks with big red crosses on them. made great targets for the Germans....

[Rafe]

So what I'm gathering from the discussion here (I haven't read the source that you're using and don't have access to it right now) is that at the time of the supposed proscription, no one living in Scotland was under the impression that the bagpipes were banned. I had always heard that piobaireachd was nearly wiped out because no one could play their pipes and it only survived because of cantairaechd (sorry about the spelling). So was piping pretty much dying on its own (like the rest of European piping) before the British army started hiring pipers for its highland regiments? Forgive my ignorance. I'm here to learn.

[Seoras Guinne]

Folks,

I should have posted this in the beginning. Forgive me.

Here's the source citation:

Traditional Gaelic Bagpiping, 1745-1945
by John G. Gibson

Publisher: McGill-Queens University Press;(April 1999)

ISBN: 0773515410

It's available via Amazon.com (surprise---not).

The paperback edition costs $24.95 (US).

The beginning section which lays out all the evidence for the, hmm, misconception that the pipes were proscribed is very complete. It is heavy reading in places, though.

I was particularly interested in the appendices which contain the actual text of the disarming act and related materials. However, as Ken MacKenzie pointed out above, it is also heavy reading.

Best,

Seoras

[Iain Sherwood]

I think it would be easiest to say that the Disarming Act contributed to a decline in piping during that period, along with the Clearances, the decline of the clan system, and other factors.

That piping was allowed in the Army during this period is another case against 'proscription,' along with the writing of Joseph MacDonald's Complete Theory in 1760 and the assemblage of the Campbell Manuscript in the late 1770s.

[Barry Shears]

Gibson is great at debunking long held mis-interpretations of piping history and one has to wonder why it took almost 200 years to do so. It might be that pipers have always deferred to what was eminating from Scotland via Seumas MacNeil and others of that ilk and that they were content to be spoon fed Victorian impressions of Gaelic culture. I feel the disarming act had minimal impact on the decline of piping. It was the the collapse of Gaelic Society and emigration which took the biggest toll on piping. As for the army, it has often been blamed for restructuring piping and while this is true to a certain extent I believe it is musical literacy ( and structured competition) which was the driving force behind the homogenous style of piping so prevalent today. If one looks at Seton's The Pipes of War, P/M John Grant complains of the lack of uniformity in tune settings among the highland regiments, indicating that there was no standard settings by the 1920s. The army replaced the clan chiefs as patrons of piping and so allowed the military tradition of piping to continue, although transformed to meet the changing demands of the military.
Gibson's second book
Old and New World Highland Bagpiping,
is written in three sections.
The first section deals with piping after 1745 and it list numerous pipers plying their trade after Culloden. Further proof that piping was not banned or even suppressed. The second section deals with the "hereditary or Chiefs pipers in Hanoverian times. and it dispels the Victorian concept of hereditary pipers. In the 17th and 18th century most sons learned their fathers trade and would move about piping for the chiefs who offered the most lucrative terms of employment. The third section deals with folk music pipers in 2 of the 4 counties of Cape Breton.
What has yet to be researched by present day piping scholars is what effect the emigration of so many trained piobaireachd players to the colonies had on the performer community in Scotland. There is a reason why so many prominent piobaireachd players today trace their knowledge of piobaireachd back to John MacKay, Raasay. That is , because just about everyone else left for North America and Australia.
The Bruces of Glenelg went to Austarlia and the Canadian maritimes received the following pipers. in the late 18th early 19th centuries.
The MacKay's of Gairloch to Pictou in 1805.
Donald Ruadh MacCrimmon lived in Shelburne County for a dozen or so years after the American Revolution, before returning to Scotland. The last MacNeil pipers to MacNeil of Barra settled at Pipers Cove, Cape Breton, in 1803.
Conn Deauly Rankin immigrated to Prince Edward Island in the 1770s after the piping college in Mull closed.
Add to this the the MacIntyre pipers of South Uist who came to Cape Breton in the 1820s, Kenneth Chisholm, family piper to the Chisholms of Strathglas, Antigonish County c.1812, The MacMillan pipers of South Uist who came to Cape Breton in the 1840s and one can see how much of the tradition was exiled to the woods of Eastern Canada. This list does not include many lesser known piping familes from the islands of Muck, Canna, North Uist and Lewis, Skye and the mainland of Lochaber and Moidart.
Sadly much of the piobaireachd tradition died out on this side of the water. All the factors which supported piping in Scotland; chiefly patronage, large estates and a growing military influence simply did not exist in the Atlantic Provinces. With regional industrialization in the late 19th early 20th centuries the occupation of piper disappeared along with that of the many other trades.
Just a few thoughts.

If anyone is interested I have a few copies of Gibson's new book for sale and they can email me off line for info.
Cheers,
Barry Shears

[Iain Sherwood]

One has to wonder if piobaireachd simply went into a 'slump' with the decline of the Clan system and the Highland Clearances. It seems that jacobite fervor was one of the main influences on composition during the 1690-1746 period; after that, there were practically no more clan skirmishes or squabbles to speak of, unless you count the various incidents caused by Campbell militia rooting out hidden Jacobites.

When the Act of Proscription (II George 19, Caput 36) was repealed in 1782 it had virtually no effect in the Highlands, because people had been openly flouting the law for over two decades, wearing tartan and bearing arms, and not just in the army. The law became unenforceable in the late 1750s as more and more highlanders enlisted in the army, and lowland and English authorities couldn't tell one tartan from another anyway.

By 1758 even William Pitt, that voracious Hanoverian and foe of all things Scottish, praised the courage and strength of Highland troops in Parliament during the Seven Years' War.
Gradually after that things returned to 'normal' in the Highlands - except for one thing.

Highland Chieftains became addicted to Edinburgh and London society, creating a major cashflow problem. To solve this lack of income, as early as 1746 noble Scots were moving their people off the land and replacing cattle with sheep. This Scotish diaspora was the true death of the clan system and much of Gaelic culture. Naturally this affected the music as well.

Recent papers on the last two MacCrimmons presented at the Piobaireachd Society in 2001 show that they were resident in Badenoch and Perthshire for a good part of their adult lives, and that they were, for a great part, inactive as pipers during their lives. Hopefully further research will provide more information about this important family's downfall.

While it is true that the Act of Proscription had a temporary effect on piping and Gaelic culture, the despicable actions of many clan chiefs was the greater cause of piobaireachd's 'decline' - if there really was a decline at all. the Highland Society's first piobaireachd competition was held in the same year as the repeal of the act - won by a young Donald MacDonald; all the competitors played 'The Prince's Salute' (You can't get more Jacobite than that tune!).

[Dave Sanderson]

This is a great thread and is what I was hopeing to learn from people who are more knowlegeable than me, also on what other books I need to read.

I don't know alot of the specifics but have alot of general knowledge of the shifts in British societies and the last 250 years through reading and historical activities. The aftermath of the '45 would have had a profound effect on the general society, as Iain suggests. The "arts" are the first thing to disappear as people are just trying to survive. Communication & teaching would have been almost impossible. There were no phone, fax, email, internet as all teaching was "face to face" and that was broken up. There has to be a large,interested pool of like minded people all striveing for the same goal, pipeing, to achieve the levels of playing before the "troubles".

My bio. states I am a Master of my trade, this trade has lost its general appeal to young people for the last 30 years. I was the last apprentice in the Province of Ontario and the last one to acheive the title of Master in Canada. I don't know if this relates at all to the topic but it reads like a paradym shift to me. Once the "rules" change everyone goes back to zero and the game begins again. Once vast quantities of people are cleared or transported the focus, ie. pipeing, is lost. It is great to see that highland pipeing is now a truly global phenomenom

I hope I haven't strayed too far from the intended topic, with my 2 cents. worth.

Dave

[Iain Sherwood]

Of course, without the despicable actions of clan chiefs in the eighteenth century piping would probably not be the 'global phenomenon' it is today.

Although the Army had its role in the spread of piping worldwide, it was those who settled in the New World and the Antipodes, over generations, who kept piping alive in their new homes.

The MacNeills, MacKays, Rankins, MacIntyres and others who went to new lands and kept their tradition alive are a primary reason we now enjoy piping all over the world.

In addition, in the U.S. particularly, many aspiring pipers had their first exposure to the instrument due to the efforts of the late Sol Hurok, who brought army pipe bands over to tour North America starting in the late 1950s. His successor organisation, Columbia Festivals, continues his tradition this year with the Highlanders Tour currently under way.

[Matt Buckley_dup1]

Originally posted by Dave Sanderson:

The aftermath of the '45 would have had a profound effect on the general society, as Iain suggests. The "arts" are the first thing to disappear as people are just trying to survive.
Hmmmm. I'm not so sure.

First, we have to be careful when discussing the "aftermath" of the 45. The Highland Clearances came one, two and even three generations after the 45 rebellion, and the reasons were only partly related to the rebellion. As Iain has suggested, the roles of the chieftains, land use policy, and land ownership policy, had far more to do with the Clearances, and loss of culture, than did any immediate effect of the rebellion.

Second, as has been pointed out, Joseph MacDonald, in his Compleat Theory, found piping generally alive and well only a handful of years after the 45. And the piping competitions that began in the 1780s again demonstrated that piping was surviving, even in the midst of the Clearances. And certainly we know that those immigrating to Cape Breton brought their culture with them, even though survival in the New World was uppermost in their minds.

I wonder whether, in the midst of a fight for survival, many folk found solace in their gaelic culture at a time their world was falling apart.
My own view is that traditional gaelic culture suffered far more in the latter half of the 19th century, and the first half of the 20th century, at the hands of modern industrialized society and homogenization of Scottish culture.

[Iain Sherwood]

The Clearances began in 1746, during the Rebellion, when Ludovic Grant of Grant ordered his entire clan to march overland to Ft. William and board a ship bound for the Carolinas. John Prebble's The Highland Clearances is one of the better overviews of this tragic period.

Other debt-ridden clan chiefs soon followed suit. The Clearances reached their height in the 1780s and 90s, so much so that by the Napoleonic Wars much of the enlistment of the Black Watch was Irish.

Alasdair Ranaldson MacDonnell of Glengarry, he of the prideful portrait by Raeburn, traveeled everywhere with a personal 'tail' of twenty-two of his clansmen, all tricked out and bristling with weapons, wherever he went in public - that being in London, where he ran up such debts that his heir was not only penniless, but over twenty thousand pounds 'in the red' upon his succession.

The riotous lifestyle enjoyed by many absent chiefs in London was the killing blow to Gaelic culture. When settlers arrived in the New World many tried to maintain a sense of community, and in Nova Scotia they succeeded for several generations; further south the settlements became diversified within two generations, and the sense of 'clan/community' was virtually erased except in pocket areas. The gaelic language was virtually lost in southern settlements, while it was maintained in Cape Breton and other areas of Nova Scotia, and exists today.

[Pete Walen]

I suspect there is a great deal of myth related to the Clearances. Many of us, indeed, most of us I suspect, were fed a diet of this myth as young people and never questioned it. Indeed, so much has been written on the subject that anyone raising objections tended to be soundly thrashed for their toubles.

The idea that the '45 brought about the end of Gaelic, Highland Scotland is tied part and parcel with this. In truth, I believe the '45 was the last hurrah, literally, of a system that was gone in all but name before then. Yes, many of the customs continued and persisted through 1746 and later. In truth, however, that which made Gaelic Scotland, well, Gaelic was a living memory.

I believe that the '15 rising was more properly the beginning of the last act of this long decline, as indeed, decline it was probably since Harlow. Culloden and its bloody aftermath was simply the final curtan call.

Now then, the Clearances. If I might be so bold, the "Clearances" were not a singular event. Rather, they were a series of events that were similar and only, in truth, by method were they related. These same events were found in many parts of Europe from the early 18th century onward well into the early 20th century. Aside from the obvious similarities to the Irish experience, there are clear parallels in Norway in the 19th century and Central and Southern Europe through the early 20th Century. These events boiled down to this, a capitalist modernization triggered by agricultural and societal changes.

The two "presentations", if you will, in the Clearances run thus: The clansmen/crofters were 1) offered new opportunities in new lands; 2) victims of wicked and grasping lairds and their factors working in collusion with others, including submissive clergy. I suspect the truth lies somewhat in the middle.

Let us look briefly at the major phases of the Clearances which will help us, perhaps, understand the core events a bit better. The first discernable phase started approximately 1740. This was very much a small scale event where factors and tacksmen recognized the changing economic and social environments and noted the increased pressure on land open to cultivation. It would appear that the first wave of clearances from this time, predating the '45, were strictly economic - that is, making room for more profitable methods of agriculture than the subsitance farming of the crofts.

Aside from any political results of the '45, eg., deportation for offenses, the next definable wave came in the 1770's and 80's. These hit most heavily in the Central and Western Highlands. They were triggered by the intorduction of lowland style sheep farming in the Southern Highlands in the late 1760's and early 1780's. They spread Northward following the economic success in the Southern Highlands.

The largest and most brutal came following the Napoleonic Wars in the 1820's. Wholsesale forced clearances of estates coloured the perception of the Clearances from that point onward. The events in Sutherland and Ross-shire bear witness to this very well indeed.

The last major phase was in the mid to late 19th century. There were pockets in the 1840's of large numbers of crofters being cleared from some areas, yet the bulk of the mass clearances were dwindling by the later portion of that century.

Part of the reason was simply economic. The estates could not be maintained as they were. The crofts were being divided into smaller and smaller crofts by an increasing population - thanks in part to the rise ofthe potato as a major food source, as in Ireland.

We know the reasons for the landlords to clear the land. What we do not know to the same level of detail the motivation of the crofters themselves. We do not know why they so willingly submitted - either to the suggested emigration or to the forced evictions. Many were simply cowed by the tacksmen and the clergy into submission. The result, however, was a pent-up anger and bitterness that is still discernable - hence the amount of folklore around the Clearances.

Of course, the Crofter's Act of 1886 forced a change - and in conjunction with the rise of the Highland Land League forced reform on a system that resisted stubbornly. I suspect that the Land League and the Crofter's Act stemmed the tide, and resulted in the survival of the last of Highland lifestyles into this century.

There are a couple of good books on the Clearances. One, "A History of the Highland Clearances Vol 1: Agrarian Transformation and the Evictions, 1746-1886" Richards, Croom Helm, 1982, is lengthy and even more dry than this post. (there is a second volume that came out a few years later) Another, "The People's Clearance: Highland Emigration to North America" Bumstead, Edinburgh University Press, 1982, is a bit more readable.

Longwindedly -

[Ian Robertson]

Originally posted by PeteBoom:

In truth, I believe the '45 was the last hurrah, literally, of a system that was gone in all but name before then. Yes, many of the customs continued and persisted through 1746 and later. In truth, however, that which made Gaelic Scotland, well, Gaelic was a living memory.
This fits perfectly with my own understanding of this complex issue. Great post in general, Pete. Let me add to the references that you cite at the end of your post two things that may be easier for many readers to get hold of: T.M. Devine's "The Scottish Nation: 1700-2000" which has an inciteful discussion on the clearances...; and Devine's earlier book called "Clanship to Crofters' War: The Social Transformation of the Scottish Highlands" that looks at the clearances in more depth. In spite of the goofy title, Herman's "How the Scots Invented the Modern World" does a good job of describing the broader context of social change in the Highlands during this general period.

[Barry Shears]

Yes, Jack Bumsted's book The Peoples Clearance is a great read for those interested in Highland immigration to North America (British) and Thanks Ian for the other two references, I 'll have to check them out! Bumsted makes a good point in dispelling the age old tale that everyone who left Scotland were "Cleared". The point I drew from his book is that the tacksman or middle class were opting for emigration from about 1765-1805. In some cases they took several tenants and sub tenants with them, probablyin effort to retain their standards of living. Of course the tacksman class also contained many of the big names in piping- Donald Ruadh MacCrimmon. the Gairloch Mackays, Robert MacIntyre, Kenneth Chisholm, John MacGillivray
It would seem that alot of the decline of Gaelic culture had its beginnings in the Statutes of Iona, 1609. Signed into law by James the First after the Union of the Crowns in 1603 (some would say in effort to minimize the power of some clan chiefs) Among other things it required the chiefs to send their sons to lowland and English schools and universities for education and this became a thin wedge which eventually reduced and eventually ruptured any paternal instinct between the chief and his people. As a friend of mine pointed out to me a few months ago, "by the time the Gaels were settling in Nova Scotia (Maritime Canada 1772-1850) they were already a broken people.

[Matt Buckley_dup1]

Clarification and Question:

I previously made a comment regarding decline of the gaelic culture in the late 19th century and the early 20th century. To be more precise, I was referring to the remnants of the culture. Gibson's research certainly supports the notion set forth in the posts above that the culture had already substantially declined by the mid-18th century.

There are those still alive in the Western Isles
today that have spoken of the deliberate attempts
to suppress the remnants of gaelic culture, e.g. suppression of the language in school, suppression of traditional step-dance, etc. I'm curious what you rest of you have found by way of discouragement of the culture during the period I'm referring to.

[Ian Lawther]

Just a s a point of correction the Reid case cited above was in York not Manchester.

With regard to earlier comments as to how this myth has been perpetuated over 200 years perhaps the motive comes from non Gaels who have tried to "preserve" something they do not have a cultural affinity with, and for whom it is convenient to show how things have only survived through their efforts and publications. In doing so they can dismiss any final vestiges of real tradition as irrelevant because there was a ban on the intstrument that meant the real tradition could not have survived. Just a cynical thought.....

Ian