Alright, so on Wednesday, we had a massively informative and critical lecture for our understanding of Scotland. Although it was titled "Scotland's Legal Tradition," our lecturer, Dr Kenneth Norrie, took us through 1,000 years of Scottish history to illustrate the impact of the country's legal tradition. As a history major, this made me incredibly happy. Having the historical context is extremely necessary in order to fully understand any subject! So unfortunately for you, I'm going to quickly summarize the important and interesting points of Scottish history that Dr Norrie noted because I felt this sped-up version of Scottish history allowed me to begin to put together the puzzle pieces of what we have been learning thus far (the Jacobites, Mary Queen of Scots, William Wallace, etc.).
So, let's go back to medieval times! Weee! It's the 10th century, and the area we know as Scotland is kind of a conglomeration of Celtic (Britons and a lot more), Irish (Scots) and Germanic (Angels) tribes. Eventually they all get unified under one dude (classic) named Malcolm II (king of the Scots tribe). So, there was a bit of an awkward clash of tradition when Malcolm II united all these tribes that literally set in motion the rest of Scottish history (cue dramatic music). See, Celtic tribes are matrilineal, that is, they trace their family line through the mother, not the father. So succession depends on the maternal line - therefore if a king dies, his successor has to be the closest related to the mother, so his brother would take over, not his son. If you think about this, it makes way more sense to trace lineage through the female; you know why? Mothers always know who their children are and fathers...don't. Right, so Celtic tribes are matrilineal and the Scots, the Irish one, is your classic patrilineal (tracing family lines through the father). Now we're gonna have a quick vocabulary lesson: using patrilineal succession is called Primogeniture and matrilineal is Tannist. Good? Good.
Well, when Malcolm II unites all these tribes and he's Scots, when he dies, they use the system of Primogeniture, and the crown is passed to his grandson, Duncan I. That's all good and well, unless your name is Macbeth. Oh my gosh, Macbeth! Shakespeare wrote about him! Yeah! He did! This moment is what he wrote about! Alright, so, Macbeth was Celtic, but he was also the son of Malcolm II's daughter. So, being Celtic and more down with the Tannist (matrilineal, remember?) tradition, Macbeth was like, "Duncan I is a usurper of my throne" and thus killed him in battle. He installed himself as King and ruled quite well actually, however, Duncan's son Malcolm (spoiled: soon to be Malcolm III) was thinking "...wait, Macbeth totally usurped my throne," since he believed in Primogeniture. So Malcolm killed Macbeth in battle and became Malcolm III. By the way, Malcolm III married Queen Margaret, a Saxon princess, who was responsible for bringing the importance of the (Christian) Church to Scotland and also for beginning the decline in Celtic influence.
 |
| Malcolm II (thanks for the photo wikipedia!) |
How are we doing? Too much history? Too bad - there's more!
Okay, skip ahead to 1290. The monarch (a wee babe), Margaret, dies and (obviously) has no heirs! There are two possible choices: Balliol or Bruce (Yeah! Robert the Bruce! We know him!) Balliol had a claim to the throne through primogeniture; Bruce had a claim through the Tannist succession. BUT they couldn't work it out. So, they submitted this issue to Edward I of England and forever changed Scottish history. THIS WAS A BAD IDEA. By asking Edward I to choose Scotland's next monarch, Scotland implied that England was superior to Scotland and had some sort of authority over it. This implication would affect Scotland for the rest of its existence up until this very day.
 |
| Edward I (thanks for the photo wikipedia!) |
So, Edward I basically tells both Balliol and Bruce if they accept England as their feudal overlord of sorts, they can be King of Scotland. Bruce was like "heck no!" and Balliol was like "yeah, whatever, okay!" so Edward chose him. Thus the wars of Independence between the Edward I of England vs William Wallace and Robert the Bruce! Woohoo connections!
Also, remember that Declaration of Arbroath thing? The thing that may have had a role in inspiring our own Declaration of Independence? Yeah, that was in 1320, right? And Robert the Bruce is the one who sent it (it was a letter to the pope) in which he essentially declared that Scotland was independent from England, the Pope himself (more or less...they remained Christian for over 200 more years), and that the people were sovereign. Not him, Robert the Bruce, the people. This is why after 1320 you never again see any monarch in Scotland called King/Queen of Scotland - they're the King/Queen of Scots (the people). Hench Mary Queen of Scots. Cool, huh?! Scotland is super progressive.
 |
| Here's the Declaration of Arbroath again! Well, a copy of it :) |
So, wars of independence distance Scotland from England, naturally. But this applies to many areas like trade and also law. Scottish lawyers begin to train in Scotland and Continental Europe and adopt a more Roman style of law which sticks with them throughout their earlier history. In fact, this is essentially the reason Scotland has a separate legal system from England even today! In the 15th century, Scottish parliaments are sitting regularly and they even pass the Education Act of 1496 demanding education! Even though this education is for the eldest son of landowners, it's still really progressive for the 15th century!
Okay, the Reformation happened and changed Scotland completely in a bunch of ways, but I think I've talked about the reformation enough in this blog, so I'll skip it. You're welcome.
The next fun fact to do with Scottish law has to do with that young 1707 Union - the joining of the parliaments. So, according to Dr Norrie, if you ask an English lawyer about the 1707 Union, he/she will say that the English parliament expanded to allow Scottish representation, which is technically correct, that's what happened. However, if you ask a Scottish lawyer, they will say both the English and Scottish Parliaments dissolved and a parliament of Great Britain was established, which is politically accurate - that was the agreement essentially. If you recall, I actually wrote the latter statement in a previous blogpost because I heard it in a lecture from a Scotsman! Cool stuff. Also, the Treaty of Union notably provided for the preservation of Scots law and the primacy of the Presbyterian church!
How did that happen? (ugh, I'm sorry guys, but this was a really great lecture and it's all so important to truly understanding Scotland) Sir James Dalrymple, First Viscount of Stair (quite the name, if you ask me, but apparently, Scottish lawyers today just call him Stair) wrote the first comprehensible book of Scottish law! His book was so comprehensive and legitimate that it allowed Scottish law to be recognized by the English in the act of Union! Good job, Stair!
 |
| Sir James Dalrymple, First Viscount of Stair! (thanks for the photo, stairsociety.org) |
Alright guys! Thank you for bearing with me! That's it for the dense history.
Okay, Wednesday night Patty, Liam and I explored the Necropolis (!) - Glasgow's central and very famous cemetery. As you may be able to figure out, Necropolis means city of the dead, and it is just that. The gravestones, like buildings, are lined up in very meticulous rows creating sidewalk-like paths for viewers. It's a very creepy place, honestly, especially since we visited at dusk. Really interestingly, though, Liam came across two gravestones for both sides of his Scottish ancestry practically right next to each other!
 |
| Patty and I at the Necropolis Entrance |
 |
| Me with the John Knox monument at the top of the Necropolis! |
 |
| The Necropolis and a lovely view of Glasgow |
Thursday proved to be a very exciting day as well. It was completely media-focused and ended with a trip to BBC Scotland!
So our lecture was all about the media in Scotland and it was all very eye-opening (as usual). Our lecturer was Dr Michael Higgins and he began his presentation by trying to explain how Scottish culture is all about disagreement and arguments and further, that there are few things that unite Scotland. This statement alone was so new, but yet so obvious to us all after being here for four weeks. This is a good time to talk about the dynamic between cities in Scotland. All the major cities love nothing more than to rip on and make fun of each other. It's not always very nice either. Aberdeen and Dundee have a kind of intense rivalry as well as Glasgow and Edinburgh. That's not to suggest that Glasgow isn't just as willing to throw a few jabs at Dundee or Edinburgh at Aberdeen. The way the media is structured adds to this dynamic, if anything. Dr Higgins showed us several different newspapers that had associations with cities. So, each of them would write from a different perspective - from the particular city's perspective - which could be drastically different from another city's perspective. So, for instance, The Herald writes the Glaswegian perspective while The Scotsman writes the Edinburgh perspective.
 |
| The Scotsman itself! |
Dr Higgins also noted how newspapers are one of the ways Scotland makes itself distinct from England. For instance, many English newspapers have Scottish Editions like The Sun has The Scottish Sun so these newspapers are slightly more geared toward Scottish audience and perspective (what those in the media affectionately refer to as "putting a kilt on it." Sometimes it's not so slight though. During independence, one newspaper printed one edition that advocated a "no" vote and the same newspaper advocated a "yes" vote in the Scottish edition! What the heck? It's a crazy place here in the U.K.
 |
| The group and Dr Higgins after our lecture on the median in Scotland |
Another interesting part of Dr Higgins's lecture was in discussing how the BBC works. As you probably know, the BBC is funded by the public, not a private corporation in order to provide truly quality content that is not necessarily economically profitable. So, as I thought before and as you might think, the BBC is not funded by taxes, it's funded by a "TV License." A TV License is essentially how if you own a TV, you have to buy a TV license and all the profits from a TV license go toward funding the BBC. That way, if you don't have a TV, you're not funding a service you don't use.
The last notable thing about the media in the UK? They watch Fox News for entertainment purposes. Like, to laugh. I just thought that was quite hilarious in itself.
After our media lecture, we (very appropriately) went to visit the BBC Scotland! We learned a lot about how the BBC and the freedom of the press in general works. One interesting and important tidbit is that the BBC is independent from the government (which makes sense since it's not funded by taxes) but still works closely with the government. It's Royally Chartered, which means the charter can be reviewed every 5 years. Some updates BBC Scotland is looking toward include new ideas for funding online TV watching (something comparable to a TV license perhaps?) among other issues. Scottish Independence, for instance, if revisited could change a lot about BBC Scotland, obviously, so far as the country could lose its association with the BBC all together and have to create its own public broadcasting system if it so desires. It's all very fascinating. Independence has so many implications that fly completely under the radar.
 |
| Getting ready to go inside BBC Scotland |
We also learned a lot from Donald Martin, Editor in Chief at DC Thomson (Based in Dundee! Remember?) about the restrictions and regulations on the press along with ethics in reporting certain issues. He faced us with a lot of important questions on whether to print certain pictures and stories and why. It was all very fascinating. I can't possibly detail it all here, but if you're interested, let me know and I'll be happy to expound.
After learning all this amazing information about media, we got to go on our own tour of the BBC Scotland. My favorite part was probably the metallic gold pair of underpants that hung from a pole at one of the cubicles. When a journalist was asked by our tour guide what it was doing there he replied "they're drying" without blinking an eye. Anyway, we got to see a lot of the studio and even got to watch an anchor record part of that night's show! It was an amazing experience.
 |
| Us in the Newsroom at BBC Scotland |
 |
| Look, Ma, I'm on TV! |
 |
| The squad on our BBC Scotland tour |
Thank you for bearing with this post through all the (super fun and interesting!) history! I promise the next one won't be so dense. Cheers till then!
No comments:
Post a Comment