Euan,
When did your family move to Glasgow? My own roots appear untraceable
before 1800 when a family appeared in London with children born in Glasgow.
I have wondered if the clearances first drove them to that city before
seeking employment in the south.
David Sinclair
----- Original Message -----
From: "Euan Sinclair" <secretary@clansinclair.org>
To: <sinclair@matrix.net>
Sent: Thursday, November 02, 2000 6:20 PM
Subject: Re: Clearances and other history
> As a native Scot - as opposed to an exiled Scot - I am moved at how deeply
> the wounds of the past still hurt. I should consider myself lucky that my
> family was not 'cleared' but it is still worth noting that they folded
their
> hand in Caithness (after generations) to seek prosperity in Glasgow around
> the time of the Agricultural Revolution in the UK - when it became clear
> that the frugal land could no longer sustain the ambition of such talented
> people.
>
> I am pleased that those who once felt ashamed of their Scottish roots are
> now reclaiming their heritage and we in the Mother Country should do
> everything we can to encourage this repatriation.
>
> I think it is clear that the Gathering in 2000 was a big welcome home to
> every Sinclair from furth of Scotland; and I suggest that genuine Highland
> hospitality is worth 100 apologies from any Parliament.
>
> Euan
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "John S. Quarterman" <jsq@matrix.net>
> To: <sinclair@matrix.net>
> Sent: Tuesday, October 03, 2000 4:28 AM
> Subject: Re: Clearances and other history
>
>
> > I can't speak for others, but I haven't said an apology would be a good
> idea,
> > and I'm not thrilled by the motivation of the apology as proposed in the
> > Scottish Parliament.
> >
> > More education on the subject would be a good idea.
> >
> > The misfortunes of American Indians at the hands of whites became well
> known
> > through books such as Bury My Heart at Wounded Knee and those of blacks
> > through books and movies such as Roots. Prebble and others have started
> > a similar process about the Clearances, but it apparently hasn't
proceeded
> > very far yet.
> >
> > One can go too far in this direction, into political correctness or
> apologies
> > for the sake of attracting tourism.
> >
> > However if we are to understand the history of how our present world
> > developed from previous years, there is much that would be of use to
> > be known, both good and bad. For example, John Elliot's work with the
> > Indians of Massachusetts and Oglethorpe's similarly peaceful dealings
> > with his native neighbors are not well known. As your postings have
> > illustrated, it is too facile to say that what distinguished Prince
Henry
> > was peaceful dealings with the natives of America. He wasn't the only
> > one to act that way.
> >
> > Why does it matter? Well, it is too easy for a few known facts to
become
> > settled dogma, repeated automatically without thought. Good decisions
are
> > seldom made that way.
> >
> > And in this era of interventions in places as varied as Chechnya and
> Kosovo,
> > Iraq and Sierra Leone, we would all do well to know what happened in
> previous
> > eras of interventions. Let us not forget that one of the main
motivations
> > of the British colonial intervention in Africa was suppression of the
> slave
> > trade. The road to hell is paved with good intentions. Examining the
old
> > bricks may help prevent us from paving the same road again.
> >
> > What does this have to do with Sinclair history? If we are to
understand
> > what significance Prince Henry's visits to North America had, it might
> > be useful to be able to compare them with other European visits to the
> > same land. Saying he was not a conquistador is too facile. The Spanish
> > who settled a long range of missions in present-day Florida, Georgia,
and
> > the Carolinas as early as 1565 (a century before the better-known ones
> > in California) weren't conquistadors in the sense of Cortez, either.
> > They were first Jesuits and then Franciscans, in missions, and they
> > were generally peaceful. They did not in the end succeed, being driven
> > out by the more warlike British colonists before Oglethorpe arrived.
> > Not quite like what most people think of as the usual history of the
> > Spanish in America.
> >
> > How was what Prince Henry did better, or at least different?
> > Different from what and whom, and in what ways?
> >
> > I think there are answers to that question.
> > Answers more comprehensive, interesting, and useful
> > than "he wasn't Columbus."
> >
> > And of course it would be refreshing to be able to say in some detail
> > that not every Scottish noble or landlord cooperated with the
Clearances,
> > and the contemporary Sinclair Earl of Caithness could make a good story.
> >
> > Finally, the Clearances remind us that we are not all closely related to
> > nobility, nor do we need to be. As my Aunt Jane (who will be 95 at the
> > end of this month) is fond of remarking, most of us descend from small
> > farmers and merchants.
> >
> > Oh, veiled and secret Power
> > Whose paths we seek in vain,
> > Be with us in our hour
> > Of overthrow and pain;
> > That we -- by which sure token
> > We know Thy ways are true --
> > In spite of being broken,
> > Because of being broken
> > May rise and build anew.
> > Stand up and build anew.
> >
> > --Hymn of Breaking Strain, by Rudyard Kipling
> > http://www.kipling.org.uk/kip_fra.htm
> >
> > John S. Quarterman <jsq@matrix.net>
> >
> > >I have reread John, Dale and Rory postings. I still find myself moved
> by
> > >the sadness and suffering that must have overcome the transported. But
> > >still I feel a touch of pride in Caithness's actions. The very idea of
an
> > >apology is an anathema to me. How do you say I am sorry for
brutalising
> > >your country. How do you say sorry for ending your way of life, abetted
a
> > >medieval one. What do we, generations later, have the right to accept
> such
> > >an apology on those long dead. I cannot justify any action by a
> > >grandstanding petty Parliament. Dale is correct imperialistly twice we
> > >spread the British Empire across the world. Is it not the role of man
to
> > >expand his national interests? Americas "sea to shinning sea" the
> Russian
> > >empire and others to numerous to mention. Communication made it
possible
> > >and now that we came communicate directly without goverment
interference
> are
> > >we not in the position to reclaim the world. This world was inherited
> from
> > >our forefathers it is on loan from our children it is to them we owe
the
> > >correctness of our actions.
> > >
> > >Sinclair
> > >-
> > >
> > >[ This is the Sinclair family discussion list, sinclair@mids.org
> > >[ To get off or on the list, see http://www.mids.org/sinclair/list.html
> > [ This is the Sinclair family discussion list, sinclair@mids.org
> > [ To get off or on the list, see http://www.mids.org/sinclair/list.html
> >
>
> [ This is the Sinclair family discussion list, sinclair@mids.org
> [ To get off or on the list, see http://www.mids.org/sinclair/list.html
[ This is the Sinclair family discussion list, sinclair@mids.org
[ To get off or on the list, see http://www.mids.org/sinclair/list.html