Burns Supper
Discussion Forum
Poems & Songs
The Letters
E - Membership
Top Features
Search the Site

The 'Jacobite cause' and Scott´s Waverley
- Consequences for the Scottish identity?

For the better understanding of this analysis I will give an overview of the political situation in eighteenth century Scotland first because the Scottish identity was deeply connected with the 'Jacobite cause'. Before this term will be explained, however, and the impact of the 'Historical Novel' Waverley on the Scottish national identity will be analysed, it is necessary to sketch the history of the 'House of Stuart' for this specific family plays a decisive role in Scottish history. It all began in 1296 with the so-called 'Auld alliance', when Scotland signed a treaty with France, and both countries agreed on being loyal and allegiant against English threat. In this context the reader has to bear in mind that there were power struggles on the British Isles in this period of time. The daughter of Robert the Bruce, who was King of Scotland from 1306 to 1329, was wed to a Stewart, and through their son Robert II 'the Stuarts' (older versions Stewart and Steward) came to power in Scotland. From that point in history the kingdom would be under a Stuart sovereign for almost 300 years. James I became King of England because he unified Scotland and England in 1603. This 'Union of Crowns' is in so far crucial as the Anglo-Scottish relationships in this period were anomalous. The next successor from the 'House of Stuart' Charles I was beheaded in 1649, and the King´s execution was the climax to a 'bloody civil war' which had divided Britain since 1642. In this civil war many Scots decided to support Parliament against Charles I. Later this attitude was called 'the sin of their ancestors in 1642' and has been a shameful mark in 'the Stuart history'. In 1660 General George Monck restored the pre-civil war Parliament. Since this body contained many Royalists it soon invited Charles Stuart, who restored the monarchy and became King Charles II. The accession of James VI (and also II) in 1685 caused much anxiety within the Protestant establishment because he was- in accordance with all the other Stuarts- a severe Catholic. In the course of this analysis we will comprehend that the special part of this Catholic family divided Britain even at Scott`s days and marked the Scottish national identity to a great extent. As laws against Catholics were relaxed at the end of the seventeenth century, supporters of the Anglican Church invited the Protestant William of Orange to rescue Britain from the Catholic threat, and James VI fled to France after being deposed as King. The powers of William III of Orange and Mary II, who reigned as joint monarchs, were strictly defined by a 'Bill of Rights' (1689), which increased the role of Parliament and excluded Catholics from the royal succession. The reign of the 'House of Stuart' in Scotland came to an ultimate end. The loss of royal power, however, has never really been accepted and caused in the following years many revolts. For these uprisings are most important for an understanding of the Scottish national identity and so for the purpose of this research paper, I offer this succinct summary of the history of the 'House of Stuart'.

Another significant factor in Scottish history is the 'Act of Union' in 1707, which founded Great Britain.The treaty between England and Scotland confirmed the ecclesiastical and legal systems and made the country an economic unity. Furthermore, with the Union the political autonomy of Scotland came to an end, which made Scotland a 'stateless nation' (the term 'nation' will be discussed later in this analysis), and many people seemed to feel that England had again defeated Scotland. As Trumpener argues one could regard this aspect as a "historically-induced neurosis" or "sub-national deformations" as Nairn puts it. We may assume that this 'Act', which marked the end of Scotland as an independent nation , had a severe impact on the awareness of Scottish pride because Scotland was no longer sovereign and non-aligned but became 'North Britain'. Daiches calls this aspect the "the loss of Scottish nationhood". In addition, Scotland was a hybrid country, divided in itself- geographically and culturally- between the Highlands and the Lowlands and uncertain of its national identity and cultural aspiration. Further effects of the Union on Scotland were the creeping 'Anglicization' and the ignorance of London. Sir Walter Scott himself stated that there were clear signs that the Government in London was determined to change everything in Scotland to an English model. It seems clear that this determination must have been a dilemma the Scots had to cope with and that it influenced their cultural and national identity. There were major transformations in Britain due to the Union, and larger England had a greater impact on geographically smaller Scotland than vice versa. In this sense the embodiment of the Union was problematic, and British people were searching for a 'British identity'. For many Scotsmen, however, we may speak of "an Englishman´s head on a Highlander´s body" because the policy of the Government was exclusively designed to suit English needs. This definitely involved a new identity for many Scots because they had to find their role within this 'construction' of Great Britain. The national body of the Scots was split. Daiches confirms the thesis that many Scots had a split personality. McCrone states in this context that the Scottish identity was schizophrenic: its low culture was a "bastard product, partly indigenous and partly maintained by British imperial mechanisms." On the one hand, we can assert that a Scot in the eighteenth century was a poor relation 'British subject' because the last vestiges of national pride were destroyed. The 'Act of Union', on the other hand, started- by admitting Scotland to commercial privileges formally restricted to England- the country on the road to material prosperity. It made Britain the largest free-trade area in Europe. As more Scots came to profit from trading and manufacturing links with England Britain became the first industrialised nation in the world. The connection of technological development with steam power- in 1764 the Scotsman James Watt invented and patented the steam engine- produced the first factories capable of mechanised mass production, and industrial expansion led to improved transport and communications. Consequently, the partial integration of Scotland into a united Britain led to growing wealth, and the country as a whole profited from this development. All in all, it was an ambivalent situation for the Scots: there may have been the cruel oppression of the Scottish people, but we could argue that there was compensation in form of prosperity. At this point we may raise the question whether prosperity caused by rapid industrial growth could really compensate for the loss of an identity which had been built up over centuries?

Apart from the economic improvements on the British Isles- including the widespread publishing and distribution of magazines and papers- the Scottish Highlands, however, remained predominantly rural and agricultural. Here nothing changed much, and this may be seen as one explanation for the resulting gap between the Lowlands and the Highlands. This 'Highland-Lowland distinction' will also be focused in the course of this examination. Here we may point out that there were positive and negative aspects of the Union, and most interesting, Scotland became the first sovereign nation in European history to surrender its independence voluntarily. No wars were fought, but the ruling Scottish clans decided to join the parliamentary union with Westminster deliberately. However, it was an unstable situation, and after the incorporating Union the cultural situation in Scotland became desperately confused. This may amplify that the Scots were looking for an identity, and all these political, cultural and social facts are mentioned here to demonstrate that the period of Scottish history Sir Walter Scott were born in was a time of indecision and great change. Additionally, it explains why the Union- and the attitude to it- was so crucial for the Scottish national identity. Now we will look into the so-called 'Jacobite cause' because this issue determined a certain type of Scottish national identity. The term 'Jacobite' derives from the Latin word 'Jacobus' for James. Thus, 'Jacobites' were those who were committed to a return of the Stuart dynasty , and 'Jacobitism' in its day was bound with fundamental political, social and religious issues and with ideas about the status of Scotland. In the context of this analysis it is important to define 'Jacobitism' because the question of support or non-support of the 'Jacobites' is most crucial for Scott´s view of Scotland and its political situation. We have to consider that in eighteenth century Scotland there was a clash between the old traditional culture and the structures and systems of a new commercial society, and the conflict between the 'Jacobites' and the Hanoverian regime served as a supreme example of this cultural clash. The social change and the process of cultural imperialism destroyed the 'old order' and marked a new Scottish national identity. As McMaster finds 'Jacobite Scotland' had been violent, economically irrational but homogeneous, and that 'Hanoverian Scotland' was more rational. Despite the positive aspects of the Union, nonetheless, it was a depressing situation for the Scots, and many Scotsmen would not accept what many saw as an occupation. The struggle for independence began right after 1707, and the 'Jacobite movement' benefited from the dilemma that the sacrifice of the Union was too great for many Scots. There were several attempts to reinstate the Stuarts on the throne and altogether five rebellions of the 'Jacobites'- before and after the Union (1689, 1708, 1715, 1719 and 1745). The reader has to bear in mind that the evolving risings and the painful situation for the mainly Scottish Catholic population, who predominately lived in the Highlands, had an enormous impact on the era of Scott, on his work and on himself. This exciting and insecure period of time was reality to him, and he would probably not have written about the 'Scottish issue' in the way he did, if these risings and especially the last attempt of the 'Jacobite Rebellion' (1745) and the resulting 'Battle of Culloden' (1746) had not taken place. In parts of his work he described the Scottish past and influenced in the wake of his celebrity the future perception of the Scottish national identity. Here in this analysis we will try to find answers to the question what the changes meant to him, how he probably have seen the transformations and- most crucially- how he would presumably have defined 'Scottishness'.

In order to achieve this we need to have an even more detailed picture of his political reality. To follow the chronological order after the last Stuart was deposed and to set Scott´s Waverley into context the following historical facts have to be added: the 'Act of Settlement' (1714) assigned the throne to the German 'House of Hanover', and the Elector of Hanover became King George I of Great Britain. The frequent absence of the new King led to important changes in the way Britain was governed , and this had a shocking effect on many Scotsmen because the Protestant King oppressed the Catholic Highland population. This led to enormous tensions and the Scots had to choose between the continued Hanoverian domination or a new Stuart King. For many Scotsmen at this state of transition the main question, which I call the 'Jacobite question', was under which king they wanted to live. Even Scott had to discuss this specific query for himself, although he had to evaluate this issue half a century later. This question, however, would affect his perception of Scotland and is in so far relevant for this examination. Now we will complete the context of 'the Stuart history' in order to understand Scott´s perception of Scottish history better. Since Britain was at odds with France, the latter power was willing to sponsor an invasion on behalf of the Stuart dynasty. In July 1745, Charles Edward Stuart ('the Young Pretender' or also called 'Bonnie Prince Charlie'), who was the grandson of the deposed James VII, landed in Scotland without substantial French aid. The modern army of 'civilized' Britain was for a time in the 'Forty-Five' routed by the massed forces of the 'primitive Highland' clans. His initial success owed much to the ineptitude of Britain´s rulers. In the end, however, the leader of this planned upheaval was beaten dramatically for William Augustus, the Duke of Cumberland (George II´s second son) defeated the 'Jacobite army' in the battlefield of Culloden. They were massacred in their thousands, but here it is more striking that more Scots were fighting for the Government than were among the 'Jacobites´ side'. The reason for this was that the 'Jacobite matter' only had its supporters in the Highlands, whereas many Scots began to deal with the Union. In other words, 'Bonnie Prince Charlie' had more Scots- mainly Lowlanders- against him than by his side. This is an indication for the weak support of the majority of Scotsmen for the rebellion and explains that many Scots were in favour of the Union and of Great Britain. We may presume that the 'pro-Britain Scots' gained in numbers and this influenced an emerging British national identity. After 1746 the Highlands were thoroughly pacified in the interests of legal and political security , and the 'Young Pretender' escaped to France and finally died in 1788 "sodden with drink and disillusionment". Before 1745 the existence of the Highlanders was faint and forgotten in England, and not even the civil wars in 1689, 1715 and 1719 had made much impression on the British public, but the 'Jacobite risings' from 1745/ 46 roused them "like a rattling peal of thunder" as Scott himself points out. The main result of the 'Forty-five' was the British Government`s decision to integrate Scotland- and particularly the Scottish Highlands- more fully into the rest of the kingdom. Without the suppression of the rebellion the dawn of civilization, which had brought material progress and political liberty , would have probably not replaced the system of Highland society. At the end, the Highland-inspired risings failed to restore Scotland to separate status. Most important for the Scottish national identity is the fact that 'Culloden' was the last convulsion of an old, outmoded system. Politically, the country was after 1745/ 46 little more than a conquered province, and intellectually its literary life was being overwhelmed by the fashions and standards of England. This problematic situation would change- as this analysis will reveal- with Sir Walter Scott and his impact on Scottish literature and culture. Furthermore, the 'Battle of Culloden' was the last major land battle to occur in Great Britain, and it was the conclusion to the 'Jacobite Rebellion' which aimed to restore a Catholic monarchy to Britain. 'Catholicism' was in the British area no longer in power- like 'Jacobitism' and probably Scotland itself. As a result of the transitions many Scotsmen, especially Highlanders, would be forced to emigrate which would emigrate which cut the Scottish population to the quick. Furthermore, since the rebellion did not succeed many Highland traditions were forbidden, e.g. the wearing of kilts was banned (6 months prison for first offenders) because kilts were associated with the overdetermined masculine practises of Highland robbery, war and political rebellion. 'The Prospection Act' (1747) even forbade the wearing of tartan in general until 1782. Obscurely, the playing of bagpipes was made a punishable offence as well. Even the speaking of the Gaelic language was prohibited by law, and the usage of Gaelic has been decreasing since. All this was an attempt to erode distinctive Highland practises. These examples are presented to illustrate again the distressing situation of the Scots, and to sum up we can put down that national self-esteem was offended to a great extent. Since the 'old identity'- expressed by Highland traditions- completely vanished, the need for a 'new identity' emerged rather desperately and urgently. Scott´s suggestions to fill this gap represent a main goal of this examination.

The following passage is another attempt to explain why the uprising broke out because the reasons symbolize an important tessera to the understanding of Scott´s version of Scottish national identity. As Brown asserts, the rising was a matter of Scottish national pride for they insisted on the 'otherness' and on their own subjectivity. Now it is important to define identity because this concept is crucial for this analysis. 'Identity' may be defined as the quality of being the same or- in other words- it may mean the essential 'oneness' of a person or nation. Here this would mean that many Scots did not probably want to be 'British citizens' but Scots only. They identified with the Scottish history and Highland traditions and have possibly seen no need to change that identity. Another -sociological- definition is that 'identity' means the general correspondence of a social pattern or organization with the same characteristics or features. Applied to this matter this could resolve that the Scots wanted to define their own nationhood with their own patterns and organizations, but within this British context it was rather problematic- almost impossible. Due to the past with all its rebellions the 'British state' would probably have never allowed Scotland to separate again and to have a 'home rule'. It would have been too dangerous for the fragile 'construction of Britain'.

Now after having given an overview of some relevant parts of Scottish history it is possible to compare 'real historical events' with Scott´s 'Historical Novels', which represent a "reinterpretation of the national history" as Nairn claims. Ferris even calls the first novel of this series Waverley a "national tale". Scott was well-known all over Europe and to have been alive and literate in the nineteenth century was to have been affected in some way by the 'Waverley Novels'. In these twenty-nine novels he observed and described the world of social and political action in early nineteenth century Britain, which was itself being subjected to violent and far-reaching changes . As far as Lukacs is concerned are Scott´s novels the demonstration of changing social and economic conditions through the life of their characters. Furthermore, Scott invented the so-called 'Historical Novel', which embodied the most important stages of the whole of English history from medieval times to the beginning of the nineteenth century in his writing. Being a Scotsman himself he touched parts of the Scottish history as well. Scott dedicated three novels to the 'Jacobite plot': Rob Roy, Redgauntlet and Waverley, whereas Redgauntlet is romantic rather than rationalistic, and Waverley is obviously much concerned with a judging and balancing of the 'old' and 'new' with all the changes symbolized by Stuart and Hanover. The hero Edward Waverley begins as a loyal servant
of George II, deviates into 'Jacobitism', is disillusioned and returns to peace and sanity. In so far the novel touches 'the Scottish search' for identity in a perfect way. Here I would like to remind the reader of the political transformations mentioned above because Scott makes an effort to portray a somewhat 'real picture' of the 'Jacobite cause' and the aftermath. With the 'Historical Novels' Scott showed a somewhat 'academic usage' and invented an important genre, which was seen "to rise out of the familiar type of configuration: a reading public with a growing need for specific knowledge, in this case knowledge concerning its own past and its position in history and the 'responsible institutions' [...] sadly failing to satisfy this demand. Thus, literature stepped in, developed a new instrumental form to mediate between the esoteric knowledge compiled by historians or antiquarians and an audience who wanted to understand what history meant in terms of their own social experience". Scott´s 'Historical Novels' combine real and fictional characters and narrate events of the 'modern state of society' in contrast to 'romances', which rather deal with uncommon incidents. He modified the traditional 'romance' and tempered it by realism. As Welsh claims it is a combination and a compromise between truth and fiction. Siebert mentions in this context that a novelist or poet only depicts single character traits or certain action and appeals to the fantasy of the reader. Here this could mean that not the complete action of the 'Jacobite cause' is portrayed but only aspects of it and that Scott´s historical persons- like Charles Edward Stuart for instance- do not rely entirely on facts as far as their character traits are concerned. In Waverley 'Bonnie Prince Charlie'- here the Scottish word 'bonnie' means beautiful- is said to have been constantly engaged in multiplied affairs , which bestows upon him the reputation of a womanizer for he was rather "a hero of romance than a calculating politician". If this really was the case, exaggerated or invented is in so far not relevant as Waverley is a novel and not an academic biography. Scott´s 'Historical Novels' are, however, in no way unhistorical and entirely fictional. Scott`s novel Waverley, which is the first novel in the 'Waverley series', may be regarded as an "academic novel" with no romantic expectations. It could be argued that Waverley may be entirely realistic and optimistic and contains an objective analysis of the rebellion in 1745/ 46. The subtitle ´Tis Sixty Years Since indicates that the novel, which was published in 1814, logically refers to the period of the last 'Jacobite Rebellion'.

Furthermore, Waverley´s mode of depicting social totality and dramatizing historical change formed the principle basis of nineteenth-century realism. The novel pictures the historical facts, reflects on them and does not blur the reality of Scottish history. All in all, Waverley represents a reflection from the perspective of the English gentleman Edward Waverley in seventy-two chapters on the 'Jacobite cause'. It is an example of the 'Bildungsroman' , the story of a young man´s growing up, his struggle to arrive at some understanding of the world and of himself. Scott´s subject is the societal basis of personal identity too. He describes persons and their individual behaviour and development in the specific society of 'post-´45 Scotland'. Waverley is an enlightened and rational man, and Scott also believed above all in the rule of law as the only possible basis for a civilized society. Many of Scott´s ideas were formed by the atmosphere of enlightenment Edinburgh. Scott was a man of the 'Scottish Enlightenment', which is no object of research in this analysis, who believed in progress, rationality, moderation and reconciliation. He rejected dogmatism and fanatism of whatever kind. Intellectually, he endorsed and upheld the civilized Scotland of his own day. Scott, nevertheless, was both a sentimental feudalist and a 'rational son' of 'the Enlightenment'. As we will see this is no contradiction but only amplifies the ambivalent and complex situation of this transitional period of time. Here the aim is to illustrate the seemingly paradoxical attitude of Scott to his character Edward Waverley. On the subject of 'Highland superstition', for instance, Waverley is consistently sceptical, and- like probably Scott himself- thinks discerningly about the 'Jacobite rising'. Scott may have been fascinated by 'Bonnie Prince Charlie' and the 'Jacobite Rebellion', but he thought about the incidents rationally, or as Hook formulates it Scott was "dazzled by no one and nothing". Scott seems to struggle to find something picturesque about the 'Jacobite cause', but he does by no means romanticize the matter. In addition, he may have not been able to believe that any rational, level-headed person could have decided to become a 'Jacobite' in 1745. At the age of ten Scott became under the influence of 'Culloden' a "valiant Jacobite" , but later in life- after having reflected on this issue- he changed his opinion in favour of a rational approach. Furthermore, Scott is trying to keep 'Culloden' and its horrific aftermath in the background and does a lot of forgetting. He supplies what could be called a conventionally happy 'novel ending'. The 'post-Culloden' desolation is not ignored in Waverley but, nevertheless, softened. We may see that Edward Waverley "forgets too much, too quickly, [...] and too easily". By describing and judging the rebellion in this sense Waverley underlines his 'pro-British' and conservative attitude to it. He rejected the radical ideas of the 'Jacobites' and relegated the seductive energies of 'Jacobitism' to the past. His hero, however, is persistently tempted to give in to the fascination of the 'Jacobite movement'. On the one hand, Waverley continually fails to see the reality behind the picturesque. On the other hand, we find an characterological roundness or realism, as the behaviour and the meaning of him changes with his historical fortune. So does Scott for he 'wavers' between personal memory and perception of real history. His character Waverley 'wavers' ("His mind wavered [...]") - on Scott´s behalf- between different visions of civil revolution , between referring to his English background or succumbing to the Highland fascination. He is hovering between the two worlds and decides to steer a middle course. He is a vacillating hero. The name Waver-ley itself stands for the inability to decide. He doubts all the time and is undecided whether he should travel, which invitation he should accept, which woman he should marry etc.. He symbolizes the situation in Scotland quite perfectly in so far as many Scotsmen were undecided whether to support the Government or the 'Jacobites', whether to stick to the old, feudal 'Scottish system' or to cope with the new 'British system'. This, indeed, was the great dilemma for many Scots - as we have seen- and marked the Scottish national identity.

We may assume that many Scots themselves 'wavered' between different identities. In Waverley we have the 'marriage' of English and Scottish Lowland aristocracies- represented by Edward and Rose Bradwardine in the end , and this depicts a rational approach to Scottish history because this tallies with reality. The rule of law and justice had- in Scott´s view- been seriously threatened by the 'Jacobite risings' in 1745/ 46, and this illustrates perfectly the assertion that he had a conservative attitude. Scott did not support the ideas of the rebellions against the 'British system' and this is
stressed by the fact that the rebel Fergus in Waverley- although his portrayal is not wholly unsympathetic- is executed in the end. Waverley sympathizes with this member of a Highland clan, but eventually Scott had the rebel die and this reveals Scott´s conservative and rejecting position on the revolt. Hook agrees that Scott was by nature and conviction deeply conservative. Concerning the development and fate of his characters in Waverley this is certainly true because rationality is rewarded and the idea of radicalization is rejected. In this context we may maintain that Waverley symbolizes the future and Fergus the past. This is achieved by offering a linear view on Scottish history in which the emotionally seductive but essentially primitive and feudal past gives way to the civilized, urbane and rational enlightenment of 'North Britain'. Scott´s fiction sees 'Culloden' as a moment of release from a primitive past. In Waverley one is made to realize how irretrievably the 'old Scotland' disappeared - not only in fiction but also in reality. To illustrate the impact of the 'Battle of Culloden', the effect on Scottish identity and the development of a 'new Scotland' consider the following anecdote: Peter Grant- who was the last survivor of the famous battle died in 1824 at the age of 110 years. Five years before his death some gentlemen had claimed that the 'Jacobite' was entitled to a pension, and the old 'freedom fighter'-or better rebel- signed the paper with 'Your Majesty´s oldest enemy'. King George IV decided to reward this courage with 'one Guinea per week'. This example demonstrates quite clearly that at this stage the 'Jacobite cause' was overcome and assimilated. The transition from the 'old ' to the 'new' Scotland was arranged. In the eighteenth century there was absolute monarchy, aristocratic power, feudal Catholicism, and the ruling class boasted of its civilization. How Scott dealt with these facts has still been one crucial aim of this chapter.

Now I would like return to the 'Battle of Culloden' because it contains a significant function for Scotland´s transformation as a whole. In Waverley, however, the battle itself only plays a minor part, or -as Gordon points out- Scott even barely mentions 'Culloden'. It is mainly brought up in the last chapter, but nevertheless the complexity of the 'Jacobite conflict' is shown in detail. Nonetheless, it is still remarkable that the decisive battle is only described in one chapter out of seventy-two in Waverley. Obviously, the battle itself is not so essential to Scott, and this indicates that the destiny of the leading characters in this novel is in the centre of his focus. He is rather interested in portraying the figures in a detailed way, and consequently Edward Waverley´s complexity of thoughts and attitudes is fully described in Waverley. This fact gives us the foundation to evaluate Scott´s attitude to the 'Jacobite cause' and from that we are able to deduce speculations on his position on a Scottish national identity. In the novel Waverley had acquaintance with 'Bonnie Prince Charlie' and respected and even admired the romantic leader of the 'Jacobite Rebellion', before he later changed his opinion on this political issue. First Waverley reveals aversion to the Union and was at least in favour of 'Jacobitism' though. Now we can assume that Scott himself was fascinated by 'Jacobitism' and- most of all- by 'Highlandism'. This term will be defined in this examination because there is no entry in the dictionaries. We may assert that it is like 'Highlandry', which means all Highlanders collectively . Scott- being a Lowlander himself- showed a warm interest in this strange and primitive culture.}

Furthermore, Scott was most likely captivated by Highland traditions and the picturesque landscape. By portraying a romantic image of the Highlands and its culture in Waverley, he develops a dangerous construction. The 'Highland world' was not so peaceful and unproblematic as it is presented in Waverley. Especially his enthusiasm for the landscape and for the traditions may convey a blurred image of reality. As a matter of fact the 'Highland world' with its clan system was rather problematic, aggressive and dangerous and the Government had the Highlands cleared of their traditions. By 1780 the Highland dress seemed extinct for it and the other symbols of 'Highlandism' like backpipes, tartans etc. were forbidden for political reasons. Scott invented 'Highlandism' as a new tradition though, and by doing so he founded the basis for a new Scottish identity. Moreover, 'Highlandism' began to manifest itself in an evolving 'British consciousness'. Amazingly, his risky construction of a new 'Scottishness' with faked old traditions- which were reinvented by him- actually worked, and thus he considerably contributed to the Scottish national identity of his time.

The following example confirms this thesis: Scott had wished the royal visit of George IV- the son of George III- to be a 'gathering of the Gael', and many clansmen and Highlanders solemnly paraded in the acceptance of the 'kilt' as the national dress of Scotland before the monarch. This reveals that Highland traditions became acceptable again. Moreover, before the novel Waverley had been published Highlanders were regarded as men beyond the pale of civilization, as a "crew of ungrateful villains, savages and traitors" , and Scottish traditions were slowly vanishing in the wake of this stigma. Scott, however, reinvented and revived them. He even promoted enormously the popularization of Highland travel, which became fashion to upper-class travellers like his concept of 'Highlandism' was soon fashionable. Since Scott the Highlands have no longer been wild but wildly-romantic and the Highlanders no longer dangerous but noble and loyal. Another reason for the fact that the Highlands and the 'old clan system' again returned to consciousness in Scotland was that the gradual fading of memories of the 'Jacobite risings' encouraged the celebration of the culture of the clans, and by writing about 'clanship' Scott injected Scottish society with a new- or in a way old -sense of identity. He gave birth to a pathos which has sustained a sense of nationhood in a country without statehood. He generated images of Scotland because he feared that Scotland might become invisible. People who lose their identity create a legend to take its place and so did the Scots after the 'Act of Union' and the 'Jacobite Rebellion' of 1745/ 46. Scott brought 'his traditions' into being or- as the historian Eric Hobsbawn finds out- traditions were made when they were demanded. Scott set himself to carry on a tradition which was not a tradition. He just invented it, and by doing that I dare say now that he invented a new Scottish national identity. Obviously, it was a construction first- for Scott created "air castles" as Bann describes- but then it became reality to many Scotsmen. We can quite rightly maintain that with Waverley Scottish Highland traditions were rediscovered- a kind of 'reincarnation', or as Trumpener states Waverley is about "national discovery and homecoming". After 1746 Britain was to establish itself culturally, but with Scott´s rediscovery and reinvention of 'Highlandism' this development was interrupted or it presumably even stopped. This is at least true for the Highlands or 'North Britain'. Eventually, nevertheless, this fascination for Highland traditions did not gain acceptance, and in the end of the novel the regional culture of Highland society is shown to have been superseded by more civilized codes of behaviour. This antithetical statement may contradict the former theses, but it only displays the complexity of an issue like 'identity'. Britain, which had to define its identity, was enriched - due to Scott- by an additional factor: 'Highlandism'.

The following passage represents an antithesis to the former assumption that conservative Scott rejected the 'Jacobite movement' as a whole. When Scott started to write the 'Waverley Novels' the 'new world' was not yet as firmly established in Scotland, but it was too late for him to become a 'Jacobite'- except in his imagination, so he let Waverley do it for him. Daiches´ remark is most important because it demonstrates that the protagonist Edward Waverley stands in one way or another for the novelist Sir Walter Scott himself, i.e. that Waverley´s standpoint on the 'Scottish issue' sometimes corresponds with Scott´s opinion. It is rather speculative and lacks academic thinking though to state that Waverley and Scott can be seen as one person. After all, Waverley is a fictional novel, and Edward Waverley is a character invented by the writer Scott. It may be seen, however, as an indicator for the direction of his attitude. Now I carry on examining this point and I am trying to illustrate similarities of Scott and his hero as far as their view on to the 'Jacobite cause' is concerned: Scott´s attitude to the 'Jacobites' seems to be at first sight in favour of the Highlanders because he identifies Edward with himself in his General Preface. At the beginning Edward Waverley is -like Scott- fascinated and seduced by 'Jacobite glamor', but later he avoids sharing his former comrades´ fate by not joining the 'Culloden Highland forces' and by making his peace with the Hanoverian Government. Scott also never decided to join military forces of any kind because he was a peaceful man. He was shocked when he was told about the "cruelties exercised in the executions […] in the Highlands after the 'Battle of Culloden'" , but still he rejected 'Jacobite' aggression. His Waverley changes- probably on behalf of him- in the course of the novel: first he sympathizes with the 'Young Pretender' ("A prince to live and die under" ), and, moreover, he even kneels to Charles Edward and devotes "his heart and sword to the vindication of his rights". Then, however, he reflects on it and concludes not to agree with the ideals of the leader of the rebellion any more. He does an about-turn in favour of the concept of a civilized Britain. In this context Mack claims that Scott´s novel helped consolidate the British state by explaining Scotland to England and by reconciling Scotland to the Union. Names such as Hanover Street, George Street etc. in both Edinburgh and Glasgow proclaim the loyalty of the urban elites to Great Britain and the Hanoverian dynasty. At the same time, Scott´s Waverley -more than any other single influence- made 'Jacobitism' acceptable- and even more, made it romantic and appealing.

According to Siebert Scott only sees 'Bonnie Prince Charlie' with an romantic eye and from the poetic perspective. It represents the process of reminding the Scottish people of their distinctively Scottish associations. They had a adequate distance from the Union and recognized the value of remaining Scottish spiritually. With Waverley he constructs a new but also risky identity. It was a combination of 'old' and 'new' Scotland, i.e. Scott created a fiction which expresses some sympathy with his hero´s openness to the appeal of the 'Jacobite cause'. In the end the hero has to grow up though, i.e. he has to choose reality rather than romance. The marriage of the Englishman Waverley and his Scottish bride reflects this quite precisely. It also depicts- like Mack maintains- a future in which national unity is achieved through the healing of old divisions. To sum up these old divisions in Scott´s day were between the 'Jacobite' and Hannoverian Government, the High- and Lowlander distinction, and, last but not least, between Scotsmen and Englishmen. In Waverley the protagonist loves Flora, who stands for the old 'feudal clan system', but he eventually weds Rose, who represents the 'British system'. This inevitably marriage illustrates Scott´s view that in 'his Britain' there was no space for old divisions. It depicts the bonding of the 'old' and 'new' world. For him the 'Jacobite Rebellion' was a conflict of civilization and the state of nature, of the 'Highlands' and the 'Lowlands' and of regionalism or localism and the 'concept of Great Britain'. Edward Waverley is a symbol of this conflict and stands commitment to prudence and superiority of civil society, and he also portrays the modern and conservative model of it. Thus, Scott probably also supported the 'modern concept'.

From his earliest years Scott had been fascinated both by the tactics and technique of war and by romantic ideas of glory. However, at the same time, he was fully conscious of the futility and waste of war and always was in favour of peace and stability. Scott thought that militant 'Jacobitism' was "madness" because he was against any form of violence at all. He once stated: "We had better remain in Union with England, even at the risk of becoming a subordinate species of Northumberland, as far as national consequences are concerned". This again amplifies his strong aversion to revolts and the acceptance of a peaceful Great Britain. As Gordon claims Scott was an unusually peaceful man , and, consequently, the hero of Waverley was longing for peace as well. Hook asserts that Waverley depicts the most "powerful image of the true meaning of civil war- the anarchy, the senseless violence and ruin it produces" to stress the senselessness of aggression. In Waverley one chapter is called 'An Incident Gives Rise To Reflections' (Chapter Forty-Fifth) and this incident is the death of an English soldier, which Waverley happened to witness while he was fighting for the Highland Army. Watching him dying the hero reflected on the senseless situation of war. Waverley speaks ultimately for peace and stability, for social and political harmony. This again underlines Scott´s peaceful- almost pacifistic- attitude. He points out that a handful of men had disturbed the tranquillity of a peaceful people who were demanding no change of their condition. Scott sees 'Jacobitism' not as a political faith but as an older way of life and as a different culture , so he has his hero not succumb to the attraction of this fascinating 'old world'. Waverley, nevertheless, emphazises that he is "no Scotchman but an unfortunate English gentleman". This seemingly contradiction to the thesis that Waverley- and probably Scott himself- were fascinated by 'Highlandism' is actually no inconsistency but only an indication of the complicated English-Scottish relationship. Waverley regarded himself as both an Englishman and a moderate- by no means radical- supporter of the 'Jacobite movement'. As opposed to that, however, Grey demonstrates that the hero himself was seized as a 'Jacobite' and got into trouble. Here the protagonist differs entirely from Sir Walter Scott because the novelist had never been identified with the 'Jacobites'. At the beginning of the nineteenth century 'this movement' was history already, the Union for more than a century fulfilled and the 'House of Hanover' established in the fourth generation. Nevertheless, one of the most important opposites in Scott is his attitude to 'Jacobitism' because he thought a great deal of it and made it the subject of three of his best novels. Furthermore, like in Scott´s historical reality the 'Jacobite cause' was lost forever as Redgauntlet had to proclaim in Scott´s novel Redgauntlet. To sum up we may conclude that Sir Walter Scott constructed a version of Scottish cultural and national identity in the 'Waverley series of novels'. He added to the romance the factor 'Highlandism', may have omitted 'Jacobitism' and (re)-invented old and new traditions.


Class distinction' in Burns´ work andits impact on Scottish society




2008 The Robert Burns World Federation