Thank you for the Lehndorff excerpts. Connecting the dots and seeing the same events from different perspectives is one of the best parts of this fandom.
a diplomat's work in peace time is boring to the reader.
Readers of 1730 diplomats might disagree. :P
He's a Scot from Aberdeen, Lehndorff! I hope you didn't praise his Englishness too much in front of him.
Oh, boy. Scottish national identity was actually quite complicated in 1756! Chronology for cahn:
[Disclaimer: these are broad outlines; simplifications have been made.]
The biggest of the Jacobite rebellions, where a bunch of Stuart supporters, mostly but not exclusively Scottish, had tried to overthrow the King*, happened in 1745. The Jacobites had been crushingly defeated, and I mean crushingly. Markers of Scottish identity such as the kilt were banned, illegal to wear except in the British army. Scottishness was on the outs with the people in power. Plus, Charles Stuart was still wandering around Europe trying to drum up foreign support for another invasion. He wasn't getting much support ("lol" was the general reaction), but the Hanovers still had to keep half an eye on the situation.
* King George II, SD's brother, whose kids she wanted Fritz and Wilhelmine to marry.
The Scots themselves had been divided during the rebellion itself. Though most of Charles's support was Scottish, that doesn't mean most Scots supported him. There was significant overlap between his support and the Catholics (though that's been overstated). There was a large population of Scots that opposed him, and a nontrivial population of Scots who had actively fought in the British army against the Jacobites.
There was also a long-standing division between Highlanders and Lowlanders. Much of Charles Stuart's support came from the Highlanders, and more importantly, after the fact, the alignment between his supporters and Highlanders became overstated compared to what it had been in reality. Much of the governmental reprisal was aimed at Highlanders, not at Scots. However, the Lowlands, having had much more historical contact with England, especially along the borders, also had a flourishing anti-English tradition. But at the same time, with the English dominant and the Highlands being crushed, you get people deciding that "climb the ladder and pull it up after you" is the way to go, i.e. identify with the more powerful English and let the Scots go hang.
Come 1756, with a political situation like that, nationalist reactions are pretty much as you'd expect. You've got the people who are seething with resentment, the people who are willing to compromise with the powers that be, and people who are seeking to distance themselves from their Scottishness as much as possible. A lot of Scots, when traveling outside of Scotland, used the existing term "North Britain" to talk about where they were from. Like Americans who say they're from Canada when they're traveling.
Some decades later, after the Jacobite threat is gone and the Highlands have undergone massive depopulation (DON'T ASK), in the nineteenth century, romanticizing Scottishness becomes safe. The monarchs get into it and start emphasizing their Scottish heritage, our current clan tartans become a thing, and pretty much everything you think of when you think of Scotland today, including the Scottish tourist industry, becomes a thing.
In conclusion, some Scots in 1756 would have been quite happy to have their Englishness praised by Lehndorff. Some (hopefully not diplomats) would have punched him. :P
Mitchell is an interesting case, if he's a Lowlander, good friends with Jacobite James Keith, and working as an ambassador for the Hanoverian government. selenak, did you get a sense of how he feels about his Scottishness?
Bit of trivia for cahn, but DON'T ask me about the Jacobites: the guy who defeated them and kicked off a war-crime-ridden give-no-quarter "created a desert and called it peace" policy against the Highlands was the Duke of Cumberland, the son of G2 whom Fritz thought sucked as a general (and my impression from what I remember of his Continental battles is that he did; beating the Jacobites (DON'T ASK) was not a testament to any kind of tactical prowess). :P
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Re: Saxon envoys
Date: 2020-02-19 04:27 am (UTC)a diplomat's work in peace time is boring to the reader.
Readers of 1730 diplomats might disagree. :P
He's a Scot from Aberdeen, Lehndorff! I hope you didn't praise his Englishness too much in front of him.
Oh, boy. Scottish national identity was actually quite complicated in 1756! Chronology for
[Disclaimer: these are broad outlines; simplifications have been made.]
The biggest of the Jacobite rebellions, where a bunch of Stuart supporters, mostly but not exclusively Scottish, had tried to overthrow the King*, happened in 1745. The Jacobites had been crushingly defeated, and I mean crushingly. Markers of Scottish identity such as the kilt were banned, illegal to wear except in the British army. Scottishness was on the outs with the people in power. Plus, Charles Stuart was still wandering around Europe trying to drum up foreign support for another invasion. He wasn't getting much support ("lol" was the general reaction), but the Hanovers still had to keep half an eye on the situation.
* King George II, SD's brother, whose kids she wanted Fritz and Wilhelmine to marry.
The Scots themselves had been divided during the rebellion itself. Though most of Charles's support was Scottish, that doesn't mean most Scots supported him. There was significant overlap between his support and the Catholics (though that's been overstated). There was a large population of Scots that opposed him, and a nontrivial population of Scots who had actively fought in the British army against the Jacobites.
There was also a long-standing division between Highlanders and Lowlanders. Much of Charles Stuart's support came from the Highlanders, and more importantly, after the fact, the alignment between his supporters and Highlanders became overstated compared to what it had been in reality. Much of the governmental reprisal was aimed at Highlanders, not at Scots. However, the Lowlands, having had much more historical contact with England, especially along the borders, also had a flourishing anti-English tradition. But at the same time, with the English dominant and the Highlands being crushed, you get people deciding that "climb the ladder and pull it up after you" is the way to go, i.e. identify with the more powerful English and let the Scots go hang.
Come 1756, with a political situation like that, nationalist reactions are pretty much as you'd expect. You've got the people who are seething with resentment, the people who are willing to compromise with the powers that be, and people who are seeking to distance themselves from their Scottishness as much as possible. A lot of Scots, when traveling outside of Scotland, used the existing term "North Britain" to talk about where they were from. Like Americans who say they're from Canada when they're traveling.
Some decades later, after the Jacobite threat is gone and the Highlands have undergone massive depopulation (DON'T ASK), in the nineteenth century, romanticizing Scottishness becomes safe. The monarchs get into it and start emphasizing their Scottish heritage, our current clan tartans become a thing, and pretty much everything you think of when you think of Scotland today, including the Scottish tourist industry, becomes a thing.
In conclusion, some Scots in 1756 would have been quite happy to have their Englishness praised by Lehndorff. Some (hopefully not diplomats) would have punched him. :P
Mitchell is an interesting case, if he's a Lowlander, good friends with Jacobite James Keith, and working as an ambassador for the Hanoverian government.
Bit of trivia for