History and the law, the Necropolis, and the BBC

Firstly, I'd like to apologize for the lack of creativity in the title for this blog post. I simply could not find an alliterative way to sum up it all up.

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!

Archives, Arbroath and Innovation

So after our exciting adventures in Inverness, we were all ready for another week in Dundee full of fascinating lectures and activities.

Monday started off with an amazing lecture about archives from Dr. Patricia Whatley (one of our host professors), Caroline Brown (Dundee's Deputy Archivist) and Alan Bell (Dundee's Records Manager). The lecture started out with Alan pointing out that records are what makes the world go round in every field - not just history. For example, receipts are records, phones are records, tickets, and anything really that gives information about something. He and Caroline also made sure to note that which records survive history can tell us a lot about what was important in a certain time and that they often will tell a lot about power relationships. For instance, who is administering financial receipts and records and who is signing them? Who can purchase and who is selling? Etc. Caroline's ultimate conclusion on the topic of which records get preserved and which don't was that when it comes to choosing which records to keep, people don't think about use, but instead about representation, which I find to be very insightful and accurate (think about the Declaration of Independence, culturally important books, newspapers, etc.).

After learning new ways to consider records, Caroline walked us through a more hands-on version by passing out several old books and documents and asking us to analyze them with her. They really were some rather remarkable documents. The first one she passed around was literally a piece of papyrus from 99 AD. No, you didn't read that wrong and it's not a typo, I really mean 99 AD.

The piece of papyrus from 99 AD

Other very fascinating records we examined included a charter from a bishop from 1634 written on animal hide, a copy of a copy of a diary from the 17th century, a diary from a prisoner of war during WWI, records from a female asylum in Dundee from the end of the 19th century and records from an infirmary. As we looked at the records, Caroline had us note certain aspects and clues we gathered from them like their level of authenticity, the material they were made of and notably, what was missing from each of them. For instance, in the records from the women's asylum, there was no mention of any sort of mistreatment for rather obvious reasons. Thus, Caroline taught us that when interacting with records, we must consider content, context and structure.

Ultimately, our time with the archivists and records really opened our perspective to how to perceive and interact with sources, which is especially valuable for me as a future educator in history. I am a sincere believer that the use of primary sources can serve to better engage students in history and this lecture gave me a lot of ideas on how to try to implement this in my future classroom.

After our fascinating lecture, we hopped on the bus to Arbroath, home of the Declaration of Arbroath and Arbroath Abbey but also the most amazing Fish and Chips! Which makes sense because it's right on the coast. Before heading to the Abbey, we stopped in at a local restaurant to try out the fish and chips which did not disappoint. We all had haddock and delicious chips (thicker french fries) and agreed it was amazing.

Everyone with our authentic fish and chips! And Keegan trying to be an Abercrombie model - classic.

After our authentic Scottish cuisine, we headed to the Arbroath Abbey. WHICH WAS AMAZING. Alright, first thing's first: the Declaration of Arbroath. This document, signed in Arbroath Abbey was a letter sent to the pope by the Scottish nobility requesting to no longer be excommunicated and insisting that they have the right to determine their own king, preferably Robert the Bruce (who fought alongside William Wallace...not literally, though). Now, why were they excommunicated? Robert the Bruce happened to murder one of his rivals on holy ground, so the pope excommunicated both Robert the Bruce and also all of Scotland, which the Scottish people were not okay with at all. Now you might be thinking, "wait a second Lisa, you've been writing all about how Protestant Scotland is! What do they care about the pope?!" Well good people, Scotland was just as Catholic, or more accurately, Christian since Catholicism didn't technically exist until the Reformation, as the rest of Europe in 1320, when the Declaration of Arbroath was being signed. So, the declaration was sent off to the pope, pleading for freedom from English domination and the right to select their own king.

The Declaration of Arbroath!...well, a copy of a copy of it. All the little circles hanging off are the seals of the Scottish Nobility who agreed with its message, like signatures! Here's a link to the actual text: http://www.nas.gov.uk/downloads/declarationArbroath.pdf

So does any of this sound familiar? It should to American audiences! It's been speculated that some of the contributors to the Declaration of Independence were inspired by rhetoric of freedom and the importance of the people in the Declaration of Arbroath. In fact, two signatories of the Declaration of Independence had grown up in Scotland and might have been influenced by this very declaration! How cool is that? Scotland and the U.S. are more intertwined than I had ever imagined.

Right, so Arbroath Abbey itself is where the Declaration of Arbroath was written -- probably. When things occur that long ago, there's always an element of "probably" involved. But the abbey itself is awesome! And in pretty good shape for being built in 1178! Basically, it was a big, beautiful church that also housed 40 monks or so and had a separate house for the Abbott (who lived rather lavishly compared to the monks who wore nothing but hand-me-downs their whole lives that they just had to layer during winter, were vegetarians and barely ever had exposure to the outside world). The reason the Abbey has been reduced to ruins is, shockingly enough, the Protestants who had a small role in its destruction, but after that, the town just used the remaining bricks and stone to build up the town! Actually our own tour guide admitted she thought her own house was made from the Abbey.

The outside of Arbroath Abbey

I'm hanging out inside some of the monk's quarters -- look at how short the doorways are! They must have all been my height. 

Perhaps my favorite part of the Arbroath Abbey was a room where the monks used to keep their robes, which was almost fully in tact and had the most amazing acoustics. My fellow Fulbrighter, Daniel and I like to sing and stuff, so we did a few renditions of some classic folk songs. Here's a video of our Amazing Grace:

After Arbroath, we all settled down to write our blogs and journals and had a nice night in.

We only had a few lectures on Tuesday, but they were both really interesting. The first was all about innovation in Dundee, which is a theme becoming more and more prevalent the more time we spend here. The highlight of the lecture was the new V&A museum (which stands for Victoria and Albert) being constructed on Dundee's waterfront. One of the more famous architects, Kengo Kuma, is behind the amazing design of the building that is hoped to bring a new wave of modernity to Dundee and allow the city to continue growing as an integral area of Scotland. Speaking of innovation, we also got to see the new museum through a virtual projection just using a headset and an app! It was pretty technologically awesome.

Here's a projection of what the V&A museum will look like

Liam checking out the new building in a virtual world - Photocred to Patty

After our experience of innovation in Dundee, we had a quick (and delicious) lunch at a restaurant called "Folk Cafe" and headed to our next lecture called "Highland Landscapes and History: a creative perspective" by Dr Annie Tindley of the History department and Lindsay McGregor, an independent writer specializing in poetry. This lecture blended the disciplines of history and creative writing and despite none of us being English majors, we were all deeply engaged in their presentation. It started out with a quick history of the Highland Clearances, particularly in Sutherland where they were considered to be the most brutal. So, the Sutherland clearances were part of this movement that considered the Scottish highlands to be wasted space in their current states of subsistence farms with thousands of occupants. The idea of "improvement" became quite enticing to land owners at the time. "Improvement" was this concept that redistributing the people living on subsistence farms in the Highlands to tiny plots of land on the coast of Scotland to be fishermen and replacing their land with commercial sheep farms (a popular product at the time) would actually serve the entire country and therefore people better than the current state of affairs. Most of these displaced Highlanders had no idea how to fish and therefore their deportation often lead to extreme poverty. So, only a few Scots owned all the land of the Scottish highlands that these subsistence farmers lived on, one big chunk of it being Sutherland itself. Thus when Lady Elizabeth of Sutherland married Lord Stafford of England (who funded much of the clearances) in 1785, the hot new trend of "improvement" was on their minds and they decided to implement. Some scholars believe that the landowners who inflicted the clearances really did have the Scottish people's best interest in mind. They may have figured the evicted people would thrive as fishermen and the Scottish economy would be better off due to the greater amounts of sheep and wool production. This did not turn out to be the case (the result was poverty, famine and wars), but who could have known, right? Perhaps. Perhaps the Scottish country and population weren't priorities in the minds of these landowners at all and it was all just a plot to become personally wealthier. Either way, the Sutherland Clearances is a sad moment in Scottish history, but a massively important one.

It should also be noted that the clearances are a mainly Scottish issue - it does not contribute much to English and Scottish tensions. Although English money was often used to implement the clearances, such as in the case of Sutherland, the clearances were an issue between Scottish farmers and their Scottish landlords.

A rather famous portrait depicting the Highland Clearances

So, where does the creative writing come in? Obviously, this was a very emotional time in Scottish history and many books, songs, and poems have been written about the issue both nationally and internationally due to the Scottish diaspora that resulted from the clearances. So Lindsay walked us through a few poems written about the clearances and the Scottish highlands then having us create a group poem and individual poems as well. Not to toot our own horns, but our group poem was stunningly beautiful. Each of us contributed a line or two or several phrases. Here it is:

I don’t usually see the earth reaching up

high enough for the clouds to reach back

where sheep grace the crags and peaks

chiselled from the wind.  Those restless hills

who mimic calves that graze snow-dusted

hollows of lichens and brambles

infusing lifelessness with beauty.

I want to live in this wonderful melancholy.

Shadows mark the contradictions

of a land of permanence and impermanence,

where castles stand and fall

on mountains which have lasted longer.  

Oceans and winds erode remembrances
to restore the heartbeat of the Highlands

One of the more interesting tidbits of the presentation brought the States into the picture yet again. There is a rather famous book written about the Clearances called Gloomy Memories written by Donald MacLeod and published in Toronto, Canada. This book was apparently a reaction to our own Harriet Beecher Stowe's (author of Uncle Tom's Cabin) novel titled Sunny Memories, which was written after her stay in Scotland during which she resided with the Sutherland family who treated her very well. As a result, her account of the Sutherland Clearances was rather mild, infuriating MacLeod. Thus, he published a direct response to Ms. Stowe's novel, countering her mild account with a quite damning eye-witness account of the Strathnaver clearances.

Thus the other Fulbrighters and I were exposed to the wonderful mingling and cooperation of History and English in a very tangible fashion. After our lectures, we all split up to relax and continue our reading and journaling and preparing for our big day in Edinburgh tomorrow.

Cheers until then!

Braveheart, Urquhart, Nessie, and the Jacobites

The major plot point of this weekend was a rather exciting trip to the Highlands of Scotland to find Nessie! But before we could leave, we had a few lectures from our lovely Dundee Professors.

The first lecture on Friday was a lecture about theater and film from Dr. Jodi-Ann George and Dr. Brian Hoyle. It mainly focused on the play Macbeth, which unfortunately, I have yet to read. Even without much context, we were still able to grasp a lot of interesting information. Macbeth actually takes place in Scotland, something I probably should have known, but didn't. Macbeth, a real person himself, plots to kill the Scottish king (in case you haven't read it either), and the castle is even based off Glamis Castle, which I visited earlier in the week. Anyway, Macbeth actually has inspired some fascinating questions about how to present Shakespeare. For instance, Orson Welles's film version originally was made with Scottish accents, but that was considered tainting Shakespeare, so it was dubbed over with English accents. The story is notably written for James I, a king particularly concerned with the concept of regicide (his own father having been murdered...perhaps by his own mother, Mary Queen of Scots) and also involved in legislation concerning witches and demonology - two major themes from the play. The other fascinating thing we learned from this lecture is a lesson of business. Apparently, thesbians were worried that people would be too depressed leaving the theater after a tragedy so they implemented a "stage jig" after the show to perk everyone up a bit. If you'd like to see an example, check out the following video:

The next lecture was the very anticipated Braveheart lecture(!) by Graeme Morton, one of our lovely Dundee hosting professors. We love Graeme. And his lecture included all the reasons why Braveheart is completely inaccurate, which is something people like to point out here quite often. Okay, let me set the scene for you. It's 1297 in Scotland, and William Wallace is quite put out at the English (surprise, surprise) and is fighting for the desired Scottish king, Robert the Bruce, or later, Robert I. Anyway, the Scottish men haven't worn face paint in battle in many many years (Braveheart Inaccuracy #1) so they approach Stirling Bridge with paint-less faces, ready for battle. Note that I said Stirling Bridge. Yeah, the real Battle of Stirling Bridge happened on a bridge (Braveheart Inaccuracy #2) and was a major factor in William Wallace's victory. The tactic used by the English that often brought them immense success was their ability to surround their enemy and attack from all sides; however, when they were fighting William Wallace and his men from across a river, their only access point was from a narrow bridge, thus, the Scots had an incredible advantage.

A bit north of the bridge pictured here is where Stirling Bridge was and the battle took place. As you can see, surrounding the Scottish men would be an impossibility for the English Army.

We actually know very little about the real William Wallace, which is part of the reason it's a little irritating that Braveheart didn't even adhere to the things we actually do know...but production value and stuff I guess. In fact, we only have one description of William Wallace, and the main feature is that he was quite large (Braveheart Inaccuracy #3...Mel Gibson is 5'8"). That description comes from an epic poem written by "Blind Harry" around 1475, almost 200 years after William Wallace's death. Our other source is the records from his trial, which essentially proved that he did in fact exist. Because we know so little about him, his story was romanticized throughout the years. One author in particular called Jane Porter contributed to this romanticizing of William Wallace with her book in 1810. Developments like this muddied Wallace's legacy shifting the focus from independence and Scottish nationalism toward more romantic motivations, which probably wasn't the case. Either way, the woman William Wallace is mainly involved with in Braveheart was either not even born yet or very very young at the time of the story in reality. (Braveheart Inaccuracy #4). There are more inaccuracies, but I'll get to them later. 

After Graeme's awesome lecture, the squad headed for the Dundee train station, and hopped on a train to Inverness, the city of Loch Ness. It's about a 2 hour train ride north of Dundee. We all immensely enjoyed watching the Scottish highlands pass outside our large windows during the ride. The trains in Scotland, and probably the rest of the UK, have large windows and comfortable seats like a coach bus. They're spacious and even have tables sprinkled throughout each car. Our train ride there went very smoothly, despite a little trouble from the avian population while waiting for our first train. After our change in Perth, we were very excited to get to Inverness and check into our hostel, which wasn't even that sketchy. 

Matt struggling with our one-legged pigeon friend

Perth Train Station, where our change was

So, we arrived in Inverness to find the same strangely large population of seagulls inhabiting the place. Did I mention the crazy amount of seagulls here? It's rather unfortunate. They're ever-present in both Dundee and Inverness so far -- perhaps Glasgow will be a different story. Anywho, after checking into our hostel, we decided to mosey around the city of Inverness for a while. You will be oh-so-surprised to know there's a castle in Inverness, but that wasn't our favorite part. There was a gorgeous walking path up and down either side of the river that the squad and I spent most of our night enjoying. They even had twinkle lights lining the path once it got dark enough, which does take a long time, mind you. One of the most difficult things to get used to up here in Scotland is how it doesn't really start to get dark outside until 10pm (or as they would say here in the UK, 22:00) and the sun doesn't even set until about 11pm (23:00). Military time has really been testing my basic math skills, let me tell you. 

Inverness Castle and Matt

The boys at the beginning of our Inverness river walk -- apparently its called "Ladies Walk," though, so please do appreciate the irony in this photo; we work hard to be subtle

Most of us hit the hay after our river walk in anticipation of our trip to Loch Ness the next morning. As we waited for our bus at the Inverness, we made a few more avian enemies of the seagull variety but luckily we all made it onto the bus unscathed...or unpecked, I guess. 

Jael, Daniel, Mike, Liam and Matt at the Inverness Bus Station

 Loch Ness is about a half hour's journey from Inverness and drops you off at Urquhart Castle (pronounced urk-ket), right on the lakefront. Urquhart Castle is the ruins of a huge castle dating all the way back to the 13th century. It ended up being intentionally blown to smithereens by its current owner at the end of the 17th century to prevent Jacobites from using it as base or any of its resources during the wars of Independence. This presents an important aspect of the idea of Scottish Independence throughout the country's history. Not everyone was on board with the idea of independence, just like today. There were the Jacobites, who fought for a Scottish king and independence from England, but there were those who disagreed and were content with the Scottish relationship with England like the owners of Urquhart Castle. (Edit: since writing this, it's been pointed out to us that it's a misrepresentation of the Jacobites to consider the uprisings an England vs. Scotland issue and that instead, it's more of a Scotland vs. Scotland issue. This idea is perfectly demonstrated by the events at Urquhart Castle.)

Urquhart Castle with Loch Ness in the Background

Daniel, Mike, Me, Nina, Omar, Matt and Liam loving Urquhart Castle

My favorite part of Urquhart Castle was a man dressed in traditional Jacobite clothing of the 17th century who told us all about the weapons and clothes used by Jacobites during the wars of independence. As promised, he even told us about another Braveheart Inconsistency! One of the swords he showed us that was actually outdated by the time the wars of independence were taking place, is featured in Braveheart, which is okay because Battle of Stirling bridge was long before the wars of independence. The sword, a double-handed Claymore, is extremely long and quite dangerous. In Braveheart, good old Mel has the sword slung over his shoulder and is seen reaching up to grab it over his head. Well, as we know, Mel is a tad on the shorter side and such a maneuver would not be possible and such a sword probably wouldn't be either since it's probably longer than Mel himself. 

Our Jacobite Warrior showing why the Claymore would not work for little Mel -- yes, his hand is demonstrating Mel Gibson's height

After Urquhart and our Jacobite lesson, we walked to a small cafe on a road near the Loch and had some lunch. We asked the owner of the cafe for the best way to the shores of Loch Ness, and she directed us to a rather offbeat path that passed a graveyard, some private farms and required trekking across a number of streams. It soon became apparent that it was a path usually used for horse trails due to the rather frequent occurrence of feces, but we didn't mind at all. The trail brought us directly to the shore of Loch Ness where several of us stripped down to swim suits and took a dip with Nessie (who was unfortunately unseen throughout our trip...but we're kind of in denial about that). It was a tad numbing, but at least the sun was out!

Crossing this lovely and only slightly frigid stream was part of our path to Loch Ness (photocred to Patty Esch)

Maybe we did see Nessie after all!

After Loch Ness we were all quite tired - we had hiked at least 5 miles, but probably more, the whole day. So we hopped on our bus and went back to Inverness where we split up for dinner. Patty, Michael, Tim and I tried "PizzaExpress" a chain here in the UK that is actually really good. Restaurants seem generally more health conscious here -- this chain restaurant offered broccolini as a side! What?! Patty, who is very passionate about vegetables, is very happy about this. 

Our last day in Inverness was Sunday and we decided to take a trip to Culloden Battlefield. Of course, we soon learned that no buses go directly to the battlefield on Sundays, so we had to take a 2 mile walk to the battlefield after our short bus ride and could therefore only spend about 30 minutes at the actual site, but it was just enough. 

Let me take a moment to talk about the Jacobites. I know I've touched on them before, but they are a rather integral part of Scottish history and identity. So, the Jacobites were a group of strong-willed Scots who adamantly supported the "rightful" king of Britain, James II and eventually opposed English rule of Scotland. The crowns of Scotland and England just happened to be joined in 1603 by chance since, as we know, Elizabeth I had no children and therefore no clear heir, James VI of Scotland was the most logical choice, therefore becoming James I of England. So, after the rule of James I, Charles I, the Glorious Revolution, Oliver Cromwell, Charles II and James II, when James II was rejected as king (he was Catholic) and his daughter and her husband William of Orange (notably not a Scot) were chosen as rulers of England (and Scotland) instead, many Scotsmen were quite peeved, and joined to form the Jacobites. Thus, the Jacobites supported James II as the true king of England and Scotland. Eventually, their mandate changed toward being against the union of Scotland and England all together. 

Here's the Jacobite flag which we saw in the McManus Gallery and Museum. It has the St Andrews cross and a thistle. The thistle is the symbol that means you're doing the work of the king, so since the Jacobites supported James II's right to the crown, they figured they were doing the work of the true king. The words across the top read something along the lines of "don't mess with us," quite fittingly I might add. 

Anyway, the Battle of Culloden was a decisive and extremely devastating battle of the Jacobite Uprisings between the English army and the Jacobites on April 16th, 1746. Note that this is after the joining of the Scottish and English parliaments into the British parliament (1707), so the country continued to move toward union even after Jacobite protests. It should also be noted that there were also religious tensions contributing to the Jacobite-English conflict. The Jacobites supported James II, a Catholic king while the English obviously embraced Protestantism as would their next King, George II of the Hanover household. The Battle of Culloden resulted in huge amounts of casualties for the Jacobites. The English were absolutely merciless and even after the battle had been won decisively, continued slaughtering the Jacobites. Ultimately, this resulted in three things: 1) the end of armed conflict for Scottish independence 2) the banning of and attempting to wipe out highland culture 3) a legacy of hatred between England and Scotland that fluctuated throughout the countries' history. This battle is an important moment in Scottish history that is still poignantly felt by the Scottish people, which is made clear by its emphasis throughout our program and the thoroughness of the site to this day. 

Culloden Battlefield - the red flag marks where the British line began

"Field of the English; They Were Buried Here"

The squad at Culloden Battlefield

After Culloden, we had to rush back to catch our bus back to Inverness and then we putzed around town for a few hours until our train back to Dundee. We were all quite happy to return to our happy little town of Dundee, especially Patty and Michael who missed the connection in Perth on the way back. 

Thus, the squad and I learned a ton about Scotland on our trip to Inverness, even without the amazing lectures we get during the week here in Dundee. 

That's enough for now, but there'll be more soon. 

Cheers!