Category: Uncategorized

I must admit that when I first learned of my “Hays” connection to Clan Hay and the Earl of Errol that I bought highland music CD’s (search CD on the internet kids), including some in Gaelic, and even ordered up a complete Prince Charlie with the intent to attend the Scottish Highland games in my area as I was “Scottish”.  Alas I was to learn that if I transported back in time and showed up with my ancestors in 1500’s Scotland wearing a Kilt and speaking Gaelic I would certainly be killed as a raider from the north looking to steal cattle. My ancestor then most likely spoke Scots and dressed in wool or animal skin clothing. 

I had no sense of my ancestry beyond my father, a depression era dust bowl “Okie” who migrated to California, as in the Grapes of Wrath diaspora, and it was only when I did a deep dive into my genealogy (including DNA) that I learned of my American Pioneer Ancestors, arriving in this new world from the lowlands of Scotland with a couple or more generation stop in Northern Ireland. While I have not researched the line beyond the 1700s in America there are general circumstances applied to all the migrators of that era and location which tell us why they came to America.

It has been speculated, based upon DNA, that my ancestry came to Scotland with the Norman invasion and there intermingled with the Anglo-Saxons, most likely in Bernicia which was the northern part of Northumbria which is present day southeast Scotland (south of Edinburg).  There were multiple cadet houses and Hay holdings throughout Scotland and the specific area my line is from has not been determined.  Additionally after hundreds of years in Scotland we migrated to Ulster with other Presbyterians and the formation of the plantations in Northern Ireland in the 1600s at some point.  

So the questions that comes to my mind is why did my ancestors migrate from Scotland to Northern Ireland in the 1600s and then on to America in the early 1700s?  Economic reasons? Religious persecution?  War or famine?  What was their life like and how did they live?  Most historical writings are based upon the aristocracy or church with only passing mention of the daily lives of the common man.  I did find one specific source, “The Scotch-Irish: A Social History” by James G. Leyburn, University of North Carolina Press, 1962.  My writings here are based greatly on that and also by multiple readings of other works, although I found this one, unlike many which focus on the ruling establishment and major historical events, to speak to the every day life and times of the common man of which my ancestors came from.  It can be borrowed from the libraries at archive.org at https://archive.org/details/scotchirishsocia0000leyb/page/n5/mode/2up.  

Given my ancestors came to America as farmers I highly suspected that they were farmers in Ulster and Scotland, part of the peasant class.  While the term peasant is often given a negative connotation it actually means a tiller of the soil, or a farmer (not to be confused with serf which was an economic slave tied to a feudal landowner).  While the social hierarchy was Lords (Nobility with title), Gentry and Lairds (landowners) and Burghers (well off Merchants), then tenants (peasants) each had a responsibility to the others in the feudal system. The Lord was expected to provide protection for all those under him and in return they were bound to provide military service to the nobleman. The tenant paid rent to the Laird (or the Lords agent) and was given a lease on specific lands.  In daily life and business, and especially when on a campaign, they would have been in close contact with each other.

Prior to the reformation few could read or write and this included most nobles.  The only  education was in schools taught in Latin which was to prepare them for a life as Clergy in the Catholic Church. After the Reformation Noble, Gentry, and Peasant alike sent their children to the same Presbyterian School, if available, and it was based upon merit which should continue on to University.  This common purpose to advance a common religion would have brought the adherents even closer regardless of class.  Even though there were distinct classes they interacted freely, often, and without airs. 

As an example of the unity, “An Old Kirk Chronicle: being a history of Auldhame, Tyninghame, and Whitekirk in East Lothian by Rev. P. Lately Waddell, B.D., Minister of the united parish; author of “the Gospel of the Kingdom” published by William Blackwood and Sons, Edinburg and London, MDCCXCIII [(M=1000+D=500+CC=200=1700+(XC=100-10=90)+III=3 which is 1793 if my Roman math and internet search is correct] pg. 107 states;

“ Mariche 18, 1638.  the said day the minister product the Covenant to the session, and red the same before them. … All the men of the parish, gentle, for the moment solemnized and brought face to face with ‘the great name of the Lord their God,’ write their names below the glowing words,…  Lauders and Cunninghames, Jacksons and Ewarts, Kers and Hays, for one day at least lifted above their common toil and out of their jealousies and strife, exalted with a new enthusiasm and bound together by the sacred pledge.”     

While not all Hays were covenanters most at that period i suspect were Presbyterian, the official religion of Scotland, as were their Lords and Lairds and as such a sense of community was strengthened.  

That said, the Tenant Farmers were free to move about as leases expired and changed and they were not bound to a specific Lord as they are in a Clan or strict Feudal System (serf)  except when on his holdings.  Shortages of labor, especially for labor of the correct religion or loyalty allowed the Peasant some flexibility in moving about as leases expired, although kith and kin still provided the best opportunity for the best lease.  Scotland of pre 1600 was mostly isolated from England and France in markets and trade and any agricultural advancements were isolated from them also.  Agricultural production was low, at barely above the subsistence level and as such no industry or trade centers formed of any size and the Burghs in Scotland, unlike the Boroughs in England, traded mostly locally produced goods.

The tenants were broken down into the Kindly (lands to one tenant) or Joint Tenant which was multiple families together forming a Plowgate.  A Plowgate was made up of at least 8 oxen which were needed to pull a single plow.  Kindly and Joint Tenants would rent to a Subtenant who was given a “tack”, a small piece of land on which to place a shack and a garden.  Lairds would usually rent to relatives thus preserving the best parcels for the extended family.  Leases were broken into an infield and outfield with the infield broken into separate strips, a “run-rig” leased by lot every few years the payment a percentage of the crops and eggs and fowl to the big house.  The outfield, usually about six times larger than the infield, was similarly divided.  The frequent changing of lands provided no incentives to improve it.

Oats and Barley were the staples and the outfield would be planted with oats until the soil was poor and then weeds would overcome the field and it would be used for grazing of cattle.  There were no fences or stone walls dividing the land and as such cattle and horses grazing crops was a problem and cause for conflict among neighbors.  Oat cakes were the common staple, a mixture of oats and water fried on a flat skillet and oatmeal, greens, and homemade beer and ale rounded out the diet with a piece of mutton or other meat occasionally if an animal died. 

Having been almost continually at war with England, and in between suffering raiding by opposing Scottish Feudal Estates, English Estates to the south and Highland Clans to the north and west, the lowlands of Scotland were decimated.  There existed nary a tree, the bogs and wetlands were undrained due to no knowledge of current agricultural practices.  There were no fences or stone walls defining holdings and cattle wandered with trespass upon others holdings and plantings. 

People wore animal skins and wool clothes and a cap, many going barefoot or wearing rudimentary leather shoes but most wearing wool clothing.  Huts were built of stone with no mortar so mud and straw was stuffed into the cracks against the cold. They had thatched roofs with a hole in the center to allow smoke from the cook fire to escape.  They had earthen floors, rocks for chairs, and people slept on one side of the hut on thatch or heather beds on the ground and the animals were tethered on the other side of the hut. While rudimentary they could easily be rebuilt after being destroyed during a raid or war.  Personal cleanliness was not yet a virtue and it was considered bad luck to clean a butter churn so hair, human or animal, was common in the butter.   Vermin were common, the huts dirty and stunk, breeding a lot of illness.  

Plows were made of wood and it took 8-12 animals to pull it and required the manpower of all available men within the plow gate. The plow made a shallow rut and not a furrow and they could plow about 1/2 an acre a day.  They used straw harnesses and rope made from hair, harrows were made of wood or even branches tied together.  Crop production was at the mercy of drought, heavy rains, flood, poor soils, and frosts in addition to loss from conflicts.  Ill fed milk cows produced only 2 pints a day and when winter supplies ran low they would bleed the cows to make blood-meal.  In spring everyone participated in “the lifting” as weak undernourished cows and horses had to be lifted onto their feet to get to the grazing fields.

They lived at, or barely above, a subsistence level so in most years there was enough to eat and a small excess to trade which would be at the fair in the burgh.  The entire family would attend to escape the day to day drudgery of work. Farmers sold wool, cattle, and horses.  Merchants sold the wares of tinsmiths, coopers, shoemakers, and haberdashers (clothing and sewing supplies).  Salt was a required commodity for preserving meats, iron (in a good year) and fish were also traded for. Scotland lacked industry and everyday items and arms were imported such as armor, spears, bows and arrows, cart wheels, and wheelbarrows. 

Given their subsistence lifestyle there is no indication the nature of people was depressed.  They enjoyed the fair which included Drambooths offering whiskey, shooting galleries, boxing booths, swings, and sideshows. Localities had their local singers, harpists, and pipe players.  Yule, Easter, and Saints Days were celebrated until the Reformation and the church looking down on such events.  

Boys were married when they could do a man’s work and was able to bear arms often as young as 14.  Girls were married when she was nubile, often as young as 12, a necessity with a life expectancy in the early 30’s.  Neighbors were expected to provide a feast at the ceremony and essentials for setting up a household. Weddings were festive with feasting, dancing, and ribaldry although the Kirk attempted to change the wedding practices.  Women attended to the duties of house and children but also were expected to labor in the field, especially when the men were called away to war.

Men were bound to serve 40 days in service of the lord for war.  Eager to go they were equally eager to get back home and many would after a week or two regardless if the war was over or not.  When called to war the men brought their own weapons, wooden pike or spear, an axe or a short sword, a knife, and a targe (a small round wooded shield covered with animal skin).  They carried a small metal plate and would use it to cook their oat cakes with the meal including any animals plundered in the march.  War, raiding, and defending against raids fostered an adventurous spirit and many younger sons of the gentry and farming class sought their fortunes in other countries in wars or in merchandise.

The peasant of Scotland lacked the humility of others in England and Western Europe as the system was reliant on loyalty to a laird or lord who proved his quality as a man and had earned the loyalty.  Justice, and the responsibility for life and goods in his domain, was the responsibility of the lord and thus it was a system of men and not laws.  Within this system a tenant versus tenant dispute assured a reasonable chance at a fair hearing and resolution of the dispute.  Smaller claims were heard by the laird and higher by the lord but in most instances justice was delivered at the hand of the offended.  The phrase might makes right applies to the times. Hundreds of years later the Clan feuds of rural America trace back to Scotland.

Scotland was changed greatly by the Reformation which in Scotland was generally a peaceful affair (for the times) with the people won over to the ideals of Presbyterianism.  It introduced a measure of democracy in church governance, fostered a community belief in morality (enforced by the Kirk), and introduced rudimentary education to the masses so they may themselves search the word of the bible.  Saints Days celebrations were replaced with attendance at inordinately long sermons and attending to religious beliefs and practices.  The failing of the official church was the failing of all official churches in that they looked to dismiss all others although unlike other religions Presbyterians only fined and imprisoned non converts in lieu of death. 

1600s Scotland lacked the rule of law, science, industry, and trade.  The Renaissance was late in coming and the Scot, lord. laird, and peasant alike lived in a hostile environment with few years passed where there was not war.  They often held the same surname and were bound together by loyalty but were loyal where loyalty was earned.  They were devoutly religious and loyal to the Kirk and Presbyterianism and active participants in religious education and affairs of the church and this fostered morality, dignity and worth of all people, self discipline and a disciplined society, and the individual being of primary importance as a moral self created a moral society.

Any current study of the Scot-Irish “race” and attempts to apply attributes based upon the race  (as DNA research shows us) is erroneous at best.  The lowland Scot was a genetic product of multiple introductions of tribes over time; Gaels (Celts), Bretons (Celts), Angles (Germanic), Saxon (Germanic), Scots (Celtic via Ireland), Picts (unknown), Norse (Vikings and Danes), Normans (historically Viking), and others.  The genetic mix is different for each village, clan, and individual and so to assign a trait to a class of people based upon genetics is bound to fail.  IMHO, the nature versus nurture debate lies more so with the nurture and the environment brought up in.

That said the Scot of the lowland of this time was described as Stoic and Dour. It is often attributed to race or religion IMHO it is the times in which they lived which made such a hardy, stern, and bold people who could endure hardship which was upon their doorstep daily. The hierarchy of the Presbyterian Church, the Kirk, was such that the people were involved in the church and many were devout worshippers often willing to lose their life or freedom before denying their beliefs which added to their dour nature and loyalty to one another.  The Presbyterian lowland Scot was formed by isolation of country, turbulent affairs, and poverty but was not a subjugated individual.   

To assign generalities to the “Scot-Irish” also ignores the social status upon migration, time of migration, and the cause of the migration (persecution, famine, war, etc.). Whether young single men searching for fame and fortune or entire families and communities relocating two conditions need to be present to foster migration, hard times in your current location and the perception of better opportunities where you are going. Hard times existed in the lowlands of Scotland and given the opportunities to farm in Northern Ireland it is understandable that many would look to relocate there in the 1600s, my ancestors among them.      

Next up, Ulster Scot Presbyterians in Northern Ireland in the 1600s.