What do you think?
Rate this book
The Highland Scots of North Carolina, 1732-1776
Meyer addresses himself principally to two questions. Why did many thousands of Scottish Highlanders emigrate to America in the eighteenth century, and why did the majority of them rally to the defense of the Crown. . . . Offers the most complete and intelligent analysis of them that has so far appeared.-- William and Mary Quarterly
Using a variety of original sources -- official papers, travel documents, diaries, and newspapers -- Duane Meyer presents an impressively complete reconstruction of the settlement of the Highlanders in North Carolina. He examines their motives for migration, their life in America, and their curious political allegiance to George III.
Using a variety of original sources -- official papers, travel documents, diaries, and newspapers -- Duane Meyer presents an impressively complete reconstruction of the settlement of the Highlanders in North Carolina. He examines their motives for migration, their life in America, and their curious political allegiance to George III.
230 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1961
24 people are currently reading
72 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 11 of 11 reviews
July 10, 2022
Duane Meyer’s point of departure is what he perceives as a paradox: “Why did the Highlanders, bitter foes of the House of Hanover in the first half of the eighteenth century, rally to the unpopular cause of George III thirty years after their defeat and humiliation in the Forty-five? (vii)” By “the Forty-five,” Meyer means the abortive attempt by Charles Stuart (Bonnie Prince Charlie) to seize the throne.
Therein lies the flaw in this meticulously researched dissertation: the terms in which Meyer cast his argument. Even in the seventh, final chapter, dealing with the role of the Highland Scots in the American Revolution, Meyer refers to “the Loyalist stand of the North Carolina Highlanders” (132). Yet his research forces him to concede: “In the fall of 1775, then, there was clearly a split in the leadership of the Highlanders” (146), and “it is clear, then, that the decision of the Highlanders to support one side or the other was not an automatic one. Members of the group were active on both sides” (155–6).
Meyer seems to have unknowingly fallen for the fallacy of history as written by the winners. He notes that the uprising was popular and feels compelled to explain why many Highland Scots in North Carolina sided with the Loyalists but feels no similar need to explain why some joined the Patriots.
Behind the seeming paradox that initiated Meyer’s research lies popular mythology about the events that led up to the disastrous Battle of Culloden in 1746, namely, that all Highland Scots supported the usurper. Yet this was not the case. The powerful Campbell clan, led by the Duke of Argyll, for one, did not (many immigrants to North Carolina came from Argyllshire).
Despite the flawed assumptions at its heart, the book is still useful. At the outset of his research, Meyer stumbled across a discrepancy in explanations of the massive relocation of Highland Scots to North Carolina. Broadly speaking, American researchers directly tied it to the failed rebellion. It first appears a half-century after the Revolution in Francis-Xavier Martin’s History of North Carolina, 1829. According to him, nineteen out of twenty rebels (chosen by lot) were allowed to escape execution if they swore loyalty to the crown and agreed to deportation. This explanation was taken up by a Presbyterian clergyman, William Henry Foote, who published Sketches of North Carolina in 1846 after visiting congregations in the area.
Meyer was surprised to learn that British historians had other explanations for the massive emigration: changes in agricultural practices, decay of the clan system, and population growth. Meyer’s research led him to accept these. Of the Martin-Foote thesis, he writes: “this historical tradition is without foundation.”
It appears to me, however, that British sources (at least as reported by Meyer) are a little too quick to remove Crown policies after the failed rebellion from the equation. While all three factors they mention were underway before 1745, it is nonetheless clear that punitive measures exacerbated them. In particular, the move to strip all clan chiefs of their authority led to social upheaval. In addition, the disabilities imposed on all Highlanders, whether belonging to clans that supported the Stuarts or not, increased social instability. These included stripping them of their arms and banning Highland attire. Finally, the roads laid out to provide quick access for troops in case of a renewed uprising led to more contact with the world beyond the Highlands.
In other words, while the Martin-Foote thesis is wrong, the British explanations are incomplete without factoring in how political repression accelerated trends and was, therefore, an indirect motive for emigration. For that reason, it might be unrealistic to expect a sharp jump in 1747, say—and indeed there wasn’t—but it could help explain the moderate uptick recorded in subsequent years. Still, it wasn’t until 1773—74 that the number of land grants in any year surpassed the record set in 1740 (before the uprising).
As for that nettlesome question of the divided response of the Highland colonists in North Carolina during the Revolution: It is not evident there is any warrant to expect a united stance in 1775 any more than there had been one in 1745. And there’s another possible reason why Martin and Foote reported the explanations given to them when they visited the area fifty and seventy years after the Revolution. Meyer notes that many Highlanders who sided with the Loyalists resettled after 1783, mainly to Nova Scotia and other parts of Canada. So Martin and Foote’s interlocutors would have primarily descended from those who sided with the Patriots, which might have colored their view of the events of 1745.
Yet there was no one-to-one carryover of division from 1745 to 1775. Allan McDonald, for instance, husband of the famed Flora who sheltered the fleeing Bonnie Prince, was an officer for the British, and at least one Campbell was a leader of the Rebellion. The reasons why a person ends up on one side or the other of a controversy are often complex, and family history is only one of them, it seems.
Despite my criticism, I learned much from this book and am glad I read it.
Therein lies the flaw in this meticulously researched dissertation: the terms in which Meyer cast his argument. Even in the seventh, final chapter, dealing with the role of the Highland Scots in the American Revolution, Meyer refers to “the Loyalist stand of the North Carolina Highlanders” (132). Yet his research forces him to concede: “In the fall of 1775, then, there was clearly a split in the leadership of the Highlanders” (146), and “it is clear, then, that the decision of the Highlanders to support one side or the other was not an automatic one. Members of the group were active on both sides” (155–6).
Meyer seems to have unknowingly fallen for the fallacy of history as written by the winners. He notes that the uprising was popular and feels compelled to explain why many Highland Scots in North Carolina sided with the Loyalists but feels no similar need to explain why some joined the Patriots.
Behind the seeming paradox that initiated Meyer’s research lies popular mythology about the events that led up to the disastrous Battle of Culloden in 1746, namely, that all Highland Scots supported the usurper. Yet this was not the case. The powerful Campbell clan, led by the Duke of Argyll, for one, did not (many immigrants to North Carolina came from Argyllshire).
Despite the flawed assumptions at its heart, the book is still useful. At the outset of his research, Meyer stumbled across a discrepancy in explanations of the massive relocation of Highland Scots to North Carolina. Broadly speaking, American researchers directly tied it to the failed rebellion. It first appears a half-century after the Revolution in Francis-Xavier Martin’s History of North Carolina, 1829. According to him, nineteen out of twenty rebels (chosen by lot) were allowed to escape execution if they swore loyalty to the crown and agreed to deportation. This explanation was taken up by a Presbyterian clergyman, William Henry Foote, who published Sketches of North Carolina in 1846 after visiting congregations in the area.
Meyer was surprised to learn that British historians had other explanations for the massive emigration: changes in agricultural practices, decay of the clan system, and population growth. Meyer’s research led him to accept these. Of the Martin-Foote thesis, he writes: “this historical tradition is without foundation.”
It appears to me, however, that British sources (at least as reported by Meyer) are a little too quick to remove Crown policies after the failed rebellion from the equation. While all three factors they mention were underway before 1745, it is nonetheless clear that punitive measures exacerbated them. In particular, the move to strip all clan chiefs of their authority led to social upheaval. In addition, the disabilities imposed on all Highlanders, whether belonging to clans that supported the Stuarts or not, increased social instability. These included stripping them of their arms and banning Highland attire. Finally, the roads laid out to provide quick access for troops in case of a renewed uprising led to more contact with the world beyond the Highlands.
In other words, while the Martin-Foote thesis is wrong, the British explanations are incomplete without factoring in how political repression accelerated trends and was, therefore, an indirect motive for emigration. For that reason, it might be unrealistic to expect a sharp jump in 1747, say—and indeed there wasn’t—but it could help explain the moderate uptick recorded in subsequent years. Still, it wasn’t until 1773—74 that the number of land grants in any year surpassed the record set in 1740 (before the uprising).
As for that nettlesome question of the divided response of the Highland colonists in North Carolina during the Revolution: It is not evident there is any warrant to expect a united stance in 1775 any more than there had been one in 1745. And there’s another possible reason why Martin and Foote reported the explanations given to them when they visited the area fifty and seventy years after the Revolution. Meyer notes that many Highlanders who sided with the Loyalists resettled after 1783, mainly to Nova Scotia and other parts of Canada. So Martin and Foote’s interlocutors would have primarily descended from those who sided with the Patriots, which might have colored their view of the events of 1745.
Yet there was no one-to-one carryover of division from 1745 to 1775. Allan McDonald, for instance, husband of the famed Flora who sheltered the fleeing Bonnie Prince, was an officer for the British, and at least one Campbell was a leader of the Rebellion. The reasons why a person ends up on one side or the other of a controversy are often complex, and family history is only one of them, it seems.
Despite my criticism, I learned much from this book and am glad I read it.
January 15, 2023
I really enjoyed this slim book, which was a quick but highly informative read. I'm currently researching a North Carolina branch of my family's history, including at least one branch of Highland Scots. This book is a fantastic introduction to the early Scots immigration to North Carolina.
Although the reprint I read was from 1987, I believe the book was originally written in 1961. While this likely means the scholarship is a bit dated, the author's broad conclusions are sound and probably stand the test of time, and he does a good job of dispelling prevalent myths that aren't supported by data (such as the supposed surge of Highlander immigration in the aftermath of Culloden, which simply didn't happen).
I doubt anyone will read this book for fun - rather, it is likely to draw readers with a purpose. And, at least for me, it met that perfectly. Only 150 pages are so in length, almost every other page had a useful tidbit of information for me, as I learn about the time and place. Meyer not only describes settlement patterns and timelines and the motivations for immigration, but also the mechanisms, the journey, and the settlements themselves ... in these early days of the interior history of the state. The wrap-up chapter is on the reaction of the Highland settlers to the Revolutionary War, and is interesting in and of itself.
Maps are well-designed and informative, and are spread throughout the book, in the chapters where they are referred to, which I love (in fact, limited and poorly located maps is a real pet peeve of mine!). Finally, the bibliographical source list is invaluable - a lot of the traditional public records that might be used by amateur genealogists were lost in various courthouse fires, so every clue is welcome!
Finally, the book is written in clear and engaging prose, and holds attention on a subject that could be quite dry.
Again, this book won't be for everyone, but the title describes its purpose perfectly, and if it's a topic for you, then I heartily recommend this book as an introduction!
Although the reprint I read was from 1987, I believe the book was originally written in 1961. While this likely means the scholarship is a bit dated, the author's broad conclusions are sound and probably stand the test of time, and he does a good job of dispelling prevalent myths that aren't supported by data (such as the supposed surge of Highlander immigration in the aftermath of Culloden, which simply didn't happen).
I doubt anyone will read this book for fun - rather, it is likely to draw readers with a purpose. And, at least for me, it met that perfectly. Only 150 pages are so in length, almost every other page had a useful tidbit of information for me, as I learn about the time and place. Meyer not only describes settlement patterns and timelines and the motivations for immigration, but also the mechanisms, the journey, and the settlements themselves ... in these early days of the interior history of the state. The wrap-up chapter is on the reaction of the Highland settlers to the Revolutionary War, and is interesting in and of itself.
Maps are well-designed and informative, and are spread throughout the book, in the chapters where they are referred to, which I love (in fact, limited and poorly located maps is a real pet peeve of mine!). Finally, the bibliographical source list is invaluable - a lot of the traditional public records that might be used by amateur genealogists were lost in various courthouse fires, so every clue is welcome!
Finally, the book is written in clear and engaging prose, and holds attention on a subject that could be quite dry.
Again, this book won't be for everyone, but the title describes its purpose perfectly, and if it's a topic for you, then I heartily recommend this book as an introduction!
May 6, 2020
To be honest, I was disappointed with this read. However I'm coming from an academic perspective.
By that I mean, I want precise details and understand when certain elements are missing or when assumptions are made with few examples given.
I'm not going to go into precise examples but I wouldn't recommend if you were searching for facts and clear cut and accurate sequence of events. Although, if you were looking to begin your journey in this History then could be worth a look-in.
By that I mean, I want precise details and understand when certain elements are missing or when assumptions are made with few examples given.
I'm not going to go into precise examples but I wouldn't recommend if you were searching for facts and clear cut and accurate sequence of events. Although, if you were looking to begin your journey in this History then could be worth a look-in.
February 23, 2022
Pretty interesting and well written for a book with these many facts. The chapters seem to go by quickly because there’s so much to be read. You find yourself asking friends about people and Historical situations just to reinforce what you’ve read and learned. Like, do you know when the first census was? (1790).
November 5, 2018
DRY
Well researched, organized, and reasoned, the factual nature of this book renders an arid read. A solid reference book, but that's it.
Well researched, organized, and reasoned, the factual nature of this book renders an arid read. A solid reference book, but that's it.
October 6, 2019
I borrowed this book to read while attending an "Outlander" Fan Event in NC. One of the speakers utilized it as a reference so I wasn't the only person who has found it informative.
March 12, 2020
Solid, basic text. It answered as many questions as it created. It provides a fairly weak explanation for why the Highlander colonists were all devout loyalist, which left a lot to be desired.
November 11, 2021
Good and informative read.
February 12, 2021
n.b. this is not the edition I'm reading; my edition is old paperback with a plain ivory cover, probably from the 1970s. Finally read the fine print: I didn't actually read this book. I read a pamphlet, condensed from the original book for the tercentenniary of NC (1663-1963.)
But fascinating nonetheless. Many of the Highland emigrants were Loyalist; they remembered the uprising in 1745. They knew the costs and had not forgotten Culloden. And many of them left Cumberland County after the war, including Flora McDonald and her husband Allan who had been a Loyalist Captain. But a sizeable number remained, as evidenced by the many Highland names and the prevalence of Presbyterian churches.
But fascinating nonetheless. Many of the Highland emigrants were Loyalist; they remembered the uprising in 1745. They knew the costs and had not forgotten Culloden. And many of them left Cumberland County after the war, including Flora McDonald and her husband Allan who had been a Loyalist Captain. But a sizeable number remained, as evidenced by the many Highland names and the prevalence of Presbyterian churches.
May 2, 2015
Just finished The Highland Scots of North Carolina, 1732-1776 by Duane Meyer! It was a great read. Very enlightening. And not too long, only 162 pages. Yet well documented (the author has 28 pages of endnotes and an 11 page bibliography). The last chapter is particularly interesting because it deals with the involvement of the Highlanders during the American Revolution, and why so many of them chose to fight for the British. The explanations for that are complex, so I will be posting some excerpts for your perusal. For many of the Highlanders, it seemed more like a labored decision to pick the "lesser of two evils" rather than a rush to join the King's cause. As Meyer writes," The six-month period from July, 1775, to January, 1776, was a time of tension for the Highlanders of North Carolina. We know now that at the end of that half-year period of consideration a large number of the Highland Gaels did 'repair to the royal banner.' That lengthy period of indecision has a point of its own, however, and it is quite necessary to note that the Highlanders gave encouragement to the rebels at this time in many ways. The loyalty of the Highlanders to the King was by no means an immediate, automatic, or unanimous response." (pg. 142) My only complaint about the last chapter is that Meyer does not spend hardly any time at all talking about the Highlanders who were not Loyalists. This is a topic that desperately needs to be further explored.
October 2, 2016
Excellent source for learning about the Scottish influence in the Carolinas! I bought this for research for a book I am writing and I found it very helpful.
Displaying 1 - 11 of 11 reviews