Europeans on the move: studies on European migration, 1500-1800 9780191676147, 9780198204190

Table of contents :
Frontmatter
CONTRIBUTORS (page vii)
LIST OF MAPS (page ix)
LIST OF TABLES (page x)
PREFACE (page xi)
1 Introduction: Europeans on the Move, 1500-1800 (Bernard Bailyn, page 1)
Part I The Early Experiences
2 The Medieval Background (Seymour Phillips, page 9)
3 The First Transatlantic Transfer: Spanish Migration to the New World, 1493-1810 (Nicolas Sanchez-Albornoz, page 26)
Part II Migration from the Three Kingdoms: England, Scotland, and Ireland
4 English Migration into and across the Atlantic during the Seventeenth and Eighteenth Centuries (Nicholas Canny, page 39)
5 Scottish Emigration in the Seventeenth and Eighteenth Centuries (T.C. Smout, N.C. Landsman, and T.M. Devine, page 76)
6 The Irish Diaspora of the Seventeenth and Eighteenth Centuries (L. M. Cullen, page 113)
Part III Continental European Migration: The Netherlands, Germany, and France
7 The Netherlands, the Dutch, and Long-Distance Migration in the Late Sixteenth to Early Nineteenth Centuries (Jan Lucassen, page 153)
8 Transatlantic Migration from the German-Speaking Parts of Central Europe, 1600-1800: Proportions, Structures, and Explanations (Georg Fertig, page 192)
9 Manon's Fellow Exiles: Emigration from France to North America before 1763 (Peter Moogk, page 236)
Conclusion
10 In Search of a Better Home? European Overseas Migration, 1500-1800 (Nicholas Canny, page 263)
Bibliography
Ch. 4 English Migration (page 284)
Ch. 5 Scottish Migration (page 289)
Ch. 6 Irish Migration (page 295)
Ch. 7 Dutch Migration (page 297)
Ch. 8 German Migration (page 303)
Ch. 9 French Migration (page 311)
INDEX (page 315)

Citation preview

EUROPEANS ON THE MOVE

This volume arises from the work of the European Science Foundation’s Network on the History of European Expansion

a,

Europeans on the Move

=

Studies on European Migration, 1500-1800

NICHOLAS CANNY “MH (S bak 12 techie ted t My ‘

- CLARENDON PRESS - OXFORD 1994

f|

en > RAV

Oxford University Press, Walton Street, Oxford 0x2 6DP

l | y ID Oxford New York Toronto

Delhi Bombay Calcutta Madras Karachi

} Kuala Lumpur Singapore Hong Kong Tokyo

E G 4 { Nairobi Dar es Salaam Cape Town

| Melbourne Auckland Madrid ,

and associated companies in ,q |a G-Berlin Ibadan

Oxford is a trade mark of Oxford University Press

Published in the United States by Oxford University Press Inc., New York © The Several Contributors 1994 First Published 1994 All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, without the prior permission in writing of Oxford University Press. Within the UK, exceptions are allowed in respect of any fair dealing for the purpose of research or private study, or criticism or review, as permitted under the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act, 1988, or in the case of reprographic reproduction in accordance with the terms of the licences issued by the Copyright Licensing Agency. Enquiries concerning reproduction outside these terms and in other countries should be sent to the Rights Department, Oxford University Press, at the address above

British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data Data available Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data Europeans on the move : studies on European migration, 1500-1800 / [edited by] Nicholas Canny. p. om. Includes bibliographical references.

1. Europe—Emigration and immigration—History. 2. North America— Emigration and immigration—History. I. Canny, Nicholas P. IV 7590.E954 1994 304.8'704'0903—-dc20 93-47546 ISBN o-—19—820419—1

13579108 642 Typeset by Best-set Typesetter Lid., Hong Kong

Printed in Great Britain on acid-free paper by Biddles Lid., Guildford and King’s Lynn

ean lo.l Contents

CONTRIBUTORS , Vi LIST OF MAPS 1x

LIST OF TABLES x PREFACE xl Introduction

Bernard Bailyn , I

1 Introduction: Europeans on the Move, 1500-1800

Part I The Early Experiences

Seymour Phillips 9

2 The Medieval Background

3 The First Transatlantic Transfer: Spanish Migration to the New World, 1493-1810

Nicolas Sanchez-Albornoz 26 Part II Migration from the Three Kingdoms: England, Scotland, and Ireland 4 English Migration into and across the Atlantic during the Seventeenth and Eighteenth Centuries

Nicholas Canny 39

Centuries |

5 Scottish Emigration in the Seventeenth and Eighteenth

I. C. Smout, N. C. Landsman, and T. M. Devine 76

6 The Irish Diaspora of the Seventeenth and Eighteenth Centuries

TL. M. Cullen 113

vi Contents Part III Continental European Migration: The Netherlands, Germany, and France 7 The Netherlands, the Dutch, and Long-Distance Migration in the Late Sixteenth to Early Nineteenth Centuries

: Jan Lucassen 153 Georg Fertig 192 Peter Moogk 236 8 Transatlantic Migration from the German-Speaking Parts of Central Europe, 1600-1800: Proportions, Structures, and Explanations

g Manon’s Fellow Exiles: Emigration from France to North America before 1763

Conclusion 10. In Search of a Better Home? European Overseas Migration, 1500-1800

Nicholas Canny 263 Bibliography

Ch. 4 English Migration 284 Ch. 5 Scottish Migration 289

Ch. 6 Irish Migration 295

Ch. 7 Dutch Migration 297 Ch. 8 German Migration 303 Ch.g French Migration 311

INDEX 315

Contributors BERNARD BAILYN is Adams University Professor and James Duncan

Phillips Professor of Early American History at Harvard University. Among his publications are Voyagers to the West: A Passage in the Peopling of America on the Eve of the Revolution (New York, 1986) and

The Peopling of British North America: An Introduction (New York,

1986). He is currently working on a book relating to settlement in seventeenth-century America to be called The Barbarous Years. NICHOLAS CANNY is Professor of Modern History in the National University of Ireland at University College, Galway. He is author of several books and articles treating of Early Modern Ireland, the most influential being 7he Elizabethan Conquest of Ireland: A Pattern Es-

tablished, 1565-1576 (Brighton, 1976), and has also written extensively on the British Atlantic world and European overseas expansion. He edited with Anthony Pagden Colonial Identity in the Atlantic World, 1500-1500 (Princeton, NJ, 1987).

L. M. CULLEN is Professor of Modern Irish History at Trinity College, Dublin. He is the leading authority on Irish economic history of the eighteenth century, and has a special interest in trade, including the development of Irish merchant communities overseas. His books include An Economic History of Ireland since 1660 (London,

1972) and The Emergence of Modern Ireland, 1600-1900 (London, 1981).

T. M. DEvINE is Professor of Scottish History at the University of Strathclyde. He is author of 7he Tobacco Lords (Edinburgh, 1975) and The Great Highland Famine (Edinburgh, 1988), and editor of another seven volumes of texts and essays, to which he has also contributed chapters. His present focus is Scottish rural history of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries.

GEORG FERTIG has completed a doctoral thesis at the Free University of Berlin on migrant motivation in German rural society during the eighteenth century. He is currently affiliated with the University of

Constance where he teaches history, and is also working on A. Sames’ and A. G. Roeber’s transatlantic project, Law and Gospel. NED LANDSMAN is Associate Professor of History at the State Uni-

Vili Contributors versity of New York at Stony Brook. He is author of Scotland and its

| First American Colony (Princeton, NJ, 1985) and of numerous articles on Scottish and American culture in the eighteenth century. JAN LUCASSEN is Head of the Department of Research and Publications at the International Institute of Social History in Amsterdam, and is Professor of Social History at the Free University of Amsterdam. _ He has written Migrant Labour in Europe, 1600-1900. The Drift to the North Sea (London, 1987) and Dutch Long Distance Migration: A Concise History 1600-1900 (Amsterdam, 1991).

PETER MOOGK is Associate Professor of History at the University of British Columbia. He has published many papers on several aspects of early Canadian history, including European migration and settlement, and has written a book entitled Building a House in New France: An Account of the Perplexities of Chent and Craftsmen in Early Canada (Toronto, 1977). J. R. S. PHILLIPs is Professor of Medieval History and Chairman of the Combined Departments of History at University College, Dublin. He has published extensively on Irish, English, and Welsh medieval

history, and is author also of The Medieval Expansion of Europe (Oxford, 1988). NICOLAS SANCHEZ-ALBORNOZ was William Kenan Professor at New

York University, and is currently Director of the Institute Cervantes, Spain. He is author of The Population of Latin America: A History (Berkeley, Calif., 1975) and editor of Espanoles hacia América. La emigracion en masa, 1880-1930 (Madrid, 1988).

T. C. SmoutT is Director of St John’s House Centre for Advanced Historical Research at the University of St Andrews and Historiographer Royal for Scotland. He is author of Scottish Trade on the Eve of Union, 1660-1707 (Edinburgh, 1963), A History of the Scottish People,

1560-1530 (London, 1969), and A Century of the Scottish People, 1830-1950 (London, 1986).

List of Maps

4.1 English Atlantic destinations 49 5.1 Scotland during the centuries of emigration 79 6.1 Ireland during the centuries of emigration 117

7.1. The Dutch in Africa and Asia 170

7.2 The Dutch in America 174 7.3 Dutch Recruitment of Foreign Labour 184 8.1 Destinations of ‘newlanders’, 1746-68 _ 230

g.1 French North America 237

List of Tables 4.1 English Atlantic Migration 64 5.1 Scottish migration, 1600-50 85 5.2 Scottish migration, 1650-1700 go

eighteenth century 98

5.3 Lowland emigrants to North America in the

| 5.4 Estimated number of Highland emigrants to North

America in the eighteenth century 104 6.1 Irish annual migration, 1600-1700 139 6.2 Irish annual migration, 1701-83 140 7.1 Long-distance foreign migration to the core regions of the Dutch Republic and its colonies, estimates

c.1600—1800 181

8.1 Empire and confederacy in the eighteenth century:

rough estimates of population and migration 203 8.2 Determinants of yearly changes in numbers of

immigrants at Philadelphia 226

Preface The subject of European overseas migration during the early modern centuries has been strangely neglected by historians. The paucity of literature on such a vital question became immediately apparent to the small group of scholars who participated in a colloquium on the

subject held at the Royal Irish Academy, 14-16 June 1990, under the auspices of the European Science Foundation, Strasbourg— hence this book. Those who met in Dublin were principally interested in the scale and character of migration from various European

countries to American destinations; but it became clear from our discussions that transatlantic migration was but one dimension of the

multi-faceted movement of Europeans during the course of three centuries. It also became clear during the course of our discussion that we had neglected some areas of major importance in the history of migration, and the essays on Scotland and Germany were commissioned especially for this volume. It has not proved possible, within the compass of a single volume, to consider all facets of the subject, and some migrations, such as that within the Mediterranean basin, have been entirely neglected, while only occasional mention has been made of such topics as seasonal

migration. However, essays have been included on all the major intra-continental migrations in which Europeans were involved during these centuries, with the exception of Portuguese migration, on which

it proved impossible to enlist an author who would consider the subject in a global context. The essay on the medieval background by Seymour Phillips and that on Spanish migration to America by Nicolas Sanchez-Albornoz are both designed to be summations of existing knowledge; but all the other essays draw upon new research which adds considerably to what was previously known of these various migrations. Each author has alluded to the complexity of the subject, and several make it clear that inter-continental migration was neither the obvious nor the logical option for Europeans seeking either employment or betterment of their condition. Collectively, the essays convey an impression of the scale and importance of migration

in the lives of Europeans during the period 1500-1800. As editor of the volume, I have incurred many debts, and I am

Xi Preface especially grateful to the several authors for their patience and perseverance in implementing successive revisions that were demanded either by me or by the readers for Oxford University Press. I also wish to thank Bernard Bailyn who led the discussion at the Dublin colloquium, who was generous with advice and encouragement on

how to shape disparate essays into a coherent volume, and who established a context for the essays with his introductory essay. The comments and criticisms of those who attended the Dublin colloquium

were especially helpful, and I am also grateful to Tony Morris, History Editor at Oxford University Press, who encouraged me to work towards a published volume, and to Gabriel Doherty for his assistance in preparing the index.

No work of this nature could be accomplished without financial

support, and I am grateful to the Royal Irish Academy for the hospitality provided during the days of the colloquium. The basic costs of the colloquium were met by the European Science Foundation, since the meeting constituted part of the work of its Network

on the History of European Expansion. The European Science Foundation has again come to our assistance in providing a grant-inaid for the publication of this volume. In thanking the foundation, I

should like to make special mention of Christoph Muhlberg, who encouraged the original initiative, and of Max Sparreboom, who administered the network during its final years. At all stages, I was supported and encouraged by Pieter Emmer of the University of Leiden, who has been secretary of the Network on the History of European Expansion during the six years of its existence. N. C.

I

Introduction: Europeans on the Move,

I500-I500 BERNARD BAILYN

Few subjects of historical study have developed as rapidly and as creatively as the history of the expansion of Europe in the early

modern period. Everything seems to have changed in the past generation—historians’ assumptions, the dimensions of enquiry, the degree of penetration into details, the rigour of analysis, the reach of historians’ imaginations. And it is a subject still very much in flux. The all-important quantitative dimensions are still uncertain, despite new and ingenious techniques of analysis; generalizations drawn from

new data remain tentative; criticism is directed so quickly to new findings that occasionally they are outdated upon publication. The contours of the subject are being reshaped, and about the whole enquiry there is an air of excitement and discovery. How the subject will settle eventually, how we will think about the expansion of Europe when the current enquiries are completed, is not yet clear. But some of the present assumptions and the most urgent questions are explored in the essays in this volume, which were written for a colloquium on European expansion in the early modern period, held in 1990 at the Royal Irish Academy in Dublin. Writing independently, the essayists made a number of common assumptions. They all assumed that the great burst of overseas enterprise, conquest, and population movement was intimately linked to— was indeed an aspect of—domestic expansion, domestic growth, and

domestic mobility. Often it was simply a spin-off, an offshoot, of domestic enterprise, economically, entrepreneurially, and demographically. The unit of analysis became the whole realm of enterprise of which overseas expansion was a part, and connections came into sharp focus that were only vaguely seen before.

Thus Britain’s westward expansion now appears, not as several distinct arrows of conquest and penetration west into North America

2 Bernard Bailyn and the Caribbean, but as a great arc of interactive parts sweeping north and west through Scotland, Ireland, Newfoundland, Nova Scotia, mainland North America, and the West Indies. Enterprise in Ireland was pursued by people simultaneously involved in North Carolina and Virginia; Irish migrants to the American back country turn out frequently to have been Scots involved in a second-generation

, displacement; ‘Londoners’ embarking on transatlantic migrations prove often to have been recruits from the English countryside who failed to strike roots in the metropolis and were moving on in the hope of betterment. Britain’s great managers of overseas investments

and enterprises—English and Scottish operators profiting from government contracting, land speculation, slave trading, stock mani-

pulation, and exchanges of goods of all sorts—were beginning to conceive of their enterprises in global terms. Investments in India were to be paid for from the African slave-trade; profits from supplying armies in Germany were invested in land speculation in Florida;

the yield from West Indies sugar plantations was secured in govern-

ment bonds and tenanted estates in Britain; the cost of luxuries at home was paid by transporting convicts, selling North American timber to the Navy, or exploiting the Newfoundland fisheries. Britain’s overseas expansion was a multi-faceted, kaleidoscopic swirl of enter-

prise, a huge lumbering machine of related parts, a trading process for the transfer and exchange of people, a generator of hope, and a terrible perpetrator of bloodshed and despair.

In none of this was Britain unique. The Netherlands was even more globally enterprising, despite the small size of its home territory and population. Its coastal regions prove to have been a transit camp

for tens of thousands of Europeans seeking employment in the booming Dutch economy, and so the Dutch emigration overseas was

in large part a secondary distribution of recent arrivals. Half the ‘Dutch’ who arrived at what became New York—that almost acci-

dental and utterly marginal offshoot of Amsterdam’s westward expansion—prove to have been immigrants to the Netherlands from

all over Europe: Germans, drawn from everywhere from Prussia to Wiirttemberg; French, from as far afield as Languedoc; Danes, Swedes, and Norwegians; and there were even some Poles. And the explanation of this bizarre situation in the settlements on the Hudson and Delaware rivers must be sought in the immigration history of the Netherlands itself—its domestic population history—whose complexity we are only just beginning to understand.

Introduction 3 So too the emigration of ‘Germans’ to the west: the central question can be perceived only in the close context of population movements throughout central Europe. The great majority of the mobile, discon-

tented, and displaced Palatines, other Rhinelanders, and German Swiss moved, sensibly, to nearby, easily accessible German-speaking

lands—south-east along the Danube, as far east as Hungary and southern Russia, or north-east to Prussia—where their labour was actively sought. But some—close to 100,000 in the course of the eighteenth century—chose instead a strange, unlikely alternative, moving off on long, dangerous, depleting journeys of 4,000 miles or more, down the Rhine to Rotterdam, then west across the Channel to Southampton, then across the Atlantic to Philadelphia, to settle on

inland farms in a frontier culture completely alien to them. Why? What was it in their original situation that propelled them out on such painful and costly journeys? Or, if drawn and not pushed, why they, and not others in identical situations and equally determined to leave? And the French: why were they so reluctant to emigrate despite the high level of domestic mobility? And why was the emigration of the Spanish to their huge overseas empire so peculiarly skewed in terms of geographical origins, class, and occupational structure? For all these questions, the local, domestic context holds the key to understanding.

Common threads inevitably appear, again and again, in these essays, the result not of prior agreement but simply of discovering, independently, common forces at work throughout western Europe. Early modern Europe was a world of almost continuous warfare— wars of religion, wars of dynastic rivalries, wars of commercial competition, wars over disputed territories. And wars meant armies and navies—not national armies and navies manned by citizens drawn into national service, but small ‘standing armies’ greatly expanded by mercenary troops recruited from mobile populations of young men wherever they might be found—essentially the same pool from which

the emigrants were largely drawn. In Ireland and also in Scotland, England, the Netherlands, and Spain, military recruitment, forcible or voluntary, bore heavily on the incidence of emigration. Was there

an inverse correlation? However they were related, both flows of manpower were directed to expansive enterprises; both enhanced the pressure to impose Europe’s hegemony over other peoples and other parts of the world. Common problems but different answers, are to be found everywhere in the history of European expansion. Race relations lie at the

4 Bernard Bailyn heart of overseas settlement, but they took remarkably different forms, with outcomes that have profoundly shaped the history of the modern world. Some of the expansionist peoples—the Spanish, the Portuguese, and to a lesser extent the French—mingled with alien

peoples, and generated racially mixed populations in the colonial areas, even though racially defined class and status structures evolved. But the British, on the whole, did not. Why? Can the differences be explained by religion—a syncretist Catholicism as opposed to a rigidly

exclusivist Protestantism? Perhaps; but the Dutch in Indonesia mingled not only with the native peoples of that archipelago but with Asians and Eurasians of all kinds as well. The resulting society of the

Dutch East Indies was neither predominantly Dutch nor Asian but Mestizo. Common problems, complex answers. Emigrants tend to be people in their most productive years: their contributions to the development

of the colonies are obvious. But what did their loss mean to the metropolitan centres whence they came? Contemporaries seem to have been confused. Many welcomed, some promoted, the departure of ‘surplus’ people—criminals, vagrants, the destitute—who clearly drained a nation’s wealth. But others discovered that a useful labour force was being depleted, that estates were being deprived of rentpaying tenants, and that useful skills were being lost, with only vague possibilities of eventual returns. Many emigrants—in some regions, at certain times, the overwhelming percentage of emigrants—financed their passage by binding themselves to years of service, years in which their personal earnings, hence consumption, were severely limited,

and in which they were prohibited from marrying yet at the same time were forced to contribute full time to the profit-making enterprises of their masters. What effect did such a peculiarly constrained labour force, in passage from servitude to freedom, have on economic growth? And slavery, almost universal in the European colonies all over the globe: can one even hope to sketch its many meanings, its varieties as an institution, its impact on those directly involved, its

role in African and European colonial societies, its vast, protean legacy?

These essays do not answer all or even most of these questions or many others that historians have framed in recent years. But they do address some of the most important issues, freshly and imaginatively, and they present a mass of information not otherwise available. Above all, they make clear the level of detail and precision now expected of

Introduction 5 any profitable discussion of this complex subject, and point the way to more sophisticated interpretations than any we now have available. They relate large-scale phenomena to micro-narratives; they bypass loose, abstract categories like ‘push’ and ‘pull’, ‘poverty’, ‘mobility’,

and ‘discontent’ in favour of specific events and detailed circumstances, precise triggers of dislocation and propulsion, and precisely delineated decisions and choices. So the immediate, practical basis for large-scale investment in overseas enterprises must now be sought

in the business papers of the major commercial organizations; so the personal decisions of thousands of emigrants must be explained in terms of the particular circumstances at the village level. Networks of information and recruitment must now be uncovered; the logic of family strategies that shaped population movements must now be explored; and the management of transportation must now be dis-

cussed in terms of profit and loss. And while we will never fully understand the impact of European expansion on the lives of whole populations of native peoples—Africans, East Indians, West Indians,

native Americans—a flood of new writing in ethnography and anthropology at least contains substantial clues, and points the way for historians to produce a better account than any we have yet had. There is no such thing, of course, as a complete and final account of so vast and intricate a development as the expansion of Europe. History is a continuous enquiry in which successful answers to old questions generate new questions at a higher level of refinement. To this dialectical process of improved historical understanding these essays make a significant contribution.

»

PART I

The Early Experiences

»

.

2

The Medieval Background SEYMOUR PHILLIPS

Contrary to the traditional impression that medieval western Europe was constrained within narrow geographical and intellectual limits, which were breached only at the time of the voyages of the Portuguese and of Columbus at the end of the fifteenth century, there is abundant evidence of earlier European contacts with other areas of the world, notably with the lands of the eastern Mediterranean, large parts of Asia, the coastal regions of northern Africa, the islands of the North Atlantic, and even with North America.’ The spherical shape of the earth, which had been demonstrated both theoretically and empirically by the ancient Greeks, was a familiar concept in scholarly circles, but also gained a wider circulation through such works as the textbook De Sphaera Mund, written by John Holywood at the University of Paris in the 1220s. It was also a commonplace academic theory and literary theme that this spherical earth could in principle be circumnavigated,” ' A fuller account of medieval European contacts with the outer world can be found in J. R. S. Phillips, The Medteval Expansion of Europe (Oxford, 1988); and in G. V. Scammell, The World Encompassed: The First Maritime Empires, 800-1650 (London, _ 1981). Some use has also been made here of material from the first and last sections of my paper “The Outer World of the European Middle Ages’, prepared for the conference on I[mpliat Ethnographtes: Encounters between Europeans and Other Peoples in the Wake of Columbus, hosted by the Centre for Early Modern History, Univ. of Minnesota, Oct. 1990. A shortened version will shortly be published by the Cambridge University Press in Implicit Understandings: Europeans and Other Peoples in the Early Modern Era, ed.

S. Schwartz. See also R. Bartlett, The Making of Europe: Conquest, Colonization and Cultural Change, 950-1350 (London, 1993), for developments within Europe. Much of what follows will be familiar ground to medieval historians. This chapter is intended, however, to provide an introduction to, and give a wider context for, the

much more detailed post-1500 studies provided by the other contributors to this volume and should be read in this light. * Phillips, Medieval Expansion, 184, 188-90, 197, 208-9, 245; see also the paper on the Traitié de l’espére by the 14th-cent. French scholar Nicholas Oresme, ‘A FourteenthCentury Argument for an International Date Line’, in C. Lutz, Essays on Manuscripts and Rare Books (Hamden, Conn., 1975), 63-70, 154. The most detailed studies of medieval geographical ideas are G. H. T. Kimble, Geography in the Middle Ages (London, 1937; repr. New York, 1968), and J. K. Wright, Geographical Lore of the Time

IO , Seymour Phillips so Columbus was not making any extravagant theoretical claims when he argued for the possibility of a westward voyage to Asia. The real

barriers to such a voyage, and to any oceanic navigation over long distances, lay in the limitations of medieval ship design? and in the lack of any general agreement in fifteenth-century Europe as to the actual circumference of the earth, the extent of the inhabited landmass, and, in consequence, the breadth of the ocean separating the Far Western from the Far Eastern extremities of the land.* In some respects the expansion of medieval Europe can be traced

as far back as the eighth and ninth centuries, to the Carolingian conquests of the pagan Saxons and Avars in central Europe, the earliest Viking discoveries in the Atlantic, and the creation of trade

links between regions as far apart as Ireland and Russia and the Caspian Sea by merchants and raiders from Scandinavia. However, it

is in the eleventh century that there is the first clear evidence of a sustained expansion. The revival in international trade centred on the Mediterranean and led by Italian cities such as Genoa, Pisa, Venice, and Amalfi was to continue, despite a serious recession in the fourteenth century, down to the time of Columbus.” At first the sphere of of the Crusades (New York, 1925; repr. 1965). To these should now be added the very important History of Cartography 1. Cartography in Prehistoric, Ancient and Medieval Europe

| and the Mediterranean, ed. J. B. Harley and D. Woodward (Chicago, 1987), together with future volumes in the series. 3 This generalization is broadly true, but requires some qualification. Although the Viking ships which made the crossing to Greenland and Vinland in the roth and 11th cent. were obviously capable of ocean voyages, by the end of the 13th cent. these were being superseded in northern Europe by other designs carrying larger cargoes. Some of the early Atlantic voyages undertaken by, or on behalf of, the Portuguese in the 14th and early 15th cent. were probably made by small single-masted vessels which were barely suitable for the purpose. The real problem was to design ships which could consistently undertake long voyages with a reasonable prospect of returning home safely. This was not achieved until the 15th cent.: see Phillips, Medieval Expansion, 159,

168-70, 234-5. For a more detailed treatment of ship design see R. W. Unger, The Ship in the Medieval Economy, 600-1600 (London, 1980). + Phillips, Medieval Expansion, 215; W. G. L. Randles, ‘La Navigabilité de l’Atlantique au Moyen Age selon les universitaires et les marins’, in Europe et l'océan au Moyen

Age: Contribution a l'histoire de la navigation, Société des historiens médiévistes de l’enseignement supérieur (Nantes, 1988), 211-16. It is not clear when the circumference was first calculated to general satisfaction, but it may have been as late as the 17th cent. when England and France, e.g., were establishing astronomical observatories both for scientific research and for the purpose of more accurate navigation at sea. An analogous problem is that of longitude, which was well understood in theory, but could not be reliably calculated at sea until the invention of the chronometer in the 18th cent. > Phillips, Medieval Expansion, 18-55; J. Le Goff, Medieval Civilization (Oxford, 1988: trans. of French edn., Paris, 1964), 56—105; D. Hay, Europe: The Emergence of an

The Medieval Background Il commercial activity was restricted to the Mediterranean basin, but

it included the important trading centres of Constantinople and Alexandria, which were not only sources of Eastern spices and silks but also provided western European visitors with tantalizing hints of what lay beyond in the inner recesses of Asia or across the Indian Ocean. European attention was also becoming increasingly focused

during the eleventh century on the lands of Syria and Palestine through the activities of both merchants and pilgrims, but especially

through the beginning of the crusades at the end of the century. Although the territorial conquests of the European crusaders lasted

for only about two centuries, so that in one sense the crusading movement had come to an end by 1300, the crusading ideal was a very emotive and enduring feature of European society. In the twelfth and thirteenth centuries it drew Europeans to the eastern Mediterranean and, like the activities of merchants, raised the question of what might lie beyond. In the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries the ideal lived on in the Iberian peninsula, where the fight against the infidel was a reality until 1492; while elsewhere in Europe | it symbolized the continuing resistance of Christendom to Muslim expansion.° Medieval Europeans therefore had strong incentives to learn more

about the East. However, these ambitions would have remained unfulfilled, but for a wholly unexpected set of events, the conquests by the nomadic Mongols under Ghenghis Khan and his successors in Asia and in eastern Europe, which in the 1240s brought Europe as a whole very close to destruction and occupation. Yet, paradoxically, the terrors of the Mongol invasion were the prelude to a European penetration of Asia on a scale never before achieved or dreamt of. Idea (Edinburgh, 1957); R. S. Lopez, The Commercial Revolution of the Middle Ages, 950-1350 (Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 1971). On international trade in the late medieval period see B. Z. Kedar, Merchants in Crisis: Genoese and Venetian Men of Affairs and the Fourteenth-century Depression (New Haven, Conn., 1976); E. Ashtor, The Levant Trade

in the Late Middle Ages (Princeton, NJ, 1983); C. R. Phillips, ‘The Growth and Composition of Trade from Southern Europe, 1350-1750’, in J. Tracy (ed.), The Rise of Merchant Empires (Cambridge, 1990), 34-101.

For a general discussion of the reasons for European overseas expansion in the medieval period see J. R. S. Phillips, ‘European Expansion before Columbus: Causes and Consequences’, Haskins Society Journal, 5 (1993; forthcoming, Woodbridge, Suffolk., 1994).

© Phillips, Medieval Expansion, 26-55, 227-53; J. Riley-Smith, The Crusades (London, 1987); N. Housley, The Avignon Papacy and the Crusade, 1305-1378 (Oxford, 1986); idem, The Later Crusades, 1274-1580 (Oxford, 1992).

12 Seymour Phillips After the first shock had worn off, Europeans discovered that the Mongols were surprisingly tolerant of other peoples and cultures, provided that their own overlordship was fully recognized; and for over a hundred years, between about 1260 and 1370, European merchants and missionaries took advantage of the opportunity to operate freely in the Mongol dominions.’ These were the circumstances under which Marco Polo’s father and uncle, the Venetian merchants Nicolo and Maffeo Polo, made their journey to China between 1262 and 1269, the first Europeans known to have visited that country since the days of ancient Rome. Moreover, it was the need of the Mongol Great Khan, Kublai, for foreign experts which set Marco Polo on the road to Peking in 1271, and kept him abroad until 1295. China, or ‘Cathay’ as it was known in Europe, became such

a familiar destination to fourteenth-century Italians that Boccaccio could refer to Cathay quite casually as the setting of one of his stories in the Decameron.® The missionary travellers to Asia were all members

of the Franciscan or the Dominican orders, and included such important figures as John of Monte Corvino, who went to China via India in the 1290s, arriving there at about the same time as Marco Polo got back to Venice. John built himself a church in Peking, won converts, and reported on his achievements in a series of letters which led to his appointment in 1307 as archbishop of Peking with responsibility for nothing less than the entire Mongol dominions in Asia.”

The opportunities for European travellers in Asia were severely curtailed when the Mongol dominions collapsed in the middle of the fourteenth century; but the records of their past in Asia lived on in

the archives of the papacy and the missionary orders and of the merchant companies of Genoa and Venice. A few Europeans still travelled to Asia in the fifteenth century, such as Nicolo Conti of Venice, a latter-day Marco Polo, who wandered through India, Sumatra, Java, and other exotic places between 1419 and 1444, and ” Phillips, Medieval Expansion, 59-82. The latest and best book in English on the Mongols and their conquests is D. O. Morgan, The Mongols (Oxford, 1986). For an excellent example of an older generation of scholarship newly translated into English from German see P. Ratchnevsky, Genghis Khan: His Life and Legacy (Oxford, 1991).

8 Phillips, Medieval Expansion, 102-21; J. Heers, Marco Polo (Paris, 1983); idem, , Génes au xve siécle (Paris, 1961).

” Phillips, Medieval Expansion, 83-101, 122-40; I. de Rachewiltz, Papal Envoys to the Great Khans (London, 1971); J. Richard, La Papauté et les missions d’Orient au Moyen Age (Xllle—XVe siécle) (Rome, 1977).

The Medieval Background 13 whose account of his travels was to become widely known through the humanist Poggio Bracciolini. In the late 1490s two Genoese merchants made the journey to Calicut in India, only a year or two before Vasco da Gama of Portugal arrived there, following the immensely long sea route around Africa and across the Indian Ocean.!° Vasco da Gama’s voyage would have been anticipated by fully 200 years, if two other Genoese, the brothers Ugolino and Vadino Vivaldi,

had succeeded in 1291 in their attempt to reach India by a circumnavigation of Africa. Although they disappeared without trace somewhere off the west coast of Africa, their voyage can also be seen

as one of a number of important episodes in the exploration of the Atlantic in the late thirteenth and fourteenth centuries which led to the discovery on behalf of the Portuguese of the Canary Islands in

about 1336 and probably also of two other important groups of Atlantic islands, Madeira and the Azores, in the 1340s. The net effect was the discovery of what in the fifteenth century were to become vital links in future routes to both India and America.”

By the fifteenth century, Europeans had accumulated a large amount of experience of the world around them. Their knowledge of Asia, in particular, was extensive, and their ambitions to reopen direct contacts with Asia after the fall of the Mongol empire were fuelled

both by practical motives, such as the desire to trade, and by less tangible but equally important factors, such as the crusade and continuing quest for the elusive Christian ruler Prester John, who was thought to live in either Asia or Africa.'* Knowledge of the Atlantic was much less extensive, but enough was known even before 1400 to tempt European sailors into further explorations. Real islands like the Canaries, Madeira, and the Azores and semi-legendary islands like 1° Phillips, Medieval Expansion, 227-509.

'T Tbid. 155-63; F. Fernandez-Armesto, Before Columbus (London, 1987), 151-68. The extent of medieval European contacts with and knowledge of the African continent are very difficult to assess: see Phillips, Medieval Expansion, 143-63. In 1290, the year before the Vivaldi brothers set out for India, a contingent of goo Genoese sailors was recruited by the Mongol ruler of Iran to help him attack Egyptian trade in the Indian Ocean. Nothing came of the scheme, but it would, if carried through, once again have anticipated the Portuguese navigation of those waters by two centuries (ibid. 104-5).

'2 Ibid. 60-2, 77-9, 190-2. The most thorough survey of the Prester John theme is V. Slessarev, Prester John, the Letter and the Legend (Minneapolis, 1959); but see also C. F. Beckingham, Between Islam and Christendom: Travellers, Facts, Legends in the Middle Ages and the Renaissance (London, 1983); B. Hamilton, ‘Prester John and the

Three Kings of Cologne’, in H. Mayr-Harting and R. I. Moore (eds.), Studies in Medieval History presented to R. H. C. Davis (London, 1985).

14 Seymour Phillips those of St Brendan, Brasil, and Antilia, which might just turn out to be real, suggested that there might be others waiting to be discovered.

There were also Iceland and Greenland (though the latter was generally regarded as an extension of northern Europe rather than an

island), which had been settled by Norwegians centuries before.!° Whether any knowledge of the other Scandinavian discovery in the Atlantic, the mysterious Vinland, passed into general European circulation in the fifteenth century is uncertain. The possibility cannot be entirely ruled out, but if knowledge of Vinland did still exist, it was probably thought of as yet another island, rather than as the outlier of

a new continent of indefinite size and opportunity.'* On the other hand, considerable attention was certainly being paid to the Atlantic during the fifteenth century, even before the voyages of Columbus, by the sailors of several European nations. Portuguese explorations of

the Azores may conceivably have taken them much further west; voyages were made during the 1480s from the English port of Bristol, in search of the island of Brasil; and trading and fishing expeditions to Iceland and Greenland were undertaken by English, German, and

Dutch sailors. Had the single-minded obsession of Columbus not driven him to cross the Atlantic in search of the land of Cathay itself, sooner or later, someone else would have done it, perhaps with more prosaic objectives, but nevertheless with similar results.'°

In a number of instances the opening of contact with the outer world was followed by some degree of migration. The earliest example '3 Phillips, Medieval Expansion, 164-84, 227-59; Fernandez-Armesto, Before Columbus, 223-52. '4 Phillips, Medieval Expansion, 241-3; see also G. Jones, The Norse Atlantic Saga, 2nd edn. (Oxford, 1986); D. B. Quinn, England and the Discovery of America, 14801620 (London, 1974). '5 The literature on 15th-cent. European voyaging in the Atlantic, and especially on

the ambitions and role of Columbus, is enormous and growing: see, e.g., Phillips, Medieval Expansion, 227-53; Fernandez-Armesto, Before Columbus, 203-22; G. R. Crone, The Discovery of America (London, 1969); D. B. Quinn, Discovery of America; P. E. Taviani, Christopher Columbus: The Grand Design (London, 1985; originally pub. in

Italian in 1974); D. T. Gerace (ed.), Columbus and his World, First San Salvador Conference, 1986 (Fort Lauderdale, Fla., 1987); L. de Vorsey, jun., and J. Parker (eds.), In the Wake of Columbus: Islands and Controversy (Detroit, 1986; repr. of special issue of Terrae Incognitae, 15 (1983)). Among the many books on Columbus which have been published to coincide with the quincentenary of 1492, the following are especially

noteworthy: F. Fernandez-Armesto, Columbus (Oxford, 1991), and W. D. Phillips, jun., and C. R. Phillips, The Worlds of Christopher Columbus (Cambridge, 1992). E. P. Cheyney’s short book European Background of American History, 1300-1600 remains of interest, even though it was first published in 1904 (repr. New York, 1961).

The Medieval Background 15 is that of Iceland, first discovered by Irish monks before the end of the eighth century, rediscovered by Swedish and Norwegian Vikings between about 860 and 870, and settled by Norwegians between then and about 930, by which time the population probably amounted to between 10,000 and 20,000. The settlement of Iceland, which probably occurred in response to both overpopulation and political change in Scandinavia, represents the first substantial movement of population out of Europe. It is also a movement which can be described in some detail. ‘The evidence of the Landnamabék, composed in Iceland in the twelfth century from surviving oral traditions, shows that most of the

settlers came from Norway, and provides both names and places of origin. But some settlers probably came from the islands off the north

and west of Scotland and from Ireland, with which the Vikings already had contacts, so it is likely that some admixture of Celtic blood was present in Iceland through earlier intermarriage and the importation of slaves. It has been estimated that by the time the Landnadmabok was composed, the population of Iceland had risen to

about 60,000, considerably higher than the 47,000 to which it had been reduced nearly seven centuries later, in 1801.!° Settlement of the neighbouring island of Greenland, which had first been sighted ¢. AD goo, was begun by Eric Thorvaldsson, better known as Eric the Red, in the g8o0s. By the end of the century, two areas of settlement had come into being, about 200 miles apart, on the south-east and south-west coastlines of Greenland, known respectively as the eastern and the western settlement. Living conditions '© The most detailed study of Iceland is the excellent book by J. L. Byock, Medieval

Iceland: Soctety, Sagas and Power (Berkeley, Calif., 1988). See esp. 51-76, and for details of population 2, 42, 82. Jones, Norse Atlantic Saga, provides the best general account of the discovery and settlement of Iceland, and also includes a substantial extract from the Landndmabok. He gives an upper estimate of c. 80,000 for the early 12th-cent. population (ibid. 87). On the origins of Viking overseas expansion see, e.g., P. H. Sawyer, The Age of the Vikings (London, 1962; 2nd edn. 1971) and its sequel Kings and Vikings: Scandinavia and Europe, AD 700-1100 (London, 1982); G. Jones, A History of the Vikings, 2nd edn.

(Oxford, 1984). While overpopulation was probably an important motive for the Scandinavian ventures, it is difficult to prove this. The process of political unification within the kingdoms of Scandinavia, which drove some to seek their fortune elsewhere, is an equally plausible explanation. The departure from Norway of Eric the Red and his father ‘because of some killings’ is an apt illustration of the need throughout the ages for the outlaw to flee to places beyond the reach of ordered government. Another explanation, too easily overlooked because it apparently lacks scientific rigour, is sheer love of adventure. The famous Viking ships, whose design was being perfected around the end of the 8th cent., and the development of techniques of ocean sailing gave such men the means to explore and to settle in previously unknown lands.

16 Seymour Phillips were in some respects more favourable than in Iceland, whence the new colonists came, and were made more tolerable by the ‘climatic optimum’ which existed between c. AD 800 and 1200; but the amount

of land suitable for agriculture was limited, and was very quickly taken up. Although the sites of many farmsteads have been excavated in modern times, there is no readily available estimate of population, which is not likely to have been more than a few thousand at most.

However, the fact that the diocese of Gardar, which was set up in 1126 to cater for the Greenland settlements, never contained more than sixteen parishes gives some idea of the small scale of colonization.

Greenland was not a land to which many outsiders came other than for trade, and so was very much an outpost at the end of an extended line of communication starting in the home country of Norway. As climate deteriorated ¢.1300, and as the native Innuit were forced further south and began to clash with the settlers, so the Greenland colony went into a decline, disappearing altogether before the end of the fifteenth century.'’ In 986 one of the first settlers in Greenland, Bjarni Herjolfsson, accidentally sighted the lands which his successor, Leif Ericsson, was to name Helluland, Markland, and Vinland, and to which a series of voyages was made in about 1,000 and the years which followed. The now-famous site at L’Anse aux Meadows in Newfoundland, which was excavated in the 1960s, has given clear proof that Scandinavians

visited North America in the eleventh century. But it was a land already settled by the people whom the Vikings referred to as ‘wretches’ (skraelings), and was too far removed from any chance of

outside assistance in the event of disaster. Further visits to North -America from Greenland were made as late as the fourteenth century

in order to collect supplies of timber, but permanent European settlement there was probably out of the question.’® '7 Phillips, Medieval Expansion, 166-9, 175-8; see esp. F. Gad, The History of Greenland i. The Earliest Times to 1700 (London, 1970), and G. Jones, History of the Vikings. An older book by P. Nerlund, Viking Settlers in Greenland (London, 1936;

repr. New York, 1971) is still useful. On the size of the Gardar diocese see Gad, History, 60, where he adds that the smallest Scandinavian diocese of the time had sixty

Pate On North America see the summary of the evidence in Phillips, Medieval Expansion, 164-84; but see also Jones, Norse Atlantic Saga; E. Guralnick (ed.), Vikings in the West (Chicago, 1982); and L. Rey (ed.), Unveiling the Arctic (Calgary, 1984), a

collection of papers first published in Arctic, 37/4 (Dec. 1984). There are also two important articles: R. McGhee, ‘Contacts between Native North Americans and the Medieval Norse: A Review of the Evidence’, American Antiquity, 49 (1984), 4-26; T.

|

|

The Medieval Background 17 Permanent settlement did occur, however, in the other area of Atlantic discovery, the island groups of the Canaries, Madeira, and the Azores.'? Although there were probably many expeditions to the Canaries between their discovery in the 1330s and the end of the fourteenth century, the systematic conquest and settlement of the islands seems to have begun only in 1402 with the expedition led by two Frenchmen, Jean de Béthencourt and Gadifer de la Salle, possibly

with Castilian co-operation. The conquest was completed in 1496 after prolonged and often desperate fighting against the native population, most of whom were eventually wiped out. Settlers came initially

from France, but later predominantly from Castile, forcing the Portuguese to abandon their claim to the islands in 1479.” Portugal was more successful, however, in Madeira and in the Azores, which were uninhabited and where it did not face opposition from other European powers. The colonization of these islands is now thought

to have begun in earnest in 1439. In the Canaries and Madeira, prosperity was ensured by an economy based on sugar, whereas the Azores became an important source of grain, both products finding a ready market in Europe.*' The colonial population of all these islands was made up predominantly of peasant farmers, but the use of slaves _

in the sugar mills of the Canaries and Madeira provided a partial precedent for the society which was to develop in yet another group of Atlantic islands, the Cape Verdes, and so for the later European

colonies in the Caribbean and the New World. The Cape Verdes were first discovered by the Portuguese in the 1460s, but since the climate made them unsuited to extensive European settlement, ‘a new

model was introduced: the slave-based plantation economy, unprecedented in European experience since the ancient latifundia’.”” During the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries, Europeans penetrated some of the remotest parts of the Asian continent. But they H. McGovern, “The Economics of Extinction in Norse Greenland’, in T. M. L. Wrigley et al. (eds.), Climate and History (Cambridge, 1981).

'9 On the discovery and settlement of the Atlantic islands see F. FernandezArmesto, Before Columbus, 151-85, 190-200, on which this paragraph draws heavily. See also idem, The Canary Islands after the Conquest: The Making of a Colonial Soctety in

the Early Sixteenth Century (Oxford, 1982), esp. ‘Introduction: The Setting and Background’; and J. Muldoon, Popes, Lawyers and Infidels: The Church and the Non-Christian World, 1250-1550 (Liverpool, 1979), 119-31. 20 Fernandez-Armesto, Before Columbus, 169-85, 190-2. 2) Tbid. 195-200. 22 Ibid. 200.

18 Seymour Phillips were, in sharp contrast to their Portuguese successors in the sixteenth

century, rarely if ever in a position of even local superiority. The merchants and missionaries whose communities could be found in cities like Tabriz and Sultaniyeh in Iran, Quilon in India, Astrakhan, Aksarai, Urgenj, and Almaligh in Central Asia, and Peking, Yangchow, and the great port of Zayton in China in the thirteenth and fourteenth

centuries were few in number, surrounded by peoples of alien culture, and dependent for their survival on the continued protection of the local Mongol rulers, who were themselves foreign to these regions. As soon as the favourable conditions created by the Mongols changed, direct European contacts with Asia virtually ceased.”°

On the other hand, for roughly two centuries, between 1099 and 1291, European colonists held political control of the crusader states

of Antioch, Tripoli, and Jerusalem in Syria and Palestine on the westernmost fringes of Asia. Their situation was complicated by the existence of neighbouring Muslim powers which were frequently hostile and which eventually conquered the European enclaves, while the society of the crusader states was itself very mixed. The indigenous population consisted of a mixture of Muslims and Jews, who were viewed with the distrust reserved in medieval Europe for the ‘infidel’ and for Christians of a variety of allegiances and traditions which did not endear them to Rome.”* European settlers were few in 23 Phillips, Medieval Expansion, 83-121. In some instances these European communities may have lasted for several generations. There is occasional evidence, such as the tombstones of Domenico Vilioni and his daughter Catherine who died in Yangchow in the 1340s, that something like a normal settled life developed (ibid. 111-12); but it is far more likely that these European communities maintained themselves only through

the regular replacement of merchants or missionaries who had died or returned to Europe. There was, however, a certain amount of enforced migration from Asia to Europe. In the 14th cent., female Tartar slaves were a common sight in the households of the

great cities of northern Italy. Masters, such as Gregorio Dati of Florence in 1391, sometimes had children by their slaves: G. Brucker (ed.), Two Memoirs of Renaissance Florence: The Diaries of Buonaccorso Pitti and Gregorio Dati (New York, 1967), 112. On Tartar slaves see I. Origo, “The Domestic Enemy: Eastern Slaves in Tuscany in the Fourteenth and Fifteenth centuries’, Speculum, 30 (1955), 321-66; and W. D. Phillips, Slavery from Roman Times to the Early Transatlantic Trade (Minneapolis, 1985), 97-106. 4 The literature on the society of the crusader states is very substantial. A summary

of the general situation can be found in Phillips, Medieval Expansion, 26-55. For a more detailed treatment, the most recent work is K. M. Setton (ed.), 4 History of the Crusades v. N. P. Zacour and H. W. Hazard (eds.), The Impact of the Crusades on the

Near East (Madison, Wis., 1985), esp. 59—192, by Joshua Prawer. See also J. Prawer, The Latin Kingdom of Jerusalem: European Colonialism in the Middle Ages (London, 1972); idem, The World of the Crusaders (London, 1972); R. C. Smail, The Crusaders in

The Medieval Background 19 number, totalling in all about 250,000. The European population of the kingdom of Jerusalem, for example, has been variously estimated at 120,000 and 140,000, and was greatly outnumbered by the indigenous population, probably by about four to one. In each of the crusader states the settlers included a small noble class, mainly French in origin, an ecclesiastical hierarchy, and foreign

merchants, most of whom came from Italy and occupied their own

quarters in many of the major seaports.” The great majority of Europeans lived, both for security reasons and for the privileged status which they enjoyed there, in cities such as Antioch, Tripoli, Jerusalem, and Acre. Most of the previous Muslim and Jewish inhabitants were expelled, leaving only the newcomers and members of local Christian communities. But there was also a certain amount of peasant settlement in the countryside. In the mid-twelfth century, for example, a village close to the fortress of Beit-Jibrin between Jerusalem and the port of Ascalon had about 150 inhabitants who

came from various regions of France, Lombardy, Flanders, and Catalonia.”° In all, about eighty settlements with a European population have been identified, scattered throughout the territory of the former kingdom of Jerusalem and forming about 15 per cent of the

total permanent settlements there.*’ None the less, even with the addition of a floating population of foreign merchants, pilgrims visiting

the holy places, and the occasional large-scale crusading expedition, there is no doubt that the kingdom of Jerusalem and the other crusader

states of Antioch and Tripoli were critically short of manpower throughout their existence. The colonial population that remained at

the time of the fall of Acre in 1291 was either killed or sold into Syria and the Holy Land (London, 1973); M. Benvenisti, The Crusaders in the Holy Land (Jerusalem, 1970; New York, 1972), a very important book which surveys the material

remains of the European presence in the kingdom of Jerusalem; and D. Pringle, ‘Magna Mahumeria (al-Bira): The Archaeology of a Frankish New Town in Palestine’, in P. W. Edbury (ed.), Crusade and Settlement (Cardiff, 1985). 23 Phillips, Medieval Expansion, 44-9; Prawer, World of the Crusaders, 73; Benvenisti, Crusaders, 18. Although the settlers came from many parts of western Europe, they

were collectively referred to as ‘Franks’, both by their own historians and by the Muslims among whom they lived. This is an appropriate occasion to correct the possible impression given in my own book that the total population of all the crusader states was ¢.250,000 (Phillips, Medieval Expansion, 44). © Benvenisti, Crusaders, 18, 26—8; Phillips, Medieval Expansion, 44-5, citing Prawer, Latin Kingdom of Jerusalem, 82-3. 27 Benvenisti, Crusaders, 18-20; the distribution of European settlements is shown very effectively in the map following ibid. 408.

20 Seymour Phillips slavery in the markets of Cairo and Baghdad.”® A few of those who escaped the disaster made their way home to western Europe, while

others, including the now titular king of Jerusalem, took refuge in Cyprus.”?

Although these medieval examples of migration beyond the boun-

daries of Europe anticipated those which were to follow in the sixteenth, seventeenth, and later centuries, they involved only small

numbers of people, who did not for the most part achieve any prolonged or conspicuous success. They also stand in sharp contrast to the very extensive movements of population which were taking

place within Europe for much of the medieval period.°? Some of 8 In 1291 the Dominican missionary Ricold of Monte Croce witnessed the sale of captives from Acre and Tripoli in Baghdad; the lordship of Peter of Embriaco at Jebail, in Syria, was able to survive under Egyptian supremacy, however, until 1298 (Phillips, Medieval Expansion, 85, 137, 246). 29 Cyprus had been under western control since the time of the 3rd crusade in the 11gos, and accordingly had its own colonial population ruling over the native Greek inhabitants of the island. See, e.g., W. H. Rudt de Collenberg, “The Fate of Frankish Noble Families Settled in Cyprus’, and works cited there, in Edbury (ed.), Crusade and Settlement; cf. A. Luttrell, ‘Settlement on Rhodes, 1306-1366’, ibid. Although the history of Cyprus was intimately bound up with that of the crusader

states on the nearby mainland, the situation in Cyprus was also analogous to the extensive western European involvement in mainland Greece and the Aegean which followed the capture of Constantinople by the army of the 4th crusade in 1204: see, e.g., B. Arbel, B. Hamilton, and D. Jacoby (eds.), Latins and Greeks in the Eastern Mediterranean afier 1204 (London, 1989), a recent, important collection of papers. ° Movements of population within Europe had been taking place for centuries. The Germanic invasions of the provinces of the western Roman Empire in Britain, Gaul, Italy, and Spain during the 5th and 6th cent., the movement of the Slavs across the Danube and into the Balkans from the end of the 6th cent., the Arab conquest of Spain in the 8th cent., the Viking raids on many parts of western Europe between the late 8th and mid-11th-cent., and the invasions of the nomadic Hungarians in the gth and roth cent. are but a few of the more conspicuous early examples. All left their mark through the settlement of some of their number in the lands they entered, as well as in new forms of political, social, or religious organization, so that, e.g., gradually Romanized Celtic Gaul and Britain became Germanic France and England, and the Pictish lands of northern Britain which had been invaded by newcomers from Ireland became the kingdom of the Scots. For a survey and interpretation of some of these invasions see, e.g., L. Musset, The Germanic Invasions: The Making of Europe A.D.400-

600 (London, 1975; trans. of original French edn., Paris, 1965); R. Collins, Early Medieval Europe, joo—1ooo (London, 1991); N. J. G. Pounds, An Historical Geography

of Europe, 450B.C.—A.D.1330 (Cambridge, 1973), 95-226; R. Koebner, in M. M. Postan (ed.), The Cambridge Economic History of Europe, 1. The Agrarian Life of the Middle

Ages, 2nd edn. (Cambridge, 1965), 1-91. In none of these cases is it possible to give reliable statistics for these population movements. We may say with certainty that people moved from region A to region B and that some of them stayed permanently, but there is rarely any way of estimating

The Medieval Background 21 these developments were brought about simply by the general rise in population of western Europe which was taking place from about the

end of the tenth century, which is thought to have resulted in a doubling of the population before the demographic catastrophe caused

by the Black Death in the middle of the fourteenth century.>’ The consequences of this increase were seen, for example, in the clearing and settlement of forest and waste land, in the reclamation of marshes

to accommodate and feed the extra mouths, in the enlargement of existing towns and cities, and in the foundation of new ones. This process, which has aptly been described as ‘internal colonization’, occurred extensively in such already settled countries as England,

France, Germany, and the Low Countries. At its least it might involve no more than a village expanding to take in land immediately adjacent to it, with little or no migration entailed.>* In other instances, new settlements were created in order to develop the local economy their numbers with any hope of accuracy. Similar difficulties apply to the study of virtually all medieval migrations.

5! Le Goff, Medieval Civilisation, 245. One estimate cited in this very stimulating general study of medieval Europe suggests that the population of western Europe rose

from ¢.22.5m. in 950 to 54.5m. in 1348, on the eve of the Black Death. Another estimate is that the population of ‘Europe as a whole’ (it is not clear precisely what geographical area is included in this definition) rose from 42m. ¢c.1000 to ~73m.

c.1300. It is also argued that ‘the maximum figure, for the start of the fourteenth century, is only a little greater than that from the period of Roman prosperity at the end of the second century (estimated at 67m.). In demographic terms, the Middle Ages may be defined quantitatively as simply a catching-up process.’ While it is impossible to confirm such figures, the broad trends indicated are probably reliable. See also the classic article by L. Génicot, ‘On the Evidence of Growth of Population in the West from the Eleventh to the Thirteenth Century’, in S. Thrupp (ed.), Change in Medieval Soctety: Europe North of the Alps, to50—1500 (New York, 1964), 14-29. There is a valuable discussion of the problems involved in estimating levels of population in the gth and11th, and early 14th cent. in Pounds, Historical Geography, 182-4, 242-5, 325-39. The more detailed treatment of the subject for the 14th cent. reflects in part the increase in record keeping and the greater survival of data. A revised, updated version of this material appears in ibid. (1990) 84-9, 119-23, 146—52. For a recent discussion of the demographic problems of the 14th cent. see R. M. Smith, ‘Demographic Developments in Rural England, 1300-48: A Survey’, in Bruce M. S. Campbell (ed.), Before the Black Death: Studies in the ‘Crisis’ of the Early Fourteenth Century (Manchester, 1991), 25-77. 32 See, e.g., R. Koebner, ‘Settlement of Europe’; G. Duby, Rural Economy and Country Life in the Medieval West (London, 1968); J. L. Bolton, The Medieval English Economy, 150-1500 (London, 1980), 82—118; on new urban foundations see M. W. Beresford, New Towns of the Middle Ages: Town Plantation in England, Wales and Gascony

(London, 1967), also Appendix 4 on foundations elsewhere in Europe. See also Professor Robert Bartlett’s new book, The Making of Europe: Conquest, Colonization and Cultural Change, 950-1350 (London, 1993), for a more detailed examination of the themes treated here and in the rest of this chapter.

22 Seymour Phillips or establish jurisdiction, as occurred for example in thirteenth-century

France.* These were by no means the only forms of population movement within medieval Europe. Pilgrims ventured to such famous desti-

nations as Rome, Compostella, and St Patrick’s Purgatory in the north-west of Ireland, as well as to a host of local places of veneration.** Like the pilgrims, the majority of those who travelled in pursuit of commercial rather than spiritual gain expected sooner or later to return to their starting-point; but in all the major trading centres of Europe there were foreign merchants who stayed on and helped to form what became well-established communities, often with a privileged status.>>

However, many of the most significant movements occurred in the

wake of political and military upheavals. By 1100, Normans from the duchy which Scandinavian adventurers had created in northern France in the tenth century had established themselves in southern Italy, in Muslim Sicily, and in Anglo-Saxon England, and were beginning to expand into Wales; while in the twelfth century they also 33 ‘Between 1263 and 1297 more than seventy new towns had been planted in that part of south-west France which owed allegiance to Henry III of England and his son Edward. Across the local frontiers—sometimes contested—even more new towns

were planted in the same period in that part of the south-west which called itself French.’ (Beresford, New Towns, 7). The naming of some of these new towns in France strangely foreshadows the much later settlements in colonial North America named after places in the home country: thus there were, e.g., towns called ‘Baa’ (Gironde), ‘Hastingues’ (Landes), and ‘Londres’ (Lot et Garonne) (ibid. 593, 604-5, 621), named respectively after Bath (the see of Edward I’s chancellor, Robert Burnell), Hastings (after Sir John de Hastings, lord of Abergavenny and seneschal of Gascony), and London (ibid. 8, 131-2, 604, 312). ‘London’ in English Gascony was not to enjoy the success of the later London foundation in 17th-cent. Ireland, however (ibid. 312). 3* For an explanation of how this remote part of Ireland became famous and was visited by pilgrims from all over Europe see M. Haren and Y. de Pontfarcy (eds.), The Medieval Pilgrimage to St Patrick’s Purgatory: Lough Derg and the European Tradition (Enniskillen, 1988). The visitors included such men as Ramon de Perellés, a prominent member of the Aragonese court, in 1397; the Hungarian noblemen George Grissaphan and Laurence of Paszthé in 1353 and 1411; and the Burgundian knight and recent pilgrim to Jerusalem Ghillebert de Lannoy in 1430. 35 Thus there were German, Italian, and Spanish merchant communities in the Flemish city of Bruges; Germans, Italians, and Flemings in London; Germans in the Norwegian port of Bergen; and Italians in Spain and Portugal: see, e.g., Abu-Lughod, Before European Hegemony: The World System A.D.1250-7350 (New York, 1989), 88-— gi, for Bruges; Scammell, World Encompassed, 38-85 (The Hanse), 86-154 (Venice),

155-224 (Genoa); for the Genoese communities, composed both of ‘citizens’ and ‘transients’, which were an important feature of the commercial and financial life of 14th- and 15th-cent. Castile and played a key role in the financing of the famous first voyage of Columbus, see F. Fernandez-Armesto, Columbus, 12-15.

The Medieval Background 23 entered Scotland and Ireland.*° In Spain the long contest between Christians and Muslims entered a new phase with the collapse of the

caliphate of Cordoba in 1031, and by the end of the century the Christian kingdoms of Castile, Aragon, and Navarre shared roughly half the peninsula between them.*’ In central and eastern Europe the conquest and settlement of Slav lands, which had been undertaken by Germans since the days of the emperor Charlemagne in the eighth and early ninth centuries, gained fresh impetus in the twelfth century,”®

when the so-called Baltic crusade against the last outposts of European paganism in Prussia, Lithuania, Estonia, and Finland got under way.°’ Some of these movements, like the Norman conquests in Sicily and England, were rapidly completed.*” Others, such as the

Norman conquests in Wales and Ireland, took place over longer periods.*’ In the case of the Baltic and Slav lands of eastern Europe, the German expansion continued until the late fourteenth century,” while the final conquest of Muslim Spain was not completed until the notable year of 1492 itself. Almost invariably conquest was followed by settlement. Sometimes,

as in Norman Sicily and Anglo-Norman England, it amounted to little more than the creation of a new noble class and the importation of foreign clergy, amounting to a few thousand individuals at most, 36 The literature on the Normans is extensive. See, e.g., D. C. Douglas, The Norman Achievement (London, 1969); R. Frame, The Political Development of the British Isles, roo—1400 (Oxford, 1990); R. R. Davies, Domination and Conquest: The Experience of Ireland, Scotland and Wales, 1100-1300 (Cambridge, 1990). 37 See A. Mackay, Spain in the Middle Ages: From Frontier to Empire, 1000-1500 (London, 1977). 38 See H. C. Krueger, ‘Economic Aspects of Expanding Europe’, in M. Clagett, G. Post, and R. Reynolds (eds.), 7welfih-Century Europe and the Foundations of Modern Society (Madison, Wis., 1961); 59—76; J. Muldoon (ed.), The Expansion of Europe: The

First Phase (Philadelphia, 1977), 103-24; H. Aubin, ‘The Lands East of the Elbe and German Colonisation Eastwards’, in Cambridge Economic History of Europe, 1. 449-86.

39 The most important study of this subject is E. Christiansen, The Northern Crusades: the Baltic and the Catholic Frontier, 1roo—1525 (London, 1980).

40 Southern Italy was seized by the Normans from Byzantine and Lombard control between about the 1040s and 1085; Muslim Sicily was taken between 1061 and 1091; the conquest of England was largely accomplished between 1066 and 1070.

*! The principality of Wales, the last part to be under native Welsh rule, was conquered by Edward I between 1277 and 1283; the remainder of former Welsh territory was under the control of a large number of individual Norman lords. Ireland was never fully conquered by the Normans in the medieval period. The highwater mark of their advance occurred about 1250.

42 The final acceptance of Christianity by Lithuania in 1386 can be taken as symbolizing the end of the Baltic crusade, although conflict between German settlers, notably the Teutonic knights, and the native population continued after this date.

24 Seymour Phillips which transformed political and ecclesiastical society, but did not make much difference to the population generally.*? In other places, such as Scotland, a Norman nobility and clergy were added to those

already existing, without replacing them.** In Wales the Norman lords of the March imported English peasants to work the land they had conquered;* and in Ireland a new colonial nobility composed of men of Norman, Flemish, Welsh, and French descent introduced peasant landholders from England and Wales.*© Extensive colonization occurred in Spain in the wake of the reconquest. Many of the

settlers came to the great underpopulated lands of the kingdom of Castile from other parts of Spain, but some came over the Pyrenees from southern France. The conquest and settlement of the Canary and other Atlantic islands during the fifteenth century were both an extension of events in the Iberian peninsula and an anticipation of what was soon to follow in the Caribbean in the wake of Columbus.*’

Above all, it was in eastern Europe and the Baltic lands that colonization was most extensive. German knights and clergy, together with burgesses and peasants from Germany, France, and the Low Countries, moved eastwards until the fourteenth century, when the dramatic fall in population caused by the Black Death and the lack of *3 See Frame, Political Development; M. Chibnall, Anglo-Norman England, 1066—

166 (Oxford, 1986); M. T. Clanchy, England and its Rulers, 1066-1272: Foreign Lordship and National Identity (London, 1983).

, 4 See Frame, Political Development; R. R. Davies, Domination and Conquest: The Experience of Ireland, Scotland and Wales, troo—1300 (Cambridge, 1990); G. W. S. Barrow, The Anglo-Norman Era in Scottish History (Oxford, 1980). Two publications which contain valuable insights on the attitudes of the conquerors towards the con-

quered in areas like Ireland, Spain, and eastern Europe are A. Simms, “Core and Periphery in Medieval Europe: The Irish Experience in a Wider Context’, in W. J. Smyth and K. Whelan (eds.), Common Ground: Essays on the Historical Geography of Ireland presented to T. Jones Hughes (Cork, 1988), 22—40; R. Bartlett and A. Mackay (eds.), Medieval Frontier Societies (Oxford, 1989).

* See R. Frame, Political Development; Davies, Domination and Conquest; idem Conquest, Coexistence and Change: Wales, 1063-1415 (Oxford, 1987).

4° See T. B. Barry, The Archaeology of Medieval Ireland (London, 1987); B. J. Graham, Anglo-Norman Settlement in Ireland, Irish Settlement Studies, 1, pamphlet published by the Group for the Study of Irish Historic Settlement (Dublin, 1985); Frame, Political Development, Davies, Domination and Conquest; R. Frame, Colonial Ireland, 69-1369 (Dublin, 1981); J. Lydon (ed.), The English in Medieval Ireland (Dublin, 1984), esp. J. R. S. Phillips, “The Anglo-Norman Nobility’, and J. Lydon,

‘The “Middle Nation”’. See also N. Canny, ‘Identity Formation in Ireland: The Emergence of the Anglo-Irish’, in N. Canny and A. Pagden (eds.), Colonial Identity in the Atlantic World, 15300-1800 (Princeton, NJ, 1987), 159-212.

47 See Mackay, Spain in the Middle Ages, esp. Pt. I: ‘The Age of the Frontier, c.1000—13507; R. S. Smith, ‘Spain’, in Cambridge Economic History of Europe, i. 432-48.

The Medieval Background 25 new pagan enemies to conquer brought the movement to an end. None the less, the new society which they formed was to last for centuries.*® In all these cases, conquest and colonization occurred at the expense of the previous inhabitants. While mutual hostility was not invariable, tensions were common, often breaking out in revolts,

such as those of the Welsh against English rule in 1400 and the heathen Prussians against the Teutonic knights in the 1260s, but sometimes taking a more sophisticated form, as in the appeals to the protection of the Church by the Irish in 1317 and the Lithuanians in

1415.” In episodes like these, as well as in the development of techniques of settlement and colonial government, medieval Europe provided many precedents for the migrants who left the continent in search of a better world after 1500.°” 48 See Christiansen, Northern Crusade, Aubin, ‘Lands East of the Elbe’, and J. Rutkowski, ‘Poland, Lithuania and Hungary’, in Cambridge Economic History of Europe,

i. 487-506; Krueger, ‘Economic Aspects of Expanding Europe’. There is also a comprehensive treatment of the subject in C. Higounet, Les Allemands en Europe centrale et orientale au Moyen Age (Paris, 1989).

9 See J. R. S. Phillips, ‘The Irish Remonstrance of 1317: An International Perspective’, /rish Historical Studies, 27 (1990), 112-29; and idem, “The Remonstrance Revisited: England and Ireland in the Early Fourteenth Century’, in T. B. Fraser and K. Jeffrey (eds.), Men, Women and War, Historical Studies, 18 (Dublin, 1993), 13-27; Christiansen, Northern Crusade, 223-32. °° See L. Weckman, ‘The Middle Ages in the Discovery of America’, Speculum, 26 (1951), 130-41; idem, The Medieval Heritage of Mexico (New York, 1992; trans. of Spanish edn., Mexico City, 1984); C. Verlinden, Précédents médiévaux de la colonie en Amérique (Mexico City, 1954); idem, The Beginnings of Modern Colonization (Ithaca, NY,

1970); I. N. Bisson, The Medieval Crown of Aragon: A Short History (Oxford, 1986). See also the very important paper by J. Muldoon, which shows the close analogy which existed between the arguments justifying an English conquest of Ireland in the twelfth

century and the Spanish conquest of the Americas in the sixteenth: ‘Spiritual Conquests Compared: Laudabiliter and the Conquest of the Americas’, in S. B. Bowman and B. E. Cody (eds.), /n lure Veritas: Studies in Canon Law in Memory of Schafer Williams (Cincinnati, 1991), 174-86. The precedents supplied by the medieval world in regard to racial attitudes and stereotypes are examined in my paper ‘Outer World of the European Middle Ages’.

3

The First Transatlantic Transfer: Spanish Migration to the New World, 1493 —I510 NICOLAS SANCHEZ-ALBORNOZ

While sailing back to Spain in December 1492, the flagship Santa Maria ran into the white coral reefs facing the coast of Hispaniola. Lacking space in the two remaining caravels of his fleet, Columbus left behind the crew of the wrecked ship. A few months later, when he returned with 1,500 men, the fort he had built had been razed, and its occupants killed. Ever since, Spaniards have moved unrelentingly across the Atlantic. These abandoned seamen are definitively the forerunners of the first large-scale transoceanic migration. Following their path, millions of Europeans, Africans, and Asians subsequently entered the Western Hemisphere.

Spaniards rushed to scour most of the islands, as well as the mainland that geographers soon identified as a separate continent. The Spanish crown was none the less unable to impose its rule over

all tracts surveyed by its subjects. After a few decades of intense exploration and conquest, the Spanish empire attained the dimensions that it was to keep for the next three centuries. This empire covered Meso-America, the Andean region, and the Caribbean, and included what was then the largest, the richest, and the most populated area of the New World. During the colonial period, Spaniards of different regional backerounds and motivations made their own decisions to leave, but the royal administration regulated their flow. The paperwork generated by the close scrutiny of potential emigrants and actual passengers is

now housed in the Archive of the Indies in Seville. For recent historians, this stockpile provides the most detailed statistical and

Spanish Migration to the New World 27 personal information available for any early modern overseas migration.’

In the pages that follow, the patterns, characteristics, and facts of the Spanish migration to its American colonies will be briefly reported upon in the light of recent literature on the subject. For the sake of brevity, the three centuries will be divided in two periods of equal length, during which different conditions prevailed. The first period covers, roughly speaking, the years 1493-1650; the second

extends from 1650 to the first upheaval towards independence in 1810.

CONQUERORS AND SETTLERS

The Spanish conquerors who subjugated densely populated and elaborate native societies and took control of their lands are rarely perceived as emigrants, although most of them remained permanently

in America. The standard, restrictive meaning of immigrant should thus be expanded to include them. Conquerors were never numerous, but they were followed, in supporting functions, by an assortment of artisans, civil servants, clerics, merchants, and the like. The demand for such people escalated as territories were secured and towns built. Such immigrants were welcomed for their skills, and they helped to broaden the Spanish human base. How many migrants actually left Spain during the first century and a half of colonial rule? According to the latest figures, some 243,000 people moved from Spain to America during the sixteenth century (1506-1600), that is, an average of 2,583 a year. An additional party ' The permits to travel (licencias) and the ship rolls (libros de pasajeros) have yielded so far a list of ¢.25,000 emigrants for the period 1509-77, in which there are several gaps: Catdlogo de pasajeros a Indias durante los siglos XVI, XVI y XVIII (5 vols., Seville,

1940-80). The ongoing project for putting the Archive of the Indies into computerized reading form is expected to accelerate the retrieval of data on emigrants. A critical appraisal of the first 3 vols. published was made by J. Friede, “The “Catalogo de Pasajeros” and Spanish Emigration to America to 1550’, Hispanic American Historical Review, 31 (1951), 331-48. A category of migrants for whom there is no record is that of the stowaways and ship-jumpers; see A. P. Jacobs, ‘Pasajeros y polizones: algunas observaciones sobre la emigracién espafiola a las Indias durante el siglo XVI’, Revista de Indias, 172 (1983), 439-79; idem, “Legal and Illegal Emigration from Seville, 15501650’, in I. Altman and J. Horn (eds.), ‘To Make America’: European Emigration in the Early Modern Period (Berkeley, Calif., 1991), 59-84; A. Flores Moscoso, “Tripulantes de inferior categoria: llovidos y desvalidos. siglo XVIII’, in Andalucia y América en el siglo XVIII (Seville, 1985), i. 251-69.

28 Nicolas Sanchez-Albornoz of 195,000 departed during the first half of the seventeenth century.

The annual average for this second period—3,goo—was clearly higher. It should be kept in mind that sharp fluctuations occurred, and that averages tend to smooth out yearly variations. Altogether, roughly 438,000 Spaniards emigrated to the Indies over a century and a half.” Looking at regional backgrounds, Andalusia provided a third of all Spanish emigrants. Such a high proportion is hardly surprising, since

all the fleets departed from Seville, the capital of this southern kingdom. Next to Andalusia, Extremadura and New Castile together yielded 28 per cent of emigrants. An additional quarter emanated from Old Castile and Leon, the northern interior. Finally, a few came

from the northern seaboard, while a trifling number departed from other places in Spain. Geographically speaking, the origin of emigrants appears highly skewed toward the south-west quarter of the peninsula.* On a closer look, Boyd-Bowman noticed that a third of all emigrants of the 1520-39 period departed from only seventeen 2 M. Morner (‘Spanish Migration to the New World Prior to 1810: A Report on the State of Research’, in F. Chiappelli (ed.), First Images of America (Berkeley, Calif., 1976), 737-82) arrives at these figures by blending data from the Catalogo; P. BoydBowman, Indice geobiografico de cuarenta mil pobladores de América en el siglo XVI i, 2nd

edn. (Mexico, 1985), ii (Mexico, 1968); the list of ships that sailed to the Indies compiled by H. and P. Chaunu, Séville et l’Atlantique (1504-1650) (Paris, 1955-9); and his own estimates of deaths which occurred on board and of sailors who never returned. + Recent studies in Spain have approached migration from the local perspective, in contrast to previous efforts to establish national aggregate levels. This local focus has contributed to the recent interest in identifying and evaluating public and private documents stored in local archives. I. Altman’s Emigrants and Society: Extremadura and Spanish America in the Sixteenth Century (Berkeley, Calif., 1989) is so far the finest example of a book-length study which adopts this approach. See also idem, ‘A New World in the Old: Local Society and Spanish Emigration to the Indies’, in Altman and

Horn (eds.), ‘To Make America’, 30-58. Other useful articles include: L. DiazTrechuelo, ‘Algunas notas sobre cordobeses en Indias en el siglo XVI; E. Rodriguez Vicente, “Trianeros en Indias en el siglo XVI’; F. Canterla and M. Tovar, ‘Autos de bienes de onubenses fallecidos en la empresa de América en el siglo XVI’; all in Andalucia y América en el siglo XVI (Seville, 1983), i. 113-34, 135-46, and 227-48 resp. Also M. Lobo Cabrera, ‘Gran Canaria y la emigracién de Indias en el siglo XVI (1500-1565) a través de los protocolos notariales’, in A. Eiras Roel (ed.), La emigracién espanola a Ultramar, 1492-1913 (Madrid, 1991), 317-23. On the 17th cent., see I. Macias Dominguez, ‘La emigracién de Malaga y Jaén hacia América y Filipinas en el siglo XVII’; J. Ortiz de la Tabla, ‘Rasgos socioeconémicos de los emigrantes a Indias. Indianos de Guadalcanal: sus actividades en América y sus legados a la metrépoli. siglo XVII’; and F. Canterla and M. Tovar, ‘Hombres de Ayamonte en la América del siglo XVII’, all in Andalucia y América en el siglo XVII (Seville, 1985), i. 1-27, 29—62,

and 63-92 resp.

Spanish Migration to the New World 29 locations, and that half of those who left between 1560 and 1579—

that is, during the peak outflow—were from thirty-nine places.* Emigration, therefore, was not a widely shared experience in Spain, but rather a specific endeavour.

Minorities (Jews, Moors, gypsies, and, later, Protestants) and foreigners were banned from moving to the Spanish Indies. Nevertheless, exemptions were occasionally granted to Roman Catholic

Europeans (often merchants) who had acquired citizenship in a Spanish town or to sailors, due to a persistent shortage of crews.

Many of these sailors jumped ship once in the Indies. Other foreigners found ways to circumvent the prohibitions. Many Portuguese went to the Spanish colonies when Portugal and Spain were under the same sovereign, between 1580 and 1640.° America was, on the other hand, wide open to black Africans. They were brought in as slaves in quantities that exceeded those of the Spanish immigrants. Spanish immigrants were, as might be expected, predominantly young and male. The age and sex imbalances never faded, but they became less acute as transatlantic travel became more regular and secure. Family or group migration had increased significantly by the

middle of the sixteenth century. Women and children were then frequently sent for by relatives or travelled in the company of them.

Single women rarely boarded ships alone. Early in the sixteenth century (1493-1539), women accounted for only 6.2 per cent of all emigrants; in 1540-59, the proportion jumped to 16.4 per cent, and at the peak of the sixteenth-century flow, 1560-79, was as high as * See P. Boyd-Bowman, Patterns of Spanish Emigration to the New World (14931580) (Buffalo, 1973); a brief reappraisal of the subject by idem, ‘Patterns of Spanish Emigration to the Indies until 1600’, Hispanic American Historical Review, 56 (1976), 580-604; also idem, ‘Spanish Emigrants to the Indies, 1595-98’, in Chiappelli (ed.), First Images of America, 723-35. > J. M. Morales Alvarez, Los extranjeros con carta de naturaleza de las Indias durante la segunda mitad del siglo XVIII (Caracas, 1960), surveys the legal exclusion of foreigners during the entire colonial period. It should be stated, however, that during the reign of Charles V foreign entrepreneurs were granted rights to colonize. The expedition to

Venezuela of the Welser, wealthy German bankers, nevertheless failed. On how Portuguese infiltrated Spanish America, see L. Hanke, “The Portuguese in Spanish America with special reference to the Villa Imperial de Potosi’, Revista de Historia de América, 51 (1961), 1-48. For recent local research on foreigners see E. Vila Villar, ‘Extranjeros en Cartagena (1593—1630)’, Jahrbuch fiir Geschichte von Staat, Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft Lateinamerikas, 16 (1979), 147-89, and J. Ortiz de la Tabla, ‘Extranjeros en la Audiencia de Quito’, in América y la Espana del siglo XVI (Madrid, 1983), ii.

93-113. On Oriental immigrants see T. Calvo, ‘Japoneses en Guadalajara: “blancos de honor’ durante el seiscientos mexicano’, Revista de Indias, 172 (1983), 533-47.

30 Nicolas Sanchez-Albornoz 28.5 per cent. Thus, despite a dramatic increase in the number of women emigrants, they still did not constitute even a third of the passengers.° Owing to this unequal sex balance, racial intermarriage and race mixture became widespread among Spanish expatriates.

The upper and lower echelons of Spanish society rarely show up among the immigrants. The nobility generally shunned the Indies, although a few from among their ranks obtained high commissions there at a late date. None of them entertained thoughts of staying beyond their term, although some died in office. At the other extreme, peasants had little money to defray high transportation costs.’ Emigrants from the middle strata formed a disparate group. Their

ranks ranged from convicts or rascals drafted from the Sevillian slums to nobles of the low rural echelons. Most of them, however,

came from the middle strata of the towns. They constituted an ambitious group eagerly looking for social promotion. The newly discovered lands promised them ample reward for their zeal. Criados (servants) of powerful fellow countrymen are found among the lower

ranks of these middle segments. Unlike their counterparts, the indentured servants of the British and French colonies, criados went overseas in the retinue of their masters. They usually served in their masters’ households for a short interval after they reached America,

but soon thereafter made their own way. They seldom became involved with agricultural work, however, except as overseers.® Pro-

fessionals made up a distinct coterie, and enjoyed a higher social status than the criados. Those with an academic training became predominant among the expatriates in the New World, because university degrees were required for most administrative or ecclesiastical positions.” © Boyd-Bowman, Patterns of Spanish Emigration; M. A. Hernandez Bermejo et al., ‘El contexto familiar de la emigracién extremefia a Indias en el siglo XVI’, in Eiras Roel (ed.), La emigracién espanola, 245-56; L. Diaz-Trechuelo, ‘La emigracién familiar andaluza a América en el siglo XVII’, also in Eiras Roel (ed.), La emigracion espanola, 189-97. ” On costs see J. L. Martinez, Pasajeros de Indias. Viajes transdtlanticos en el siglo XVI (Madrid, 1983), ch. 3, and Jacobs, ‘Pasajeros y polizones’; also Altman, Emigrants and Society, esp. 69-72; G. Duran Lépez, ‘Pasajes a Indias a principios del siglo XVIII. Precios y condiciones’, in Eiras Roel (ed.), La emigracién espanola, 199-214. 8 Altman, Emigrants and Society, 69-72, has recently stressed the high proportion of criados among the emigrants who left Caceres and Trujillo during the second part of the 16th cent.

? See e.g., J. A. Olleros Pina, ‘La Carrera en Indias de los colegiales de Maese Rodrigo de Sevilla en el siglo XVII’, in Andalucia y América en el siglo XVII (Seville,

Spanish Migration to the New World 31 No single destination prevailed for the entire sixteenth century. Migrants tended to be selective in targeting their final perch. Up to 1520, the Caribbean islands were, for obvious reasons, the only destination for a limited flow of emigrants, but as New Spain and

Peru were conquered, large numbers of migrants bypassed the islands and went directly to the continent. At first, it was New Spain that attracted most of them, but from the mid-sixteenth century on, as the rich silver mines of the Andes were discovered, Peru became the destination for most newcomers.” The American continent did not then offer the only opportunity for Spaniards to emigrate. In fact, the Indies had earnestly to compete with several closer locations in Europe. During the sixteenth century, many Spaniards were stationed in Italy or the Netherlands, or went there on business. In making their choice, potential emigrants made informed decisions, therefore. Recent local studies are beginning to

show how kinship and personal links played an important role in helping people to arrive at decisions. Those thinking of leaving rarely

responded to vague decoys, but rather to the concrete experiences conveyed to them by fellow countrymen who had previously departed.'' In fact, those travelling alone were very few from midcentury onwards; most joined the retinues of powerful people or travelled in family groups (including spouses, children, parents, or a variety of relatives). Spanish colonization was primarily an urban undertaking. Coming,

as most did, from urban backgrounds, Spaniards preferred to take up residence in towns. They chose to build them in densely inhabited areas, unlike other Europeans who established communities in the

Western Hemisphere. In such neighbourhoods American Indians were available for menial work, and also supplied the settlers with the consumer goods which were demanded of them in the form of native tribute. The services and contributions of the indigenous population

Migration’. , 1985), i. 119-38. On Spanish missionaries see P. Borges Moran, E/ envio de mistoneros a América en la época espanola (Salamanca, 1977).

10 See Boyd-Bowman, Patterns of Spanish Emigration, and Morner, ‘Spanish

1! Letters to relatives or associates that may have shaped the image of the Indies in Spain and may occasionally have triggered the decision to emigrate are published in F. del Paso y Troncoso (ed.), Epistolario de Nueva Espana (16 vols., Mexico, 1939-47); J. Lockhart and E. Otte (eds.), Letters and People of the Spanish Indies: Sixteenth Century (Cambridge, 1976); and E. Otte (ed.), Cartas privadas de emigrantes a Indias, 15401616 (Mexico, 1993).

32 Nicolas Sanchez-Albornoz made life easier for the white settlers, and made it possible for the latter to concentrate on business or administrative matters. We know from the official records that 121 towns had already been established

throughout Spanish America by 1574, and twice that number was established in a frenzy of city building between then and 1628, by which time 331 cities had been founded.'* A concomitant increase in

the white population of these cities was the result principally of a steady inflow of Europeans to Spanish America.

COLONISTS, SOLDIERS, AND MERCHANTS

By the middle of the seventeenth century, newcomers could no longer assume that they would control the labour of American Indians or get easy possession of large tracts of land or attain rapid economic and social advancement. Rather, the emergence of a stratified white

Creole society in the New World created a situation in which immigrants were expected to perform particular functions. Newcomers

continued to be welcome, but they now had to struggle to gain admission even to the lower rungs of white society. Once there, however, they could expect to move smoothly upwards to the higher rungs. Spaniards were frequently admitted to fill vacancies in the competitive trades, and contenders of metropolitan origin actually had an edge over Creoles for posts in the civil service. Considered

geographically, the best opportunities for immigrants lay on the Atlantic seaboard, which was an area largely neglected at the outset

of European settlement, but which began to take off during the eighteenth century. How many immigrants entered Spanish America during the second phase of immigration, that is, from 1650 to 1800? This is a difficult question to answer, because record keeping by the Spanish administration declined in accuracy, particularly during the late seventeenth

century. This was so both because convoys were discontinued and because several Spanish ports, not only Seville, were open to direct trade with the New World. The resulting scattered, less reliable sources have deterred scholars from even venturing a guess. It is a '2 J. E. Hardoy and C. Aranovich, ‘Urbanizacién en América hispanica entre 1580 y 1630’, Boletin del Centro de Investigaciones Histéricas y Estéticas (Caracas), 11 (1969), g—8g, and ‘Urban Scales and Functions in Spanish America toward the Year 1600: First Conclusions’, Latin American Research Review, 5/3, 57-110.

Spanish Migration to the New World 33 fair conjecture, none the less, that fewer immigrants (perhaps as few

as half) arrived in the New World during this second phase than during the first period of emigration; this would mean, roughly speaking, a quarter of a million people. As conditions for success in the New World changed, so too did the kinds of people who were attracted there as immigrants. Fewer bureaucrats were required during the late seventeenth and eighteenth

centuries, because locally trained Creoles were then, for the first time, permitted to take up positions in the lower ranks of the administration.'’ Prospects for immigrants recovered, however, when, late

in the eighteenth century, the reforms introduced by the Bourbons aimed at reinvigorating the waning administration, favoured the appointment of officials from the metropolis. Many of these newly appointed officials were military men who had received technical training in the military academies, who could therefore be expected to institute managerial reforms in the colonial administration. Military officers also made their way to the New World in command of troops, because regiments were required to prevent the harassment

or occupation of the colonies by foreign powers. Recent estimates suggest that 60,000 soldiers were shipped overseas from Spain to the

colonies during the period 1739-98, and this figure makes no allowance either for previous and later dispatches or for the families

and staff of the married men enlisted.'* Relatively few soldiers returned home, either because they died in service or because they deserted or because they chose not to renew their contracts when discharged. Soldiers thus became an important source of new settlers,

and, unlike what happened during the first wave of migration, the shipping costs of these emigrants were borne by the royal treasury. Other emigrants were also financed at public expense. This was so because the Spanish government became alarmed that extensive tracts of its empire which were virtually unpopulated would fall prey

to rival European powers. The Caribbean islands had remained '3 Similarly, Spanish-born novices admitted to the Franciscan friary of Mexico City faded out during the 18th cent.: E. Malvido, ‘Migration Patterns of the Novices of the

Order of San Francisco in Mexico City, 1649-1749’, in D. J. Robinson (ed.), Migration in Colonial Spanish America (Cambridge, 1990), 182—92. Up to the 18th cent. a persistent ‘traditional’ pattern of origins continued to prevail, seven out of ten novices coming from Andalusia or Castille. '4 J. Marchena, Oficiales y soldados en el ejército de América (Seville, 1983). For the previous period, see idem, ‘Las levas de soldados a Indias en la Baja Andalucia. Siglo XVII, in Andalucta y América en el siglo XVII (Seville, 1985), i. 93-117.

34 Nicolas Sanchez-Albornoz underpopulated for centuries, and some of them, such as Santo Domingo and Jamaica, had easily fallen into the hands of the British,

the French, and the Dutch a century earlier. The government was now afraid that the same would happen to the mainland, where, from the estuary of the Rio de la Plata south to Tierra del Fuego, the sea-

coast was exposed to similar encroachments. It also decided that Texas and other inland territories to the north should be placed under closer control of New Spain and that the lands newly acquired from France (Louisiana) should have their populations balanced by

Spanish settlers. For all these reasons, the Spanish government sponsored emigration to the New World, while it also accepted that colonization would help to relieve population pressure in such areas of the metropolis as the Canary Islands and Galicia. Peasants were

transported in family groups. Upon their arrival, local authorities granted them land, and provided them with shelter, seeds, and livestock. They were then expected to foster agriculture. During the eighteenth century, thousands of Canary Islanders, the

largest group of colonists, were brought to Cuba, Santo Domingo (primarily to places bordering French Saint-Domingue), Texas (San Antonio), Florida (S. Augustine), and Louisiana (Valenzuela), as well

as to Venezuela and Uruguay (Montevideo). Each ship leaving the Canary Islands was supposed to carry five families for each 100 tons of merchandise transported, a goal seldom achieved.!° People from Malaga, on the other hand, settled in Galveston (Texas), and those from Leon went to Carmen de Patagones (Argentina).'© These are

only a few examples of an ambitious scheme whose full range remains to be studied. Some of the agricultural colonies, such as Montevideo, succeeded; others, such as San Julian in Patagonia, failed. When they stumbled, the inhabitants looked for opportunity elsewhere, but seldom returned home. Among those who came on their own—that is, who were not sent

on duty or as colonists—the majority set foot in the New World looking for business. They were not really fully-fledged merchants, but mostly younger partners or even adolescents sent as apprentices to relatives or friends. These adolescents helped in the retail shops; 15 J. J. Parsons, ‘The Migration of Canary Islanders to the Americas: An Unbroken Current since Columbus’, 7he Americas, 39 (1983), 447-81; M. Farifia Gonzalez, ‘La emigraci6én canaria a Indias, 1680-1717’, in Eiras Roel (ed.), La emigracién espanola,

ec P. Paesa, ‘Aspectos en la poblaciédn de las costas patagénicas hacia 1779’, Investigaciones y ensayos (Buenos Aires), 10 (1971), 313-49; A. Acosta, La poblacion de Luistana espanola (1763-1803) (Madrid, 1979).

Spanish Migration to the New World 35 the clever and reliable ones were often promoted to become clerks or even partners. A few of them saved enough money to open their own shops, or got control over businesses through inheritance from their relatives or through marriage. In fact, merchants quite often chose to marry their daughters to these motivated young Spanish immigrants

who were prepared to perpetuate their trade, while their own sons pursued prestigious professional careers. Their metropolitan birth gave them an aura of prestige as marriage partners. The large commercial hubs of Mexico and Buenos Aires were filled in this way by immigrants from the northern seaboard (Santander, the Basque Country, and Old Castile); fewer came then from Andalusia, despite the fact that Cadiz remained the official and major port of trade with the Indies." By the end of the eighteenth century, another group entered the arena. Ships registered in Catalonia and the Balearic Islands began to

carry goods from those regions to Caribbean ports. Their masters tended to leave behind partners to retail the merchandise. Migrants from the eastern littoral of the peninsula thus entered the Indies in significant numbers for the first time.'® In addition, foreigners were more liberally admitted during the eighteenth century. Catholic Irish,

whose foreign careers are traced in Chapter 6, as well as French Catholics, were actually recruited as colonists, and Trinidad, for example, was assigned a significant number of such settlers.!” In sum, patterns shifted radically from the first to the second half '7 S. M. Socolow, The Merchants of Buenos Aires, 1778-1810: Family and Commerce (Cambridge, 1978); D. A. Brading, Miners and Merchants in Bourbon Mexico, 1763-

1810 (Cambridge, 1971). For the Basque top merchants of Peru see G. Lohmann Villena, ‘Los comerciantes vascos en el Virreinato peruano’, in R. Escobedo et al. (eds.), Los vascos y América (Bilbao, 1989), 53-106. On the social mobility of immigrants see M. Vargas-Lobsinger, ‘El ascenso social y econdmico de los immigrantes espafioles: el caso de Francisco de Valdivieso (1683-1743), Historia mexicana, 140 (1986), 601-19. On capital sent back to the metropolis see C. A. Gonzalez Sanchez, Repatriacion de capitales del virreinato del Peri en el siglo XVI (Madrid, 1991).

'8 J. M. Delgado Ribas, ‘La emigracién espafiola durante las décadas del comercio libre (1765-1820): el ejemplo catalan’, Siglo XIX. Revista de Historia (Monterrey), 7 (1989), 315-39; C. Manera, Comerg i capital mercantil a Mallorca, 1720-1800 (Palma de Mallorca, 1988). The unusual case of Spanish emigrants settled by British authorities is described by D. Ramos, ‘La poblacién de Menorca trasladada por los ingleses a Florida en la época de la dominacién britanica’, Revista de Historia de América, 87

(1979), 65-77. | | .

19 C, F. Nunn, Foreign Immigrants in Early Bourbon Mexico, 1700-1760 (Cambridge,

1979); L. A. Newson, ‘Immigrantes extranjeros en la América espafiola: el experimento colonizador de la isla de Trinidad’, Revista de Historia de América, 82 (1979),

79-103; J. W. Cooney, ‘Foreigners in the Intendencia of Paraguay’, Americas, 39 (1983), 333-57.

36 Nicolas Sanchez-Albornoz of the colonial period. The predominance of settlers who had their origin in the south-west quarter of the peninsula gave way to people coming from the north and east, as well as from the islands (both the Canary and the Balearic Islands). The destinations of the emiigrants to the New World also changed over time. During the later phase of settlement it was the Atlantic seaboard, rather than the highlands, which was the principal host region. Differences also emerged in relation to the personnel who left Spain for the New World. During the second phase of settlement it was merchants, civil

servants, colonists, and soldiers who emigrated, rather than conquerors and their associates, who made up the bulk of the emigrants in the original exodus. The features that did not change significantly

were those of age and sex: single young men continued to be in a distinct majority, but less decisively so with the passage of years.

Spanish America received roughly three-quarters of a million emi-

grants from the metropolis over three centuries of colonial rule. Given the size of the metropolitan population and the shipping con-

straints of the time, this transfer seems quite a large one. Most emigrants never returned home, which meant that the European stock in the New World was being constantly replenished. Settlers of

European origin none the less continued to be outnumbered by natives and Africans, and the highly skewed sex and age distribution of emigrants to Spanish America favoured the mixing of European migrants with other ethnic groups.

This great emigration was mostly a spontaneous movement. Of those who made the journey to Spanish America, only the troops and

colonists who went in the eighteenth century were sent at royal command and public expense. These subsidized migrants were few in number compared with the hundreds of thousands who travelled

at their own risk during the course of three centuries. The overwhelming majority made their own decisions, and paid for their own passages or found a relative or friend to do so.

PART II

Migration from the Three Kingdoms: England, Scotland, and Ireland

*

»

‘

4 English Migration into and across the Atlantic during the Seventeenth and Eighteenth Centuries NICHOLAS CANNY

The phenomenon of English migration into and across the Atlantic during the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries has only recently come to be taken seriously as a subject worthy of historical investigation. The neglect of such an obvious subject is accounted for by a variety of factors. Those historians whose primary interest is English politics and society have traditionally displayed scant interest in people who have abandoned England to settle overseas, except sometimes to

explain their departure. The other principal body of scholars who might have been expected to address the subject in its entirety were those concerned with the history of English settler society abroad. Until recently, however, such scholars have tended to concentrate upon one particular area of settlement, and have been interested in English migration only to the extent that it influenced social devel-

opments in that particular area. Even more problematic is the fact that, until recent years, the overwhelming majority of scholars of Colonial British America have limited their attention either to societies on mainland North America which eventually became part of the United States or to colonies that continued to be part of the British Empire after the disruption of 1776. And to further complicate matters, historians with but a slight interest in migration have tended to lump together English, Scottish, and Irish settlers under the generic term ‘British’.’ Apart altogether from the bias or lack of interest of historians, the ' N. Canny, ‘The British Atlantic World: Working towards a Definition’, Historical

Journal, 33 (1990), 479-97. The popularization of the concept of Colonial British America owes much to J. P. Greene and J. R. Pole (eds.), Colonial British America: Essays in the New History of the Early Modern Era (Baltimore, 1984).

40 Nicholas Canny subject of migration has been hindered by the scarcity of sources that might shed light on it and by the lack of competence or disinclination

of historians to study such sources as do exist. Instead of analysis and quantification, we have had listings of the various groups of free migrants who moved to various destinations on mainland North America, linked to descriptions of the societies in which they had their origin. Some older books of this kind, such as Marcus Lee Hansen’s Lhe Atlantic Migration, 1607-1860, published in 1951, had the virtue of describing the European background of the various

groups of migrants, but the shortcoming of being based on the assumption that movement across the Atlantic was the only logical course open to people in the Old World for whom economic opportunity was shrinking. Such studies, therefore, had little to say about internal migration within European societies; nor did they recognize that emigration to the New World was but one of several moves open to Europeans in search of fresh opportunity during the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries.” Scholars in yet another tradition were interested in the European background of migrants for the clues it provided to the various distinct cultural forms which, they believed, had existed and endured in the several regions settled by Europeans during the colonial phase of American history. This tradition, which can be associated with scholars such as Thomas Jefferson Wertenbaker on Virginia and Perry Miller on New England, reached its apogee with David Hackett Fischer’s Albion’s Seed, published in 198g. Although more sophisticated than the earlier works, Fischer’s book proceeds from the same assumption: namely, that Colonial

British America was comprised of a number of distinct cultural segments each of which owed its distinctiveness principally to the European regional background of the dominant settler group.” While the general study of English migration over time has been 2M. L. Hansen, The Atlantic Migration, 1607-1860: A History of the Continuing Settlement of the United States (Cambridge, Mass., 1951). For the more recent approach see the essays in this book and A. Fogelman, “The Peopling of Early America: Two Studies by Bernard Bailyn’, Comparative Studies in Society and History, 31 (1989),

605-14, esp. 607, in which Fogelman makes the point that while go,o00 Germans emigrated to North America during 1683-1775, over 700,000 German-speaking Rhinelanders were involved in migrations within Europe. 3 T. J. Wertenbaker, Patrician and Plebeian in Virginia, or the Origin and Development of the Social Classes of the Old Dominion (Charlottesville, Va., 1910); P. Miller, The New England Mind: The Seventeenth Century (Cambridge, Mass., 1939); idem, The New England Mind: From Colony to Province (Cambridge, Mass., 1952); D. H. Fischer, Albion’s Seed: Four British Folkways in America (Oxford, 1989).

English Migration 41 sadly neglected, some notable work on particular migrations has been accomplished, some of it even before the late 1960s when interest in the subject quickened. Pride of place among early scholars must go to

Norman C. P. Tyack, whose unpublished 1951 thesis on English migration to New England has been drawn upon by a great number of scholars.* Before Tyack, it was already assumed that this particular migration was confined to the single decade of the 1630s, and that it involved between 12,000 and 20,000 individuals. It was also widely presumed, and frequently stated, that it was essentially a movement

of family groups who had previously enjoyed secure positions in England but uprooted themselves for religious reasons. Tyack challenged those assumptions by pointing to economic and social, as well as religious, explanations for the great migration. His conclusions, which amounted to disputing the essentially Puritan character of the emigration, have been slowly absorbed into the mainstream literature

on New England and would now seem to be challenged only by Virginia Dejohn Anderson.” It is generally accepted that a high percentage of the migrants to New England were urban artisans, and some recent authors, such as David Cressy, have suggested that the economic rather than the spiritual motive was the prime, or even the sole, one in determining settlement in particular communities within

New England. A total migration of 21,000 people, concentrated within a twelve-year time span has now also won general acceptance,

as has the case for a continuing trickle of outward and return migration after the 1640s. Allowance is now made for a higher proportion of men than was previously suggested in the literature, and those

young single men among them are seen to have been primarily concerned with bettering their material rather than their spiritual lives. The picture that has emerged, after some decades of intensive study, is of a migration which was more diverse in composition than was previously thought, but still family-based. More important is * N.C. P. Tyack, ‘Migration from East Anglia to New England before 1660’ (Univ. of London Ph.D. thesis, 1951). > The historiography is summarized in D. Cressy, Coming Over: Migration and Communication between England and New England in the Seventeenth Century (Cambridge,

1987); and D. G. Allen, /n English Ways: The Movement of Societies and the Transferal of English Local Law and Custom to Massachusetts Bay in the Seventeenth Century (Chapel Hill, NC, 1981), esp.163-—204. For a restatement of the traditional position see V. D. Anderson, New England’s Generation: The Great Migration and the Formation of Society

and Culture in the Seventeenth Century (Cambridge, 1991). I wish to thank Peter Mancall for alerting me to the Anderson book.

42 Nicholas Canny the acceptance that this was a relatively minor movement of people when compared with the outflow of people from England to other destinations in and across the Atlantic during the seventeenth and the eighteenth centuries.°

The pioneering work of Norman Tyack on New England was matched by that of Abbot Emerson Smith and Mildred Campbell on white emigration to North American destinations other than New England. The broad subject investigated by Smith is suggested by his title: Colonists in Bondage: White Servitude and Convict Labor in America, 1607-1776. Published in 1947, this book, like all works of

its generation, is marred by Smith’s preference for literary over quantitative sources and by his tendency to advance broad generalizations on the basis of impressions gained from the literary sources

he consulted. However, while impressionistic, the book marked a sharp departure from previous scholarship, first, in devoting attention

to white migration to the British West Indies as well as to the colonies on mainland North America, and second, in drawing attention, in the appendices, to the known surviving sources that seemed

valid for compiling statistical data on free migration to Colonial British America. These were servant or emigration lists compiled in different English ports for several series of years during the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, a list of transported convicts com-

piled for London and the Home Circuit for the years 1718-72, records of immigrants and land grants compiled in several American colonies during the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, and census lists drawn up in some colonies at different intervals. On the basis of a superficial examination of this data, Smith drew some conclusions

about the trend and scale of servant migration during the two centuries, and identified the years just before and immediately after the Restoration of 1660 and the period 1770-75 as the two phases of greatest migration. Even this pinpointing was based on impression rather than a close analysis of data, and he explained his failure to move beyond conjecture to establish precise figures by his inability to

disentangle English from Irish, German, and Scottish settlers who became more numerous in the eighteenth century. ’ © Cressy, Coming Over, S. Foster and T. H. Breen, ‘Moving to the New World: The Character of Early Massachussetts Immigration’, Wiliam & Mary Quarterly, 3rd ser., 30 (1973), 189—222; S. Innes, Labor in a New Land: Economy and Society in SeventeenthCentury Springfield (Princeton, NJ, 1983); C. L. Heyrman, Commerce and Culture: The Maritime Communities of Colonial Massachussetts, 1690-1750 (New York, 1984). ’ A. E. Smith, Colonists in Bondage: White Servitude and Convict Labor in America,

1607-1776 (Chapel Hill, NC, 1947; paperback edn., New York, 1971).

English Migration 43 The long-term importance of Colonists in Bondage was therefore that it identified the several kinds of quantitative sources relating to free migration that a more statistically minded future generation of scholars would use to arrive at a more precise understanding of the

settlement of Europeans in Colonial British America. Its immediate , impact, however, derived from Smith’s judgemental depiction of the vast majority of indentured servants from England as ‘shiftless, hopeless, ruined individuals, raked up from the lower reaches of English society by emigrant agents, kidnappers, and officers of the law’.® This and similar assertions provoked Mildred Campbell to scrutinize two of the sources cited by Smith, and her analysis of two seventeenthcentury emigration lists led her to the conclusion that English emi-

grants were, for the most part, young, highly skilled, ‘middling people’, as opposed to the rabble depicted by Smith.” More recent historians, notably David Galenson and David Souden, have challenged Campbell’s analytic method, and have concluded, on the basis of their own examination of the same emigrant lists, that English emigrants of the seventeenth century were younger than Mildred Campbell believed and came from a position ‘towards the bottom of the middle ranks’ of the English social order. Even with this modification, Mildred Campbell would appear to have won her argument

with Abbot E. Smith, in that it is now accepted that such lowly emigrants were economically useful to the host societies that absorbed them.!° The quality of the exchanges between Mildred Campbell and her younger adversaries did much to arouse interest in the wider question of emigration during the colonial period; the debate also enhanced the reputation of emigrant lists as sources for the study of migration

from England to Colonial British America. One of the disputants, David Galenson, identified himself as a disciple of Abbot E. Smith, 8 Ibid. 307-37, 299-300. ” M. Campbell, ‘Social Origins of Some Early Americans’, in J. M. Smith (ed.), Seventeenth-Century America: Essays in Colonial History (Chapel Hill, NC, 1959; paperback edn., New York, 1972), 63-89. Besides A. E. Smith’s conclusions, Campbell, set out to refute also those of R. B. Morris, Government and Labor in Early America (New York, 1936).

'0 Campbell, ‘Social Origins’, esp. 71-9, and for the ensuing debate: D. Galenson, ‘“Middling People” or “Common Sort”?: The Social Origins of some Early Americans Re-examined’, William & Mary Quarterly, 3rd ser., 35 (1978), 499-524; M. Campbell, ‘Response’, William & Mary Quarterly, 3rd ser., 35 (1978), 524-40; Galenson, ‘Reply’,

William & Mary Quarterly, 3rd ser., 36 (1979), 277-86; D. Souden, ‘ “Rogues, Whores and Vagabonds”? Indentured Servant Emigrants to North America and the Case of Mid-Seventeenth-Century Bristol’, Social History, 30 (1978), 23-41.

44 Nicholas Canny and his first book White Servitude in Colonial America followed Smith’s example in taking emigrant lists as its basic sources of information. In

this book Galenson delineated the flow of one category of emigrants,

indentured servants, from England to the British Atlantic colonies over the entire sweep of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, and to this end he made use of six lists of emigrants to transatlantic destinations who embarked from the ports of Bristol, London, and Liverpool during several series of years between September 1654 and

March 1776." The portrait of the typical indentured servant drawn by Galenson | from his analysis of the details relating to 20,657 emigrants from these six registers was not all that different from that which he and David Souden had agreed upon, on the authority of a much smaller database, during their debate with Mildred Campbell. The typical English migrating servant was young, of relatively low social status, with but modest skills. More significantly, Galenson’s analysis of his

larger database revealed change over time in the character of the migration flow of indentured servants. For the seventeenth century, Galenson calculated that 23.3 per cent of migrating servants were

women, whereas in the eighteenth century only 9.81 per cent of indentured servants were women.’? As regards the skills of the emigrants, Galenson again discovered variation, both over time and in relation to destination. Generally speaking, he identified rising skill

levels over time, interrupted only by a dip in the early eighteenth century. He also discovered that, at least from the 1680s, those who headed for the Caribbean were older and more skilled than migrants

to the mainland colonies. This he attributed to the fact that in the West Indies menial work was then being done by black slaves; but he found that, with the passage of time, slaves were trained to engage in

skilled occupations, with a resulting tapering off of white servant migration to the Caribbean; first affecting Barbados, then Nevis, and finally Jamaica. The closing off, in about 1770, of the West Indies as

a destination for white servants meant that the Chesapeake area became the most usual destination for servant migrants, with Pennsylvania becoming increasingly important.'* Finally, Galenson con'l PD. Galenson, White Servitude in Colonial America: An Economic Analysis (Cambridge, 1981).

'2 Tbid., Appendix A: ‘The Servant Registrations’, 183-6, and 16-17, 23-33,

34-64, and 78. ,

'S Ibid. 51-64, 81-96.

English Migration 45 cluded from the price paid for servants and the terms of indenture agreed upon, that the servants were themselves active partners in negotiating both their destinations and terms of service. The variables

influencing the price paid for servants were the overall supply of servants, their range of skills, their sex, the time of the year when they offered themselves for embarkation, and the level of prosperity obtaining in their chosen destinations.'* Galenson’s investigations revealed more about the character of English servant migration than anything published previously, and his book also drew attention to trends that had previously escaped notice.

He made it clear, however, that he was not addressing the entire picture of migration, first, because he studied only those English emigrants who completed contracts of indenture, and second, because

he had looked only to English, as opposed to Irish, Scottish, and continental, sources regarding emigrants to Colonial British America.

Because this chapter is devoted specifically to English overseas migration during the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, the second

deficiency is of no great concern here. The first shortcoming has recently been remedied, at least for the Chesapeake and the seventeenth century, by James Horn in his consideration of what he calls free, as opposed to indentured servant, emigration from England. Horn is of the opinion that about 20 per cent of those who emigrated to the Chesapeake during the course of the seventeenth century went as free migrants, paying their own way and with sufficient cash in hand to establish themselves as planters or traders in the colonies. His analysis of letters and wills points to the fact that free migrants, like indentured servants, came from southern and central England and were predominantly single men. They were different from the

servants, however, in being slightly older (in their middle to late twenties rather than late teens and early twenties) and equipped with a wider range of skills and family contacts. They also migrated in the knowledge that they could always return home if they wished, and Horn shows how they cultivated and sustained an English character to their settlements in the Chesapeake, both through correspondence with their contacts in England and their own regular passages across the Atlantic.!° '4 Ibid. 97-113, esp. 110-12. '> J. Horn, ‘“To Parts Beyond the Seas”: Free Emigration to the Chesapeake in the Seventeenth Century’, in I. Altman and J. Horn (eds.), ‘To Make America’: European Emigration in the Early Modern Period (Berkeley, Calif., 1991), 85-130.

46 Nicholas Canny While the work of David Galenson, and more recently that of James Horn, has increased our understanding of the kinds of English people who made careers for themselves in various colonies during the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, it did not satisfy people’s curiosity about the number of English people who emigrated. His-

torians were made all the more aware of their ignorance in this matter by the appearance in 1969 of The Atlantic Slave Trade: A Census by Philip Curtin. This book made it clear to historians that a

reasonably full understanding of the economy and society of the British Atlantic world would be attained only if they could match Curtin’s precise information on African slave immigration in the colonies with some reasonable approximations regarding the scale and character of white immigration, and only if they could supplement both sets of figures with an understanding of mortality rates in the several areas of setthkement. This could be achieved, it was believed, if due account were taken of population estimates compiled

within the colonies together with lists and registers of those emigrating from various European ports for colonial destinations. ‘This

conviction hastened the search for quantifiable data, and when such sources had been identified by J. H. Cassedy, the analysis of the figures compiled therefrom became a major preoccupation of historians.'°

The first to take advantage of the newly identified sources was Robert Wells in The Population of the British Colonies in America before

1776. This study was more reliable statistically than anything previously published on the subject, in that its authority rested on the analysis of ‘124 censuses covering 21 American colonies between _ 1623 and 1775’. These censuses enabled Wells to estimate the gross population of several regions of settlement at different times, and to show the wide diversity of demographic and familial experiences that obtained within the British Atlantic world. While using the censuses to reconstitute the total population of different colonies at particular moments, Wells maintained that they shed little light on the scale of emigration. This was so, he stated, because eighteenth-century compilers of population estimates were scarcely interested in the origins '6 P. D. Curtin, The Atlantic Slave Trade: A Census (Madison, Wis., 1969); J. H. Cassedy, Demography in Early America: Beginnings of the Statistical Mind, 1600-1800

(Cambridge, Mass., 1969). Another influential work was J. Potter, “The Growth of Population in America, 1700—1860’, in D. V. Glass and D. E. C. Eversley (eds.), Population in History: Essays in Historical Demography (London, 1965), 631-88.

English Migration 47 of the people they counted, and relatively few of the censuses distinguished either between immigrants and native born or between those who were of English or of other nationality. Wells also recognized further problems in using census estimates of population to establish the scale of emigration required to build up this population, the principal ones being that origin, age, and sex ratio of emigrants varied considerably over time and that mortality rates within the different colonies had also varied dramatically." Not all historians were as pessimistic as Robert Wells, and some remained convinced that the census data on the various colonies could be induced to reveal its secrets on emigration. The optimists can be broken down into two categories: those who believe that it is possible to disentangle the various ethnic elements that made up the colonial populations through an analysis of the surnames that appeared on the census returns and those who are convinced that it is possible to arrive at an understanding of the vital statistics of birth, marriage, and death for at least some of the colonies by linking close archival study with sophisticated numerical analysis.

The first school has concentrated its attention on the first United States census of 1790, and its analysis of the surnames on this census has shed considerable light on the ethnic composition of the free population in the thirteen colonies that became the United States. This analysis is especially valuable for indicating the possible scale of emigration of peoples such as Germans, whose ethnic origin is immediately identifiable from their surnames and whose movement to

the thirteen colonies took place close to the census date of 1790. Scholars engaged on this endeavour have run into controversy, however, in their efforts to distinguish between Scottish, Irish, and Scots-

Irish surnames; and the analysis is unable to provide even a rough estimate of the scale of English migration, because this migration persisted over the entire colonial period, and the disease environments encountered during the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries varied enormously.!° "7 R. V. Wells, The Population of the British Colonies in America before 1776: A Survey

of Census Data (Princeton, NJ, 1975), esp. 5, 267-8, 277. '8 Wells, Population of British Colonies, 5, 267-8, 277-8; H. F. Barker and M. L. Hansen, ‘Report of the Committee on Linguistic and National Stocks in the Population of the United States’, in American Historical Association, Annual Report for the Year 1931 (Washington, DC, 1932), i. 107-441; F. McDonald and E. S. McDonald, “The Ethnic Origins of the American People, 1790’, William & Mary Quarterly, 3rd ser., 37 (1980), 179-99; T. L. Purvis, “The European Ancestry of the United States

48 Nicholas Canny The endeavours of the second school of historians have therefore been the more valuable for the understanding of English emigration to the Americas. Within this category of historians, those whose work has earned most respect are those who, both individually and collectively, have attempted to reconstitute the experience of living in the

Chesapeake from the moment of first English settlement there in 1607. to the mid-point of the eighteenth century. Their research has shown that the earlier half of this period was a time of extraordinarily high mortality for European settlers in the Chesapeake, and they have demonstrated that an English community was kept in being there

only through a continuous inflow of settlers. For the eighteenth century, the Chesapeake historians have arrived at the conclusion that the settler population in the Chesapeake was increasingly able

to sustain itself through natural growth, and that migration from England to the agrarian economy of the Chesapeake tapered off correspondingly.!? In their effort to understand the migration phenomenon, these historians have first had to determine the principal cause of high immigrant mortality, which is now accepted as malaria, and then the means by which this lethal disease was overcome. After a protracted debate, it has become accepted that the high mortality rates were overcome at the point where more than half the settler community were people born in the Chesapeake who had developed a natural immunity to malaria while enduring the hazards of infancy. Having established the cause and trend of mortality rates in the Chesapeake, historians of that area have moved to calculate the birth and mortality rates that obtained over the course of time. The

critical information has been obtained from a close study of the Population, 1790’, William & Mary Quarterly, 3rd ser., 41 (1984), 85-101; D. H. Akenson, ‘Why the Accepted Estimates of the Ethnicity of the American People, 1790,

are Unacceptable’, William & Mary Quarterly, 41 (1984), 102-19; further contributions by these authors to ‘The Population of the United States, 1790: A Symposium’, William & Mary Quarterly, 3rd ser., 41 (1984), 119-35; A. Fogelman, ‘Migration to the Thirteen British North American Colonies, 1700-1775: New Estimates’, Journal of Interdisciplinary History, 22 (1992), 691-709. 19 The results of the Chesapeake historians, who frequently collaborate, have been

reported in a series of conference volumes: A. C. Land, L. G. Carr, and E. C. Papenfuse (eds.), Law, Society and Politics in Early Maryland (Baltimore, 1977); T. W. Tate and D. L. Ammerman (eds.), The Chesapeake in the Seventeenth Century: Essays on Anglo-American Society (Chapel Hill, NC, 1979); L. G. Carr, P. D. Morgan, and J. B.

Russo (eds.), Colonial Chesapeake Society (Chapel Hill, NC, 1989). See also D. B. Rutman and A. H. Rutman, 4 Place in Time: Middlesex County, Virginia, 1650-1750 (New York, 1984).

English Migration 49 Ulster*

A IRELAND 3°35

ENGLAND Ly , NEW° SBSpMunster Ibid. 67-83, 271-95.

52 Nicholas Canny that can be gleaned from merchants’ records on the recruitment and disposal of immigrants, enables Bailyn to speak with greater certainty than any previous historian about the quality of those who migrated from Britain to the American colonies during the years before the American Revolution. The most dramatic of Bailyn’s findings is that not one but two migration flows are recorded in this single source. The first group had their origins in the southern half of England and took ship from either London or Bristol, whereas the second group

came either from Scotland or from the northern half of England, usually Yorkshire. Those in the first category were typically young, single, skilled adults who travelled in small groups and were destined

to take up artisan employment (usually in the timber or ironprocessing trades) in long-settled areas of Pennsylvania, Maryland, or

Virginia. Those in the second category were also young, but their previous experience was usually limited to agricultural activities, and as many as 40 per cent were women. They usually travelled in groups of up to fifty emigrants, which included some families and many from

the same area. They were typically bound for recently developed areas of New York or journeyed southwards along the Appalachian mountain chain, where they hoped to establish themselves as frontier

farmers. Bailyn found that people in his artisan group decided to emigrate either because they were experiencing shrinking opportunities for their skills at home or because they knew that their skills

would command higher wages in the New World. Those in the northern group were usually fleeing from an erosion of their living standards, frequently associated with rack-renting.”° This adumbration of a dual migration will unquestionably be sub-

jected to future refinement by Bailyn himself or by his critics, and some writers have already suggested that more Scots settled in Pennsylvania than his model allows for.*’ The principal significance of Bailyn’s findings for present purposes is that it shows that English migrants to the mainland colonies, like those identified by David Galenson to the islands of the British West Indies, were becoming more highly skilled and specialist in the eighteenth century. English migrants were still travelling to a wide range of American destinations, as in the seventeenth century, but only a trickle of those on the 1770 register were travelling to the island colonies, and hardly 26 Ibid. 126-203. 27 Wokeck, ‘German and Irish Immigration’; Fogelman, ‘Peopling of Early America’.

English Migration 53 any to the coastal areas of the Chesapeake; the vast majority were bound for the more economically sophisticated areas of the Middle Atlantic colonies.

Despite these very considerable advances in our understanding of the quality of English migrants to America during the eighteenth century, conventional historians have proceeded with less certainty in estimating their quantity. This task, for the seventeenth as for the

eighteenth century, has been left largely to scholars with special expertise in quantification, because only they are confident in their ability to wrest such information from unpromising sources. Foremost among the quantifiers is Henry Gemery, who, like the historians of the Chesapeake, uses data from the census returns to posit esti-

mates of emigration, but to all the colonies and over the entire colonial period.”® For the seventeenth century Gemery had made his

impact with an influential paper whose title describes its purpose: ‘Emigration from the British Isles to the New World 1630-1700: Inferences from Colonial Populations’.*? In it Gemery proceeded from the assumption that we can arrive at a series of fairly reliable estimates of population in the several British Atlantic colonies towards the end of the seventeenth century. Then, taking this population as a

stock, he saw it as possible to infer the total number of migrants required to replenish this stock, once allowance has been made for the different birth and death rates that prevailed in the several colonies. Then, by adding together these inferred figures, Gemery estimated a gross figure of British transatlantic migration in the seventeenth century.

In the case of the Chesapeake, Gemery took the birth and death

variables that had been derived from the life tables devised by the Chesapeake historians. Then, proceeding on the assumption that white mortality was even higher in the tropics than in the Chesapeake, he sought to arrive at variables of his own for the white

population in the British West Indies. These variables he derived from the known demographic history of black slaves in the British West Indies, and from the statistics relating to such diverse groups as 78 Gemery, ‘Emigration from the British Isles’; idem, ‘European Emigration to North America, 1700-1820; Numbers and Quasi-Numbers’, Perspectives in American History, NS 1 (1984), 283-342; idem, ‘Markets for Migrants: English Indentured Servitude and Emigration in the Seventeenth and Eighteenth Centuries’, in P. C. Emmer (ed.), Colonialism and Migration: Indentured Labour Before and After Slavery (Dordrecht, 1986), 33-54. 29 As in n. 21.

54 Nicholas Canny white traders in West Africa and British troops in the West Indies who confronted a disease environment similar to that probably experienced by white settlers in the island colonies. Gemery was keenly

aware that ‘evidence’ drawn from such sources is necessarily tentative; he was also conscious that census figures were less reliable for

the British West Indies than for the mainland colonies. For these reasons he posited only ‘probable ranges’ for the migration flow from

Britain during the seventy-year period 1630-1700. On this basis he concluded that a minimum total migration of 378,000 was necessary to make up the colonial population of 1700, of whom, he believed, more than half, or 222,000, were required to establish a viable white population stock in the British West Indies, where mortality was particularly high. He also concluded that more than 116,000 people migrated to the Chesapeake region. By comparison, only an insignificant 39,000 people were estimated by Gemery to have migrated to

the northern and Middle Atlantic colonies. Of these, he assigns 15,500 to the New England migration of the 1630s, and the bulk of the remainder to Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and New York in the post-Restoration decades. The most significant of Gemery’s conclusions is the size of the total migration he posits. Moreover, he makes clear that this estimate is a conservative one, based on the assumption that the initial ‘gateway mortality’ in the West Indies and the Chesapeake became less lethal over time. Therefore, as he puts it when commenting on his estimate of 378,000, the total migration ‘cannot have been less’ than a quarter of a million, and ‘may have been more’ than half a million. The second most startling conclusion is the huge migration to West Indies destinations that he posits, and this concentration on West Indies destinations emerges even more starkly when Gemery breaks down his figures chronologically. Of his total of 378,000 for the entire period, he calculates that more than half, or 210,000, emi-

grated to the colonies during the decades 1630-60. Of these, he believes that at least 144,000 were required in the Caribbean region to make up the total white population of 43,000 that existed there in 1660. This leaves him with an estimate of something less than 50,000 migrants to Chesapeake destinations during the same three decades. Both Gemery and those who have commented on his work realize that it is based on pretty slim foundations where data on the Caribbean are concerned, and his conclusions have won general acceptance only because of the high regard in which his work on the Chesapeake |

English Migration 55 is held.°° The figures that he advances for that region conform closely to those arrived at by the Chesapeake historians, and it seems plausible that white mortality rates in the Caribbean were higher than

those which obtained in the Chesapeake, and fertility rates lower. Historians therefore have no option but to accept the ranges which he infers until more reliable evidence on the Caribbean destinations comes to light. His figures seem all the more credible because they are consistent with the figure of 495,000 posited by E. A. Wrigley and R. S. Schofield as the maximum possible outflow of people from

England and Wales during the years 1630-1700. Indeed, it is his respect for this figure which suggested to Gemery that he should keep his own estimate low; for he believes that migration to the colonies during the seventy years covered by him came primarily from England and Wales, and even more exclusively from there during the three decades of peak migration 1630-60.” Gemery has not been able to use his method to calculate similar ranges for British (much less English) transatlantic migration during

the eighteenth century, because migration was then more diverse, making it difficult to disentangle any one element from the general body of migrants. The problem of establishing the scale of English emigration during the eighteenth century is also rendered difficult, if not impossible, by the fact that the range of destinations, and therefore the demographic experiences of the migrants, were altogether more varied than they had been in the seventeenth century. Another consequence of the more varied emigration and immigration pattern of the eighteenth century is that the basic archival research required to establish such variables as fertility and mortality rates in particular

areas of settlement has not yet been carried out. Because of these difficulties, some of which are intractable, Gemery has been able to calculate only gross estimates of migration from the census returns of

the eighteenth century, not the numbers of migrants in any one ethnic category.°” His figure for gross migration (black as well as white) to the mainland colonies (excluding Canada) during the years 1700-90 is 600,000, and he allows for a migration flow to the British 30 DPD. S. Smith, ‘The Estimates of Early American Historical Demographers: Two Steps Forward, One Step Back, What Steps in the Future?’, Historical Methods, 12 (1979), 24-38, esp. 28. 31 E. A. Wrigley and R. S. Schofield, The Population History of England, 1541-1871 (London, 1981), esp. 219-22. 32 Gemery, ‘European Emigration’.

56 Nicholas Canny West Indies of something less than 200,000 people (mostly black) during the same period.°°

Gemery’s method does not facilitate anything more precise than these crude figures for the eighteenth century, and some have despaired of making any meaningful progress towards obtaining

figures for particular groups by working with gross estimates of population. These people seek instead to arrive at an understanding of the precise nature of population movement by analysing what is known of those areas that have been studied intensively. The most venturesome in pursuing this line has been Bernard Bailyn, who can proceed with confidence from his own investigation of the Register of

Emigrants for 1773-6, and can relate what he can speak of with authority to what has been posited by Gemery for the total movement of people.** Seeking to disentangle those who had their origins in

Britain and Ireland from the whole, he concludes that a total of 125,000 people ‘from the British Isles alone’ settled in the mainland

colonies during the period 1700-60, of whom he believes that 55,000 were Protestant Irish, 40,000 Scots, and 30,000 English. He arrives at these figures by assuming that the rate of migration from Britain and Ireland for the entire period of peace 1763-76 was the same as he knows it to have been during the years 1773-6.°° This

figure of 30,000 English emigrants for the eighteenth century pales beside the estimate of roughly 400,000 English emigrants to all American destinations during the seventeenth century, and Bailyn emphasizes that the importance of this later English migration lay in its quality and its significance for the development of a manufacturing sector in the Middle Atlantic colonies.*° This review of the secondary literature makes it possible to sum-

marize the existing state of knowledge regarding British Atlantic migration and England’s place within it, before proceeding to suggest some modifications that may be required because of factors that have not been taken into account. The estimate given by Gemery for the

total British migration of the seventeenth century has now been absorbed into the literature, and rounded to 400,000. It is now generally assumed, as it was by Gemery, that these were mostly English migrants; and it is also accepted that they were usually young, 33 Tbid., esp. 304-5.

34 Bailyn, Voyagers to the West, 67-84. | 35 Thid. 24~—7.

3© Ibid. 271-95.

English Migration 57 single people, predominantly male, who had been geographically mobile in search of work in England before they crossed the Atlantic.

No great claims are made for the skills of these people, but it is accepted that their previous work experience in English agriculture or

manufacturing would have been more than adequate to equip them for the generally rudimentary work associated with tobacco and sugar production or domestic service. It is also accepted that some highly skilled work was associated with all these activities and that artisans

or entrepreneurs were recruited to meet these labour needs in the colonies. More general recruitment, however, is attributed to ship captains in the English ports, especially London and Bristol. Nevertheless, it is thought that the individual migrant exercised some

choice as to destination, and that the choices made were based on some information or hearsay previously available to potential migrants. This factor is invoked to explain the shift in the migrant flow first from the West Indies to the Chesapeake, and then to the Middle Atlantic colonies towards the close of the seventeenth century. The work of Bernard Bailyn has confirmed that this concentration upon the Middle Atlantic colonies was sustained well into the eighteenth

century. There and in the developing frontier regions along the Appalachian mountain chain, settlers could expect to live a normal European life span, as opposed to the hazardous existence that had confronted English settlers in the West Indies and the Chesapeake during the seventeenth century. The acclaim with which Bernard Bailyn’s Voyagers to the West has

been received adds authority to his assertions relating to both the quality and the scale of English migration, and his conclusions stand as the received wisdom on the subject as far as the eighteenth century

is concerned. His general characterization of the migration flow during the short interval 1773-6 is certain to endure, and all historians accept his contention that white migration to Colonial British

America was altogether more diverse in the eighteenth than the seventeenth century and that the inflow to the mainland colonies varied greatly in ethnic composition at different times. On the other hand, Bailyn’s work has been criticized because it implies greater exclusivity in migration during particular decades than actually

existed, and because it takes insufficient account of the peaks and troughs in the flow of migration from Europe to Colonial British America during the course of the eighteenth century. Some variation in flow was clearly caused by warfare, which disrupted commercial

58 Nicholas Canny traffic on the Atlantic on innumerable occasions in the eighteenth century; but some would have resulted from economic conditions in Europe, with fewer people motivated to undertake a journey into the unknown when conditions were favourable at home.*’ Because he takes insufficient account of such variables, it is contended, Bailyn exaggerates the total number of free migrants. His tendency to inflation is well illustrated by Louis Cullen, in Chapter 6, in which he takes Bailyn to task for his assumption that the rate of migration documented in the British Register of Emigrants for the years 17736 had been constant since 1760. Cullen also makes it celar—and he is supported in this by Wokeck—that Bailyn overestimates the scale of eighteenth-century Irish migration to the mainland colonies; it is also evident from the work of other recent scholars that Bailyn places

undue emphasis on the purely Protestant character of this Irish migration.

Such criticisms combine to suggest that Bailyn (and, by implication, Gemery also) overstates the scale of European free migration

to British America during the eighteenth century, and that he exaggerates both the scale and the predominantly British character of

the migration for the period 1760-75. On the other hand, when we look more narrowly at purely British, or more specifically English, migration, it is probable that Bailyn offers too low an estimate for the

scale of English and Scottish migration over the entire eighteenth century. This is because he makes no allowance for a Scottish and English element among the migrants during the poorly documented years 1700—60, and because he takes no account of the number of English convicts transported to America during the period 1718-75. A. Roger Ekirch, who is the leading authority on the transportation of convicts, believes that as many as 36,000 convicts were transported

from England to America during those years, and that over go per cent of them were bound for Virginia, Maryland, and Pennsylvania, with most of the remainder destined for the West Indies. Not all these convicts were English, but the majority certainly were; and when convicts are added to voluntary migrants, it seems plausible to

| think of a total movement of 50,000 English to the mainland colonies during the course of the eighteenth century. Their departure from England would have been spread fairly evenly over the century when37 See esp. Fogelman, ‘Peopling of Early America’, and Wokeck, ‘German and Irish Immigration’.

English Migration 59 ever traffic was not interrupted by war, and a short sharp burst occurred only during the brief interval 1773-6 when economic circumstances in Britain were especially difficult.°> The case made by Bailyn for the skilled nature of the English among these late migrants

seems above dispute, but the presence of significant numbers of convicts among the English migrants over the entire eighteenth century dictates that we proceed with caution before generalizing from the particular migration of 1773-6. The figures—a total of 50,000 English emigrants out of a grand total of 262,000 migrants to the mainland colonies over the period 1700—-75—make it clear that the eighteenth-century English con-

tribution was more significant in terms of quality than quantity. The seventeenth century was the one in which England lost most people through emigration, but it will now be suggested that Gemery has erred in his appraisal of this seventeenth-century movement, both in exaggerating the total number of English people who went to the West Indies and in underestimating the number of very highly skilled

people who left England during this century. The exaggeration becomes apparent when account is taken both of the very significant Irish Catholic presence among the settlers in the West Indies during

the seventeenth century and of the even more significant English presence in Ireland which, when added to Gemery’s estimate of 378,000 English emigrants to all transatlantic destinations, implies an English seventeenth-century exodus well in excess of the figure allowed for by demographers. Evidence of an Irish Catholic migration to the British West Indies

during the seventeenth century is presented by Louis Cullen in Chapter 6. The contribution organized by Irish Catholic merchants focused on fringe islands such as St Christopher’s and Montserrat, where members of these families had themselves acquired plantations. The Irish Catholic presence was already on such a scale in St Christopher’s in the 1630s that people could consider drawing upon it to stock an Irish Catholic colony in the Amazon basin under the protection of the Portuguese monarchy.°” Irish Catholics who made 38 See L. M. Cullen, Ch. 6 of this book; D. N. Doyle, Jreland, Irishmen and the American Revolution, 1760-1820 (Dublin, 1981), 51-76; A. R. Ekirch, Bound for America: The Transportation of British Convicts to the Colonies, 1718-1775 (Oxford, 1987), 22—4, 112-14. 39 J. Lorimer (ed.), English and Irish Settlement on the River Amazon, 1550-1642 (London, 1989), 446-59.

60 Nicholas Canny their way to the West Indies under Irish sponsorship were joined by others who were conveyed in English ships that stopped at Irish ports to collect provisions and settlers on their way to the island colonies.

There is no systematic record of this traffic, but the frequency of reports in the High Court of Admiralty records suggests that it was conducted on a regular basis. The usual stopping-off places would have been the ports of the south coast, where ship captains would have hoped to draw upon the sizeable English settlement that had developed in that region. When the number of English volunteers was insufficient, however, the captains were ready to recruit Catholics

as settlers, and any would-be servants taken aboard in Dublin or in the ports of the west coast would almost certainly have been Catholic.*? There was therefore an Irish Catholic element even on the ‘English’ island of Barbados almost from the moment of settlement; and this was greatly added to in the 1650s by the forced migration of Catholics sponsored by the Cromwellian regime in Ireland. This, like the previous Catholic migration, is impossible to quantify, but it was on a sufficient scale to leave a lasting impression on the folk memory of Irish Catholics.*’ It was also on a sufficient

scale to make Irish Catholics a conspicuous element within the white population of Barbados, and, as has been amply demonstrated by Hilary Beckles, the possibility of Irish Catholic servants and exservants joining forces with black slaves against their common English oppressors remained a constant nightmare for planters on Barbados. **

Their fears must have been all the greater because, as Cullen has shown (Chapter 6), Irish Catholic voluntary migration to the marginal

islands was increasing during the 1650s and 1660s when English emigration to the West Indies was significantly reduced.

The evidence of an Irish Catholic presence in the British West Indies (there were also some Scots) makes it clear that Gemery has been rash in supposing that all whites on the islands were of English origin. His exaggeration of the numbers of English who went to the

islands also becomes apparent when due account is taken of the English who went to settle in Ireland over the course of the seven40 D. O. Shilton and R. Holworthy (eds.), High Court of Admiralty Examinations (MS vol. 53), 1637—8 (New York, 1932), esp. entries 16, 108, 290, 334. 41 A. Gwynn, S. J., ‘Documents Relating to the Irish in the West Indies’, Analecta Hibernica, 4 (1932), 233-5. 42H. McD. Beckles, White Servitude and Black Slavery in Barbados, 1627-1715 (Knoxville, Tenn., 1989), 79-114.

English Migration 61 teenth century. This movement has been largely ignored by historians, who like to think that it was principally Scots who went to settle in Ireland. Contemporaries were keenly aware of the passage of people from England and Wales into Ireland, however, and Carew Reynal, in his frequently quoted observation of 1674, considered it

to have been on a scale at least equal to that of transatlantic migration. Reynal’s comment came in the context of his bemoaning the

economic collapse of England and the decline in its population, which he explained as follows: our people were consumed mightily in these late years, some three hundred

thousand were killed in these last Civil Wars; and about two hundred thousand more have been wasted in repeopling Ireland; and two hundred thousand lost in the great sickness, and as many more gone to plantations.”

The 200,000 that Reynal assigned to Ireland must have been those associated with the Cromwellian conquest and resettlement of the country. What the precise number of these settlers was is a subject that has been strangely neglected by historians, who have not yet come to terms with the putative ‘Census’ of 1659, which conveniently distinguishes between Protestant and Catholic adult males in each of

the townlands it treats of.** Even if this listing of heads of household was properly tabulated, it would not disclose the scale of the Cromwellian immigration, because it does not distinguish between Protestants newly arrived in Ireland and those already settled in the country before the insurrection of 1641. The only person to make such a distinction between what he described as ‘Old Protestants’

and ‘New Protestants’ in Ireland was Sir William Petty, and his tabulations allow for the presence in Ireland in 1672 of 122,176 Protestant people who had not been there before 1641. When allowance is made for such factors as natural increase and continued 43 C. Reynal, The True English Interest (1674), quoted J. Thirsk and J. P. Cooper (eds.), Seventeenth-Century Economic Documents (Oxford, 1972), 758. 4S. Pender (ed.), 4 ‘Census’ of Ireland circa 1659 with Supplementary Material from

the Poll Money Ordinances, 1660-1661 (Dublin, 1939). For an appraisal of this source

see R. C. Simington, ‘“Census” of Ireland, c.1659—the term Titulado’, Analecta Hibernica, 12 (1943), 177-8; N. J. Pilsworth, ‘Census or Poll Tax’, fournal of Royal Society of Antiquaries of Ireland, 73 (1943), 22—4; W. J. Smyth, ‘Society and Settlement in Seventeenth Century Ireland: The Evidence of the “1659 Census” ’, in W. J. Smyth and K. Whelan (eds.), Common Ground: Essays on the Historical Geography of Ireland Presented to T. FJones Hughes (Cork, 1988), 55-83.

62 Nicholas Canny migration to Ireland in the interval between 1660 and 1672, Petty’s calculations suggest a Cromwellian migration to Ireland of 100,000 English and Welsh people, over and above the return to Ireland of those British Protestants who had fled the country in the aftermath of the 1641 rising.*°

This Cromwellian settlement, which was almost entirely English and .Welsh in composition, was superimposed upon an existing settler

population made up of Scots as well as English and Welsh, which Petty believed to have been as sizeable as 225,538 people in 1641.*° This figure seems excessively high, even when allowance is made for natural increase, and my own suggestion that approximately 100,000

people migrated from Britain to Ireland during the years 160341, although conservative, has won general acceptance. As many as 30,000 of these migrants (but probably fewer) would have been Scots

migrating to Ulster, which leaves us with an estimate of 70,000 English and Welsh migrants to Ireland before 1641, with the great bulk of these making the move during the 1610s and the early 1620s.*’ When added to the Cromwellian figure, this estimate indicates a total migration to Ireland of 170,000 English and Welsh and

30,000 Scots before 1672. What happened immediately after that date is unknown, because the social history of Ireland in the second half of the seventeenth century has yet to be written. However, the

earlier belief that, once the Cromwellian influx was over, Ireland ceased to be an attractive destination for English migrants other than

artisans with rare skills seems unsustainable. Recent research by Raymond Gillespie on the records of the Brownlow estate in Ulster provides evidence of a steady inflow of English tenants during the * Sir William Petty, The Political Anatomy of Ireland [1672] (London, 1691), 17-18.

, Here Petty suggested a population of 1,466,000 people for Ireland in 1641 and 1,100,000 in 1672. He contended that 2/13 of the 1641 population (i.e. 225,538) and 3/14 of the 1672 population (i.e. 235,714) was Protestant. He also suggested that 112,000 of the original Protestant population had been killed or had died in the interval. Thus he believed that only 113,538 of the 235,714 Protestants of 1672 were original settlers. This subtraction provides the figure of 122,176 for new settlers. Petty himself, when breaking down the population of 1672 into Catholic, Protestant, and Presbyterian did so in the proportions of 8:2:1. *© See the tabulation in n. 45. 47 N. Canny, Kingdom and Colony: Ireland in the Atlantic World, 1560-1800 (Baltimore, 1988), 69—102, esp. 96; R. Gillespie, Colonial Ulster: the Settlement of East Ulster, 1600-1641 (Cork, 1985); M. Perceval-Maxwell, The Scottish Migration to Ulster in the

: Reign of James I (London, 1973); M. McC. Morrogh, The Munster Plantation, 15831641 (Oxford, 1985).

English Migration 63 decades after the Restoration, giving way to Scots only towards the

end of the century. What held true of this single Ulster estate probably obtained elsewhere, and there was certainly an increase in

the number of English people in the expanding urban centres of Ireland during the later decades of the seventeenth century.” It would therefore seem safe, if conservative, to allow for a further 10,000 English and Welsh settlers in Ireland during the last three decades of the seventeenth century: a figure which looks paltry beside

the 60,000 Scots who, as Christopher Smout has estimated, moved into the province of Ulster alone during these same three decades.” This allowance for 180,000 English and Welsh migrants to Ireland over the full course of the seventeenth century—and this is a very conservative estimate—can only be reconciled with Gemery’s calculations if we suppose that a substantial number of those he counted as English migrants to the West Indies were in fact Irish Catholics or Scots. Once we make such a supposition, it becomes possible to advance revised estimates of English migration into and across the Atlantic (see Table 4.1), before proceeding to a discussion of the type

of migrants who went to the several destinations at different times during the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. Table 4.1, like all previous calculations, reveals that English Atlantic

migration was on an altogether greater scale in the seventeenth than in the subsequent century. This difference suggests that the seventeenth-century migration was one of desperation, whereas the recent publications of Bailyn have consolidated the opinion of Galenson that the great bulk of English migrants who crossed the Atlantic voluntarily in the eighteenth century left home not because they were desperate but because they knew their skills would be more highly valued in the colonies than they were in England. To these, however, must be added the very sizeable number of English convicts, perhaps half the entire number who went to America, whose skill levels would have been mixed. Historians of the seventeenth century, most notably

James Horn, who have related transatlantic migration to English internal migration, have presented powerful supporting evidence for

the view that the overwhelming majority of English migrants to 48 R. Gillespie (ed.), Settlement and Survival on an Ulster Estate: The Brownlow Leasebook, 1667-1711 (Belfast, 1988).

49 See Ch. 5; also A New History of Ireland iv. Eighteenth Century Ireland (Oxford,

1986), 14, 133-4, where the usual figure of 50,000 families is cited for the Scottish movement to Ireland at this time.

64 Nicholas Canny TABLE 4.1. English Atlantic migration

Seventeenth century Eighteenth century (pre-1776) Destination Rough estimate _—_ Destination Rough estimate

West Indies 190,000 (mostly West Indies 20,000 pre-1660)

Ireland 180,000 (mostly Mainland America 50,000 post-1640)

Chesapeake 116,000 (mostly _ Ireland 10,000 post- 1660)

Middle Atlantic 23,500 (entirely post-1660)

New England 21,000 (1630s)

Total 530,500 , 80,000 America were then young, single people with but a modest level of skills. Horn’s more recent work, which has identified those who went to the Chesapeake as entrepreneurs or for religious reasons, has done little to disturb the prevailing impression that those Puritans who migrated to New England were as exceptional in their skills and in the previous comfort of their lives, as they were in their religious commitment.”° Now, however, the integration of Ireland into this general portrayal of English overseas migration necessitates some modification to this view, because preliminary investigations have shown that the English

who migrated to Ireland, or at least the 70,000 who went there in the decades before 1641, were an extremely accomplished group of people and that their material achievements probably outstripped those of any other English settler community during the first half of °° Souden, ‘Rogues, Whores and Vagabonds’; J. Horn, ‘Servant Emigration to the Chesapeake in the Seventeenth Century’, in Tate and Ammerman (eds.), Chesapeake, 51-95; R. R. Menard, ‘British Migration to the Chesapeake Colonies in the Seventeenth Century’, in Carr et al. (eds.), Colonial Chesapeake Society, 99-132; J. Horn, ‘Adapting to a New World: A Comparative Study of Local Society in England and Maryland, 1650-1700’, in Carr et al. (eds.), Colonial Chesapeake Society, 133-75; Greene, Pursuits of Happiness; P. Clark and D. Souden (eds.), Migration and Society in Early Modern England (London, 1987).

English Migration 65 the seventeenth century. These assertions can be made in the light of a detailed study of the depositions taken in 1642 from some of the Protestant settlers in Ireland who had endured the assault made upon them by their Catholic neighbours during the previous winter. Historians of settlement in Ireland have previously made little use of this source, and have concentrated instead upon the surveys of plantation, which provide musters or enumerations of the settler population in

particular areas. Such surveys have the merit of accuracy when it comes to estimating the size of the settler community in the planted areas, but they tell us little of the skills, activity, or even names of the individual settlers.°! The depositions, on the other hand, while but a partial record of settlement, with only something over 3,000 heads of household making depositions, have the merit of providing details on the lives and occupations of settlers from all parts of the country, not only from those regions where formal plantations were instituted. All individuals who came forward to make depositions identified them-

selves by name, social status or occupation, and precise address in Ireland. Most gave details of their experiences at the moment of

attack, and all provided an estimate of what they had lost in the rebellion usually in the form of a list of their goods and chattels and the debts due to them. Such inventories, we can presume, maximized or exaggerated the value of what had been lost; but they have the

merit of providing details of the activities, living conditions, and material possessions of this cross-section of the settler community. Another less obvious benefit of the depositions as a source is that deponents made mention of other settler neighbours, either because

they had been killed or brutalized during the attack or because they were indebted to them, and such references enable us to gain some impression of the micro-communities that developed within the larger settlement.°* An analysis of the depositions relating to three counties in Ireland— County Cork on the south coast, Queen’s County (now county Laois) >! For a critical appraisal and use of such surveys and musters see T. W. Moody, The Londonderry Plantation, 1609-1641 (Belfast, 1939); Perceval-Maxwell, Scottish Migration; M. Morrogh, Munster Plantation; P. Robinson, The Plantation of Ulster: British Settlement in an Irish Landscape, 1600-1670 (Dublin, 1984). °2 A. Clarke, ‘The 1641 Depositions’, in P. Fox (ed.), Treasures of the Library of Trinity College, Dublin (Dublin, 1986), 111-22; N. Canny, “The 1641 Depositions as

a Source for the Writing of Social History: County Cork as a Case Study’, in P. O’Flanagan and C. G. Buttimer (eds.), County Cork: History and Society (Dublin, 1993), 249-308.

66 Nicholas Canny in the Irish midlands, and County Fermanagh in Ulster—reveals that

settlement everywhere had common features as well as subtle differences.°? Those who dominated the settlement in each region were

large landowners who had come into possession of thousands of acres, spread over several counties, which they sublet in blocks of hundreds of acres to tenants-in-chief. Some, but by no means all these proprietors, were from moderately high social background in England, but almost all had found themselves in straitened economic circumstances before seeking their fortunes in Ireland. These for-

tunes by 1641 usually amounted to a rental income of several thousands of pounds per annum; and the success of these individuals was symbolized by elaborate mansions, extensive ornamental grounds,

fully equipped home farms and coats of arms. Such spectacularly successful individuals clearly had no equivalent in Colonial British America in the seventeenth century, but they had had little to do with the detailed development of settlement in Ireland, because their rapid

economic and social advancement meant that they had inevitably become involved in political affairs in Ireland and Britain, while maintaining only a supervisory role over their estates. Responsibility for development rested rather with the tenants-in-chief, who placed tenants to farm their agricultural properties, and with manufacturing

entrepreneurs, who were given responsibility for promoting urban settlement. These were key individuals whose previous skills were suited either to the agricultural conditions of the particular region or to the processing of the raw materials of the country. The result, therefore, was a patchwork of micro-communities within

each region of settlement, with each tenant-in-chief or urban entrepreneur taking responsibility for the recruitment of specialist workers who would generate wealth for themselves, pay rent to their superiors, and enhance the value of the property they rented through improvement. Recruitment of artisans, with a resulting development of urban manufacturing, seems to have occurred in each of the three counties

studied, but with more dramatic consequences in County Cork and Queen’s County than County Fermanagh. The remoteness of the Ulster county from a dynamic centre of trade seems to have limited the opportunities open to the artisans, who appear to have concentrated on providing for the manufacturing needs of the local society. 53 Canny, ‘1641 Depositions’; idem, ‘The Marginal Kingdom: Ireland as a Problem in the First British Empire’, in B. Bailyn and P. D. Morgan (eds.), Strangers within the Realm: Cultural Margins of the First British Empire (Chapel Hill, NC, 1991), 35-66.

English Migration 67 Those in Cork and the midlands, whether textile and leather workers or involved with iron smelting and timber processing, made use of internal waterways to reach markets in the south of England and the

Netherlands. Their enterprises flourished as a consequence, and their success was manifested both in the expansion of the urban sector within the settler society and in the spill-over of the urban sector into the surrounding rural community. This spill-over occurred when the urban artisans entered into commercial arrangements with the native rural population or when they invested their profits in the leasing of farms within close proximity of the towns.

Access to outside markets may also explain why more settlers | were attracted to County Cork and Queen’s County than to County Fermanagh. In each of the first two counties, communities of settler farmers with skills appropriate to local circumstances were drawn from England; some of them were experts in tillage farming, others were specialists in stock raising, and still others had previous experience in dairy or fruit farming. Planters and tenants-in-chief in County Fermanagh appear to have experienced difficulty in attracting skilled farmers to their properties, and where they did procure settlers from abroad, they were from Scotland and north-west England, where the rural economy was hardly more advanced than that of Gaelic Ulster. Where these were not available, the principal proprietors had to take on natives as farmers, and the combination of these factors meant that advanced agriculture in Fermanagh was exemplified only on the home farms of the landowners, their tenants-in-chief, and the Protestant clergy.°*

The experience of these three Irish counties covers the range of settlement that was established in Ireland during the first half of the seventeenth century. It will be clear even from this brief summary that settlement in Ireland differed from that which came into being at the same time in Colonial British America in terms of both scale and diversity. Of the various settlements in Colonial British America, only those in New England attracted the range of farmers, textile workers, butchers, fishermen, and tanners that were drawn to Ireland, and in

far fewer numbers than in Ireland. The inventories drawn up by farmer and artisan deponents in Ireland suggests that they prospered more than their New England counterparts; only the very occasional

New England entrepreneur such as John Pynchon could have > Ibid.

68 Nicholas Canny matched the wealth accumulated by enterprising manufacturers in

Ireland like Henry Turner of Bandonbridge and Isaac Sands of Mountrath.°° In the West Indies before 1650 only the more successful tobacco planters and those moving into sugar production functioned on a level comparable to that of the proprietors, tenants-inchief, merchants, and manufacturers in Ireland, and even then for more modest returns. The West Indies was then beginning to employ a small number of personnel skilled in sugar refining, and these were handsomely compensated, but the vast bulk of the white population, whether involved with tobacco or with sugar cultivation, eked out a miserable existence at bare subsistence level. As such, their condition compared unfavourably with that of the yeomen and husbandmen of the rural settler population in Ireland and with the artisans who had made their homes in the towns.”°

This same point can be illustrated for the Chesapeake by comparing the condition of some of the more humble settlers in Ireland with that of some settlers in Virginia for whom inventories of goods

were compiled either before or after death. The vast majority of settlers in the more intensively developed areas of Ireland were yeomen and husbandmen in the rural sector and artisans in the towns. Taking some typical examples of such deponents from County Cork, we find that they enjoyed a secure, albeit not affluent, position

in society. John Greenfield, a yeoman from the parish of Murragh, for example, estimated his wealth in 1641 at £35, which he accounted for as follows: livestock, comprising cows, heifers, bulls, mares, and

swine, which he valued at £27. 6s. 8d.; ‘household stuff? which he

valued at £1. 16s.; hay and ‘garden fruits’ worth £2. Ios.; and a further £3. 12s. which he had paid as an entry fine and ‘laid out’ to improve his farm. No specific mention was made by Greenfield of his house or outhouses, but we can take it that he lived in comfortable if

modest circumstances, and his inventory makes it clear that he was 55 Qn John Pynchon see Innes, Labor in a New Land, esp. 30-1, where he points out that Pynchon marketed skins in London to the value of £1,860 in 1654. Henry

Turner of Bandonbridge (on whom see Trinity College, Dublin, MS 824, fols. 118—1g9) was a manufacturer of broad cloths, which he exported to Mr John Quarles of Amsterdam at an estimated profit of £400 a year. Isaac Sands was a servant to Sir

Charles Coote, and was in charge of the textile works at Mountrath in the Irish midlands, where looms and finished cloth for the export market, valued at £560, were lost in the 1641 rising. °° R. Dunn, Sugar and Slaves: The Rise of the Planter Class in the English West Indies

(Chapel Hill, NC, 1972), 1-83; F. C. Jones, “The Pre-Sugar Era of European Settlement in Barbados’, Journal of Caribbean History, 1 (1970), 1-22.

English Migration 69 principally engaged in pastoral farming.’ So also was Richard Pearl,

a husbandman from the town and parish of Coole in the eastern sector of County Cork. He estimated his wealth in 1641 at £288. 1os., of which £60. 10s. was accounted for in losses of livestock, made

up of cows, heifers, horses, and swine; £8 in household stuff, one fowling piece, and a rapier; £20 in corn in the haggard, and £200 in the loss of farms which he held on leases of eighteen, seven, and fifteen years. Pearl was clearly more enterprising than John Greenfield, and the fact that he held leases on three farms indicates that his superiors trusted in his ability to succeed.°°

We find the same variation when it comes to artisans in County Cork. John Rice, a weaver from Mallow, clearly stuck to his trade, estimating his wealth at £65, of which {£20 was accounted for in losses of wool and woollen yarn, £15 in the implements of his trade, £20 in household stuff, and {10 in the loss of his house, which had

been burnt.°? By way of contrast, Giles Dangar, a tanner from the parish of Temple Martin, had diversified into farming, and only £24 of his total estimated loss of £146. 12s. was directly related to his tanning activity.” There were presumably servants and other poorer settlers who did not come forward to make depositions in Ireland, and we know that others who went to Ireland as settlers failed to get off to a successful start and subsequently returned to Britain or made their way to some of England’s transatlantic settlements. However, the essential point is

that the more developed settlement regions in Ireland contained a sizeable farming and artisan population, whose wealth and comfort far exceeded that of the average settler in the Chesapeake during the first half of the seventeenth century. What we know of the circumstances of the poorer settlers in Virginia at this time comes principally

from the Minutes of the Council and General Court of Colonial Virginia, 1622-32, or from the records of the county courts of Accomack-Northampton county and York and Norfolk counties, which begin respectively in 1632, 1633, and 1637.°! All these courts >” Deposition of John Greenfield, Trinity College, Dublin, MS 824, fol. 30. 8 Deposition of Richard Pearl, ibid., fol. 111. >? Deposition of John Rice, idid., fol. 150. °° Deposition of Giles Dangar, ibid., fol. 163. ©! H. R. Mcllwaine (ed.), Minutes of the Council and General Court of Colonial Virginia, 1622-32 and 1670-76 (Richmond, Va., 1924). S. M. Ames (ed.), County Court Records of Accomack-Northampton, Virginia, 1640-45, (Charlottesville, Va., 1973);

York County, Virginia, Deeds, Orders, Wills, etc., no. 1, 1633-57; ‘Norfolk County,

70 Nicholas Canny were managed by the successful planters who, as we know from the writings of James Horn, were men of some substance and standing in

England before they assumed leadership roles in this new settler society. The records show that these planters had recourse to the courts for assistance in maintaining authority over their subordinates

and for arbitrations that would resolve differences between themselves. ‘There are regular references to punishments imposed upon inferiors for sexual misdemeanours, to extensions of servitude for servants who were lazy and recalcitrant, and to the disciplines extended to those who, by word or deed, showed disrespect towards their superiors or the social order in general.°*

This evidence of the harshness of the regime in Virginia far outweighs more humane incidents, as when masters granted freedom and compensation to servants or even black slaves as an expression of gratitude for their loyalty.® In so far as evidence of humane values emerges from these court proceedings, it is in the solicitude shown by

planters for the maintenance of the orphans of deceased planters. The concern here was to ensure that the terms of the wills of these planters were rigidly adhered to and that the orphans were not defrauded by their guardians. Such concern, as has been suggested by Edmund Morgan and Lois Carr, is only what one would expect in a society in which mortality rates were high and in which planters, who might themselves expect to leave young children as orphans, saw that it was in their own interest to set high standards in this matter.°* However, while the planters were concerned to see that the wishes of their deceased peers were adhered to, one is struck by the modesty

of the worldly gains that even the wealthiest of the planters had to Virginia, Deed Book A, 1637-46; Wills and Deeds B, 1646-51, consulted on microfilm at the Colonial Williamsburg Foundation. © For examples of punishments imposed for illegitimate births see the cases of Mary Rouge and of Daniel and Eleanor Neale as reported in the court records of Norfolk County, Virginia, fols. 176-7; for an example of a work-related punishment see the sentence imposed on Michael Bryant of Accomack-Northampton found guilty of shirking work for three weeks, in Ames (ed.), Records of Accomack-Northampton, 1632—40, 28—g; and for an example of a punishment imposed for disrespect see the case against Richard Duning in the court records of York County, Virginia, fol. 386. 63 For a rare example see the will of Thomas Gybson of York County, who released one ‘Humphrey from servitude in recompense for any former neglect’: records of York County, Virginia, fols. 1og—10. 6 E. S. Morgan, American Slavery: American Freedom: The Ordeal of Colonial Virginia

(New York, 1975), esp. 158-79; L. G. Carr, ‘The Development of the Maryland Orphans’ Court, 1654—1715’, in Land et al. (eds.), Early Maryland, 41-62.

English Migration 71 leave to their orphans. Captain Adam Thorowgood was head of the county court of Norfolk county from its institution in 1637 until his death in 1640. During these years occasional reference was made to his troubles in maintaining control over his servants, and we learn

that he built a house in the county. On his death he left a widow, but it was his fellow planter Captain John Gookin who was given responsibility for the maintenance of the Thorowgood children Adam

and Anne. Gookin was a conscientious executor, and he brought a

case before the court in October 1642, in which he successfully defended the orphans’ title to the estate which had been willed to them by their father. Land alone was of little value in a society as fluid as seventeenth-century Virginia, and planters like TThorowgood were especially concerned to leave livestock with the property so that

the natural increase from these would be available to the orphans when they came of age. The particular provision that Thorowgood made comes to our attention because Captain Gookin died in 1643, and the court required a statement on the condition of the orphans’ property. By then, the house had already fallen down, and the cowkeeper and the goat-keeper reported that the depredations of wolves had left them with just sixty-three cattle and eighty-seven goats for the maintenance of the orphans. The court required a further report in 1645; by then, when account was taken of sales and losses as well as natural increase, the herd stood at sixty-six cattle, fifty-seven goats,

and five horses: hardly a fortune for orphans of somebody who had been the most prominent man in the county only five years previously.”

Several wills from Virginia convey an impression of the extent of these planters’ houses, because their inventories of goods were organized according to the rooms that they furnished. Typical of these is the will of Robert Glascock, also of Norfolk County, who had enjoyed a sufficiently high social position to serve on the jury that had adjudicated the contested Thorowgood will. When he in turn died in 1646, a detailed inventory of his possessions was made, which reveals that his house had five rooms on the ground floor with a loft over the kitchen. The hall, which was the principal room, was furnished with two feather beds and bedclothes, as well as tables, chairs, table-cloths and napkins, two suits, stockings, one Bible, and a book of sermons. °° For the relevant references to Thorowgood see records of Norfolk County, Virginia, 1637-46, fols. 204-5, 255-6, 258-9.

72 Nicholas Canny Pewter serving dishes, two butter tubs, cups, and chamber-pots were kept in the buttery, while cooking utensils such as iron pots, pothooks, skillets, and dripping pans were kept in the kitchen. The

loft over the kitchen must have been used as servants’ sleeping quarters, because it was furnished with flock-beds with bolsters, rugs,

and coverlets; but it must also have served as a store because its contents included a powdering tub, pothooks, axes, hoes, saws, and Shovels. The ‘maid’s chamber’ was apparently on the ground floor, and was sparsely furnished with one flock-bed, a bolster, one rug, and one ‘old bedstead’. Finally in ‘the little chamber’ there was one

feather bed with bedclothes, as well as warming pans and minor items of furnishing.°°

This listing suggests that Robert Glascock, his prominent social position notwithstanding, enjoyed but frugal comfort. The house, like that of Adam Thorowgood, would have been made of wood, and if left uninhabited for even a short period would, like the Thorowgood house, have fallen in. We can presume that Glascock had a wife and

some children, although this was not stated in the will; and he is known to have had two menservants, two maidservants, a boy, and ‘a

small boy’ in his employ. Thus living conditions in the Glascock household must have been cramped. The years which his servants had to serve accounted for one-sixth of Robert Glascock’s estimated wealth, and the remainder was accounted for by twenty hogsheads of

tobacco, thirty-nine barrels of corn, ten cows, three bulls, and ten other cattle, as well as two sows, a boar, and their offspring, three old, and six young turkeys, and fifty other poultry. The Glascock inventory indicates that somebody who would have been considered a success in the Virginia of 1646 had attained a level of affluence which no more than matched that of a yeoman or artisan

settler in Ireland. There were others in Virginia at this time whose

inventories show them to have been much poorer than Robert _ Glascock, and relatively few of those who left wills were more prosperous than he. Moreover, we can assume that all property owners who made wills were infinitely more wealthy than the landless servants who did not even own the time of their labour. These impres-

sions of but modest gains made by those who were considered successful in Virginia coincide with the detailed information that is available to us on the social and material achievements of Robert °° Inventory of the goods and cattle of Robert Glascock, taken September 1646, in records of Norfolk County, Virginia, fols. 45-6.

English Migration 73 Cole, a tobacco-planter in seventeenth-century Maryland. Indeed, the scholars who have analysed the inventory and other documents

relating to his estate have arrived at the conclusion that it was freedom from the social and legal disabilities associated with being a

Catholic, rather than any dramatic opportunity for economic gain, which was the principal benefit which Cole derived from his move to Maryland.°’ This evidence relating to both colonies in the Chesapeake, as well

as to other places of English settlement in America, indicates that (ignoring the 1641 insurrection in Ireland) those would-be English settlers who opted for Ireland over all transatlantic destinations were making the correct economic and social choice. The fact that Ireland in the pre-1630 period attracted more skilled workers than perhaps

all American destinations combined suggests that migrants were indeed making choices based on reliable economic information and matching their destinations to their abilities. This can never be more than an implication, however, because English migrants of the seven-

teenth and eighteenth centuries seldom explained the reasons for their moves and seldom mentioned whether they entertained any options or alternatives when it came to deciding on an overseas destination. And while historians can point to trends and delineate migratory patterns, there are always many individual cases that run counter to these trends. Thus, while Ireland in the pre-1650 period, or even New England, might seem to have been a more logical destination than the Chesapeake for artisans and professionals, several

such people come to our attention in the court records of colonial Virginia. Those coopers, carpenters, and joiners who make their appearance in the Virginia records could presumably have made a better living in Ireland than in the Chesapeake, and medical men such as Dr John Pott, who was elected governor of Virginia in 1629,

must surely have been defying their own professional knowledge when they took up residence in that disease-ridden colony.©® Simi©” The modesty of the gains of planters in Virginia was recognized by some astute contemporary observers as, e.g., John Rosier, clerk, when he remarked that although William Hutchinson, a deceased planter, “was accounted a rich man’, he (Rosier) had never ‘supposed him to be a rich man’, even though his ‘credit was accounted to be very good’ (Shilton and Holworthy (eds.) High Court of Admiralty Examination. no. 263). On Cole see L. G. Carr, R. R. Menard, and L. S. Walsh (eds.), Robert Cole's World: Agriculture and Society in Early Maryland (Chapel Hill, NC, 1991), esp. 77-117. I wish to thank Peter Mancall for drawing my attention to the book on Cole. 8 A carpenter, one Thomas Cooper, is referred to in the court records of Norfolk

County, 1637-46, fol. 18. There is reference in those same records (fol. 28) of a

74 Nicholas Canny larly, the comings and goings of clergymen seem beyond explanation. One Lazarus Martin who disembarked in Virginia from the London Merchant in 1629 arrived unannounced, and had no parish waiting for

him, while the Reverend George Keith, who had been present in Virginia in the early years, became discouraged and went back to England, only to return in 1629 when he sought to carve out a new parish in a recently settled area.®’ And the actions of those who had originally established themselves in Ireland only to take up their roots again to resettle in Virginia are also difficult to explain. Some, such as Simon Tuchinge, who ‘was diligent in investigating the James River and other rivers in the bay’, may have had little choice, in that he had fallen foul of the authorities in Ireland because of his open attachment to Catholicism. Others, such as Captain Dowse, were fleeing from wives they had abandoned in Ireland; but still others such as

Mr Daniel Gookin and his agent Lieutenant John Shipward, who developed a significant plantation at Newport News, were abandoning already secure positions in Ireland.’° Cases such as these suggest that no generalization can account for all migratory decisions or explain migratory trends. Clearly, economic conditions at home and knowledge of the range of prospects abroad

were factors of prime importance, but so too were religious considerations and personal connections. Historians of recent vintage have tended to downgrade religion as a factor influencing English overseas migration during the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. This tendency has developed partly in reaction to the generalizations

advanced by an earlier generation of historians on the basis of a defective understanding of the seventeenth-century migration to New

England, and partly out of a belief that religious persecution in England was never at a level that would justify a comparison with the experiences of Huguenots in seventeenth-century France or Jews in nineteenth-century Russia. However, religious considerations can be

seen to have exerted at least some influence on English migratory trends, whether these are considered at the macro-level or at the micro-level. Those who fit the description of Puritan and who did decide to leave England during the early seventeenth century tended payment made to Mr Thomas Bullock for physic administered at several times to the Negro servants of Mr Robert Carne, which suggests that Bullock also was a medical man. ©? Mcllwaine (ed.), Minutes, 189.

7 Ibid. 33-4, 113, 48.

English Migration 75 to gravitate towards New England, while English emigrants who were

Catholic were attracted by the more tolerant regime in Maryland. Similarly, during the late seventeenth century, Quakers were drawn to settlements in the Delaware valley, and Presbyterians to a broader spread of settlements in the middle Atlantic colonies. However, not

all Puritans went to New England, or all Quakers to the Delaware valley, and viable communities of both Puritans and Quakers did emerge in such diverse places as Ireland, the British West Indies, and

the Chesapeake Bay. The formation of such micro-communities in unexpected areas is sometimes attributed by historians to the influence of charismatic leaders, but, while plausible, this highlights

the point that it is impossible for the historian to pin-point the relative importance of economic interest, personal connection, and the quest for a religious ideal in motivating groups of people to seek their fortunes outside England two and three centuries ago.’! The historian’s problem is even more difficult when it comes to considering what motivated the individual migrants because, as George

Fertig points out in relation to German migration in Chapter 8, we must not only consider the circumstances that influenced the individual’s choice between several possible destinations; we must seek also to explain why some individuals left England, while others of the same social position and from the same place of origin decided

to remain at home although exposed to the same pressures or influences. For these reasons, I decided in this chapter to give more attention to describing what happened than to explaining why it happened that way. My hope is that the description will inspire others to pursue the more fundamental questions, while for now it will show

that the dual character of English overseas migration which Bailyn depicted for the 1770s had been a constant since the outset of the seventeenth century. “| For recent efforts to assess the importance of religious motivation see Anderson, New England’s Generation, esp. 12-46, and B. de Wolfe, ‘Discoveries of America: Letters of British emigrants to America on the Eve of the Revolution’, Perspectives in

American History, NS, 3 (1986), 1-80, esp. 4-7, 35-43, 43-5, 47-8. ,

5

Scottish Emigration in the Seventeenth and Eighteenth Centurtes T. C. SMOUT, N. C. LANDSMAN, AND T. M. DEVINE

| As already explained by the editor in his preface, Scotland was not among the countries considered at the original conference which occasioned this book, but it soon became apparent that it provided a particularly rich example of a country with a strong migratory tradition directed initially towards other regions of northern Europe, but after 1700 increasingly towards North America. It was agreed, therefore, that three scholars should examine Scotland, each from their own perspective of research interest. The seventeenth century is

discussed by T. C. Smout, who emphasizes the great scale and diversity of Scottish migration to Europe and Ireland before the Union with England of 1707. The eighteenth-century movement from the Lowlands is discussed by Ned C. Landsman, who stresses both its probable scale and the difficulty of distinguishing Lowland Scots from the Scotch Irish in emigration sources. The eighteenthcentury movement from the Highlands is treated by T. M. Devine, who emphasizes its concentration in time and location, and places it in a reconsidered socio-economic framework. The authors wish to

make only one general point, that the whole of Scottish society throughout the early modern centuries was highly orientated towards out-migration, and must be regarded as one of the European countries most prone to sending its population overseas; the patterns and directions of migration are more akin to those from Ireland than from anywhere else, but the overall volume as a percentage of total population was larger, at least in the seventeenth century.

BEFORE 1700 The fame of the Scots as a nation prone to emigrate goes back long before the peopling of British America. Probably at least 10,000

Scottish Emigration 77 soldiers sought their fortunes in the service of France during the fifteenth century, many perishing in the penultimate phase of the Hundred Years War between 1418 and 1424.’ Highland ‘galloglass’ were active in Ireland in the late thirteenth and fourteenth centuries, founding mercenary dynasties there; their successors, ‘the redshanks’, went again in the late fifteenth and sixteenth centuries, but now as seasoned mercenaries fighting for a few months every year for the

Irish Gaelic nobility. The MacDonnells, however, settled in north Antrim in the sixteenth century, making it essentially part of the Scottish clan’s territories.” The king of Denmark found it necessary as early as 1496 to restrict the activities of Scottish pedlars in parts

of his kingdom, and in the sixteenth century the migration of both pedlars and soldiers to Prussia, Denmark, and Sweden rapidly gathered pace.” Scots began to move into Poland in some numbers in the late fifteenth century, as pedlars, merchants, and craftsmen; they were citizens of Cracow by 1509 of Warsaw by 1564, and numbers accelerated rapidly from about 1570.* Small but distinctive Scottish

mercantile communities were settled before the Reformation in Danzig, Copenhagen, Elsinore, and Malmo; there was a longestablished one at Bruges, and others in the Low Countries at Middleburg, Bergen-op-Zoom, and Campveere; in France they were

at Dieppe, Rouen, La Rochelle, and Bordeaux.? The Scots were ageressive traders; thus at Danzig in the late fifteenth and early sixteenth centuries the trade with England was in German hands, with small numbers of large ships moving goods to Hansa factories in

London and elsewhere; but the trade with Scotland was in Scottish hands, a relatively large number of small boats carrying wares to Danzig and buying up flax and hemp through a network of petty ' W. F. Leith, The Scots Men-at-Arms and Life-Guards in France (Edinburgh, 1882), p. v.; P. Contamine, ‘Scottish Soldiers in France in the Second Half of the Fifteenth Century’ in G. Simpson (ed.), The Scottish Soldier Abroad 1247-1967 (Edinburgh, 1991).

2 T. W. Moody, F. X. Martin, and F. J. Byrne (eds.), 4 New History of Ireland, iii (Oxford, 1976), 15, 31, 102, 109. 3°T. Riis, Should Auld Acquaintance Be Forgot... Scottish—-Danish Relations c.1450-

1707 (Odense, 1988); J. Dow, ‘Skotter in Sixteenth-Century Scania’, Scottish Historical Review, 11 (1965), 34-51; T. A. Fischer, The Scots in Sweden (Edinburgh, 1907); idem, The Scots in Eastern and Western Prussia (Edinburgh, 1907).

* W. Borowy, Scots in Old Poland (Edinburgh, 1941), 5-8; A. F. Steuart (ed.), Papers Relating to the Scots in Poland, 1576-1793 (Scottish History Society, 1915), pp. xii-xiii; T. A. Fischer, The Scots in Germany (Edinburgh, 1902); idem, Scots in Eastern and Western Prussta. > Riis, Auld Acquaintance.

78 _ Smout, Landsman, and Devine Scottish traders in the Polish hinterland.® Although very few Scots took out formal naturalization papers in England, they were at least plentiful by the reign of Queen Elizabeth in Northumberland, where one commentator in 1569 spoke of 2,500 Scots in one wardenry, and another in 1586 maintained that every third man within ten miles of the frontier was Scottish: political exaggerations no doubt, but indicative of a substantial presence (see Map 5.1).’ In these circumstances it is perhaps surprising that in the first half of the seventeenth century America aroused little interest among the Scots. Although as early as 1607 their king, James VI and I, was said to be ‘urging the Scots to go there’, and Thomas Henderson from

Fife, one of the original settlers of Jamestown, has the honour of being the first known Scot in the New World, only about 250 of his fellow countrymen followed before 1648.° Nevertheless, the first four decades of the seventeenth century were ones of major importance in

Scottish emigration history, as wave after wave of migrants left, motivated by the evident lack of profitable employment and land in Scotland, and by manifest opportunities for enterprise by the daring abroad.

There were three main destinations, all traditional by 1600. The first was Ireland, where new openings in Ulster provided boundless opportunities for a new wave of emigrating Lowland farmers; hitherto

only Gaels had gone to Ireland. The best estimate suggests that by 1625 ‘no less than 8,o00 Scottish men capable of bearing arms’, plus

6,000 women, had settled: there was a second wave after 1633, arousing a good deal of contemporary attention, and by the eve of the

rising of 1641, it is hard not to imagine that at least 20,000 Scots people, and perhaps 30,000, had crossed to Ireland.’ The initial setthements, from as early as 1606, were very largely

in County Antrim and County Down, associated with the private initiatives of Sir Hugh Montgomery of Braidstane in Ayrshire and Sir

James Hamilton, First Viscount Clandeboy. Later migrants went 6 H. Samsonowicz, ‘Deux formes d’activité commerciale: les Anglais et les Ecossais

en Pologne et dans les pays limitophes au XIVe—premiére moitié du XVle siécle’, Studia Maritima, 2 (1980).

’ D. Dobson, ‘Scottish Emigration to Colonial America, 1607-1785’ (Univ. of St Andrews, M.Phil. thesis, 1988), 1; R.Howell, Newcastle-upon-Tyne and the Puritan Revolution (Oxford, 1967), 97-8. 8 Dobson, ‘Scottish Emigration’, 24-40. ? M. Perceval-Maxwell, The Scottish Migration to Ulster in the Reign of James I (London, 1973), 311-14.

Scottish Emigration 79

f 9 » e N “ SA wg oO / . SUTHERLAND 3

SA NS

QS > \ (~ CS -th” (‘Sh l) 4 73S? oH Uist Sk 8 Pea RN oe ™“ w

South ( q % SYA j ( a\3 ye oN r& XeA718" Aberdeen ie FO ‘> INVERNESSSN é ) eo SHIRE {POL “Do? SCOTLAND Uf ~ - ff Nara LP D> ( 5 o c undee ve bay (PERTHSHIRE ;

7OG;ya7J . ARGYLL a. ye —< FIFE

BUX NU py

cee j ene, “\ly A S~~

/ oS “ty “\~~4a _ L ~y ~_

M] \Q \ MS id AYRSHIRE ~\ p+ 4 P

~~ Vout —

“GALLOWAY j Newcastle-e

tT Pm ENGLAND on-Tyne

Map 5.1 Scotland during the centuries of emigration

further west, to the six escheated counties of the Ulster plantation under the auspices of the royal undertakers. Those who left were overwhelmingly small tenants, mainly from the contiguous southwestern counties of Ayrshire and Wigtonshire and from Galloway, where rising population and acute rural congestion placed a consider-

able strain on inelastic resources. Such a district was Cunningham, where in 1597 Timothy Pont observed that ‘the dwellings of the yeomanry are very thickly powdered over the face of this country... so that one may wonder how so small a bounds can contain so very many people.’’° Others came from further afield, such as the settlers © Quoted in R. Gillespie, Colonial Ulster: The Settlement of East Ulster, 1600-1641 (Cork, 1985), 35.

80 Smout, Landsman, and Devine from Argyll, who moved into the existing Scottish Gaelic areas of the glens of Antrim, or lairds from Lothian and Fife. One of the adventurers in County Fermanagh was Thomas Moneypenny, laird of Kinkell, near St Andrews, veteran of an earlier attempt by Fife gentlemen to colonize Lewis in the Outer Hebrides against the will of

the Highland inhabitants but with the backing of the Crown. This had .quite literally been an attempt at internal colonialism, following a tradition of Fifers to expand as landowners into Orkney and Shetland in the late Middle Ages."!

This Scottish willingness to combine the sword with the ploughshare was distinctive; for example, there was one proposal to settle waste land in Monaghan with a ‘wall’ of Scots as protection between English farmers and the wild Irish.'* The fighting farmer was a type that was to surface again in eighteenth-century Pennsylvania and

North Carolina, in the truculent exploits of the ‘Scotch-Irish’ as frontiersmen and colonial rebels, such as the Paxton Boys and the Regulators. Similarly, a fierce, independent Presbyterianism, with traditions of field preaching, public conversion, and Covenant was

| incubated in the Scottish communities of Ulster before being carried across the Atlantic to break out as part of the Great Awakening in America.'? Very different in some respects was the contemporary movement

from Scotland to Poland, which also involved tens of thousands of individuals in a continuation and extension of sixteenth-century migration. As early as 1569, Sir John Skene reported seeing ‘ane great multitude’ of Scots pedlars in Cracow; Fynes Morrison in 1598 described the country as swarming with petty Scottish merchants; Chamberlain and the Polish ambassador in London in 1621 thought there were ‘about 30,000 Scots in Poland’; and this was not the most extravagant guess.'* Such statistics represent no head count, yet they may give an order of magnitude. Recent Polish research has traced the names of over 7,400 male Scots in no fewer than 420 localities throughout Poland; some are clearly second generation rather than new arrivals, but ‘only a fraction’ of the total numbers arriving ‘actu11 W.C. Mackenzie, History of the Outer Hebrides (Paisley, 1903), 171-203, 210—30; Perceval-Maxwell, Scottish Migration, 351. '2 Perceval-Maxwell, Scottish Migration, 278. 'S M. J. Westerkamp, Triumph of the Laity: Scots-Irish Piety and the Great Awakening,

1625-1760 (Oxford, 1988). , 14 Borowy, Scots in Old Poland; Steuart (ed.), Papers Relating to the Scots.

Scottish Emigration 81 ally appear in the sources’.'? This work shows a jump in arrivals after about 1570, a large peak between 1610 and 16109, then a falling off after mid-century. From British sources it is clear that this movement

to Poland, not that to Ulster or to Scandinavia, attracted contemporary attention as the most conspicuous, so presumably the largest. Thus, in the debate in the English Parliament in 1606 on the naturalization of the Scots in England after the union of the crowns, one member spoke of fears that ‘we shall be over-run with them, as cattle pent up by a slight hedge will over it into a better soyl, and a tree

taken from a barren place will thrive to excessive and exuberant

branches in a better, witness the multiplicities of the Scots in Polonia’.!© And William Lithgow from Scotland, in Poland in 1616, found ‘abundence of gallant rich Merchants, my Countrey-men’, and

called the country , ,

Mother and Nurse, for the youth and younglings of Scotland, who are yearely sent hither in great numbers . . . cloathing, feeding and inriching them with the fatnesse of her best things; besides thirty thousand Scots families, that live incorporate in her bowells. And certainly Polland may be termed in this kind to be Mother of our Commons, and the first commencement of all our best Merchant’s wealth.!’

Although there were, at times, thousands of Scots in Polish military service, it is plain that most who went were small merchants, pedlars,

or tradesmen; and few who left seem to have sought to return to Scotland. As their numbers increased, the attraction of Poland for poorer migrants seems similarly to have grown, especially when bad harvests like those of 1621-3 created hardship. In 1624 the ‘Scottish subjects at Danzig’ complained to James VI about the new decree in the town ordering ‘the removal of all strangers’ and blaming it on the recent arrival from Scotland of ‘exorbitant numbers of young boys and maids, unable for any service’, whose reputation had damaged

that of established families. The king replied with a proclamation prohibiting masters of ships from embarking such young people unless they could produce letters from relatives in Poland inviting them over or show that they had the means of subsistence for one 'S A. Bieganska, ‘A Note on the Scots in Poland, 1550-1800’, in T. C. Smout (ed.), Scotland and Europe, 1200-1850 (Edinburgh, 1986), 157-65. 16 Steuart (eds.), Papers Relating to the Scots, p. ix. '7 W. Lithgow, The Totall Discourse of the Rare Adventures and Painefull Peregrinations of Long Nineteen Yeares Travayles (Glasgow, 1906), 422.

82 Smout, Landsman, and Devine year.’® This makes it plain that women as well as men were involved,

but the bulk of the references suggest that most who went were indeed males. Considering the length of time over which the migration persisted, the number of names actually traced, and the contemporary impression of its magnitude, the movement was probably larger than that to

Ulster in the first half of the seventeenth century: 30,000—40,000 migrants might have been involved, at a rough guess. They have been traced from over 140 localities, mainly in the east and north-east of Scotland; Aberdeenshire had a concentration, as did Fife and south-

east Perthshire. On the other hand, the mercantile Scots, unlike the farmers in Ulster, quickly became integrated with the local inhabitants; the 1650 tax list of Scots in Poland (albeit very incomplete) mentions names like Czarmas, clearly a Fife Chalmers on the way to assimilation. '? The third major destination of Scots abroad before about 1650 was

Scandinavia, where the kings of Denmark and Sweden displayed an almost insatiable appetite for Scottish fighting men. The Scots already knew Scandinavia well—we have already referred to early mercantile settlements around the Sound, and Scots were very prominent in the foundation of Gothenburg. Recent work has suggested that about 10 per cent of the population of Bergen in the first half of

the seventeenth century was born in Scotland, often in Orkney or Shetland. The military tradition again went back to the sixteenth century; for example, the Danish king recruited possibly 2,000 men in Scotland in 1568, and Patrick Ruthven brought over 3,000 men to

fight in Swedish service in 1573.°° Despite further activity in the Danish—Swedish war of 1611-13, best known in Scottish history

for the slaughter of 300 Scots by Norwegian peasants at Gudbrandsdalen, the major peak of Scandinavian demand for Scottish mercenaries fell between 1620 and 1642, and more narrowly between 1626 and 1632.”! Within the broader period, warrants were issued by

the Scottish Privy Council for the recruitment of 19,560 men for

Sweden and 13,700 for Denmark; but, as Fallon warns us, the '8 Borowy, Scots in Old Poland, 18-19. '? Public Record Office, Warsaw, Archiwum Skarbu Koronnego, i. 134. 20 E.-B. Grage, ‘Scottish Merchants in Gothenburg, 1621-1850’, in Smout (ed.), Scotland and Europe, 112-27; Yngve Nedrebo, Statsarkivet i Bergen, personal communication; Riis, Auld Acquaintance, i. 88; J. A. Fallon, ‘Scottish Mercenaries in the Service of Denmark and Sweden, 1626-1632’ (Univ. of Glasgow Ph.D. thesis, 1972). 71 Fallon, ‘Scottish Mercenaries’, 5, 34.

|

Scottish Emigration 83 original warrants ‘cannot be regarded as sound statistics for the numbers of recruits actually levied’.*? Considering the Danish recruit-

ment (mainly in 1626-9) in detail, he concludes that the number who left Scotland is ‘unlikely to have exceeded 10,000’; on the other hand, the Swedish recruiters, while finding it difficult to fill the ranks with volunteers, nevertheless usually managed in the end to obtain

their quota.*’ As some of those recruited under Scottish auspices were in fact English or Irish, an estimate of about 25,000 Scottish emigrants in Scandinavian service for the entire half-century might therefore be close to the mark; though some scholars have put the figure higher.**

Except among the officer class, military recruitment seems to have

been much less popular than migration to Ireland or Poland; or, at least, it was often necessary to use compulsion to enforce it. There were many problems. Some volunteers accepted the recruiting money in Scotland, and promptly deserted with it, perhaps only to re-emerge as a volunteer in another regiment and go through the same process

again.”” Others resisted all pressure to release themselves or their

dependents for service, even giving up their tenancies in order to avoid it.2° When the government ruled that idle, immoral, or economically redundant people be rounded up and offered to the recruiting officers, some parish authorities (like Abdie in Fife) replied that there were none to be found, ‘but sic as hes maisteris, tredismen, handiecraftismen, necessar industrious and laborious people for our

commone and particular gude, quhilk we cannot gudlie spair’.?’

Others were more forthcoming: the minister of Auchindore in Aberdeenshire was pleased to recommend ‘George Tower... ane ewill disposed persone, ane drunkard, blasphemer of Godis name, and ane continuall tuilzear, and most fit to serwe the Kingis Majesties Varres’.”° Occasionally the recruiters resorted to violence; for example, 22 Ibid. 36-7. 23 Ibid. 35, 246.

24 A. Aberg, ‘Scottish Soldiers in the Swedish Armies in the Sixteenth and Seventeenth Centuries’, in G. Simpson (ed.), Scotland and Scandinavia, 800-1800 (Edinburgh, 1990), 91, speaks of ‘possibly as many as 30,000 officers’ in the service of Gustavus Adolphus. Correspondence with Aberg has established that the word ‘officer’ was an error, but that he considered 30,000 troops not to be an extravagant estimation, based on his knowledge of Swedish archives. 2 Fallon, ‘Scottish Mercenaries’, 163.

27 Ibid. ror. | 26 Riis, Auld Acquaintance, i. 100.

28 Ibid. 103.

84 Smout, Landsman, and Devine Margaret Steele sought a summons against Nicol Rose of Afflossen for violently capturing her husband Gilbert Brown, their son, and their servant, and selling them for £40 to Captain George Ogilvie for service in Denmark.”” Reluctance was entirely understandable; to

become an ordinary soldier in the Thirty Years War was to buy a one-way ticket to almost certain death. Only for swashbuckling officers like Robert Monro, who left a memorable account of his adventures in the service of Christian IV and Gustavus Adolphus, was there much realistic chance of fame, fortune, and survival.°° The number returning would therefore have been small. Fallon found that

‘no part of Scotland escaped the recruiting net... [but] the areas | which appeared to have yielded least soldiers were Argyll and the counties of the south-west, like Renfrewshire and Ayrshire’.*' It is easy to see how the recruits here might have sought their fortune in Ireland before the net closed upon them. Scandinavia and Poland were not the only outlets for soldiers. The Register of Privy Council, 1620-42, also records 10,320 recruiting warrants for France, 2,800 for the United Provinces, 800 for Spain,

200 for Russia, 1,500 for Bohemia, and 2,000 for the Earl of Morton’s expedition to fight in the Isle de Rhé in 1628.°% Discounting the last, and assuming a lower success rate than for Scandinavia—say only 50 per cent on average—this would still account for about another 8,o0o0 migrants. Considering that fair numbers also went to the Netherlands to seek their fortunes in civil business in the first half of the seventeenth century, and that others

joined foreign regiments in the Netherlands,’ France, and the Empire long before 1620, 10,000 must be the minimum who emi- | grated permanently to destinations other than Scandinavia, Ireland, Poland, and America in this period, and it may have been as many as 15,000. Obviously one unknown factor is the scale of movement to England. Plainly there was a certain amount. For example, a Newcastle document of 1637 speaks of ‘above eighteen hundred able

men...keelmen, watermen and labourers’, most of whom were ‘Scottish men and Borderers which came out of Tynedale and 29 Ibid. 100; Fallon, ‘Scottish Mercenaries’, 73-4. 3° R. Monro, His Expedition with the Worthy Scots Regiment (London, 1637). 31 Fallon, ‘Scottish Mercenaries’, 156. 32 Ibid. 34.

33 J. Ferguson (ed.), Papers Illustrating the History of the Scots Brigade in the Service of

the United Netherlands, 1572-1782 (3 vols., Edinburgh, 1899-1901). .

|

Scottish Emigration 85 TABLE 5.1. Scottish Migration, 1600-50

Destination Minimum Maximum

Ireland 20,000 30,000 Poland 30,000 40,000 Scandinavia 25,000 30,000

Elsewhere 10,000 15,000

Rough numbers 85,000 115,000 Riddesdale’, with a ‘great charge of wives and children’, and in 1639

politicians in the north were concerned about dangers from the hundreds of Scots who worked in the coal-mines or lived as tenants. Newcastle and Durham were said to be full of Scots in 1639, and in Durham they drank openly to the Covenant in a public house.**

The population of Scotland in the middle of the seventeenth century might be put at 1.0—1.2 million. The estimates that we have

made so far of the main net emigration outflows, 1600-50, are summarized in Table 5.1. This represents an annual loss of about 2,000 people. However, since the migrants would have been predominantly males, mostly aged between 15 and 30, it is likely that almost 20 per cent of the young men left Scotland at this time. Such a figure could be found again in the nineteenth century (for example, 23 per cent of young adult males registered in the 1851 census had left Scotland by 1861); but it is unexpected for so early a date. On the other hand, it is not without parallel. More than 20 per cent of the young men of Holland were lost in the service of the Dutch East India Company between 1602 and 1795, and there was a comparable loss among the male population of Switzerland.*°? The depressive 34 J. M. Fewster, ‘The Keelmen of Tyneside in the Eighteenth Century’, Durham University Journal, 50 (1957), 27, 31; Howell, Newcastle-upon-Tyne, 98-9. 3° If we assume that the average age at departure was 20, that the expectation of life was 30 years, and that there was an intrinsic growth rate of 1% (likely enough, since pressure on land was creating the pressure to leave), and if we assume further that all the migrants were men, this movement of 2,000 people would be drawn from a cohort

of 10,500 men (Princeton life tables), and amount to just short of 20%. Taking into account the various uncertainties in the estimates, the truth probably lay between 15% and 25%. I am greatly indebted to E. A. Wrigley for help on this point. For wider comparisons, J. de Vries, ‘Population and Economy of Preindustrial Netherlands’, Journal of Interdisciplinary History, 15 (1985), 669. | am indebted to Michael Anderson for the comparison with 1gth-cent. Scotland.

86 Smout, Landsman, and Devine effects on the natural rate of population growth could have been material. The figure above is necessarily highly speculative, yet we certainly

know more about the volume of out-migration in the first half of the seventeenth century than in the second half. Movement to two traditional areas, Scandinavia and Poland, had by then dropped to an insubstantial trickle, and never subsequently revived. The main destinations were now Ulster, possibly England, to some extent America, and the Netherlands. Unfortunately, little sustained study has been undertaken of any of these movements except that to America. The economic and demographic parameters were also different from what

they had been between 1600 and 1650. Population pressure on the land probably slackened; on the other hand, the economic gap between Scottish and English prosperity (as evidenced by wage rates)

grew wider after 1660.°° And in the later 1690s a series of catastrophic harvest failures acted as an obvious push towards Ireland, where remarkably, climatic fortunes were a great deal better.

The most thorough research has been done in respect of the movement to America. Dobson considers that between 1648 and 1660 about 2,000 Scots went to the New World, mainly as prisoners

of war following Cromwell’s victories, and mostly to Virginia, Barbados, and Jamaica, with some to Massachusetts (as well as a few even to Tangiers and Guinea in Africa). A Massachusetts militia law of 1652 treated Scots as of low status—‘AI] Scotsmen, Negroes and Indians, inhabiting with or servants of the English, from the age of 16

to 60 years, shall be listed and hereby enjoined to attend training.’ Between the Restoration and the Union of 1707, another 5,000 went to America, for the most part voluntarily. About half these were destined for the Company of Scotland’s disastrous venture to settle Darien. Of the remainder, the well-known settlement of Scottish proprietors in New Jersey studied by Landsman took well over 600 in

the decade before 1690.°° Most of the others went to the West Indies, especially to Barbados. In 1673 it was estimated that of 21,000 whites in Barbados, half were English, ‘and the rest Scots, Irish, French, Dutch and Jews’. Three years earlier the Scots had

(Cambridge, Dobson, ‘Scottishforthcoming). Emigration’, 35-40. || °° A. J. Gibson and T. C. Smout, Prices, Food and Wages in Scotland, 1550-1780 |

38. N. C. Landsman, Scotland and its First American Colony, 1683-1765 (Princeton, NJ, 1985), 134.

Scottish Emigration 87 been described in a letter to Charles II concerning colonization of St Lucia as ‘the chief instrument in bringing Barbados to its perfection’, and there were identifiable concentrations of Scots in Jamaica and

Nevis.°? Of the 7,000 migrants to the New World in the second half of the seventeenth century, probably two-thirds went to the Caribbean. This number would still be much lower than that for people who emigrated as servants from Ireland to the West Indies, as discussed in Chapter 6. It is much more difficult to make observations about the scale of

migration to Ulster between 1650 and 1700. Cullen has suggested that the logic of Sir William Petty’s contemporary calculations is that about 20,000 Scots had survived there by the early 1650s, following

the massacre of some and the return to Scotland of many more after 1641. A poll-tax-based estimate of about 75,600 Scots in seven Ulster counties in 1660 would therefore point to an enormous immigration of 40,000 to 50,000 from Scotland in the Cromwellian period.*° This is a smaller estimate than some,*’ but it implies that more came in this decade than in the whole of the initial setthement of Antrim, Down, and the escheated counties in the first half of the seventeenth century. As Scottish sources are virtually silent about it, it is hard to see how the movement can have been of this magnitude. If a good proportion represented merely the flowing back of Scots who had been temporarily expelled as a result of the troubles, perhaps we should now put the total of new immigrants between about 10,000 and 20,000; but this is no more than a guess. It is generally agreed that the 1660s was not a decade of substantial

migration, but the stream recommenced after 1674, as the Irish economy improved and both the political situation (at least for Covenanting malcontents) and the economic situation deteriorated in Scotland. The Scottish Privy Council was concerned in 1678 about ‘sundry tenants and other persons of mean quality’ leaving or plan-

ning to leave for Ireland, ‘to the great prejudice of heretours and 3? Dobson, ‘Scottish Emigration’, 92-108; Cullen (Ch. 6) refers to 201 Scots in Nevis, Monserrat, and Antigua in 1678. 40 1. M. Cullen, ‘Population Trends in Seventeenth-Century Ireland’, Economic and Social Review, 6 (1975), 154. 41 W. Macafee and V. Morgan, ‘Population in Ulster, 1660-1760’, in P. Roebuck (ed.), Plantation to Partition: Essays in Ulster History in Honour of 7. L. McCracken (Belfast, 1981), 47, speak of a contemporary figure of 80,000 immigrants ‘now regarded as an over-estimate’.

88 Smout, Landsman, and Devine others... who are thereby lyke to be left destitute of tenants and servants for labouring their lands’.*” Irish sources in the 1680s spoke of 1,000 Scots coming every summer through the east Ulster ports.*°

Perhaps we could surmise another 10,000 arrivals between the Restoration and the Revolution of 1688, though again others have suggested more. Finally, there was the great migration of the 1690s, particularly of

the second half of that decade when the Scottish harvests failed; contemporaries were universally clear that this was on a dramatic scale without precedent, even on the crowded crossing between Scotland and Ireland. Some estimates at the time were very high indeed; for example, an estimate of 1698 speaks of 80,000 Scottish families arriving since the Revolution, and another of 1715 of 50,000 families since 1688. If we believed them, we should have to imagine that at

least a quarter of the entire population left Scotland during this period. They are no more than implausible scaremongering rumours

put about by ecclesiastical authorities anxious to exaggerate the danger to the Church of Ireland of an inrush of Presbyterians.** On

the other hand, it is thought that during the famine the Scottish population might have declined by as many as 200,000, and that not more than half of that was by excess mortality.*°? Thus a figure of 40,000 to 70,000 individuals moving to Ireland in the 1690s would not be at all impossible, and coincides roughly with one contemporary estimate of 50,000 people in this period.*° During the early part of

the decade the Scottish Privy Council complained, as before, of persons ‘who run away from their landlords without giving satisfaction’, but later Ireland was seen as a necessary refuge for starving multitudes.*” To summarize, our best guess for movement to Ireland between 1650 and 1700 lies between 60,000 and 100,000 people. We are almost completely in the dark about movement to other destinations. Circumstantial evidence suggests that a good many Scots went to England. The Tyneside keelmen, for instance, remained as *2 Quoted in Cullen, ‘Population Trends’, 156. *3 Moody et al. (eds.), New History of Ireland, iii. 459.

44 T. W. Moody and W. E. Vaughan (eds.), 4 New History of Ireland iv (Oxford, 1986), 134; Cullen, ‘Population Trends’, 157. 45 R. E. Tyson, ‘Contrasting Régimes: Population Growth in Ireland and Scotland during the Eighteenth Century’, in R. A. Houston et al. (eds.), Conflict and Identity in the Social and Economic History of Ireland and Scotland (Edinburgh, forthcoming). *© Cullen, ‘Population Trends’, 157. 47 Ibid.

Scottish Emigration 89 heavily Scottish as they had been in 1637. In 1710 the mayor of Newcastle spoke of ‘the many Scotch young fellows who come hither

to work at the keels for the summer only’, and in 1712 the keelmen themselves declared that out of a total of 1,600 men, 400 were at that

time in Scotland, ‘whither they go always in the winter to their families’. They were, however, by no means all migrant labourers. When an investigation of keelmen took place after rioting in 1740, out of 341 individuals, 55 per cent were found to be Scots-born:

most of them had been there for more than ten years, and five individuals for more than forty years.** There were probably other towns and cities with communities of Scottish workers and migrant

workers, though none that posed such manifest social problems to , their hosts. One Scottish pamphleteer in 1705 put the number of Scottish hawkers in England at between 500 and 1,000; it was a cohort that would be constantly replenished.””

Elsewhere we have a more solidly based estimate of a Scottish community in Rotterdam, where the kirk had 1,000 communicants in 1700. The tradition of migrant labour in the Netherlands was already so strong that the kirk decided to hold its communions in spring and autumn, because in summer so many sailors were away in the Arctic whaling, and in winter so many on voyages to the south.°? We also

have details of the Scottish brigade in the Netherlands, apparently maintained in this period at about 1,500 strong.?’ Considering the rate of turnover of mercenary troops, it would be surprising if this did not imply a migration of at least 5,000 in the half-century to 1700. Other destinations for mercenaries were not so important after 1650, but with Jacobites in French service after 1690, the migrant soldier

was not altogether negligible. All in all, perhaps we could put a realistic figure for Scottish migrants to England and Europe in the period 1650-1700 at between 10,000 and 20,000. Table 5.2 summarizes our rough estimates for the second half of the seventeenth century. It will be seen that the overall volume is very

similar to the estimates for the first half of the century, and our assumptions of the size of population from which the migrants were drawn are also very similar, about 1.0—1.2 million. The main differ*8 Fewster, ‘Keelmen of Tyneside’, 28-9. 9 J. Donaldson, Money Increased and Credit Raised (Edinburgh, 1705), 19. °° 'W. Steven, The History of the Scottish Church in Rotterdam (Edinburgh, 1832), 123; J. Morrison, Scots on the Dijk (Castle Douglas, 1981), 7.

>! Ferguson (ed.), Scots Brigade in the Netherlands.

go Smout, Landsman, and Devine TABLE 5.2. Scottish Migration, 1650-1700

Destination Minimum Maximum

America 7,000 7,000 Ireland 60,000 100,000

, Elsewhere 10,000 20,000

Rough numbers 78,000 127,000 ence is that the gender mix of the emigrants in the second half of the century was much more equal, as there were proportionately fewer mercenaries and more families involved. Consequently, not so high a proportion of young males emigrated; it may have amounted to one-

tenth of all young adults aged 15-30. One last comparative statistic is relevant. Wrigley and Schofield

suggest a net annual migration of 7,144 individuals from England | between 1601 and 1701, from a population perhaps four to five times

as large as that of Scotland. Our estimates suggest a net annual migration in the range of 1,630—2,420 a year, or 23-34 per cent of that of England. It would be surprising (given the relative affluence

of the two countries) if the Scots were not proportionately more numerous migrants than the English. The scale of their movement may have been overlooked, but the estimate is not at all implausible.>*

As we shall see in the two following sections, it is doubtful that emigration in the following century fully maintained the scale and impetus of the earlier period; and it is certain that it was redirected from Europe to the New World. LOWLAND EMIGRATION IN THE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY

The last years of the seventeenth century marked a significant turning-point in Scottish emigration. During the next century, Scots continued both to migrate and to emigrate, although quite possibly at >? E. A. Wrigley and R. S. Schofield, The Population History of England, 1541-1871 (London, 1980), 219. The author wishes to express his thanks to E. A. Wrigley, R. E.

Tyson, R. A. Houston, R. M. Mitchison, D. Stevenson, and L. M. Cullen for their many helpful observations and comments on this part of the chapter.

Scottish Emigration gI a lower rate than during the earlier period. But the origins and the destinations of emigrants changed considerably. While out-migration

to the Continent dwindled, Scots continued to move to Ireland and England; with the Union of Parliaments, the latter movement increasingly took on the character of domestic migration. Moreover,

Ireland and England began to serve as stopping-over points for emigrants headed for North America, which became the principal destination for Scottish emigrants from the Lowlands and, increasingly, the Highlands. There was occasional Scottish movement to mainland America in

the seventeenth century, but sustained emigration there cannot be documented before about 1680, with the much more considerable efforts to settle East Jersey and Carolina, which collectively attracted well over 100 Scottish investors and close to 1,000 settlers before the end of the century. Thereafter, the Jersey colony would continue to

maintain its connections with Scotland and to attract Scots to the whole of the New York-to-Philadelphia corridor.°’ Thus Scottish interest in, and emigration to, the Americas were well established before the Union of Parliaments, one of the purposes of which, from

a Scottish point of view, was commercial access to the English trading world.

During the first phase of that movement, most of the emigrants came from the Scottish Lowlands. Historians over the years have paid relatively little attention to Lowland emigration during the eighteenth century; as a subject, it has been largely overshadowed by

two better-known and seemingly more colourful stories: the emigration by Scottish Highlanders and Ulster Protestants, the so-called ‘Scots-Irish’. This is unfortunate in several respects; for most of the century, the overall number of emigrants from the Lowlands probably

exceeded that from the Highlands by a considerable margin, and in peak years may have come closer to the totals of the better publicized Scots-Irish emigration than has been allowed. Moreover, to an unusual degree, Lowland emigrants came from skilled and educated groups in Scottish society, and assumed highly influential positions in America, with important ramifications for both places. Part of the obscurity derives from a lack of sources for the first six decades of the century, and the consequent difficulty of establishing anything resembling reliable estimates of Lowland emigration for that °3 Landsman, Scotland and tts First American Colony.

Q2 Smout, Landsman, and Devine period. Until the peak of the ‘emigration mania’ in 1773-5, Scottish

ports kept no emigration registers of the sort that Bernard Bailyn exploited so profitably in his monumental Voyagers to the West.-* Nor

can we discern much from the records of ship departures from Scottish ports or their arrival in America for those years, since almost

all emigrants who travelled from those ports boarded commercial vessels rather than emigrant ships, and their passage most often went unnoted. A second difficulty in estimating Lowland emigration is that Lowland emigrants did not all set out from Scottish ports. Many—exactly how many may never be known—sailed from England and Ireland aboard both passenger and trading vessels. Not only is it difficult to trace their movements; it is also difficult to distinguish Scots from

} other British emigrants from those places. We happen to know about the travels of a few, such as the Shetlander John Harrower, who sailed from London to Virginia in 1774 and kept a journal of his experiences. There were at least half a dozen other Scots on the vessel with Harrower, whose travels are known only because of his notations.°> How many others travelled on less well-recorded passages from England or Ireland is impossible to determine. Those problems are compounded by the traditional mobility of the

Lowland population both at home and abroad. In Scotland, rural Lowlanders moved from farm to farm with an almost unbelievable regularity, reflecting in part the traditionally precarious position of the lower classes within a rigid social hierarchy. They moved also, and increasingly during the eighteenth century, into the growing central cities of Edinburgh and Glasgow.°° And they moved farther, within Britain and Ireland and to distant shores. South of the border,

substantial Lowland communities could be found in London and in several northern towns, especially Newcastle, which became an important post both in the Church of Scotland and in the seceder >+ B. Bailyn, Voyagers to the West: A Passage in the Peopling of America on the Eve of the Revolution (New York, 1986).

°° E. M. Riley (ed.), The Journal of John Harrower: An Indentured Servant in the Colony of Virginia (Williamsburg, Va., 1963).

56 On the mobility of Lowlanders see M. Gray, ‘Scottish Emigration: The Social Impact of Agrarian Change in the Rural Lowlands, 1775-1875’, Perspectives in American History, 7 (1973), 95-174; Landsman, Scotland and its First American Colony, ch. 1; and

R. A. Houston and C. W. J. Withers, ‘Population Mobility in Scotland and Europe, 1090-1900: A Comparative Perspective’, Annales de démographie historique (1990),

5-306.

Scottish Emigration 93 communions. Towards the end of the century Scots would increasingly appear in the manufacturing towns of the north.°’ Lowlanders were even more visible in Ireland, especially in the north, the legacy

of the great migration of the seventeenth century, which at least some observers suggested had continued at a reduced pace a decade beyond the turn of the century. Scots continued to travel to Ireland

during the eighteenth century, although the movement tended to

even out, as Ulster Protestants often returned to Scotland for education and trade. Distinguishing Scots within the larger English

and Ulster emigrations that occurred throughout the eighteenth century is difficult indeed.”®

Lowland emigration is best evaluated in three distinct phases. The first, encompassing the first six decades of the eighteenth century, was undoubtedly the slowest period as well as the most difficult to measure. There one finds a modest and irregular, but still significant, movement of Lowlanders closely linked with Scotland’s rapidly developing commercial ties with America, interrupted by periods of

war during the 1740s and 1750s. Scots appeared throughout the American colonies during those years, with particular concentrations

in places linked to their trading interests: the Chesapeake, where Glasgow was becoming dominant in the tobacco trade; New Jersey,

where the remains of the seventeenth-century colony anchored a Scottish sphere of influence from New York City to eastern Pennsylvania; Boston and northern New England; the Carolinas; and several West Indian islands.°?

Whatever the difficulties in measurement, most of the evidence >? See e.g. J. Morison, The Crisis: A Discourse on the Aspects of Providence, in November

1777 (Edinburgh, 1778); tdem, The Secession Testimony Abundantly Consistent with Liberty of Conscience (Paisley, 1774); and W. Graham, False Prophets Unmasked: A Sermon, Preached and now Published, at the Desire of the Committee of the Protestant Association in Newcastle Upon Tyne (Glasgow, 1780). See also R. A. Cage, ‘The Scots in England’, in Cage (ed.), Zhe Scots Abroad: Labour, Capital, Enterprise, 1750-1914 (London, 1985), 29-45, and the sources cited there in n. 48.

>8 For some notices of Scots who sailed from Ireland, see the citations in E. R. Fingerhut, “The Assimilation of Immigrants on the Frontier of New York, 1764-1776 (Columbia Univ. Ph.D. thesis, 1962), 308—11; also J. Stevens to Campbell Stevens, 6 Feb. 1751, and passim, Stevens Family Papers, New Jersey Historical Society; and Glasgow Journal, 11 Feb. 1773. >? The best general survey remains that of I. C. C. Graham, Colonists from Scotland: Emigration to North America, 1707-1783 (Ithaca, NY, 1956); but see also W. R. Brock, Scotus Americanus: A Survey of the Sources for Links between Scotland and America in the Eighteenth Century (Edinburgh, 1982).

94 Smout, Landsman, and Devine suggests that the annual rate of emigration during those years was never large. For the most part it involved the movement of individuals

and families, rather than larger groups, and the annual totals were certainly in the hundreds rather than the thousands. While Scots achieved considerable notoriety among the residents of several of those places for their clannish and aggressive commercial style, none of those movements was sufficient to rate more than a passing mention in Scotland, where the emigration of several thousands per year to Ireland in the 1690s and to America after 1770 began to provoke fears of rural depopulation. In fact, some of the most visible Scots in the colonies were not properly immigrants at all, but sojourners, who ventured to the New World for a few years in commercial employ with the hope of acquiring enough property to return to Scotland in

style.

Given what we know of the Lowland population during the first

half of the eighteenth century, the surprising thing may not be the modest size of the emigration, but rather that it took place at all, since the total population for the first several decades was undoubtedly well below what it had been before, as the result of the severe harvest failures at the end of the seventeenth century. These had reduced population totals by as much as 25 per cent in such areas as the north-east. That was also the most intensive period of emigration from the western Lowlands to Ireland. Thus there was little population pressure driving emigration for many decades, so whatever movement occurred was surely a matter more of the attraction of life abroad than affliction at home. The data are much better for the second phase of emigration, from the end of hostilities in the Seven Years War until the outbreak of war with America in 1775. The Treaty of Paris of 1763 opened up _ the American back country to a flood of Scottish settlement that has been chronicled by such noted authors as Johnson and Boswell in their journals of their tours to the Hebrides and, more recently, J. M. Bumsted and Bernard Bailyn. As Bailyn has demonstrated, during those years, Scots flocked especially to the perimeters of settlement: to Georgia, the Carolinas, Canada, upper New York, and the back country generally. Drawing on the earlier work of Eugene Fingerhut, Bailyn has estimated that 40,000 Scots came to America during those °° See A. Karras, ‘Transatlantic Transients: Scots in Jamaica and the Chesapeake, 1740-1800’ (Univ. Pennsylvania Ph.D. thesis, 1988).

Scottish Emigration 95 years, deriving his figures from estimates of ship tonnages in the transatlantic trade; Fingerhut himself had projected that the total might have reached 50,000.°! Along with nearly every other interpreter, Bailyn has attributed the

‘rage for emigration’ in Scotland during those years to changes engulfing Highland society after the ’45; yet his own data suggest that for most of the period, Lowland emigrants outnumbered those from the Highlands, at least before 1773.°% Moreover, from the perspective of the Lowlands, the upsurge after 1760 seems less like a break with past patterns than portrayals of Highland emigration have suggested, and more like an acceleration of earlier movements. Lowland emigration after 1760 continued to result from previously established trading networks, deriving principally from Glasgow and the south-

western countryside. The settlements of Lowland immigrants in America fanned out from places where earlier generations had settled:

the commercialized mid-Atlantic corridor from New York to Philadelphia and on into upper New York and western Pennsylvania; and south and west from coastal Carolina and Virginia. Scotland’s eastern

ports, which had contributed significantly to some of the earlier emigrations, were now largely eclipsed by Glasgow as a source of emigration to the mainland, although they evidently continued their contacts with the West Indies.°°

Lowland emigration after 1760 suggests the continuing significance of another long-standing Scottish— American connection linking merchant, tradesman, and evangelical networks. During the peak years of the movement in the 1770s, the leading promoters of Scottish emigration to America were Glasgow trading families with long his-

tories of evangelical involvement, such as the Buchanans and the merchant John Pagan. Its leading publicists were the evangelical clergymen William Thom of Govan, near Glasgow, and his former neighbour John Witherspoon, who emigrated from Paisley to Princeton in 1768 to head the Presbyterian College of New Jersey.°* 61 Bailyn, Voyagers to the West, 45-9. Fingerhut, ‘Assimilation of Immigrants’. Graham, Colonists from Scotland, 185-9, relying on shipping notices in Scotland and America, counted only about half that number of emigrants, but it is clear that not all travel took place on the kind of large emigrant vessels that were likely to be recorded. ° See e.g., Bailyn, Voyagers to the West, 111, 115 ff. 3 Karras, ‘Transatlantic Transients’. °# N. C. Landsman, ‘Witherspoon and the Problem of Provincial Identity in Scottish Evangelical Culture’, in R. B. Sher and J. R. Smitten (eds.), Scotland and America in the Age of the Enlighterment (Edinburgh, 1990), 29-45.

96 Smout, Landsman, and Devine Witherspoon’s former neighbourhood in Paisley provided one of

the most fertile sources of emigrants. Just before embarking for America, Witherspoon wrote to his friend Benjamin Rush of so many

friends and neighbours planning to join him in America that he would have to ‘look out for an Island to settle a colony’.®° Over the next several years, Paisley sent a number of prominent settlers, in-

cluding merchants, teachers, and printers. Those numbers were swelled by the linen recession of the 1770s, and in 1774 the ship Commerce sailed for New York carrying more than 200 tradesmen from Paisley and Glasgow. Over the next eighteenth months at least a dozen additional voyages were advertised from Glasgow to New York alone, attracting settlers from all over the western Lowlands as far as

the Borders.°° There is an excellent description of many of the Paisley natives in the correspondence of Hugh Simm, who accompanied Witherspoon to Princeton and sent back a series of letters to his brother, a weaver in Paisley. As he traversed the mid-Atlantic from New York to Philadelphia, Simm everywhere bumped into former neighbours and acquaintances: Henry Glen on the streets of New York, Robert Steward in New Brunswick; Henry Glass on the way to Halifax; and others as he travelled through New York to the settlement at ‘New Paisley’.°’

This second phase of emigration was halted by the outbreak of hostilities between Britain and America in 1775, although Scots continued to travel to America during those years in military service. Historians have given more notice to Highland soldiers in America, but Lowlanders served as well; the experience of Lowland soldiers

during the Seven Years War was one of the principal stimuli to increased emigration thereafter. The character of that particular link between emigration and military service is well captured in the statement that one Captain Allan Stewart gave to emigration officers in 1775 before his departure for North Carolina. Captain Stewart was planning to take up the land granted him at the end of the last war. ‘But should the Troubles continue in America he is Determined to make the Best of his way to Boston and Offer his Service to General Gage.”°® As many as a quarter of the officers in the British Army in 65 Witherspoon to Rush, 9 Feb. 1768, in L. H. Butterfield (ed.), John Witherspoon Comes to America (Princeton, NJ, 1953) 69.

66 V. R. Cameron, Emigrants from Scotland to America, 1774-1775 (Baltimore, 1965), I~5; see also the shipping notices in the Glasgow Journal. 67 Correspondence of Hugh Simm, Princeton University Library. 68 Cameron, Emigrants from Scotland, gt.

Scottish Emigration 97 the eighteenth century may have been Scottish, and Scots may have comprised a similar fraction of the common soldiers, particularly in America, although nothing like that number became permanent emigrants from Scotland.°”

The conclusion of that war brought on the third phase of emigration, lasting until the end of the century, directed not only at the newly independent United States but, increasingly, towards the remaining provinces of British North America. There were almost

certainly more Highlanders than Lowlanders in the last phase of settlement, but several thousand Lowlanders emigrated also, settling mostly within the commercial communities of the Atlantic provinces; in the 1780s Scottish emigrants in Halifax were reported to be a glut

on the market.’? Others went to the United States, including a notable group of artisans and intellectuals from Glasgow and Paisley, such as the poet-ornithologist Alexander Wilson, all refugees from a decade of political reaction. If we assume a rate of no more than 500 emigrants to America per year before 1760, that would suggest fewer than 30,000 Scots during the first phase of emigration, as many as nine-tenths of whom were Lowlanders; possibly 40,000 for the peak years of 1760-75, at least

10,000 of whom came from the Highlands; and perhaps another 5,000 for the last phase, including both Highlanders and Lowlanders

(see Table 5.3). That would suggest perhaps 75,000 Scottish emi-

grants to the North American mainland during the eighteenth century, of whom more than 60,000 went to what became the United

States. The total Lowland emigration would have been fewer than 60,000. Emigration totals elsewhere were far lower, but are more difficult to estimate. Scots certainly continued to travel to England, Ireland, the West Indies, and the European continent, but whether there was a significant net outflow to those places after the first years of the century—other than to London, a few northern English towns,

and the West Indies—has yet to be determined. Thus the total number of Scottish emigrants leaving Great Britain in the eighteenth ©? See esp. J. Hayes, ‘Scottish Officers in the British Army, 1714-1763’, Scottish Historical Review, 37 (1958), 23-33. 7° D. S. Macmillan, ‘The “New Men” in Action: Scottish Mercantile and Shipping Operations in the North American Colonies, 1760-1825’, in Macmillan (ed.), Canadian Business History: Selected Studies, 1497-1971 (Toronto, 1972), 44—103; also see J. M. Bumsted, The People’s Clearance: Highland Emigration to British North America, 1770-

1815 (Edinburgh, 1982), which provides some figures for emigration from the Highlands and the Lowlands.

— 98 Smout, Landsman, and Devine TABLE 5.3. Lowland emigrants to North America in the eighteenth century

Years Number 1700-60 under 30,000 "1760-75 C.30,000 1775-1800 6.3,000

Total c.60,000

century appears to have been fewer than 100,000, but still quite substantial for a nation of only about a million and a quarter population at mid-century. If we turn our attention from emigration to estimates of Scottish

immigration in America, we may find that we have to consider revising those totals upwards. Beginning with the pioneering work of

Howard Barker in 1931, American historians have conventionally estimated the ethnic origins of the early American population on the basis of surnames. The method employed by such historians—a complicated statistical procedure involving the identification of distinctive ethnic surnames and a projection of the total population of a national group on the basis of projections from those surnames—has been roundly criticized. Nor is there much consensus among those

who have employed the method as to the correct result; recent practitioners have revised Barker’s original estimates of the Scottish

population in the United States in 1790 from his figure of fewer than 200,000 upwards to a seemingly exaggerated 400,000 or more, offered by Ellen and Forrest McDonald. Even the most conservative

of those estimates, that of Thomas Purvis, suggests the need to reconsider the information available. If fewer than 70,000 Scots arrived in what became the United States, the majority after 1760, including most of those who came with families, then an estimate of upwards of 120,000 Scots in the United States by 1790 seems high, especially considering that all the evidence suggests a high proportion of Scots among the more than 60,000 colonials who left the United States for England, Scotland, or British North America after 1776. The estimates of 200,000-—400,000 seem impossible.” “1-H. F. Barker and M. L. Hansen, ‘Report of Committee on Linguistic and National Stocks in the Population of the United States’, in American Historical

Scottish Emigration 99 We are left with two possibilities: either all the immigration estimates are wrong, the result of flaws in the method and an inability to distinguish Scottish from Scots-Irish surnames; or else there were simply a good many more native Scots included among supposedly

Scots-Irish and even English emigrants to America than we had thought. The answer is likely to be somewhere in-between. It does seem that some Scottish emigrants appeared in nearly every settlement that historians have classified as ‘Scots-Irish’; but how many we cannot know. In the final analysis, surname analysis provides no clear

way to make that distinction. There is a rather telling illustration of

the problem in John Harrower’s diary. Harrower was lodged on board with four other Scots and a Yorkshireman in what came to be known as the ‘Scots mace’ [mess]. Shortly after their departure they

were visited by the captain, who told them that he himself was a Scotsman. He had left his home at age 15 to go to sea and had yet to

return.’ Among so mobile a population, it is difficult not only to trace Scots, but even to define who they were. Whatever the total number of Scottish emigrants, there is no doubt that Scotland contributed a disproportionate number of skilled and

educated emigrants: merchants, doctors, ministers, and educators. Scots formed prominent commercial cliques in the Chesapeake, the port cities of New York, Philadelphia, and Charleston, and throughout the back country, extending into Canada. More than 150 Scottish

doctors emigrated to America during the eighteenth century, and almost the whole of the colonial medical profession was Scottish emigré or Scottish-trained. Scots and Scottish-trained ministers dominated both the Presbyterian and the Episcopal Churches in America. Scottish educators were also predominant not only at Princeton, under Witherspoon, but at the College of Philadelphia, the many Presbyterian academies in the middle and southern states, and as tutors in Carolina and the Chesapeake. Together, educated Association, Annual Report for the Year 1931 (Washington, DC, 1932), i. 107-441; F. McDonald and E. S. McDonald, “The Ethnic Origins of the American People, 1790’, William & Mary Quarterly, 3rd ser., 37 (1980), 179-99; T. L. Purvis, ‘The European Ancestry of the United States Population, 1790’, William & Mary Quarterly, 3rd ser.,

41 (1984), 85-102; and the critiques in that journal, Jan. and Oct. 1984. D. H. Fischer, Albion’s Seed: Four British Folkways in America (New York, 198g), has offered

enlarged estimates of ‘North British’ emigration to America, but Fischer has little interest in distinguishing Scots from either northern Irish or northern English emigrants, and is of little use here. 72 Riley (ed.), Journal of John Harrower, 18.

100 Smout, Landsman, and Devine Scots provided an almost astonishing array of links between Scottish

and American culture, that would have broad significance for the conceptions of political, religious, commercial, and intellectual life well into the nineteenth century.’° The emigration of educated Scots was itself not new, but two developments in the eighteenth century affected the character of that movement. One was the rise of the Scottish universities in the early part of the eighteenth century, which was predicated in part upon the ability of its students to find employment abroad, since they educated

many more than the domestic economy could absorb. The other was the growing sense among Scotland’s upper and middle classes of an emerging affinity between Scotland and America as linked provincial societies within the British Empire, sharing some common inheritances in politics, religion, and the economy. That would allow Scottish merchants, ministers, and speculators to promote emigration to America as a matter not simply of necessity, but of the public good.

In this section I have not attempted to deal at all with one very distinctive and important sector of Scottish eighteenth-century migration, that from the Highlands. What I hope to have established is

that Lowland migration, though seldom widely celebrated except as a channel for cultural ideas in America,’* was of considerable quantitative significance both to Scotland and to the New World. For a look at the Highlands, we must turn to the final part of this chapter.

HIGHLAND EMIGRATION IN THE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY

Highlanders formed a component of the great migration of Scottish soldiers to Europe and Ireland in the seventeenth century described in the first section of this chapter. However, no systematic analysis of

the social and economic background to Highland emigration, its magnitude and social composition, is possible until the following century. Even then, information is scarce until the period after 1760. 73 I have discussed this more extensively in Landsman, ‘The Provinces and the Empire: Scotland, the American Colonies, and the Development of British Provincial Identity’, in L. Stone (ed.), An Imperial State at War: Britain from 1689-1815 (London, 1994), 258-87.

(Glasgow, 1975). .

, 7 A. Hook, Scotland and America: A Study of Cultural Relations, 1750-1835

Scottish Emigration IOI Such data as do exist suggest that, to an even greater extent than for the Lowlands, outward movement to the Americas was modest, spasmodic, and confined to particular areas of the Highlands. Even including those Jacobite prisoners who were exiled after the °45 rebellion, the total number of emigrants between 1700 and 1760 is unlikely to have exceeded 3,000.”° Significant levels of emigration from the Scottish Highlands to North America can be dated from the early decades of the eighteenth century. Nevertheless, by the 1760s connections already existed between northern Scotland and migrant

settlements in North Carolina, Georgia, and New York. The important link between North Carolina and the Highlands was established during the administration of the Scottish governor Gabriel

Johnston (1734-52), who promoted immigration of his fellow countrymen into particular areas of that colony. Emigrants from Argyllshire were especially prominent, as, for instance, in 1739 when

‘about three hundred and fifty people’ led by several gentlemen arrived in Carolina.’ In numerical terms this first phase of emigration was not very substantial, but it was important in creating a favourable environment for the much greater exodus of later times. Links between the New World and specific districts of the Highlands became vital conduits through which information was disseminated widely about colonial circumstances in particular and the emigration experience in general.’’ The promise of aid and support on arrival from previous immigrants also helped to lower the threshold of risk for those who followed. Chains of connection were gradually built up by the later eighteenth century which made transatlantic movement much less traumatic and intimidating than it had been in previous times. The existing immigrant communities in North America did not necesarily cause the huge upsurge in outward movement which took place from the 1760s, but they did help to facilitate it.

As in the Lowlands, the Seven Years War (1756-63) seems to have been something of a watershed in Highland transatlantic emi-

gration. Although precise figures are difficult to obtain, current estimates, based on customs records, the contemporary press, and > D. Meyer, The Highland Scots of North Carolina, 1732-1776 (Chapel Hill, NC, 1961); A. Murdoch (ed.), ‘A Scottish Document Concerning Emigration to North Carolina in 1772’, North Carolina Historical Review, 67 (1990), 438-49.

7° W. L. Saunders (ed.), The Colonial Records of North Carolina (Raleigh, NC, 1886-—go), iv. 489-90. 7 Bailyn, Voyagers to the West, 503-4.

102 Smout, Landsman, and Devine government enquiry, clearly demonstrate a quite dramatic increase in

outward movement in the years between 1763 and the outbreak of the American War of Independence in 1775.’° I. C. C. Graham, who has conducted a careful survey of the existing evidence, reckons that 9,500 Highlanders left for North America between 1768 and 1775. Even this total, however, is almost certainly an underestimate, because

Graham did not take into account the significant number of emigrants of Highland origin who left from Lowland ports. In addition, customs administration in the north was weak and patchy, and an unknown number of emigrants must have escaped the surveillance of local officials. It might therefore be appropriate to raise Graham’s estimate to at least 15,000, and possibly to 20,000. Even given these qualifications, however, the figure is still strik-

ing.’” Bailyn’s analysis of British emigrants to North America in 1773-6 reveals that more left from the Highlands than from any other British region with the exception of London. An astonishing 18 per cent of all British emigrants in these years came from the High-

lands and islands off Scotland, one of the most sparsely populated areas of Great Britain.®°

However, it is important to note that there was no continuous or increasing volume of emigration. The great exodus of people all | but ceased during the American War. Reliable information on what happened thereafter is even more incomplete and ambiguous than it is for before 1775, but evidence from estate papers and contemporary comment indicates that while emigration resumed, it did so at a much slower pace and on a reduced scale.®! Even the serious subsistence crisis of 1782-3 did not produce a significant increase in emigration,

and when outward movement did become more substantial from ¢.1785, it still occurred at irregular intervals, with great variation between localities. After the outbreak of war in 1793, emigration slowed to a trickle until the Peace of Amiens in 1801. Between 1801 78 This pre-1775 emigration can be examined in Bumsted, People’s Clearance, 1-82; M. W. Flinn et al. (eds.), Scottish Population History from the Seventeenth Century to the 1930s (Cambridge, 1977), 443-6; Graham, Colonists from Scotland. ”? Graham, Colonists from Scotland, 114. 8° Bailyn, Voyagers to the West, 111.

81 The pattern described in what follows has been built up from an examination of correspondence in the following sets of estate papers in the Scottish Record Office,

Edinburgh: GD2o01, Clanranald Papers; GD221, Lord Macdonald Papers; GD46, Seaforth Muniments. In addition, material has been gathered from contemporary newspapers and periodical literature.

Scottish Emigration 103 and 1803 the size of the outward movement was reminiscent of the high levels of emigration which occurred before the American War. Figures were quoted of a possible 20,000 Highlanders preparing to leave for the New World, and careful enumerations by estate factors and local parish ministers suggested an actual emigration of between 3,000 and 4,000 departures from the Hebrides alone.” The sheer scale of the planned emigration shook both Highland landowners and Government. The former were concerned about the loss of a labour force at a time when the profits from such labour-intensive activities as kelp production and fishing were high. The latter was equally sensitive to the haemorrhaging of a population which had demonstrated its martial qualities in both the American and the Napoleonic wars. The immediate consequence of their anxieties was the passing

in 1803 of the Passenger Vessels Act, whose overt purpose was humanitarian, but was in reality designed to increase the costs of the transatlantic voyage and so reduce the incentives to emigrate.®’ The number of emigrants did fall drastically again after 1804, but this was

more because of the resumption of hostilities than the impact of the new legislation. Nevertheless, individual parties of Highlanders continued to leave their native land. Table 5.4 summarizes the rough estimates for the period 1700-1815.

The decisive influence on this cyclical pattern of emigration was war. The remarkable exodus before 1775 was curtailed by the American War, and that which was building up again from the early 1790s by the outbreak of conflict with revolutionary France. The chronology of Highland emigration before 1815 suggests that the internal forces making for outward movement were temporarily offset

by the effects of hostilities. A clear illustration of this came in 1801, when a brief period of peace almost immediately precipitated a resurgence of high levels of emigration. War limited Highland emigration in several ways. Hostilities raised costs, and interrupted sea transport. By cutting the link with emigrant communities overseas for

some years, it inevitably delayed the renewal of vital connections.

One reason why emigration declined in the 1780s was that the American War severed traditional ties with North Carolina and New 82 Transactions of the Highland and Agricultural Soctety, 2 (1803), vii—xi; Parliamentary Papers, Survey and Report on the Coasts and Central Highlands of Scotland, 4 (1802-3), g—10; Anon., Remarks on the Earl of Selkirk’s Observations on the Highlands (Edinburgh,

1806), 288-9. 83 J. Hunter, The Making of the Crofting Community (Edinburgh, 1976), 24-6.

104 Smout, Landsman, and Devine TABLE 5.4. Estimated number of Highland emigrants to North America, 1700-1815

Years Number

1700-60 Below 3,000 1760-75 ¢.15,000+ 1775-1801 2,000— 3,000

1801-3 C.5,000 1803-15 C.3,000

Total C.30,000 York, and it took time to establish or renew equally close relationships with the ‘new’ migrant areas of Upper Canada, Prince Edward Island, and Nova Scotia.** In addition, the Highlands made a huge

contribution to the British army and navy in both the great wars of the later eighteenth century. Military service, both at home and overseas, became an alternative to emigration. The profits and prestige to be derived from raising family regiments from among the people of their estates encouraged some landlords to postpone the execution of the radical economic strategies which were promoting emigration. Detailed study of three different properties in mainland Inverness-shire has revealed a temporary pause in eviction and dispossession in the 1790s as landowners attempted to recruit the tenantry to their personal regiments.®° The main outlines of the chronology of emigration from the Highlands in this period are not in dispute. But the reasons why so many

from this particular region of Scotland sought to emigrate are far from clear. Why was there a steep increase in emigration from the 1760s? Were the Highlanders ‘pushed’ or ‘pulled’ across the Atlantic? Why did this area contribute disproportionately to British transatlantic emigration at this time? These and other questions have

long been debated, but with few entirely satisfactory answers yet forthcoming.”° 84 M. Maclean, ‘In the New Land a New Glengarry: Migration from the Scottish Highlands to Upper Canada, 1750-1820’ (Univ. of Edinburgh Ph.D. thesis, 1982),

a Ibid. 219. 8° As long ago as the 1920s Margaret Adam was addressing some of these issues in

a series of pioneering essays. See M. Adam, “The Highland Emigration of 1770’,

Scottish Emigration 105 It is apparent, however, that a more satisfactory context for mass emigration from northern Scotland had emerged by the second half of the eighteenth century. The foundation of Highland communities in North Carolina, Georgia, and New York from the 1730s created the essential basis for ‘chain migration’. The commercial relationship between Scotland and North America was revolutionized by the remarkable success of Glasgow in the tobacco trade from the 1730s. The American trades helped to provide the transport infrastructure

for large-scale emigration from Scotland. Most Highland communities were within relatively easy travelling distance of the Clyde

ports, and vessels were often chartered from there by organized emigration parties. It was the growing trade in Canadian timber to Scotland in the early nineteenth century which helped to offset the impact of the Passenger Vessels Act of 1803 on emigration.®’ The British timber market’s demand for Canadian lumber radically increased as a result of wartime needs. The timber trade required large

vessels, but these had low freights on the outward journey. The emigrant traffic to Upper Canada and the maritime provinces was therefore an effective means of utilizing surplus capacity and cutting freight costs. Highland society at all social levels had also become less insular by the late eighteenth century. Reference has already been made to

the military service of Highlanders in the Seven Years War, the American wars, and the French revolutionary war. But its extraordinary scale needs to be emphasized. So extensive was it that demographers have shown that marriage and fertility rates were affected in a significant way by the temporary absence of young adult males.®® One estimate has suggested that 37,000 men were raised in the years 1793-1815, organized in forty battalions and seven militias of the Highland counties.®’ Military recruitment of this magnitude must have accustomed Highland society to greater mobility. This was

even more likely when government paid off officers and men in colonial land; these military settlements then provided another point

of attraction to kinsfolk at home. A key element in this Highland Scottish Historical Review, 16 (1919), 280-93; idem, “The Causes of the Highland Emigrations of 1783-1803’, Scottish Historical Review, 17 (1920), 73-89; idem, ‘Eighteenth-Century Highland Landlords and the Poverty Problem’, Scottish Historical Review, 19 (1921-2), 161-79. 87 Bumsted, People’s Clearance, 191-2. 88 Flinn (ed.), Scottish Population History, 14. 89 E. Richards, A History of the Highland Clearances (London, 1982), i. 148.

106 Smout, Landsman, and Devine emigration was the leadership given to many emigrant parties by gentlemen or lesser gentry who had either obtained land in, or had become familiar with, the colonies as a result of their service within the officer class of the British army.”?

All these influences facilitated emigration. But they could not in themselves cause it to happen. In the search for causation, contemporary commentators and later scholars have addressed both the impact of conditions in the Highlands and the opportunities emerging in North America. It has been argued that the increasing volume of emigration reflected the pressure of rising population on the fragile

economy of the Highlands, which led, in turn, to an outflow of ‘surplus’ peasants and their families.’ At first glance, this hypothesis

has much to commend it. Numbers did increase substantially in northern Scotland in the late eighteenth century. The Highland economy was indeed poor and underdeveloped. In the long run, when the emigration of the Highland people is examined down to the middle decades of the eighteenth century, the Malthusian explanation does have real force.”* Population loss was inevitable, because the regional economy proved utterly incapable over time of generating

the necessary level of employment. However, the picture between 1760 and 1815 is considerably more complex, and it is by no means certain that the demographic explanation is entirely satisfactory for that earlier period. There are several problems. First, although numbers were increasing, economic activity was also expanding. There were indeed

years of crisis, such as 1712-13, 1782-3, and 1801-2, brought about by harvest failure, and they may have helped to trigger some emigration. In addition, the vast majority of the population continued to eke out an existence at, or only marginally above, subsistence level. Nevertheless, in these decades, there was a huge increase in employment opportunities, especially in the western Highlands and islands from which most emigrants came, in kelp manufacture, fishing, illicit whisky making, the seasonal migrant economy in the Lowlands and,

above all, military service. Landlord correspondence in these years 90 Maclean, ‘In the New Land’, passim.

21 M. W. Flinn, ‘Malthus, Emigration and Potatoes in the Scottish North-west, 1770-1870’, in L. M. Cullen and T. C. Smout (eds.), Comparative Aspects of Irish and Scottish Economic and Social History (Edinburgh, 1977).

92 T. M. Devine, The Great Highland Famine: Hunger, Emigration and the Scottish Highlands in the Nineteenth Century (Edinburgh, 1988).

Scottish Emigration 107 often reveals a fear of labour shortage on some estates, a concern which explains why most lairds were resolutely opposed to emigration from their estates.”° Second, detailed investigation of the emigration process does not provide confirmation of the Malthusian hypothesis. This was no flight

of the very poor or the most vulnerable in Highland society. For a start, without some assistance, sea migration would have been out of reach of the impoverished. One historian reckons that ‘even for indigent emigrants travelling to a wilderness totally supported by charity £10 was a minimum cost per adult’.”* With the majority of the

landlord class firmly opposed in this period, the only evidence of substantial ‘assisted’ emigration was that which took place from South Uist. This was enthusiastically supported by the Catholic Church in

Scotland because it feared Protestant proselytism, which partially explains why the Roman Catholic islands and enclaves on the western mainland tended to generate more emigrants than many other areas.”

The alternative for the poor and distressed was to obtain passage

as indentured servants. But a remarkably small proportion of all Highland emigrants at this time travelled as indentured servants. Only 150 of the nearly 3,000 Scots emigrants documented in the customs return for 1774—5 were indentured, and most of these were Lowlanders.”° The vast majority of those who left the Highlands for

North America in this period did so by using their own resources. They belonged overwhelmingly to the tenant group, the middle rank in Highland society, those with some surplus above subsistence, with sufficient stocks of cattle, sheep, goats, and household goods which, when sold, could raise money for passage and resettlement for themselves and their kinsfolk.”’ Examinations of passenger lists have shown

that the movement was led by married tenant farmers of mature years, with their wives, children, other relatives, servants, and subtenants. The emigration parties were well organized, usually had close links with established emigrant communities across the Atlantic, 73 R. R. Berry, ‘The Role of Hebridean Landlords in Early Nineteenth-Century Emigration’ (Univ. of Strathclyde history department, BA thesis, 1979). °4 Bumsted, People’s Clearance, 12. »° J. M. Bumsted, ‘Highland Emigration to the Island of St John and the Scottish Catholic Church, 1769-1774’, Dalhousie Review, 58 (1978), 511-27. 76 Bailyn, Voyagers to the West, 165.

97 All detailed studies confirm this point. See Berry, ‘Hebridean Landlords’, 27-8; Bailyn, Voyagers to the West, 165, 515-16; Bumsted, People’s Clearance, 74, 99; Maclean, ‘In New Land’, 21, 368.

108 Smout, Landsman, and Devine carried with them substantial sums of money, and consisted of large

numbers of related families from specific estates, communities, or districts of the Highlands.”®> This was not an exodus born of desperation or the stress of hunger and destitution. Rather, it was a

movement which involved a degree of calculation and a careful weighing of prospects on the part of social groups who were able to exert some choice. They could exploit favourable circumstances. One | reason for the sudden surge in emigration in 1802-3 was that cattle prices peaked in these years, thus yielding good returns in the sale of stock to help defray the costs of transport and resettlement.”’ At the

Same time, on some estates, tenants employed the threat of emigration as a means of thwarting or delaying landlord plans for the reorganization of their holdings.'°° All this hardly suggests a people driven by the inexorable pressure of demographic forces from their native land.

J. M. Bumsted contends, on the contrary, that ‘the Highlander chose to come to America of his own free will and usually to improve his situation rather than escape grinding depression. This emigration

was one of rising expectations’.'°' This explanation recognizes the lure of cheap land and freedom from feudal oppression that were clearly significant in promoting emigration. Information received by letter from earlier emigrants, the impact of chain migration, the work of emigrant agents, and reports from returning solders had created

a powerful image of the New World as a land of opportunity.'°? Bumsted’s thesis is also consistent with our knowledge of the social

composition of the emigrant parties. They were, as already seen, drawn predominantly from the ‘middling’ element in society, which apparently had the possibility of some freedom of choice. In addition, the argument is based on the assumption that there were no fundamental coercive, or push, forces which could reasonably account for emigration on this scale. He suggests that the clearance of peasant communities in order to establish large sheep farms, a pivotal factor in post—1815 emigration, was not significant in the earlier period, 8 See studies cited in n. 97 above. ? 'T, Douglas (Lord Selkirk), Observations on the Present State of the Highlands of Scotland (London, 1805), 79.

'09 Scottish Record Office, Lord Macdonald Papers, GD 221/15, Minutes of Commissioners of Lord Macdonald, 7 Nov. 1802. ‘0! Bumsted, People’s Clearance, 63. 102 Murdoch (ed.), ‘Emigration to North Carolina in 1772’.

Scottish Emigration 109 especially in the western Highlands and Islands from where most emigration occurred. This was then a ‘People’s Clearance’, rather than one directly inspired by landlord action. Bumsted is correct to an extent in his dismissal of sheep clearances

as a causal factor. They were very limited before 1815 in most of Outer and Inner Hebrides, where the landed class was creating a labour-intensive economic structure based on kelp, fishing, and military employment.'*’ But even in this earlier period, the development of commercial pastoralism was not irrelevant to emigration. Close links have been identified between the ensuing clearances and emigration in mainland Argyll, several parishes in mainland Inverness, some parts of Sutherland, and at least one estate in Skye.'°* Moreover, it is clear that the relentless march of the big sheep-farmers was

spreading deep alarm and anxiety throughout the western Highlands.'°° Preparation for emigration was often a prudent precaution to avoid the likely future catastrophe of complete dispossession.

The Bumsted thesis also does not fully take into account the | extraordinary scale and intensity of the broader social and economic changes which were sweeping across the Highland region.'°° Power-

ful forces of coercion were at work quite apart from the familiar expansion of sheep ranching. Long before the ill-fated Jacobite rebellion of 1745, commercialization of the society had begun. The cattle trade, rent commutation, landlord strategies, seasonal mig-

ration, and exploitation of slate and timber resources were all symptoms of this process. Yet in many ways a military social order remained alongside these new economic tendencies. But the post— 1745 pacification finally destroyed much of the rationale for clanship,

though the old martial connection continued to be used by some chiefs to levy men for the British army from their states. But because the State had now effectively imposed the rule of law throughout the

Highlands, it had undermined the value of the clan and of military tenures as sources of protection and defence for the élite, and so created a more suitable context for the rapid acceleration of com103 Devine, Great Highland Famine, ch. 1. '©* Hunter, Crofiing Community, 27; Maclean, ‘In the New Land’, passim; Berry, ‘Hebridean Landlords’, 8.

'©> Douglas, Observations, 110.

'°© The social impact is assessed in T. M. Devine, ‘Social Responses to Agrarian “Improvement”: The Highland and Lowland Clearances in Scotland’, in R. A. Houston and I. D. Whyte (eds.), Scottish Society, 1500-1800 (Cambridge, 1990), 148-68.

110 Smout, Landsman, and Devine mercial development. Such a process was likely to cause profound social disorientation, however, as it would be achieved in concentrated fashion over a much shorter time-scale than occurred in the Lowlands. Ironically, however, the full impact was delayed for a decade or so.

Only from the later 1760s did the real magnitude of the changes become apparent, because only then did southern markets for Highland produce start to expand quickly. In the next four years many landowners systematically subordinated their estates to the pursuit of profit. The methods varied from area to area, but the general strategy

was to extract more income from the land and to transform the traditional social structure in ways consistent with this new priority.

Thus the old joint-tenancy settlements, or bailetoun, on many Hebridean estates were dissolved and replaced by single croft holdings. This may not have been as dramatic as sheep clearances, but it was nevertheless a radical attack on the delicate social hierarchy of the old order.’®’ It involved both dispossession and social levelling. Often, the allocation of the new crofts was designed to compel people to depend more on the highly laborious manufacture of kelp to pay rental. Above all, the croft system was a mortal threat to the middle tenantry, whose larger holdings were likely to be divided to support the larger labour force demanded for kelping and commercial fishing. Equally threatened were the tacksmen, or gentry of the clans, whose

military role was now redundant and whose middleman position had no relevance in the new economic order. They contributed significantly to the leadership of many emigrant parties. Commercialization also meant sharp increases in rental, which produced

acute pressures in such years of distress as 1772-3, when cattle prices were depressed, but tenants needed to import more Lowland grain at higher prices. Rent inflation was characteristic of all rural Scotland in these decades, but it almost certainly caused more stress among the population of the western Highlands because of the relative poverty and hostile climate of that region.'®®

To a significant extent, therefore, the Highland emigrations of the 107 A. J. Macinnes, ‘Scottish Gaeldom: The First Phase of Clearance’, in T. M. Devine and R. M. Mitchison (eds.), People and Society in Scotland, 1: 1760-1830

(Edinburgh, 1988), 70-90. :

'08 This is apparent from an ongoing research project (1989-92) supported by the

Economic and Social Research Council of the UK, under the direction of T. M. Devine, on agrarian conditions in 18th-cent. Scotland.

Scottish Emigration III eighteenth century were reactions to these radical economic and social changes. The emigration parties attempted to preserve in the New World that which was being destroyed in the old. They sought security, land, and the maintenance of their culture and community. North America offered opportunity, but it was primarily increasing pressure in the Highlands which in the final analysis determined the decisions of the emigrant groups. There are important similarities and differences with the Lowland movement. In each case emigration in the first half of the eighteenth century was moderate, increasing substantially only after the Seven Years War. Emigration was part of

a wider Scottish mobility, which was to be found in both major regions of the country. Temporary and seasonal movement, migration from country to town, the circulation of people within the countryside, with the breakup of bailetoun and fermetoun, and recruitment to the army and navy were all expanding fast in the late eighteenth century. Most Lowland emigrants were skilled and educated. The majority of

Highlanders were from the middle ranks of society. The Scottish exodus did not consist on the whole of the poor or the destitute. Yet contrasts did exist between the two areas. Lowland emigration seemed

to rise on a gradual curve in the eighteenth century, whereas the Highland movement was much more limited in the first few decades, but by the last quarter of the century was significantly greater than that from the Lowlands. With the exception of the weaver emigrations, Lowlanders tended to move as individuals, as families, or in small groups. The Highland exodus often consisted of highly organized, large parties leaving from particular districts of the region and settling in areas in the New World with which they already had close kinship

connections. The Highland emigrations above all seem to reflect a powerful opposition to forces of economic change, which were absorbed with much less difficulty and trauma in Lowland society. For that reason they represented a greater break with the past.

CONCLUSION

There can be no doubt, from the foregoing outline, that migration abroad had become a profoundly important social tradition in Scotland between the late Middle Ages and the beginning of the nineteenth century. Though varying in intensity from one period to another (the

seventeenth century sending out more people, both absolutely and

112 Smout, Landsman, and Devine relatively, than the eighteenth), by the time industrialization arrived, emigration for all ranks and in all regions had become an accepted strategy for young Scots looking to improve their chances in life. From this, two consequences followed in the nineteenth century. First, as industrialization revealed its heavy costs as well as its considerable benefits, Scots were frequently willing to cast their bread upon the waters of the world and leave, even as others with fewer resources or lower expectations were flooding in. Scotland by midcentury resembled a bath with the plug out and the taps on: tens of thousands left for Canada, New Zealand, Australia, and the United States, as tens of thousands immigrated from a destitute Ireland. The

water rose, but there can be little doubt that higher rates of outmigration accounted for the much slower rate of population increase in Scotland compared to England. Over three centuries, the ratio of

Scottish to English population has altered from about 1:5 around 1700 to about 1:10 today. Secondly, the prevalence of migration as a social habit led ultimately

to a relative lack of fear of foreign cultures and environments, thus placing the Scots in an excellent position to exploit personal career opportunities in the British Empire. There is a clear line of descent from the mind-set of those who settled Ulster or ventured their lives

and fortunes in Poland in the seventeenth century to those who settled Canada and administered India in the nineteenth. Even today, a dread of the ways of the foreigner in Brussels and Europe is characteristic of ‘metropolitan’ London, but not of ‘provincial’ Edinburgh and Glasgow. To come from a small, poor country can be a good way of learning how to cope with the world outside.

6

The Irish Diaspora of the Seventeenth and Eighteenth Centuntes L. M. CULLEN

The Irish diaspora of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries has received comparatively little attention from historians, largely because

it has been overshadowed in the popular imagination by the great emigration of the nineteenth century. Although far short in absolute terms of that movement, Irish out-migration of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries represented a higher proportion of the total movement of people who crossed national boundaries within and out

of Europe than did the nineteenth-century outflow. Irish men and women who crossed the North Atlantic in the nineteenth century constituted less than a quarter of the Europeans who sought North American destinations and a still smaller fraction of the total move-

ment from Europe to America, North and South combined. By contrast, during the neglected earlier period, the Irish constituted from mid-century the largest single flow of white immigrants to the

seventeenth-century West Indies; they were the most important external source of supply of mercenary soldiers in three critical decades, the 1600s, the 1650s, and the 1690s; and Ulster Scots were the most constant and at times the largest element among European migrants to mainland North America in the eighteenth century. The Irish diaspora of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries is

also different from that of the nineteenth century by virtue of its complexity. Irish emigration during those two centuries was especially

complex because it flowed in so many different directions, and at a time when the world was less well known and costs and risks of travel

far greater. This point is made manifest when we take account of Irish settlement in the Amazon basin, continental North America, the West Indies, and Europe, in addition to a strong Protestant presence in the English East India Company and a powerful Catholic presence in the French East India Company. The geographical range of move-

114 L. M. Cullen ment from Ireland exceeded that from the other great insular source of supply of mercenaries, Scotland. The Scots military migration, as

we have learned in Chapter 5, was larger in proportion to the domestic population. However, not only did the geographical spread of Irish mercenaries cover central Europe, where it was the other side

of an interface with Scots in northern Europe, but Irishmen were officers for and, until the early decades of the eighteenth century, manned more than a dozen French and Spanish standing regiments at the peak of their involvement. In North America, they outnumbered

Scots on the mainland, and in the West Indies they, alone among white settlers, were to be found on both British and foreign islands. Uniquely for people involved in large-scale migrations at this time,

Catholic migrants not only experienced legal discrimination at home but faced it in the English-speaking territories to which they went.

This mobility of the Irish is a complex phenomenon, explained by

a mix of elements of dynamism, persecution, and poverty. Their movement during these centuries has never been studied as a single

phenomenon, and this chapter will raise as many questions as it answers. However, I hope in a short compass to describe, and, as far as possible, hazard an attempt at quantifying the flow; to identify the

many separate strands within it and show how they are related to each other; and to explain how the three precipitating factors of dynamism, persecution, and poverty were interrelated.' Much is, and will remain, unknown, and what insights we do get frequently come by chance from documents relating to administrative or political matters. One such document which serves to illustrate the

overlapping themes had its origin in a single obscure occurrence mentioned fleetingly in a British source but otherwise hidden from view in French military and naval files. The incident of July 1762. related to an Irishman, a Capitaine Bleu in French service who, while preying on English settlements in the New World, carried 356 Irish

seasonal migrants to France from Newfoundland. His aim was to enlist them in a new Irish regiment in French service; but when the migrants declined to serve, it was proposed by the Irish promoters of the project that the unaccommodating Irishmen should join Choiseul’s ' Sources are not indicated for the most part, since they would take up too much space. It is hoped to set out the sources in a more extended treatment of some of the

issues at a later date. For some background discussion, see L. M. Cullen, 7he Emergence of Modern Ireland, 1600-1900 (London, 1981; 2nd edn., Dublin, 1983).

The Insh Diaspora 115 ill-fated Guyana colonization project.” It is from the accident of this impasse which occurred when the men reached France that we have this single detailed list of Irish seasonal workers from what was a sizeable pre-1783 migration to Newfoundland. Frequently, as here, it is only intractable administrative difficulties which generated the kind of detailed information that is required for the study of any migration. Our reliance upon chance information relating to Irish migration is

matched by a similar, if less acute, reliance in the study of other migrations. A general outline of Irish migration can be pieced together from this uneven information, and we gain further insights from the

investigation of the subject in the context of a comparative study of the character and well-springs of European migration during the preindustrial centuries. Bernard Bailyn in his splendid writings to date has focused attention

on the British dimensions of this general movement of peoples, and his ideas will undoubtedly stimulate others to investigate European migration on an even wider geographical scale.’ The statistical problems are formidable, however, and to some degree insoluble. Estimates based on population counts are doubly fragile: tentative in them-

selves, and not offering a clear-cut divide between different national or racial groups. It is therefore important that estimates derived from

such counts, however ingenious they may appear, should not be accepted as ‘reliable’.* Figures emanating from such sources as verbal reportage and contemporary pseudo-statistics also tend to exaggerate the movement, as, for example, do the estimates of Irish Presbyterian

migration frequently volunteered by contemporary observers. This flow can rarely have exceeded 1,000-—2,000 per year in peacetime, and far fewer when the passage to America was disrupted by war.” 2 Archives nationales, Paris, Archives de la Marine B° 557, fols. 184-8, 190-1, 196-202, 203-6, 208, 210-13, 214, 217-19, 227-8, 229, 232. On other aspects of the project, see B. Cherubini, ‘Les Acadiens en Guyane francaise, des colons exemplaires pour une colonisation en dilettante’, Bulletin du Centre d'histoire des espaces atlantiques, NS 5 (1990), 157-96. 3B. Bailyn, The Peopling of North America: An Introduction (New York, 1986); idem, Voyagers to the West: A Passage in the Peopling of America on the Eve of the Revolution (New

York, 1988 edn.). H. A. Gemery’s ‘Emigration from the British Isles to the New World, 1630—1700: Inferences from Colonial Populations’, Research in Economic History,

5 (1980), 179-231, is an interesting paper, though it notes the impossibility of distinguishing the proportions of Scots, Irish, and English in the post-1660 population on this basis. J. Meyer’s Les Européens et les autres de Cortes a Washington (Paris, 1975) is

also an interesting attempt at a broad approach. * The word used in Bailyn, Peopling of North America (1988 edn.), 60. > L. M. Cullen, ‘Economic Development 1750-1800’, in W. Vaughan (ed.), New History of Ireland iv (Oxford, 1986), 161.

116 L. M. Cullen More recent estimates, although better, are not always reliable. Bailyn, for example, probably inflates the size of British migration to

America during the years 1763-76, because he assumes that the well-documented high emigration rates of the mid-1770s had been constant since 1763, and because he accepts that the specifically English impetus to emigration so evident in the years 1773-6 had prevailed for some considerable time.° Bailyn’s further estimate of the scale of Irish migration during the eighteenth century is also cast in doubt by the work of Marianne Wokeck. Where he asserts that 53,000 ‘Protestant’ Irish arrived between 1763 and 1775, she calculates that no more than 10,139 emigrants from known northern ports in Ireland disembarked at Philadelphia during the interval of 176374.’ Even with the allowance made by Wokeck for southern Irish ports, for unidentified ports of outset, and for other centres of disembarkation on the Delaware, her total still only comes to 20,234. The addition of the unknown number of Irish who disembarked at American ports outside Delaware would add to this figure; but apart

from peak years such as 1773, when places on vessels were in demand, it must have been a relatively small component of migration.

Probably a 50 per cent increase on the Delaware total would more than cover it comfortably, in which case an annual average of 2,500 emigrants would be a realistic estimate of Irish migration to the thirteen colonies in 1763-74. All European migrations of this period have to be set against an obscure demographic background, and probably none more obscure than that of Ireland. Even the absolute population size for seventeenthcentury Ireland, though not the trend, is gravely in doubt. Moreover,

making its circumstances quite unique, Ireland, in addition to its outflow, experienced an immigration throughout the seventeenth century which was in fact the largest sustained immigration experienced by any country in Europe during this period. Only the Netherlands, though from the perspective of a highly developed country (treated in Chapter 7), offers a pattern of parallel inflows and

. outflows, which in Ireland’s case derived from underdevelopment. At © Fogelman makes the assumption that the same ratio of English to Scots emigrants in the 1770s extended back to 1700: A. Fogelman, ‘Migrations to the 13 American Cojonies 1700-1775: New Estimates’, Journal of Interdisciplinary History, 22 (1992), 06. ’ 7 Bailyn, Voyagers to the West, 24—8; M. Wokeck, ‘Irish Immigration to the Delaware

Valley before the American Revolution’ (unpubl. paper delivered at the Brendan conference, Ennis, Sept. 1986).

The Irish Diaspora 117 many times in the seventeenth century the outflow from Britain to Ireland exceeded the entire flow from Britain and Ireland across the Atlantic, though the relative order of the two flows was probably reversed in years of peace during the second half of the century. If both inflows to and outflows from Ireland were significant, Ireland’s exceptional circumstances hardly need stressing, and it is necessary to call on a wide range of factors, economic, social, and political, external

———— Provincial Boundary . oy

% ?pyi \\

— ——-— County Boundary

\

N ero Oy \TAY\)2 los

fo w+, \ Larne |

~~ “~ ULSTER &-7

?) NN ~ \/bro\ \(

\ L ee ee ¢ ro) —~\ (

co a \ \ (od XX Wo y \. J y ) | “> SLIGO SS. KON Lag y |

nN S~? LOUTH

2 CONNACHT yoo LE Nu \ ~~ wy }eyN.. GALWAY otuw’, ) i" “wy

7, ¢ Qe SS rat) eo “ows 70 LEINSTER ¢,c

| bf - er,

CLARE / pa pees ATIPPERARYK ZR \

a ~~ \ ward ? ao?a KILKENNY, > YW

Qe __ / WEXFORD M U NSTER 2~” —Waterford (7 \ \ , WATERFORD -2/, KERRY { CORK a

iaP D Corke., Lr (> ae 27

0pe 20 40 60 80km

“ad 0 20. 40 miles

Map 6.1 Ireland during the centuries of emigration

118 L. M. Cullen as well as internal, to account for them. Moreover, the flows in and out were reciprocal in scale, in that the outflows peaked in fairly well-

defined crisis periods, whereas the inflows did so at intervening points.

There is a complicated interconnection between inflows and outflows. Taking a long perspective, emigration, especially of military men, preceded inflows. On the other hand, much of the early immigration itself nurtured emigration. It has been suggested that settlers in Munster were drawn from a pool of younger sons of gentry and from ambitious yeomen in southern England, some of whom were simultaneously involved in colonizing ventures in America and Ireland.

Apparently they could more easily recruit retainers and servants for their far-flung ventures from among their followers in Ireland than they could in the more solid and comfortable districts whence they had originally come, where the potential supply of emigrants had already been creamed off for Ireland. In a general sense, however, immigration was largest and most sustained in Ulster. The strength

and continuity of the movement into Ulster rested on a pool of would-be migrants in Scotland capable of paying for their own passage

and settlement, who created, when they crossed to Ireland, a solid layer of tenant settlers occupying the social space between large planters (the so-called undertakers) and immigrant servants. This contrasted with the top- and bottom-heavy immigration to other provinces of Ireland. In Munster, given this new, mobile group in society who had participated in the management of immigration, emigration to the New World, largely by constituents of this dependent immigrant population, was important almost from the very moment of colonization. The difficulties in attracting settlers from the south of England for the early colonies in America made adventurers eager to tap the Irish labour supply (including recent arrivals from England) for their ventures across the Atlantic, and family ties and background, which bound together adventurers and promoters in England, contributed to the development of a triangular relationship across the Atlantic. Even the migration to the Amazon in the 1610s to 1630s, in which the Irish thrust has been seen as more persistent and

more successful than the English one, started off in a triangular pattern.© This pattern, though it later weakened, foreshadowed a 8 J. Lorimer, English and Irish Settlement on the River Amazon, 1550-1646, Haklyut Society, 2nd ser., 171 (London, 1989).

The Irish Diaspora 11g similar pattern in the Newfoundland trade and associated migration of the eighteenth century.

Given its promoter ethos, immigration to Munster, though it succeeded in creating permanent settlements, produced comparatively few really viable communities with a capacity simultaneously to add to

their numbers over a sustained period and to push off roots further afield. Indeed, as promoter interest was increasingly focused on the New World, many settlers abandoned Ireland for America or simply returned to England. Continued colonial expansion was not, therefore, a source of strength for local settler society, as later proved the case among Presbyterians in Ulster. On the contrary, it became a threat to its survival. The triangular Newfoundland fishery of the eighteenth century, though it owed its existence to entrepreneurial

flair in the Bristol Channel and in Poole on the south coast of England, had to depend on Catholics in the hinterland of Cork and Waterford for its manpower. In that migration, given the hardships and low returns, Ireland dominated seasonal movement and in the long term even permanent residence. The really important permanent migration from Ireland to America was to come from the Scottish settlers in Ireland. This has often been seen—from the time of the historian Lecky? onwards—as evidence of a deep and prolonged

economic and religious crisis in Irish Presbyterianism. But it was | quite the reverse. The settlers from Scotland, little beholden to promoters and at first unwanted by Anglican landlords in Ireland, created a vigorous pattern of internal settlement in Ireland, spreading

outwards from the initial bases. It was out of this pattern, as new settlement opportunities in Ireland began to dry up at the beginning of the eighteenth century, that their movement to America began. Thus the emigration to America sprang from a vigorous community,

itself already, by definition, a mobile one because it had arrived in Ireland by a process of migration. The later migration itself strengthened, rather than weakened, the community within Ireland, and Presbyterian society in Ireland displayed great economic, intel-

lectual, and political vigour at home throughout the eighteenth century. Indeed, as its clergy and professionals chose to be educated

in Glasgow rather than Dublin, and at times made up as much as one-third of the students at Glasgow University, they were a prime ? W. E. H. Lecky, A History of Ireland in the Eighteenth Century i (London, 1892), 437.

120 L. M. Cullen force in making the Scottish Enlightenment. The names of Francis Hutcheson and Joseph Black are themselves testimony to that. The elements in early migration are startlingly complicated, and it is dangerous to generalize, especially for the regional level and for the years immediately following the cessation of hostilities in 1603 and 1652. But at national level two broad generalizations for the seven-

teenth century are permissible. First, the absolute number of emigrants, though it fluctuated wildly, fell short of the annual totals of

| the first half of the eighteenth century, though drawn of course, from a much smaller population. As comparatively little of this migration, except perhaps in the case of early seventeenth-century military migrations, was from Ulster, the inroads of migration into communities

in the south and the east must have been even greater. Second, at peak periods of military defeat and economic crisis, emigration exceeded immigration. This must be qualified for the 1690s, however, if we take the decade as a whole. Emigration was then exceeded by a massive Scottish influx into Ulster, itself an astonishing phenomenon in the history of both Ulster and Scotland. However, the second proposition remains true for Munster and probably also for Connacht and Leinster in the 1690s. Irish emigration must be seen in the context of Europe at large, it being misleading to try to explain it in isolation. Patterns of sustained migration in part derive from the contrast between more rapid popu-

lation growth in peripheral parts of Europe and slower population growth in more settled or advanced regions. Military service in any army, domestic or foreign, and migration to the hardships of a new life elsewhere had little appeal for the inhabitants of the more developed regions of Europe. In the case of Scotland, with its rather striking population stability during the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, there was, as Smout shows, a rise in the importance of non-military relative to military migration from the mid-seventeenth century. This seems to offer a contrast to Ireland, where military migrations did not taper off decisively until the 1740s. Limited resources combined with novel population pressures were the factors forcing the inhabitants of poor regions to have recourse to military service or migration. However, people were enormously loath to move at all in the first instance, and one of the significant contributions of military service—one noted by Devine for Scotland as well— was that it familiarized people in remote rural societies with service

or life beyond familiar horizons. Even in the case of the more

The Insh Diaspora 121 comfortable elements of rural society—and this holds true equally for

Scots and Huguenots—a short-lived career as an officer was frequently a prelude to a life as a merchant abroad. Armies grew enormously at the end of the sixteenth century, and they continued to do so throughout the following century. The first of

the great standing armies was that of Spain, and this was soon followed by the armies of the countries embroiled in the Thirty Years

War. Together, these armies soon outran the supply of amenable local recruits. If the armies of the time seem to us relatively small, they were of course enormous in relation to preceding armies. In 1648 the warring factions in central Europe had 210,000 men under arms.!° France alone had 2 50,000 under arms in 17 10;'! its peacetime establishment was to remain at around 120,000. The effective demands on manpower were significantly larger, as muster strength concealed a colossal turnover dictated by the toll in deaths (mainly from disease) and invariably and always by desertions, seventeenthand eighteenth-century armies being a sieve through which recruits passed. (The really intriguing question is the extent to which deserters returned home.) Military service was harsh and poorly remunerated, and had little appeal for the inhabitants of the rich and prosperous plains of north-west Europe. The soldiers recruited were frequently criminals, vagabonds, or opportunists, who accepted a premium on enlistment and hoped to desert at the first opportunity, perhaps even with re-enlistment in mind. Recurrent war on a large scale inevitably meant recourse to the populations of poor districts in Flanders; to the hilly regions on both sides of the Rhine, coincidentally frontier regions, reaching as far afield as Switzerland and the Alps; and ultimately even to the bleak regions of Scotland and Ireland. Among mercenaries the exception to this picture of misery and hopelessness is of course the Swiss, who alone turned service into a profession. In consequence, they commanded a premium in pay, and their units in foreign service became the prestige regiments of the age because of the quality of their sheer rank and file. The mass exodus after defeat in Ireland, as in the early 1580s and 1603 and again in 1652 and 1691, is more immediately evident to the historian than the lack of employment outlets. Those who left at the end of campaigns in Ireland did so, of course, because 10 G, Parker, The Thirty Years War (London, 1987), 191. 'l J. Childs, Armies and Warfare in Europe, 1648-1789 (Manchester, 1982), 42.

122 L. M. Cullen peacetime outlets in gainful employment at home were overwhelmed by swift demobilization. Less fitfully, the driving force of poverty

which had led men into the army in the first instance, sustained a smaller but regular outflow in peace years. These factors, more than the mechanics of military defeat and conquest, were behind enlistment in foreign armies. A salient fact is that enlistment did not cease

with- these exceptional movements; in fact, they tended to trigger sustained recruitment of both men and officers. In turn, its scale and persistence was at first determined more by the military needs of Europe than by conditions at home. The integration even of two island peoples into the supply of manpower to European armies thus represented on the Continent one of the final stages in a wide range of responses to the novel and pressing demand for manpower which

emerged in the century in which Europe had for the first time to confront the manpower needs of large permanent armies. The attraction of insular mercenaries to continental Europe pre-

sented more acute practical problems than the enlistment of continental levies; but it was aided by two circumstances. First, endemic warfare in Ireland and to a lesser extent in Scotland had contributed in the sixteenth century to the presence of both hordes of swordsmen, divorced from useful occupation and maintained by or preying on the civilian population, and younger sons of gentry with no profession except that of arms. Conditions in Scotland and Ireland differed only in degree before 1600, but in Ireland prolonged war, followed by

abrupt and decisive defeat for the insurgents in 1603, created an acute, immediate problem of redeployment. Second, Irishmen and Scots were recruited typically in regimental strength by condottiere officers of local gentry background: such centralized recruitment was vital for service abroad, and landlord involvement in army enlistment lingered on into the eighteenth century in Ireland and more widely and more permanently in Scotland. Indeed, given the threat posed by idle swordsmen at home, there was official connivance in recruitment for foreign service. The first recruitment in Ireland had originated

in a regiment raised by Stanley for service with Leicester in the Lowlands in the 1580s, which then passed into Spanish service.’ Direct recruitment into foreign service was first decisively discountenanced only in 1730. The pattern of careers abroad created long'2 For a general account, see G. Henry, ‘‘Wild Geese” in Spanish Flanders: The first generation, 1586—1610’, /rish Sword, 17 (1989), 189-201.

The Irish Diaspora 123 standing family traditions of military service. One of the most lasting

was that of the landed families of north Connacht, such as the O’Rourkes and O’Conors, as too that of the Walises and Taafes in the Pale. Reduced in circumstances by the changes of the seventeenth century, these sought to maintain or restore their fortunes by officer service, especially in the Austrian armies of both the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. Their long-standing Austrian ties originated in the demands of early wars in central Europe.

Another arresting instance, and one more effective than the Austrian association in generating an ongoing flow of rank and file in addition to officers, was that of recruitment of Tipperary men (and indeed of Munstermen at large) into the French armies. The Jacobite

armies which surrendered in Limerick in 1691 and which in large part opted for the choice under the terms of the Treaty of service overseas, seem to have had a large number of officers and soldiers from Tipperary and from the counties bordering it. This ‘flight of the wild geese’ laid the foundation of an outflow which persisted not only

through the 1690s but into the early decades of the new century. Until recruitment tapered off at the end of the 1730s, men from Tipperary and also from counties Clare, Kerry, Cork, and Waterford

and from the Leinster county of Kilkenny, which had originally provided so many in the army which surrendered at Limerick, were disproportionately well represented in both rank and file and officer

level in Irish regiments. Indeed, fear both of the return of Irish soldiers in foreign service and of the activity of recruitment agents in

Clare and south Munster was an obsession of Protestants in that region and of the rabid politicians who represented Tipperary, Cork, and Waterford constituencies in the Irish parliament in the eighteenth

century. The large estimates of the number of recruits for France which appear in reports from the countryside to Dublin Castle up to mid-century are invariably worthless figments of imagination, conjured up and drawn to the government’s attention at times of political crisis. The fears behind these estimates were nourished by the multiple links created by trade, both legal and clandestine, and the emerging Catholic community in exile. Those associated with the active contraband trade with France were especially feared by Protestants, and their role as traders and recruiters was accordingly

exaggerated by the Dublin government. ,

How large were these migrations? Irish recruitment to the Spanish army of Flanders, the greatest army of its time, was a continuing one

124 L. M. Cullen by the outset of the seventeenth century. An intriguing reference in the 1641 depositions implies that the number in Spanish service at the time was 2,000.'° In 1639-40, some 5,000 men were raised in Ireland for French service. In 1652-4, 25,000 men were said to have been shipped to Spain, and between 10,000 and 15,000 to France; in 1691, 12,000 men were carried to France, in addition to the 6,000 troops already sent there in 1690 to replace trained French troops. Estimation of army recruitment in the seventeenth century is problematic because of sharp swings in its scale. The large numbers of recruits quoted for the peak years may be deceptive (and such figures should be regarded with suspicion in the case of other countries as well), except for the well-documented and bureaucratically highly organized movements of 1690-1, because recruiting commissions were not always fulfilled in full and because many deserted either on the way to the ports or on arrival overseas. On the other hand, there was also an outflow in intervening years to replace deserters and those decimated by disease and war losses, and this has attracted little attention. Enlistment must have oscillated quite widely between

the high figures of the crisis years and the much lower figures of intervening years. The crude addition of the various estimates, ignoring movement in the intervening years, would give an average of

600 per annum for the century. Possibly such a figure, ignoring the migrations of intervening years, might afford a working guess of the proportions of effective military migration across the century. Certainly, even on the most cautious estimate, the Irish component in the Flanders army would have required several hundred men a year to maintain its strength, to which should be added Irish enlistment in central European and French armies. Perhaps an average of 500 men

per annum may represent a realistic estimate. Since the greatest of : the seventeenth-century migrations were those of defeated armies and the men were accompanied in many cases by women and children, a rounding upwards of the figure to 700 migrants might be justified.

For the eighteenth century we have more certain figures. At its peak in the 1720s and late 1730s, enlistment in the French army reached, or did not fall far short of, 1,000 a year. It was smaller in the immediately preceding decades, and tapered off decisively at the end '3 1641 depositions quoted in N. Canny, ‘In Defence of the Constitution? The Nature of Irish Revolt in the Seventeenth Century’, in L. Bergeron and L. M. Cullen (eds.), Culture et pratiques politiques en France et en Irlande XVI°—XVIII* siécles (Paris, I9QI), 40.

The Insh Diaspora 125 of the 1730s. Obtained from muster rolls, these figures, though still

to be worked out in detail, are close to reality. While small in comparison to exaggerated contemporary and later historical accounts

(in the 1750s, for instance, the numbers serving in France were put as high as 20,000 in public comment in Ireland), these figures, which are derived from actual induction, rather than enlistment with its inbuilt exaggeration of effective recruitment, are in fact large. Smaller

than those at the peaks in military movement in the seventeenth century, they are probably larger than the normal levels in the pre-

ceding century, and are close to, or at times larger than, civilian migration in the same years. In other words, the estimates reveal that behind the wildly exaggerated figures by contemporary politicians, were migrations that were both significant and provided some real

basis for the fears crudely expressed. Moreover, the figures for France reflect the near-total of rank-and-file recruitment, since the French service had taken the place of the Spanish. The Irish regiments in Spain, after the outset of the eighteenth century, absorbed officers only, apart from an apparent upturn in rank and file recruitment for Spain in 1721. Apart from recruitment in the 1720s and 1730s, army service in the eighteenth century was not only less important than it had been in the previous century, but was declining. Ironically, this was even truer

of war years than of peace years. Moreover, the downward trend persisted, despite efforts to maintain clandestine recruitment, which succeeded in giving a modest momentum to the figures for the early 1750s. Only the commencement of rank-and-file recruitment of Irish Protestants for the British army in 1756 began to redress the balance of decline. Catholic recruitment came later, though once enlistment

efforts spread from solidly Protestant regions in the north to the other provinces, recruiting officers turned a blind eye to religious affiliation. Only the reluctance of Irishmen, regardless of religion, to serve at all prevented recruitment from being important. Naval recruitment of landsmen, Catholic and Protestant alike, occurred at least as early as the 1730s; but it was a haphazard activity, conducted by the few vessels on station on the Irish coast prior to their return to base. It was only in the final decade of the century that it became systematic,

though enlistment of Irish Catholics into the marines in 1758, the first public acceptance of Catholic rank and file for military service, foreshadowed the new, open policies of the 1790s. The official dilemma was that, until it became legal for Catholics to bear arms in

126 L. M. Cullen 1793, recruitment of Catholics was itself a violation of the law, and on occasion a politically explosive issue in Ireland. Seamen were not

seen as an armed force, and the marines, a force intended to be carried on board vessels and for service in distant waters, were covered by the more relaxed view of men at sea than on land. Leaving army and naval service aside, Irishmen settled in the New World in some numbers from quite early on. The starting-point is the Irish colony in the Amazon, but such settlement was overshadowed

quickly by the importance of the West Indies. Census figures bear out the Irish prominence in all but Barbados, and the State Papers Colonial illustrate not only their presence in some numbers, largely among the bottom layers of the white population, but also the religious, political, and security problems that the Irish created then and later, especially when war or invasion was feared. Movement to the West Indies can be traced as far back as the 1630s, at least for some Galway families. The islands acted as a magnet for younger sons who wished to try their luck and venture their capital as planters and merchants. It was not simply a migration inflicted upon Ireland by Cromwell, as is so frequently suggested. It was a highly structured

migration involving both sons of well-off families and a stream of indentured servants. Given the high mortality rate in the pestilential islands, the Irish population there presupposes an annual migration which could have

been substantial, running at several hundred a year, and probably many more in peak years in the 1650s and 1660s. Even before 1641 the numbers of Irish were not insignificant. In 1640-6 Peter Sweetman, one of the promoters of Irish settlement on the Amazon, proposed to move 400 Irish from St Christopher’s, which probably represented more or less all the community there, and he was actually

granted a licence by the Portuguese court in 1644 to relocate 130 from the island.'* During the 1650s and 1660s Ireland probably supplied the main single stream of white immigrants. In the longerestablished settlements populated originally by the English, such as Barbados, the flow was now outward to the more attractive mainland colonies. In Barbados, few servants now arrived or remained beyond the end of their indentures.!” On the other hand, in 1678 there were 3,466 Irish on the islands of St Christopher’s, Nevis, Montserrat, and '* Lorimer, English and Irish Settlement, 120, 121, 446-7. "> Calendars of State Papers Colonial, America and West Indies, 1677-80, 503.

The Insh Diaspora 127 Antigua, of whom, in contrast to the rest of the white population, relatively few seem to have been island-born.’® Moreover, the persistence of reference to the problems created by Irish servants suggests that this migration from Ireland to a destination that was almost as hazardous as service in the armies of Europe dried

up more slowly than comparable flows from England or Scotland. Significantly, Scots servants never went in any numbers to the West

Indies. At the end of the century an Edinburgh merchant, John Watson, warned that in the West Indies ‘all you can expect is women, whores and boys under 14 or 15 years old’.!’ By contrast, as we know

from other evidence, Scots were already well established in the tobacco colonies on the mainland. A London merchant in 1689 routinely enquired of an Edinburgh house whether there were ‘any servants to be got. ... If there were 2 or 3 hundreds of them, I should

find a way to get them sent to Virginia.’® There were only 201 Scots compared with the 3,229 Irish in the three islands of Nevis, Montserrat, and Antigua in 1678. The Irish were also to be found in the French islands, as, for example, in Guadeloupe, where 100 or 200 settlers were Irish who ‘live much as they do at home in little huts, planting potatoes and tobacco, and as much indigo as will buy

them canvas and brandy and never advance so far as sugar plantation’.!? By contrast, the mobility of the Scots was impressive. Indeed,

the Scots were already entering the waters of the Indian Ocean; a Scottish London merchant, James Foulis, in 1682 made enquiries in Scotland for ‘a good hearty fellow who can play well on the bagpipes’

to accompany an acquaintance about to make a journey to the East Indies.7°

In absolute numbers the migration of the seventeenth century, military and non-military, from time to time exceeded later, pre-1783 peaks. Overall, however, it fell short of the absolute figures for the

eighteenth century, though its peaks far exceeded later levels. In terms of migrants per 1,000 of the population, the only really valid basis for meaningful comparisons, the long-term trend was close to that for the eighteenth century. After 1697, army migration to the 16 Ibid. 266. '7 Scottish Record Office, West Register House, CS96/33009.

'8 Scottish Record Office, General Register House, RH15/46, London, g July 1689, Francis Scott to Alexander Campbell, Edinburgh. | Calendars of State Papers Colonial, America and West Indies, 1669-74, 446.

20 Scottish Record Office, General Register House, RH 15/14/37’.

128 L. M. Cullen Continent, except in the 1720s and 1730s, was decisively below the seventeenth-century level. ‘Though this fall-off was partially offset by British army recruitment from 1756, a new current in army enlistment was slow to establish itself as a significant one. Civilian migration across the Atlantic was of course rising, but before

mid-century its peaks were probably no greater than those in the seventeenth century, and decisively below them in terms of population levels. The pre-1775 emigration of migrants from identifiable north of Ireland ports to Philadelphia, the largest and best-documented stream

in this flow, did not exceed 1,000 a year until 1766. Indeed, even additions allowing for arrivals at other Delaware ports, would probably leave the figures below 1,000 a year in the years 1729—65. Marianne Wokeck’s recent estimates for the Delaware valley, the main point of

arrival of Irish emigrants, suggest only 52,695 for the entire period 21 1729-74. Emigration to North America from the remaining three provinces is

difficult to estimate, because it merited less comment than Ulster emigration. However, in the case of vessels from identifiable Irish ports arriving at Philadelphia, the numbers, according to Wokeck’s calculations, were close to or exceeded those from northern ports in the 1730s and early 1740s (and soared above them in the crisis years

of 1740 and 1741). The year 1736, with its abrupt reversal in the fortunes of the linen industry after rapid expansion, was the one year

in which numbers rose sharply north and south and in which the north exceeded the south. Even in the early 1750s southern migration

in hard figures was close to northern. The only years in which southern numbers fell sharply below northern were 1744-8 and 1756-63, when warship- and privateer-infested southern waters discouraged migration, and when the northern route was still open to unimpeded navigation. Indeed, excepting the crisis-inflated levels for 1740 and 1741, the figures for arrivals from identifiable southern ports exceeded the highest 1730s level during three years in the first half of the 1750s and the last four years of the 1760s. Moreover, to this southern migration should be added the seasonal movement of people to Newfoundland, an unknown proportion of whom did not return, either remaining behind in Newfoundland or moving on to the thirteen colonies. This seasonal movement from the south, which had emerged in the 1730s, may have been running at 5,000 21 See Wokeck, ‘Irish Immigration’.

The Insh Diaspora 129 a year in the 1760s and 1770s. As early as 1755 a pamphleteer with considerable exaggeration asked, ‘How many thousands go every year to the fish-islands, who never return again?’*” Even if it is assumed that only one in twenty of those migrating seasonally did not return, the trade would provided 250 fresh permanent migrants every year. Of course, by

contrast with northern migration, which was novel, the impact of southern migration should not be exaggerated, because it was effectively a compensating move for a fall after the 1730s in military recruitment:

Catholic movement to mainland North America and the fall-off in enlistment for the French army synchronize in timing and source of outflow. Indeed, the story already cited of the Newfoundland venture in 1762 illustrates the marked reluctance, even at the low social level of seasonal migrants who happened to find themselves in France, to come

forward for army service. ,

It is important not to treat the experiences of the late 1720s and early 1730s in Ireland as typical of the century as a whole. This was a truly exceptional period of serious demographic and economic crisis,

with poor prices in the good harvest years of the early 1730s compounding the disastrous effects of famine in the late 1720s (in the

context of enlistment in France, French military need and Irish economic difficulties also coincided). Another measure of the crisis is

that seasonal migration to England attracted comment for the first time: its novelty is seen in south County Dublin in the fact that a group of migrant labourers setting out for England from Bullock harbour were mistaken in 1726 for French recruits. The crisis in Ireland in the late 1720s and early 1730s is evidenced also by the ease with which landsmen for the British navy were recruited in areas

as different as Connemara in County Galway and the hinterland of Larne in County Antrim.” In the years around 1730 too a movement of indentured servants from the hinterland of the port of Waterford and bound for the French Indies left some traces in Nantes. This was probably part of a trickle to the French West Indies that had persisted down to this time, but which is hard to track down at the European 22 The Great Importance and Necessity of Increasing Tillage... in a Letter Addressed to the

Rt. Hon. Fohn Earl Grandison (Dublin, 1755), 22. 23 The letters of some of the captains of English admiralty vessels at Irish stations in the 1730s are interesting on this score. Naval recruitment was never much concerned with religion. From 1758 Catholics were recruited into the marines, whereas Catholic

suggested. |

recruitment into regular infantry appears to have begun much later than is often

130 L. M. Cullen end. We learn, for example, that Bernard Cantillon had a number of Irishmen indentured for his colonial venture in Louisiana in 1719.7*

A large outflow of people for the 1720s and early 1730s is also suggested by the fact that the first emigrant vessel from Galway bound for mainland America sailed in 1729, but was not followed by further sailings for roughly four decades. Difficult circumstances in the 1720s and early 1730s may also explain a significant movement of

southern Protestants, particularly Quakers, from rural locations to

| America in these years. Emigration from the north of Ireland was widely reported on for the same years, and in exaggerated terms, because it reflected a crisis in the linen industry, which had been identified as the country’s sole hope of economic regeneration in its appalling difficulties, which included famine or harvest failure in 1725~—9 and disastrously low prices in 1730-2. A temporary recession

in linen in 1735 again quickened the movement, north and south, to America, and also provoked fresh comment. Quite aside from the controversy over the relative proportions of Irish Catholics and northern Irish Protestants in Irish emigration, it

_ does seem that the absolute number of Ulster Scots was greatly exaggerated. Contemporary calculations guaranteed that the figures

were inflated, because they were based on the assumption of an emigrant for every ton of the vessel’s burthen. Indeed, since Ulster

was becoming a much more peopled province, the incidence of migration per 1,000 of the population probably did not rise between

the 1730s and mid-1760s. In fact, employment over the whole northern half of Ireland rose dramatically from the mid-1740s, and seasonal movement within Ireland at this time actually fell. Charles

O’Hara, a County Sligo landlord, commented on the decline in movement. Similarly, Arthur Young related how a County Louth landlord experienced more difficulty in the 1770s in hiring twenty labourers than would have been involved twenty years previously in hiring 200 or 300. Recruitment of rank and file for the British army, which began in 1756-63, was also conspicuously unsuccessful before the 1790s. This suggests both more opportunities within Ireland and, for those who chose to emigrate, more attractive alternatives. The rise in emigration from Munster in the late 1760s and the resumption 24 Archives de la Charente maritime, La Rochelle, étude notariée Desbarres 3E 573, fols. 88”.; 93”.; 8, 21 Feb. 1719. See also M. C. Guibert, G. Debien, C. Martin, ‘L’Emigration vers la Louisiane (La Rochelle, Nantes, Clairac) (1698-—1754)’, in 97° Congres national des sociétés savantes, histoire moderne ii (Nantes, 1972), 112.

The Irish Diaspora 131 of emigration on vessels from Galway for the first time since 1729 were in response to problems which also brought to a halt an internal flow of skilled artisans over several decades. This flow was comprised of Protestant textile workers who had been induced to leave Ulster to

establish the linen industry in the west, midlands, and south of Ireland. It was one dimension of the sustained landlord investment in southern industry which persisted from the 1720s to the 1760s. Thus, one way or another, southern emigration to North America

fits into a wider pattern embracing the three interrelated factors of the northern linen industry, inland migration, and conditions in the New World. Somewhat more simple to picture is the other stream of southern migration, the origins of which lay in seasonal movement to Newfoundland. This seasonal flow originally coincided with a dip in

recruitment for the French army in the first half of the 1730s, and centred on a region which had been active in army enlistment. It was

also in the heartland of this region—Tipperary, Kilkenny, and the border areas of Cork and Waterford—that rural unrest as a concerted, organized phenomenon emerged in the early 1760s. Both emigration and unrest represented responses to demographic pressures and a rapid commercialization of farming in the boom years of the 1760s in a region where farms were large and where a tradition of army service had already created a readiness to move away from home. The reluctance of the seasonal migrants carried from Newfoundland to France in 1762 to contemplate army service is instructive regarding the negative appeal which army service had by then acquired. In the

case of the 334 who remained, despite all the pressures exerted on them, only fourteen signed on for the Irish Brigade, twelve for the navy, and forty-nine for the Guyana colony.”

If eighteenth-century emigration was not much greater than seventeenth-century emigration in terms of the proportion of the population involved, and if the emigrants were increasingly drawn from either well-defined compact regions or well-defined groups within society, this suggests some improvement over time in the quality of Irish life. Some leeway was feasible as to destination, and less attractive locations and occupations could be avoided; an element of real choice had thus entered into emigration decisions. There was also an improvement in the quality of the emigrants themselves. First, mass migration embracing women and children as well as men, such ° Archives nationales, Paris, Archives de la marine B* 557, fol. 234, 15 Mar. 1763.

132 L. M. Cullen as that manifested by the great camp of 3,000 Irish on the outskirts of Paris in 1604, was a thing of the past, having been largely replaced by

a heavily male emigration. Second, emigration for army service, a migration of the poor, had increasingly given way to non-military emigration. Third, as regards army emigration, there was a shift in the eighteenth century from mass recruitment by officers to migration by individuals; this is clear from the fact that the eighteenth-century

catchment area (apart from the prominence of the south-west) was nation-wide, providing a trickle over the year (which underlines the decline of recruiting agency) and embracing a wide spread of ages (revealing an individual urge to escape pressures of family or the law more than economic pressure). Only Kerry and west Cork hint at a systematic recruitment of the very young. In any event, systematic recruitment broke down after the 1730s, never to be resumed except fleetingly and ineffectively in the 1750s. Fourth, seasonal migration

(whether within Ireland or reaching to Britain as well), which had quickened in the 1720s, was not able to sustain the upward momentum, and increased again only from the early nineteenth century. The population was kept at home by the rising incomes afforded by the textile industries and by the higher prices of young livestock sold to the highly commercialized farming districts of eastern Ireland. Wages

rose between the 1740s and the 1770s throughout Ireland. This could hardly have happened if labourers in the richer counties had found themselves overrun by hungry competitors from the poorer counties. Indeed, a small subsidiary stream of relatively recent seasonal migration to England also eased the pressures. This became a subject

of public comment for the first time only in 1750, when it was suggested that half of them did not return.*° In 1775 a writer deeply imbued with the concern over emigration evident in both islands that

year noted that ‘a great number of men and boys go yearly to old England for want of work at home, in the latter end of April or beginning of May’.?’

Much labour was also syphoned off by the growing towns. The population of both Dublin and Cork trebled in the eighteenth century. By the end of the century, Dublin was one of the six largest cities in Europe, Cork one of the ten most populous seaports. The pull of the 26 Some Considerations on the British Fisheries with a Proposal for Establishing a General Fishery on the Coast of Ireland (Dublin, 1750), 14. 27 Anon., ‘Mallow and its Neighbourhood in 1775’, Journal of the Cork Historical and Archaeological Society, 27-8 (1921-2), 79.

The Irish Diaspora 133 towns was complemented by the growth, especially after mid-century (a coincidence of timing which seems to justify the concern of con-

temporaries that many seasonal migrants did not return), of Irish communities in Ayrshire, Cumberland, and especially Bristol, Liverpool, and London. Little known, these communities, combining

both the upwardly mobile and a sump of poverty, began to merit comment at this time. The London community was probably several thousand strong, and in a memorable phrase Adam Smith penned a line on some of its constituents.”° While army enlistment virtually dried up at rank-and-file level by the 1750s, enlistment of officers in continental armies survived as a career strategy for younger sons. Army service had a special appeal for the sons of declining gentry families and for aspirants to a higher

station among middling families. These families took no interest whatever in fostering recruitment of rank-and-file soldiers from Ireland. Their lack of interest in this role—or their abandonment of it—was in part a response to Protestant hostility, which in 1730 forced the Dublin government to oppose the mission in Ireland of Richard Hennessy, an Irish officer of high rank in French service, a mission which had been agreed in negotiations between the English

and French courts, and which was designed to enlist 750 men.” Families with estates were now reluctant to exert their influence, — while those without estates had too small a territorial base to enjoy real influence. However, the fact that even the latter did not use their kinship links and local standing to exercise a modest recruiting role as agents shows that intimidation of them was just as effective as it was of the greater families who remained propertied in fee. By 1740 an Irish officer whose influence could help recruitment in Ireland was highly prized in France, no doubt because he was the exception rather than the rule. Several recruiting agents were executed over the years; the formidable steps taken to hunt down Morty Oge O’ Sullivan

on the Berehaven peninsula in County Cork in 1754 constituted a reaction to his anachronistic role in recruitment, as well as to his other *8 ‘The chairmen, porters, and coal heavers in London, and those unfortunate women who live by prostitution, the strongest men and the most beautiful women perhaps in the British dominions, are said to be, the greater part of them, from the lowest rank of people in Ireland, who are generally fed with this root (the potato)’ (Adam Smith, An Ingutry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations, ed. W. R. Scott (London, 1921), 141).

79 Archives de la Guerre, Paris, A’ 2770, no. 78, De Broglie to Harrington, 18 Aug. 1730.

134 L. M. Cullen deeds and misdeeds. His past career as an army officer, his business

activity as a merchant in contraband, his killing of a Protestant (coincidentally a revenue official), and an exaggerated Protestant perception of his modest recruitment agency all served to seal his fate. His execution ensured that he was remembered in legend and poetry as a tragic and romantic figure, later immortalized in a powerful novel by the historian James Anthony Froude. Acts were passed in

the Irish parliament in 1746 and 1756 against Irish officers serving abroad.

The 1756 Act, which declared service abroad to be treasonable,

struck real fear into Catholic families in Ireland. The brother of Charles O’Conor, a small country gentleman and one of the founders of the Catholic Committee, undertook long negotiations with London

before returning to Ireland, lest he fall foul of the law. Similarly, a testimonial written by his commanding officer in 1757 on behalf of Richard Hennessy (a relative of the Richard Hennessy of 1730 fame),

who was later to establish the famous brandy business in Cognac, professed fear of the consequences of the Act as the reason for his renouncing his army career. The young officers maintained close links with home. This contact was dictated as much by practicalities as sentiment, because pay was so bad that an officer in the early stages of his career could only hope to survive with some family supplement. Officers often left the service, even if their years as aspirant officers or cadets had not already given

them a distaste for it. Some passed into trade with Ireland in a French or Spanish port; others, in the absence of quick promotion, returned to the life of a gentleman farmer and, if fortunate, made an advantageous marriage. Others who persisted in service retired to

Ireland late in their careers, either to inherit or to pursue an inheritance. The gentilshommes of mature years, devoid of contact with home or content to serve in the ranks, who were still to be found as

late as the 1710s, had become a thing of the past. Army life was a career, albeit often a temporary one, and if it did become permanent,

at least when rank was attained, it provided a satisfying, if not particularly well-paid, place among the few respected really professional officers in the aristocracy-ridden armies of the age. Some, like Colonel Daniel O’ Connell, advanced to write the infantry regulations

for the French army, or, like Count John O’Rourke, to write a famous book on military tactics.

The Irish regiments in France and Spain offered around 500

The Irish Diaspora 135 commissions at any time to Irishmen, probably an even greater number in the first half of the eighteenth century when the number

of Irish regiments in France and Spain was at its peak. To this should be added commissions in Austrian service, in which at least 300 Irishmen pursued successful officer careers over two centuries; perhaps at least twenty-five Irishmen served at any one time (these figures ignore those who fell by the wayside). If we assume arbitrarily

some 525 commissions available to Irish Catholics, it compares favourably with the prospects available in army service in Britain. In the early 1750s there were 2,000 commissions in the entire British

army. Commissions in the British army, had they been open to Catholics, would not have been such an asset to Irish families anxious

to provide careers for sons. Not only would the latter have been in competition with a large number of Scottish and English families, as well as Irish Protestant families, but commissions in Britain could be procured only for cash payment, whereas in mercenary regiments kinship or recommendation acquired them. Thus, even if a quarter of the officers in British service had been Irish Catholics, opportunities

would not have been any greater than those already enjoyed in foreign service. The rather poor families of gentry background in north Connacht, Cork, and Kerry exploited these opportunities systematically. However, younger sons of families which were landed in a more substantial sense were also to be found in foreign service. Indeed, even as early as the 1690s, there is some evidence of discontent over the fact that officers of lower social standing were emerging; and throughout the eighteenth century a distinction must be made between sons of good family and sometimes many acres and others of lower birth and remarkably few acres who still succeeded in obtaining

commissions (usually, if not invariably, through the mediation of better-connected relatives, who found themselves assailed by the demands of needy poor relations). A high proportion of emigrants from Ireland came from relatively

high-status families. In a total annual emigration in the eighteenth century of some 2,000—3,000 per year, they probably accounted for roughly 300. Army service, if volontaires and some who first entered the ranks are included, may have absorbed as many as 100 aspiring officers per year. The Church and the universities on the Continent may have accounted for as many again. Indeed, a rather low percent-

age of the churchmen returned to Ireland. Many remained on the Continent, entering the diocesan Church or the French and Spanish

136 L. M. Cullen navies, or passed into the service of the French East India Company as chaplains on its vessels or at its trading posts. French churchmen disliked this service with its high mortality rate and hardships, but more desperate Irishmen were lured by the prospect of augmenting | their stipend with small commercial speculations. Irish merchants were also widely spread across the trading world, with large colonies in London, Nantes, Bordeaux, and Cadiz in particular. In the West Indies merchants and planters overlapped, with the Irish, who were settled on the British, French, Dutch, and Danish islands, providing

the sole cosmopolitan group who migrated regularly between the islands in any number. How many individual migrants this network could absorb each year is impossible to gauge, but Irish merchants and planters alike were assailed with requests for positions. Even as late as 1785, Richard Hennessy, at that time resident in Bordeaux, wrote that ‘many young men come here of late well recommended, from Ireland and very few of them have succeeded in getting places’. Apprenticeship to an established house was especially hard to procure, requiring both a strong recommendation and a fee, and in practice was open only to relatives or to sons of customers at home. Clerkships were a more common first stage in getting established, and Irishmen, with their command of the English language, could aspire to employment in non-Irish as well as Irish houses in both France and Spain.

In the plantations, even if access to trade or plantation ownership required capital and backing, there were many openings in the hard life of overseer. In 1760 on the small Danish island of Saint-Croix (dominated by the Irish businessman Nicholas Tuite) there were only twelve Irish plantation owners, but more than too Irish overseers. If one were to assume an average of 100 migrants a year either to, or in hope of, commercial or plantation positions abroad, it would not be an excessive estimate. Moreover, what is said above concerns only Irish Catholics; Anglicans and Presbyterians pursued similar possi-

bilities, usually, though not invariably, in the British Empire. In Jamaica, a late developer in commercial exploitation, Irishmen and Jews accounted for 10 per cent of the inventories above £1,000 in 1771-4. Migration reflected the presence of relatively mobile elements within the population. Apart from officer migrations, which drew on comfortable or well-connected families across the entire country, it stemmed principally from two areas: the north and the south-east. Outside those areas it did not touch the rural communities except for

|

The Irish Diaspora 137 pockets of Protestants in industry, often themselves recent immigrants, who soon experienced the vicissitudes of intermittent recession or the vagaries of landlord patronage, and the gentry and near-gentry

in need of careers for younger sons in church, state, trade, and plantation. This pattern depended on the existence in more developed

areas of a vigorous social structure which ruthlessly squeezed out younger sons, and barred permanent access to land through subdivision either to its own sons or to the ranks of hungry labourers who provided the work-force of gentry and farmers alike. In turn, the emigration to which this policy gave rise helped to maintain a viable social structure, and to protect patrimony and status for the better-off families. Some of the gentry in north Mayo, Sligo, and Roscommon who had been reduced in circumstances were able through this policy

to maintain their tiny estates intact, and in consequence to preserve | and even improve their impaired gentry position. But in that poor and

even barren region other families were unable to do this, and the subdivision of patrimonies over generations impaired the establishment of a viable social structure. County Clare, with its host of small gentleman farmers or mid-

dlemen, also experienced social problems in the late eighteenth century. It had had strong Irish Brigade associations in the past, but seems to have lost out in access to commissions in the course of the century. Clare’s dynamism in army and naval careers and in business (of which in both fields the MacNamaras were the most distinguished examples), did not long outlive the generation which laid its basis in the 1690s. After mid-century, the sons of Clare disappeared from the officer ranks in the regiments; for ordinary Claremen, who had once served in the ranks and had even been recruited in some numbers by agents, there was no syphon comparable to the Newfoundland trade which opened up in East Munster. The county’s excessively numerous small gentleman farmers, each with his little knot of tenants, were

doomed to financial ruin in the years of the Great Famine (if not already before), its peasants on ever smaller holdings to starvation. Clare is one of the most telling instances of the consequences of a decline in mobility in the eighteenth century. On the other hand, in many other areas, at both gentry and sub-gentry level, the policy of pushing out sons enhanced the economic and social position of families. In complex fashion too, in forcing out both younger sons and many smallholders and labourers, it preserved, admittedly at a short-term price, a core of strength within the social system.

138 L. M. Cullen The pursuit of careers meant everything to the better-off families of the countryside. The feared backlash against Catholics serving abroad, as well as the need for career outlets, explains the interest in the proposal in 1762 to recruit seven regiments of Catholics in Ireland, under Catholic gentry officers, to serve Britain’s ally, Portugal. The

proposal was defeated because of the strength of the Protestant opposition to foreign service; but as early as 1776 and again in 1782, interest in the prospect of careers in the British army was aroused.

This interest was prompted in part by the dramatic shrinkage in prospects in the peacetime French army in the 1760s and 1770s; in the 1780s the mercenary regiments were reorganized yet again, and the prospects of officer careers in France or of advance in them fell to the nadir point for the eighteenth century. Indeed, when advancement was already at a low point in 1776, with the Irish regiments temporarily reduced from three to two, Irish officers had already

| displayed an interest in careers in British service in America. Careers abroad reflected the presence of a middle class in rural life, and helped not only to preserve the class but even to promote its

growth and stir new aspirations, social as well as economic. Only Ulster, with the total upheaval in the fortunes of its aboriginal population in the seventeenth century, seemed to stand aside from these developments among Catholics. Elsewhere, contrary to what is often

said, Catholics not only preserved, but built, painfully and slowly perhaps but surely, on what they held. Sons were squeezed out, and in Wexford, even late in the eighteenth century, the small gentry class, which remarkably kept and improved its lot amid a Protestant gentry, seemed to have been prepared on occasion to place sons in the ranks if officer commissions were not immediately available. Emigration was larger in the eighteenth century than in the seven-

teenth century in absolute terms, reflecting a larger population. However, per thousand of the population, despite the qualitative improvements in migrants themselves and the new opportunities, migration probably did not rise significantly. Emigration could be suggested, rather rashly perhaps, to have run at somewhat less than one per 1,000 in the seventeenth century (though with startling peaks in the first decade, the early 1650s, and 1691). This compares with less than or no more than one per 1,000 in the eighteenth century, rising finally to six per 1,000 in the decades immediately preceding the Great Famine. The highest rates in the seventeenth century were in the third quarter of the century, the lowest rates in the eighteenth

| :

The Irish Diaspora 139 TABLE 6.1. Irish annual migration, 1600-1700

1601-50 1651-1700

soldiers 500 ~ 500 dependents 200 200

Army (rank and file)

Americas 200 400 Europe (officer and non-military) 200 200 England 100 150 Total 1,200 1,450 Note: Population: ¢c.1-1.4m. in 1600, ¢.2.1m. in 1641,

¢.1.7m. in 1672, c.2-2.2m. in 1687. |

century in the 1740s and 1750s. At other times, rates stood at intermediate points within the range of magnitudes for each century. Even greatly different estimates of population or of emigration would

not immeasurably alter the contrast (see Tables 6.1 and 6.2). The emigration estimates for the seventeenth century are the more pro-

blematic, because of both poorer data and the sheer problem of generalizing a trend for a movement so heavily concentrated in particular periods; for example, if seventeenth-century population figures are put at very conservative levels, the rate is significantly higher. On the other hand, the eighteenth-century estimates for both population and migration are somewhat more reliable, and probably not too far removed from the reality. Overall patterns, of course, conceal regional divergences. Sharp contrasts existed between areas of mobility and areas of arrested mobility such as Clare. The most instructive con-

trast of all is that of Presbyterian or Scots-Irish migration. If the Scots-Irish population is assumed, plausibly to have been 250,000 in

1753 (and almost 500,000 in 1791),°° a typical outflow of 1,000 migrants a year would represent four per 1,000 of their numbers at the population level of the 1750s. This is four times the national rate, and highlights the much higher mobility of the Scots-Irish. Moreover, the 2,000 Ulster Scots estimated to have landed at Delaware ports in 30 These figures are calculated from the most recent estimates of population, assuming that roughly the same proportion of the population of Ulster was Presbyterian as it was in the 1861 census.

140 L. M. Cullen TABLE 6.2. Irish annual migration, 1701 —83

I7OI-50 «1751-75

Europe 7900 50

Armies and navies

England (including East India Co.) 50 250 Americas

Ulster Protestants 300 1,000 Catholic and southern 250 500

Professions (priest, army officer, trader, clerk, overseer, law, etc.)

Europe (including colonies and East India 300 300

England 100 200 English East India Co. 5 25 companies)

Unskilled, semi-skilled, and seasonal workers not returning

England and Scotland 100 200

Total 1,805 25525

Note: Population: ¢c.1.8-2.1m. in 1701, ¢.2.2—2.6m. in 1753, ¢.4.4m. in 1791.

1773 then represents five per 1,000 (assuming a Presbyterian popu-

lation of 400,000 in 1773). As numbers certainly arrived at other ports in this peak year, the migration could have been as much as ten

per 1,000 in 1773 if we make the probable assumption that the numbers leaving Ulster were as large again as the Delaware arrivals.

Such a proportion (close, though for this one year, to the rate of emigration from all Ireland in post-Famine decades) makes understandable the concern expressed in 1773, even if the wild estimates of the time are heavily discounted.

The sharp rise in migration in the first half of the nineteenth century in fact represented at first simply an accentuation of regional

trends or patterns which had emerged in the preceding century. Emigration was still largely from the north and the south-east and concentrated in well-defined mobile social categories. Thus it drew the better-off rather than the poor; and in general, individual

travellers replacing indentured emigrants, outnumbered family

The Irish Diaspora I4I groups. No doubt a new crisis was building up. The fact that, outside the large towns, immigration was no longer significant means that net movement (emigration minus immigration) had reversed decisively in the course of the eighteenth century, and had become a net outward

movement. Indeed, it is precisely in areas of Ireland which had received immigrants in large numbers in the seventeenth century that outward movement was most evident in the eighteenth century. All this illustrates the sheer complexity of the Irish situation. Longterm comparisons point to different patterns, depending on whether emigration estimates are made in isolation from immigration statistics

or whether net movement is selected as the basis of study. However, even if the aggregates remain low, the changing character of eighteenth-century society and the antecedents of future crisis may be seen in the fact that religious and regional patterns which had greatly diverged in the past were converging in the early nineteenth

century, with mobility and the net outward movement that could result from it becoming somewhat more general. The slowing down in the growth of the urban centres of the east and south of Ireland at the end of the eighteenth century was probably one of the first factors dictating the necessity of a new and enlarged mobility. The rise in British army recruitment during the revolutionary

and Napoleonic wars reflects this novel mobility to an impressive degree. In the immediately preceding decades army recruitment had met with a limited response, reflecting both a reluctance to enlist and an ambivalent support by the Irish establishment for recruitment even of rank-and-file Protestants. However, from 1776 on, the success of East India Company recruitment in eastern Ireland, at the hands of several determined agents, including Robert Brooke, which at peak took up to 1,000 men, foreshadowed a new trend.*' Largely centred on eastern districts and on Catholics in Dublin’s catchment area, it may reflect among other things the slow-down in Dublin’s growth.

Moreover, we have to integrate into the general picture, both for Ireland and for Scotland, a superficially conflicting pattern of simultaneous new emigration outlets and recovery in military enlistment. 31 East India Record Office, London, embarkation lists L/MIL/9/go, L/MIL/g/ 94, L/MIL/9/103. See also A. N. Gilbert, ‘Recruitment and Reform in the East India Company Army, 1760-1800’, Journal of British Studies, 15/1 (Nov. 1975), and J. Mokyr and C. O Grada, ‘The Height of Irishmen and Englishmen in the 1770s: Some Evidence from the East India Company Army Records’, Eighteenth-century Ireland, 4 (1989), 83-92.

142 L. M. Cullen The experience of the Scots Brigade in Dutch service paralleled that of the Irish Brigade in France. Its non-officer component dried up at the same time as the Irish one, in the 1750s. During the Seven Years

War this was a consequence of a ban in Scotland aimed at aiding recruitment for domestic armies, but even in the ensuing peace years,

repeating the identical pattern for the Irish Brigade in France, the privates were by 1776 all foreign.** As its recruitment was largely from the east coast, and from Fifeshire in particular, this illustrates the new options which more comfortable regions enjoyed. The great rise in military recruitment in the Seven Years War was from the Highlands, where it played the same role as it had a century or two earlier in eastern Scotland. In Ireland the success of recruitment in the 1790s reflected both the penetration of poorer western areas, which had previously provided comparatively few of the officers for foreign service, and the attractions of the army for the immobile Catholic poor in Leinster, who had previously been excluded from crown service on religious grounds. These Leinster poor were now predisposed to serve as a result of their rising numbers and immiseration. By the early nineteenth century, enlarged seasonal mobility from the west and north-west of Ireland, districts little involved in eighteenth-

century migration, pointed to impending crisis further afield; but it required a disaster such as the Great Famine to break emigration out of its long-established mould. Eighteenth-century emigration pales by comparison with the mass-

ive emigration of the second half of the nineteenth century, and indeed with the soaring movement of the early decades. But if it was so much smaller and for that reason can easily be underestimated, it represented not a weakness or inadequacy in society as did nineteenthcentury emigration, but one of the very bases of the strength of the society. Indeed, it was the strategy which made possible the economic prosperity of its best-endowed regions, the survival of its old gentry families in something akin to gentry status, and the rise of comfortable

farming families. Moreover, nineteenth-century emigration by its sheer scale directed the aspirations of a huge number (more than half the natural increase in population) towards foreign horizons. In crisis districts in the crisis years, individuals loomed relatively smaller than

in the eighteenth century (though a strong current of individual 32 See J. Ferguson, Papers Illustrating the History of the Scots Brigade in the Service of the United Provinces (Edinburgh, 1899), i. 25; ii. 394, 396.

The Insh Diaspora 143 emigration has tended to be underplayed in accounts of Irish migration for the nineteenth century).

On the other hand, eighteenth-century emigration was intimately

tied up with strategies directed towards assuring the position of families within Ireland. Indeed, the return of officers to Ireland or of some of the clergy as curates had a profound effect. It is not simply because they had absorbed philosophical ideas—though they did in fact—but because experience of life abroad on a basis of full legal equality made social and political discrimination in Ireland intolerable and unacceptable to them. A gulf existed between those who served abroad and those who remained at home, and it was all the more real because those who went abroad were usually second or younger sons, hence those with less stake in society than their elder brothers. The lives of returning officers such as Morty Oge O” Sullivan and Arthur O’Leary conceal searing personal experiences. The families prominent on the Catholic Committee and in the Catholic Convention of 1792 all had officer connections over the century, just as the Wexford families and Edward Byrne, the Dublin merchant who had proposed the Convention, were linked together in a tight circle of financial and career interest (and continental education opportunities which often

preceded careers either at home or abroad) which revolved over decades around France. There is little doubt that both the success of Catholic families in subverting the penal laws and the explosive aspira-

tions of the 1790s drew heavily on the emigration of the eighteenth century. The extreme example is the Lawless family, migrating to

France in the 1750s in dismay at the penal laws, returning in the 17708, alienated by French conditions. Though conforming to the established Church, the banker father, despite a peerage earned in the late 1770s by outward political subservience, was one of the three

leading lights of the anti-government financial circle in the 1780s, and the son Valentine, the future second Lord Cloncurry, a United Irishman.

If emigration from Ireland was a more conscious and less involuntary decision in the eighteenth century, this lends support to the idea that the 1760s constitutes the greatest single watershed in the history of migration overall. The 1760s and 1770s are usually seen in terms of a crisis which greatly swelled the number of migrants. But it can be argued that they should not be seen as the most serious in a series of crises but rather as an entirely new development, in recognition of wider and positive economic changes. In other words the flow

144 L. M. Cullen has to be seen not as a response to a crisis but as a movement triggered by a perception of quite novel opportunities. ‘There are reasons for thinking this, both in the nature of the migrations and in the fact that belief, contemporary and historical, in economic crisis has been greatly exaggerated. First, regarding the migrants themselves, the pool drew from both advantaged and novel locations, reflected in the 1760s and 1770s in an upsurge of migration from the south and west of Ireland, and in Britain in the rise of migration from the Scottish Highlands, London, and Yorkshire. Bernard Bailyn has

emphasized the role of London in the migration.*? But it may be more accurate to regard the scale of migration from London as what is relatively novel. In 1767 the French embassy in London singled out the migrants from Ireland and Germany in the movement into the thirteen colonies, noting that there were very few from England,**

and Adam Smith a decade later seems to have shared the same view.°° A rise in the 1770s may be seen less as a rise in an established migration than a shift to a more mobile, more skilled pool of people exercising some real choice. There was already an emphasis on skills

of migrants in the 1760s, even from Ireland, and migrants in the 1770s were if anything even more skilled. Taking a very long perspective, it is easy to see too that there was a swing from members of religious sects— Dissenters, zealots, and alienated groups—to people with more individual motivation, just as in the structuring of migration there was a move from group movement led by ministers, gentry, or promoters to a more individual emigation. This is not surprising, of

course, as the demand moved in favour of skills and versatility. Moreover, as costs of transport fell, and improved communications made new opportunities much better known, the pull of the Americas became more decisive for individuals.

The second factor is the economic environment of the 1760s and 1770s. In migration studies this period is presented either in terms of a crisis in the economic conjoncture or in terms emphasizing the crisis

element in emigrant motivation; but while the economic crisis was severe in 1772 and in consequence Irish emigration peaked in 1773, overall, the striking dimension of the two decades is one of powerful 33 Bailyn, Peopling of North America, 24-5, 40. 34 Ministére des affaires étrangéres, Paris, correspondance politique Angleterre, vol. 475, fol. 5, 3 Sept. 1767. 35 Adam Smith, An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations, ed. W.

R. Scott (London, 1921), 164-5.

The Irish Diaspora 145 economic expansion. The migration also occurred in conditions of rising wages, at least in Great Britain and Ireland. This was probably the case elsewhere too. While German migration (discussed in detail in Chapter 8) does not fit the pattern in quite the same way, in that German movement to America fell from a peak in 1749-53, it does so in other ways. German migration to Philadelphia had soared to 9,500 in 1749, and averaged 5,600 over the following four years.”° Its abrupt rise to what were the largest known annual flows of colonial

times points to something less than choice, and its methods and routes rested conservatively on the family, religious, and ethnic patterns of preceding German migrations to America. By contrast, in the

1760s German migration to Philadelphia fell to less than 1,000 per year. Migrants from Germany now took more diversified paths. There

was a large German migration to Spain, which was experiencing a boom in Catalonia: 7,000 Germans passed through Sete on their way to Spain in 1767.°’ Germans also moved into eastern Europe in the

1760s and 1780s.°° In the case of the remaining migration to America, the number of single, as opposed to family, migrants increased, pointing to a further shift in German migration patterns.°?

The 1760s and 1770s were a period of economic boom, with unprecedented peaks in economic activity in the Atlantic business world in 1771 and 1776—7.*" Exports rose rapidly from the Americas,

and the return trades boomed as well. Imports flooded into both Maryland and Virginia in the years up to 1772.*' Even the inevitable

recession in tobacco was eased by a marked switch from tobacco culture to wheat, ‘the prevalency in the planters of turning farmers’.*” The demand for slave labour weakened, as tobacco lost impetus, and

lands near waterways were ‘all going largely into farming’.** This 36 M. Wokeck, ‘German and Irish Immigration to Colonial Philadelphia’, Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society, 133/2 (June 1989), 132. °7 L. Dermigny, Sete de 1666 & 1880: esquisse de l'histoire d’un port (Montpellier, 1955), 60. 38 Wokeck, ‘German Immigration’, 143.

3? Ibid. 132. :

*° L. M. Cullen, ‘History, Economic Crises and Revolution: Understanding Fighteenth-Century France’, Tawney Memorial Lecture, Economic History Society Annual Conference, Manchester, Apr. 1991, Economic History Review, 46/4 (Nov. 1993), 635-57. 41 Strathclyde Regional Archives, Mitchell Library, Glasgow, TD 167/1, Falmouth, 22 Aug. 1772, Robinson to Cunninghame & Co., Glasgow. 2 Tbid., 15 May 1773. 43 Tbid., 29 Apr. 1774.

146 L. M. Cullen favoured European labour less perhaps in farming itself than in a general demand for labour in the invigorated village and urban com-

7 munities at large as a non-slave economy gained in economic appeal. Cultivation and trade in wheat, which increased at a phenomenal rate during these years, thus underpinned the colonies at a time when the

tobacco staple weakened; and it both sustained the demand for migrants and helped to speed their dispersal beyond the limits of Pennsylvania. The novel appearance of American wheat in Irish, English, and French ports in great quantities both in the 1760s and 1770s is a relevant aspect of the total change as well. Not only were migrants of a new cast and the environment of trade and cultivation one of unprecedented strength, but channels of communication and shipping were at a new pitch. Ships were also larger, and some were even specialist vessels for the emigrant trade. While the cost of the passage from Ireland to America had halved between

the 1720s and the 1770s, more telling is the fact that the term of service in indentures had contracted from 4-7 years to 2—4 years," meaning in effect that inducements were necessary to attract emi-

grants. What developed in these years was an effective Atlantic economy: even the credit crises of the period had novel elements which tended to lead contemporaries, unaccustomed to this complexity, to overemphasize their unfavourable aspects. However, the very real sense of crisis evident everywhere—in the thirteen colonies as well as in Britain, Ireland, and France—was in essence a political one: wage demands (even servant wages, the most unchanging of all, went up, to the consternation of the employing classes), a deep social and economic malaise in England, food riots in France, and agrarian

unrest in Ireland were interpreted somewhat extravagantly as exorbitant demands which (amid political uncertainties) not only made the lower orders less deferential but might lead to the dissolution of society itself. Emigration, where it occurred, was feared, not solely for economic reasons, but because of this disquieting, novel context, and in the process its scale and possible effects were exaggerated. Finally, four observations are worth making. Emigration estimates,

contemporary or reworked, not only for emigration in the normal sense but for army recruitment (recruits were sometimes deserters re-enlisting for the sake of the bounty), tend to be unreliable and to exaggerate movement. They frequently draw on a belief in a widely * T. M. Truxes, Irish-American Trade (Cambridge, 1988), 128, 132.

The Irish Diaspora 147 diffused compulsion, moral or physical to emigrate, rather than on quite specific individual motivations. Second, if emigration from

Ireland, one of the prime emigrant territories of the eighteenth century, increased in importance (which it did), it did so less because

of a rise in the absolute numbers of migrants than because, with a decline in immigration, it was more conspicuously a net outward movement. Third, when emigration from Ireland increased in the 1760s and 1770s, its significance must be weighed in the context of the fact that the internal pressure for employment outlets and the crisis mobility associated with it had greatly eased. ‘This emphasizes the specific individual motivations which have to be taken into account in explaining the rise in emigration in the 1760s and 1770s. It also fits with the pattern of a greater proportion of Irish migrants paying their own passage in the 1770s, as noted by Marianne Wokeck, and the well-defined Yorkshire and London component in English migration identified by Bernard Bailyn for 1773-6. Fourth, emigration has to be related to the rise and fall in army recruitment, which made communities more aware of the outside world, and in which desertion (as much a central facet of the process as recruitment itself) multiplied ties in residence and survival in new districts. The diffuse Scottish presence in northern Europe was closely related to the rise of larger and

more permanent armed camps in Europe. More than any other comparatively short-lived war, the Seven Years War had seen an unprecedented rise in military expenditure, just as the unprecedented indebtedness that the war entailed and the peace that indebtedness itself helped to guarantee resulted in an exceptional reduction in army size at the peace. This situation helped both to terminate rank-and-file army migration to France, which was still capable of staging a recovery in the early 1750s, and to accelerate the seasonal movement to Newfoundland, which rose sharply in the 1760s and 1770s. Likewise, the movement of

Ulster Scots and Scottish Highlanders (both of which had been recruited in considerable numbers into the British army for the first time

in the Seven Years War) to the New World rose sharply. The sudden contraction in the swollen army outlets of the Seven Years War was also

a factor in German movements in the 1760s ( the traffic to Catalonia significantly included some recruits for the reduced peacetime Spanish army establishment). These observations lead to a further, broader one. The transatlantic

migration of the 1760s and 1770s bears little relation to any preceding migration. It is in many respects novel, and occurred in

148 L. M. Cullen conditions both of a renewed pace of expansion in colonial America and of an Atlantic economy which was quite literally transformed by the great upsurge in trade and output on both sides of the ocean in the 1760s and 1770s. It was effectively the first stage in the emergence of a broad modern intercontinental migration. Its character and significance are greatly underestimated if we relate it too readily to past migrations, a comparison which is tempting because the novel volume of comment and a richer contemporary documentation suggest super-

ficially that it can be seen simply as the best-documented of the old-style migrations. However, in conjunction with the sense of farreaching crisis, it is the novelty of the migration which accounts for the comment. Its sudden eruption beyond the traditional sources of

migrants into new districts not noted for outward movement, the skilled character and independence of many of the migrants, and its occurrence in good as well as bad years are all features which were not lost on contemporaries. The fact that the rise in migration in the 1760s and 1770s was not a temporary feature of the crisis years is seen in the fact that it was sustained during the years of peace post-1783. Between 1783 and 1794 Irish immigration to Philadelphia averaged 5,604 per annum.”

As this does not include other Delaware ports or other American ports, it does not cover all Irish immigration. But even the partial figure is twice the pre-1783 level of 2,500 migrants arriving in the thirteen counties suggested earlier. Moreover, the rise in the number of travellers paying their own passage in the early 1770s is not, as usually assumed, a simple repetition of the pattern of earlier crisis

years: it was to remain a feature of the sustained migration of the 1780s. The American Revolution, which brought discrimination against Catholics to an end, also made America an attractive haven for them. The first serious thought of such migration by the propertied seems to have occurred in 1777, and Catholics became interested in and eventually bought land in and after the 1780s. A small current of immigration from the south-east was evident before 1775, witnessed

for instance by figures who acquired fame, like John Barry, and those who remained obscure, like John Prendergast, a lieutenant in ** M. J. Bric, ‘Ireland, Irishmen, and the Broadening of the Late-EighteenthCentury Philadelphia Polity’ (Johns Hopkins Univ. Ph.D. dissertation, 1990), pt. 2, p. 672. See also E. C. Carter, ‘A “Wild Irishman” under Every Federalist Bed: Naturalisation in Philadelphia 1789-1806’, Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society, 133/2 (June 1989), 178-89.

The Irish Diaspora 149 Washington’s army; and a significant migration from the south-east,

especially Wexford, to the southern ports was well established by 1800. Thus, migration widened and deepened in a new stream which

first welled up in the 1760s and 1770s, then reasserted itself in the 1780s, and again even more powerfully in the 1810s. In many respects, not just in migration, the modern world was born in the 1760s and 1770s as part of a great, interrelated process evident in economic and political spheres alike.

”

PART III

Continental European Migration: The Netherlands, Germany, and France

~

The Netherlands, the Dutch, and LongDistance Migration, in the Late Sixteenth to Early Nineteenth Centurtes JAN LUCASSEN

INTRODUCTION | Among the countries of Western Europe, the Netherlands was regarded for two centuries as one of the most attractive to those longing

for greater prosperity, more freedom, and, in many cases, for the perfect combination of the two. By comparison with other nations, during most of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, the Republic

of the United Provinces was characterized by a high degree of religious tolerance and by economic opportunities and high wages. These advantages were of course relative, not absolute. ‘The Republic was not tolerant of all dissenting opinions; nor was it the Garden of

Eden for all those living within its borders. Still, its attraction to foreigners was an outstanding fact.’

Economic historians now agree that economic growth in the Republic was a result of simultaneous balanced growth in many sectors.” A number of features are often highlighted: the highly specialized agricultural sector, which gave the countryside substantial ' For more extended comment on the figures cited in this chapter and how they were arrived at, see J. Lucassen, Dutch Long Distance Migration: A Concase History,

1600-1900 \ISG-Research Paper, 3 (Amsterdam, 1991). Research for this chapter was finished by 1 Jan. 1992. Consequently, as a rule, no literature that appeared in 1992 or later has been used.

J. L. van Zanden, ‘The Dutch Economic History of the Period 1500-1940: A

Review of the Present State of Affairs’, Economic and Social History in the Netherlands, 1

(1989), 9-29; J. I. Israel, Dutch Primacy in World Trade, 1585-1740 (Oxford, 1989);

H. P. H. Nusteling, ‘Periods and Caesurae in the Demographic History of the Netherlands, 1600-1900’, Economic and Social History in the Netherlands, 1 (1989), 87-117; J. T. Lindblad, ‘The Economic History of Colonial Indonesia: A Historiographical Survey’, Economic and Social History in the Netherlands, 1 (1989), 31-47.

154 Jan Lucassen purchasing power; the availability of energy in the form of locally obtainable peat; the importance of export-based industries in the highly urbanized western part of the country; and international and

colonial trade. Although from the end of the eighteenth century export industries (along with much international trade) suffered great crises, other sectors, like peat extraction, continued to make significant contributions to the wealth of the country for most of the nineteenth century, as did colonial trade far into the twentieth century, and specialized agriculture even today. The specialization characteristic of most of these sectors involved

the allocation not only of capital and raw materials but also of manpower. As a consequence, migration was essential for the development of the Dutch economy. While some sectors showed an urgent need for foreign labour, others, through mechanization and rationalization, needed only seasonal migrants, while the lack of work available in yet other sectors led to the migration overseas of both Dutchmen and foreigners. This ability of the Netherlands to make flexible use of the population potential of its neighbours as well as that of its own

people is one of the key factors explaining how a small country, perched precariously on the edge of continental Europe, with a population which did not exceed two million inhabitants before the nineteenth century, could become prosperous and remain so for such

| a long time. Since the focus of this study is the function of migration, and therefore of migrants, in Dutch society, it will be useful to distinguish among migrants in terms of the duration of their stay in the Netherlands, aboard its ships, in its armies, or—in specific cases—in its colonies. Migrants coming seasonally or yearly for a period of time will be referred to as ‘migrant labourers’, whereas other temporary migrants staying longer than one year before returning home will be termed ‘labour migrants’. Those settling permanently will be referred

to as ‘immigrants’ or ‘emigrants’, depending on their country of origin. All three groups played a distinctive role in the Dutch and colonial economy and society, and we shall consider the character and contribution of each population movement first within the Netherlands itself, then to the Dutch sea-borne empire in Europe, and finally to the Dutch overseas possessions in Asia, Africa, and America.

One important consequence of taking Dutch society as our focal point is that at times the net result of migration flows receives more

Dutch Emigration 155 attention than the separate ingoing and outgoing streams. Although

many types of movements of people (migrant labourers, labour migrants, immigrants, emigrants, and especially return migrants) and the relationships between them are discussed here, I do not claim to

provide a total history of migration. First, as will be apparent, the emphasis is on significant, large groups of migrants. Second, by restricting this study to international migration and migrant labourers (although in the last case the definition used here means that national

borders do not play a role), an important type of migration is excluded from the scope of this study: ‘internal migration’, that is, migration between municipalities within the Netherlands. Although it

is impossible in this limited study to discuss such migration more than cursorily, it is clear that internal migration was not only frequent

in the Netherlands, as many local studies have suggested, but also that it forms an integral part of the picture that will be discussed later, particularly the east-west and south—north migration flows.” IMMIGRATION IN THE NETHERLANDS

The changing fortunes of the Eighty Years War (1568-1648), the Dutch war of liberation from Spanish rule, caused a considerable movement of population from the southern Netherlands (an area roughly corresponding to what is today Belgium and French Flanders) to the north. The attack on religious freedom, rising taxation, and the

threat to provincial and local autonomy led to growing unrest and eventually to a revolt against Philip II. This revolt started in the south-western provinces of the Netherlands, in Flanders, Artois, Hainaut, Tournai, and parts of Brabant. It was there that the first Calvinist congregations were founded, the first strikes organized, the 3 On terminology see C. Tilly, ‘Migration in Modern European History’, in W. H. McNeill and R. S. Adams (eds.), Human Migration: Patterns and Policies (Bloomington,

Ind., 1978), 48-74. On my own choice of terms see J. Lucassen, ‘Quellen zur Geschichte der Wanderungen, vor allem der Wanderarbeit, zwischen Deutschland und den Niederlanden vom 17. bis zum 19. Jahrhundert’, in E. Hinrichs and H. van Zon (eds.), Bevolkerungsgeschichte im Vergleich: Studien zu den Niederlanden und Nordwest-

deutschland (Aurich, 1988), 75—89. For the wider significance of internal migration see

J. de Vries, European Urbanization, 1300-1800 (London, 1984 edn.) and C. Tilly, ‘Demographic Origins of the European Proletariat’, in D. Levine (ed.), Proletarianization and Family History (Orlando, Fla., 1984), 1-61. For the Netherlands in the 1gth cent. see C. A. Oomens, De loop der bevolking van Nederland in de negentiende ceuw (The Hague, 1989), 44-5.

156 Jan Lucassen first political demands put forward by the nobility and the burghers, and the Eighty Years War started. The king reconquered the southern provinces, but the northern ones succeeded in gaining independence,

an independence which was officially recognized by the Spanish crown in the Treaty of Miinster in 1648. This reconquest of the southern Netherlands by Spain caused those who had started and supported the revolt to flee to the north, especially when the Catholic Church, assisted by the Brussels government, embarked on a severe

campaign of counter-reformation. Perhaps of equal importance in their decision to emigrate was the damage inflicted upon the economy

of the Spanish southern provinces by the new Republic, which succeeded in 1585 in cutting off the port of Antwerp from its access to the sea, a blockade that lasted until 1795. Most of those who fled from the region between Lille in the south and Ghent and Bruges in

, the north ended up in the Dutch Republic, sometimes after a temporary stay in Germany or England. One conservative estimate puts

the number of inhabitants of the Republic born in the south as at

least 100,000 by around 1600, or about 7 per cent of the total population of the Republic. It would be a mistake to think that there were no differences between these immigrants and the indigenous population of the north, or that assimilation took place without pro-

blems. Not only were the various Dutch dialects distinct, but in addition, many thousands of those moving to the Republic originated in French-speaking areas. The general effect of this predominantly family immigration on the cities in the seaside provinces where most of them settled was positive. ‘Textile workers settled in Leiden, boosting anew the local textile industry; men like Balthasar de Moucheron, Olivier Brunel, Willem Usselincx, and Isaac Le Maire set up trading companies and financed exploratory voyages overseas; and when the VOC (the Dutch East India Company) was established in 1602, more than one-third of its capital was provided by immigrants from the southern Netherlands. The intellectual accomplishments of the immigrants deserve mention too. Among them were the cartographer Peter Plancius, the classicist Justus Lipsius, and the theologian Gomarus. Gomarus was one of the great figures in the Synod of Dordrecht, at which not only was the

Dutch Reformed Church established but the official Dutch Bible was translated. Through the publication of the Bible in Dutch, southerners made a lasting contribution to the development of the Dutch language. In short, the Dutch cultural and scholarly achieve-

Dutch Emigration 157 ments of the so-called golden age, as the seventeenth century is known in Dutch history, would have been unthinkable without the mass immigration from the south.*

Nearly a century later, a second wave of refugees—the French Huguenots—arrived in the Republic.” In 1685 Louis XIV abolished the privileges of the French Protestants and, according to a detailed

discussion of the available figures by Nusteling, some 130,000 Huguenots, or around one in eight or nine, fled their homeland for

good. About 35,000 of these chose to settle permanently in the Dutch Republic. It is hardly an exaggeration to suggest that, initially at least, the towns in the west received them with open arms. Between 1681 and 1690 Amsterdam attracted 5,000 new inhabitants; 2,243 of

them were accorded the rights of burghers at no charge (normally such rights were expensive to buy), exempted from the payment of excise duties, and given a number of other prerogatives. One impor-

tant reason for this eagerness to attract the immigrants was that skilled artisans were among the first to settle. When, after some years, their poorer kinsmen began to settle in the Republic too, many of the privileges previously awarded to them were abrogated. Nevertheless, the immigration of the French Protestants was, like its

counterpart from the southern Netherlands a century earlier, of profound significance for the Dutch economy. It also contributed, as the figure of Pierre Bayle, one of the precursors of the Enlightenment, testifies, to the scholarly and artistic achievements of this period. It was not only Protestant but also Jewish refugees who settled in

the Republic.® After the unification of Spain and Portugal under 4 For details of this immigration see J. Briels, Zuid-Nederlanders in de Republiek

1972). ;

1572-1630. Een demografische en cultuurhistorische studie (St Niklaas, 1985). For a study

of the same immigration flows to England see J. Peters, 4 Family from Flanders (London, 1985); cf. also H. Schilling, Niederlandische Exulanten im 16. Jahrhundert. Ihre Stellung im Sozialgeftige und im religidsen Leben deutscher und englischer Stadte (Giitersloh,

> H. P. H. Nusteling, “The Netherlands and the Huguenot Emigrés’, in J. A. H. Bots and G. H. M. Posthumus Meyjes (eds.), La Révocation de ’Edit de Nantes et les Provinces Unies (Amsterdam, 1986), 17-34; see also H. Bots et al, Vlucht naar de vrijheid. De Hugenoten en de Nederlanden (Amsterdam, 1985); C. Cruson, ‘De Hugenoten

als refugiés’, De Gids, 148 (1985), 225-31; and M. Bakker et al., Hugenoten in Groningen (Groningen, 1985). 6 A. G. Fuks-Mansfeld, De Sefardim in Amsterdam tot 1795. Aspecten van een joodse

minderheid in een Hollandse stad (Hilversum, 1989); H. P. Salomon, The ‘De Pinto’ Manuscript. A 17th Century Marrano Family History (Assen, 1975); J. 1. Israel, European

Jewry in the Age of Mercantilism, 1550-1750 (Oxford, 1989); and the statistical data presented in H. P. H. Nusteling, Welvaart en werkgelegenheid in Amsterdam 1540-1860.

158 Jan Lucassen Philip II in 1580, the persecution of New Christians, descendants of Jews who had converted to Catholicism, and of people accused of belonging to this group was becoming unbearable. Many Portuguese,

rightly or wrongly, were accused of crypto-Judaism and fled the Iberian peninsula. Many thousands reached the Republic. The Dutch were suspicious of Catholics, and this fact, added to the settlers’ own

doubts about their religious identity, led many of the settlers to embrace the Jewish faith, a religion almost totally new to them. It is said that they were assisted in their conversion not only by a German

rabbi, but also by the Sephardi ambassador of Morocco in the Republic. After a few years a ‘Portuguese’ or ‘Sephardi’ synagogue was built in Amsterdam. Persecutions in central and eastern Europe

resulted in the exodus of other refugees to the Republic, the ‘Hoogduitse’, ‘German’, or ‘Ashkenazi’ Jews, who spoke Yiddish and were less wealthy in general than their ‘Portuguese’ co-religionists. As persecution continued, in Poland and Russia in the second half of

the eighteenth century for example, the Jewish population of the Netherlands, which was concentrated mainly in Amsterdam, grew by approximately 10,000 before 1750, and the same number after that

date. The result of this immigration and the natural growth of this group was such that by the time of the first census in 1796 there were

around 30,000 Jewish inhabitants of the Netherlands; this figure includes both the Ashkenazi majority and the small group of Sephardi

population at that time. | In addition to these major groups, there were also smaller

Jews, and it represents about 1.5 per cent of the Republic’s total movements of refugees to the Dutch Republic, including Polish Socinianists, English Puritans and Quakers, and Czech Comenians in

the seventeenth century and Swiss, Polish, and Prussian Baptists, Austrian Lutherans from Catholic Salzburg, and German Herrnhutters

in the eighteenth century. With the exception of the anti-Jewish pogroms, religious persecution gradually disappeared from most of Europe as the eighteenth century proceeded, and the Netherlands

ceased to be what Pierre Bayle had called ‘la grande arche des fugitifs’.

Besides such religiously motivated migration to the Netherlands, Een relaas over de demografie, economie en sociale politick van een wereldstad (Amsterdam,

1985), 238—9. For Jewish emigration from Amsterdam in the second half of the 18th cent., see R. Cohen, Jews in Another Environment. Surinam in the Second Half of the Etghteenth Century (Leiden, 1991), 11-65, esp. 25 ff.

Dutch Emigration 159 there was also a more economically inspired immigration taking place

from as early as the late sixteenth century and continuing well into the nineteenth century. ‘This was commented on in 1807 by Malthus, in an interesting footnote to the fourth edition of his Essay on Population, seeking to explain what he considered to be an unusually high

number of marriages in the Netherlands. While accepting that the phenomenon was partly explained by a high mortality rate, Malthus also remarked that “Such a proportion of marriages could not, however, be supplied in a country like Holland, from the births within the territory, but must be caused principally by the influx of foreigners:

and it is known that such an influx, before the Revolution, was constantly taking place. Holland, indeed, has been called the grave of

Germany.’ This notion of Holland as ‘the grave of Germany’ was extremely widespread, particularly because of the fate of many of the

Germans who travelled to the East Indies in Dutch service, and Malthus in his footnote was probably also registering his recognition

that many shopkeepers, merchants, and artisans in the towns and cities of the Netherlands were foreigners, usually Germans.’ A detailed study of this phenomenon, especially one that offers a quantitative analysis, is still lacking.® A combination of indirect data on the birthplaces of newly registered poorters of Amsterdam and of couples intending to marry in the cities of Amsterdam, Hoorn, and

Leiden allows us to look at the years 1531-1800.” Together these sources permit at least an approximation of the number of young immigrants settling and marrying, and therefore most likely staying, in cities in the west of the country. The figures for Amsterdam show

a rapid rise in the number of foreigners in the 1580s; a peak was reached in the first half of the seventeenth century, when 40 per cent ’ T.R. Malthus, An Essay on Population (London, 1958), 191 fn. 3. This footnote does not appear in the 3rd edn. (London, 1806). It is one of the few additions to the 4th edn. (London, 1807), 376. Unfortunately Malthus does not provide a source; nor does he provide an explanation for this alteration. Siissmilch, quoted on p. 376 of this edn., seems not to be the source, but it could be Grabner; see J. Bientjes, Holland und der Hollander im Urteil deutscher Reisenden 1400-1800 (Groningen, 1967), 206. Heinrich von Kleist in his play Der zerbrochne Krug, produced in Weimar in 1808, writes about the East Indies: ‘und von dort, Ihr wisst, kehrt von drei Mannern einer nur zuriick!’ (‘and from there, as you know, only one out of three men returns’); see H. von Kleist, Werke und Briefe, i (Strellov, 1978), 305 and 35. I would like to thank Dr C. A. Davids who drew my attention to this play. 8 For what follows the most important study is that of Nusteling, Welvaart, 41-9. See also J. Lucassen and R. Penninx, Meuwkomers. Immigranten en hun nakomelingen in Nederland 1550-1985 (Amsterdam, 1985), 161-6.

? For these sources see Lucassen and Penninx, Niewwkomers, 161-6. ,

160 Jan Lucassen of those getting engaged were foreign-born. Of course, immigration from the southern Netherlands played a role here, but only a limited one. In the first quarter of the seventeenth century, western German marriage partners outnumbered their urban Belgian counterparts by a factor of four.'° These high percentages were not maintained after 1650; they fell to a (still considerable) average of 25 per cent between 1680 and 1800. In the first half of the nineteenth century, immigration from abroad declined rapidly for the second time, as may be deduced from data relating to the cities of Rotterdam and Amsterdam. Nevertheless, after Switzerland, the Netherlands was still the most important destination for immigrants in Europe around the middle of that century."! Although it is risky to try to reconstruct the total number of immi-

grants to the Netherlands using data of the nature just described, nevertheless we need at least a rough indication of the number of immigrants required to maintain these high percentages. We can be reasonably sure that total immigration to the Netherlands during the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries was something of the order of half a million people, the majority of whom arrived before 1700.” If the percentages relating to brides and bridegrooms in Amsterdam are representative of all these immigrants, then 60 per cent (of whom, in turn, 60 per cent were men and 40 per cent women) came from what until recently was West Germany, 14 per cent from Scandinavia, 4

per cent from the seven principal Belgian cities, less than 1 per cent from Gdansk, and 21 per cent from unspecified regions and countries.'? Such percentages did not of course remain constant over time, since allowance has to be made for the large Protestant family immigration from the southern Netherlands and France. Nevertheless, a figure of two-thirds for Germany cannot be far off the mark, with Scandinavia, Belgium, and France trailing much further behind. '° Unfortunately, S. Hart, Geschrifi en Getal. Een keuze uit de demografisch-, economischen soctaal-historische studién op grond van Amsterdamse en Zaanse archivalia, 1600-1800

(Dordrecht, 1976), 162-72, publishes figures only for the western part of Germany on

the one hand and the Belgian cities of Antwerp, Brussels, Liége, Ghent, Bruges, Tournai, and Namur on the other. There are no published data as yet for the eastern part of Germany and the countryside of the southern Netherlands. '! For Rotterdam see H. van Dijk, Rotterdam 1810-1880. Aspecten van een stedelijke samenleving (Schiedam, 1967), 214; for Amsterdam see Nusteling, Welvaart; also A. Legoyt, L’Emigration européenne: son importance, ses causes, ses effets (Paris, 1861), p. xvi.

12 This is based on Lucassen, Dutch Long Distance Migration, Appendix 1; see also Nusteling, Welvaart, 35-49. "3 Computed from Hart, Geschrifi, 143, 162-72.

Dutch Emigration 161 LABOUR MIGRATION TO THE NETHERLANDS

Many foreigners arrived in the Netherlands with the intention of working there for only a few years rather than settling permanently. For the young, particularly, this was an attractive way of trying to earn

a good sum of money with which to increase their prospects in the competitive marriage market at home. Quantitatively, the most important groups among these labour migrants from Europe were soldiers, serving either in the mainland army or in the colonies, mariners, and

female servants. As most soldiers and mariners served outside the actual territory of the Netherlands, aboard its ships, in armies destined

for or in the southern Netherlands, or in its colonies, we will treat them separately in discussing migration within the Dutch Empire in

Europe and outside. | In this respect, domestic servants were different, because they stayed in the Netherlands for several years. Because of the underrep-

resentation of females in the groups mentioned, it is even more regrettable that we have hardly any information on the migration of servants. Although qualitative sources give the impression that foreign,

predominantly female servants were quite common in the Republic,

hard information is lacking. One recent study of the migration of Norwegian female servants to Amsterdam in the late seventeenth and early eighteenth centuries provides some interesting details, however. It shows, for instance, the links between female servant migration and the male labour migration of sailors from the region of Stavanger to Amsterdam.'*

MIGRANT LABOUR IN THE NETHERLANDS

Although the first reports of migrant labourers in the Dutch coastal provinces of Holland and Friesland date back to the first half of the seventeenth century, and those for Zeeland go back even earlier, it was during the last quarter of that century that their numbers reached a maximum. From ¢.1675/1700 until 1850/75, a period of almost two centuries, an average of 30,000 long-distance migrant workers '4 See Lucassen and Penninx, Nieuwkomers, 46-7; S. Sogner, ‘Young in Europe

around 1700: Norwegian Sailors and Servant-Girls Seeking Employment in Amsterdam’, in Mesurer et comprendre. Mélanges en l’honneur de Jacques Dupaquter (Paris, 1991).

162 Jan Lucassen came yearly to the coastal provinces along the North Sea, from Flanders in the south to German East Friesland and the coastal area north of Oldenburg.'?

The need for seasonal workers in this rich coastal strip, never more than 50 kilometres wide, seems to have originated with the population decrease of the second half of the seventeenth century, especially in rural areas, following what had been a century of rapid population growth. The period 1650-1750 was one characterized by falling grain prices. The construction of dikes and polders virtually ceased, and the depression affected the herring fleet too. The improvement and maintenance of dikes, the building of fortifications, urban development, harbour construction and maintenance, the ex-

tension of the canal network—all such projects came to a halt. Farmers tried to reduce permanent labour costs by introducing labour-saving technology, such as mechanical churners, and by switching from dairy farming to livestock farming; it was significant too that the cleaning and deepening of drainage ditches’ took place at

longer intervals. In short, in many rural areas there were far fewer jobs available, in agriculture in general, but also in the excavation industry during spring, in herring fishing from June to December, and in ditch maintenance—and perhaps also fewer opportunities for domestic work during the winter months. Since the work cycle of many small peasants in the coastal regions was based on seasonal employment in these sectors, they had little chance of escaping the effects of the economic depression. The larger farmers retained their livestock, however, and therefore their demand for hay. The cutting and drying of grass in June and July continued without a pause. Because such work could only be carried out during a short period of the year, there was an acute need for manpower during this period.

The same holds true for the digging of peat, which took place between the beginning of spring and June. 15 For a fuller discussion see J. Lucassen, Migrant Labour in Europe 1600-1900. The Dnifi to the North Sea (London, 1987), originally pub. in a somewhat more extended version in Dutch in 1984. Since then, a number of other studies on the subject of migrant labour to the Netherlands have appeared: F. Bélsker-Schlicht, Die Hollandgangerei im Osnabriicker Land und im Emsland. Ein Beitrag zur Geschichte der Arbeiterwanderung vom 17. bis zum 19. Jahrhundert (Ségel, 1987); P. Lourens and J. Lucassen, Lipsker op de Groninger tichelwerken. Een geschiedenis van de Groningse steenindustrie met bijzondere nadruk op de Lipper trekarbeiders 1700-1900 (Groningen, 1987);

J. Lucassen, ‘Hannekemaaiersbrieven 1860-1889. Een bijdrage tot de geschiedenis van de arbeidsverhoudingen in de Friese hooibouw’, /t Beaken, 49 (1987), 200—29; and J. Lucassen, ‘Quellen’.

Dutch Emigration 163 Since the rural population, and especially the peasant and labouring part of it in north Holland and Friesland, was so drastically in decline as a result of the breakup of their established work cycle, opportunities

arose for seasonal migrant labourers from outside the area. Such workers were plentiful in the east of the country and especially further east in Westphalia, where wages for agricultural work during the summer were a half or even a third of those available in Holland. In this 200—300-kilometre-wide belt to the east of the coastal strip, unlike the coastal provinces, the population expanded after the wars of the first half of the seventeenth century. The result was a marked increase in the number of landless rural inhabitants unable to subsist on their earnings from small leased farms. Furthermore, the class of small tenant farmers and cottagers grew, since the inheritance system characteristic of this region made it difficult to divide up large farms

among different heirs. The number of farms therefore remained more or less constant, certainly during the period of declining grain prices between 1650 and 1750, when there was little incentive to bring new land under cultivation. This increase in the number of small tenant

farmers was accompanied by a period of proto-industrialization, which saw the rise of the rural textile industry. Not all regions were

characterized by the presence of small farms, the importance of domestic industry, and outgoing migratory labour; but ‘Twente, the Ems region, south of Oldenburg, north of Osnabriick and Lippe, and

parts of Belgium and the southern provinces of the Netherlands were, and this fact facilitated the emergence of a regular work cycle that took advantage of all these forms of work. So, whereas along the North Sea coast favourable conditions in the second half of the seventeenth century attracted migrant labourers, in

regions to the east and south conditions were conducive to the seasonal out-migration of labour; moreover, there existed substantial differences in wage and price levels between the two regions. After one or two generations, this flow to the North Sea coastal provinces become firmly established in the work cycle of the migrant labourers. Of the 30,000 migrant labourers who moved yearly to the North Sea coast, an estimated 12,000 came to cut and dry the grass that was

used as winter fodder on the dairy farms.'® The cattle on these specialized, capital-intensive farms grazed on grassland, but during the winter they were kept in cowsheds, and had to be fed with hay. '© These figures are for c.1811. See Lucassen, Migrant Labour, passim.

164 Jan Lucassen Throughout Friesland, Holland, and the north-west of North Brabant

the grass had to be mown and brought in within six weeks, a task impossible without the use of seasonal labour. The same migrant labourers who did the mowing could in many

cases be found earlier in the season working along the North Sea coast. Approximately 9,000 migrant labourers worked in the peatbogs,

either in the so-called high peatbogs in East Friesland, Groningen, Drenthe, and part of Friesland or in the low peatbogs in other parts of Friesland, in Overijssel, Utrecht, and Holland. Some 3,000 workers

found employment in high peatbogs, where they cut peat with a shovel; around 6,000 worked in the low peatbogs, where they dredged up peat from under the water with a scoop.

The third important source of employment for migrant workers was the grain harvest, mainly in the southern and northern extensions of the North Sea coastal region, Flanders (the northern part of which

is now in the Dutch province of Zeeland) in the south, and from Friesland and Groningen as far as the Oldenburg coastal region of Butjadingen in the north. The grain was ready in July or August, and, just as with haymaking, harvesting ideally had to be finished quickly. Migrant labourers could also be found in a number of other smallscale agricultural activities. The digging of madder on the Zeeland and

South Holland islands from September to October and November was a particular speciality of about 1,000 mostly Belgian seasonal labourers, for example.'’ Migrant workers were also employed in industries in which a significant proportion of work was of a seasonal nature, construction, brick manufacture, and bleaching being the most important ones. In the construction industry the majority of migrant workers (especially those from Belgium and North Brabant) were employed as masons; they were often specialized in the construction of large-scale masonry,

such as was required for building quay walls, fortifications, and certain kinds of foundations.’® Many long-established centres of brick production depended on migrant workers; this was true for the

ovens west of the Schelde, some Holland ovens, and particularly those in the area stretching from Groningen to the Weser, where workers from Lippe had a near monopoly on brick production. '7 For migrant workers employed in the cultivation of flax, the digging of potatoes, and the stripping of bark from oak trees see Lucassen, Migrant Labour, passim. 18 Another important migrant group in the construction industry, particularly in the 1gth cent., was that of the plasterers from the German grand duchy of Oldenburg.

Dutch Emigration 165 Likewise, in certain areas bleachers were almost exclusively migrant workers—in this case, exceptionally for the North Sea coastal region, of both sexes. One notable group were the women from the Dutch— Belgian border regions of Brabant and Limburg who worked in the bleach works situated among the dunes to the west of Haarlem. On a

rather smaller scale, migrant workers could also be found among excavators, hawkers, pedlars, or as hands working on the huge rafts used to transport wood along the rivers. A clear picture emerges from all this. The sectors along the North Sea coast in which migrant workers found employment were usually modern and capital-intensive. Work was generally intensive, of short duration, and dependent on seasonal changes in the weather. Speed was therefore of particular importance. Wages were almost always paid on a piecework basis, and gross earnings often reached a high level. The size of the work groups differed, depending on the sort of work being undertaken; and it was not unusual for men to co-operate and form themselves into gangs appropriate in size to the work being sought. It is striking that it was almost exclusively men, and particu-

larly adult, married men, who went in search of employment. The families of these workers remained behind in the south and east, supported in part by the earnings of the migrant labourers in the north and west. Migrant and local workers only sporadically came into contact with each other. The migrants usually worked in narrowly defined occupations of a seasonal kind, and there was therefore little competition between them and local workers.

LABOUR MIGRATION IN THE DUTCH SEA-BORNE EMPIRE IN EUROPE The Dutch Sea-borne Empire, as Boxer called it in his famous book, had urgent need of migrants not only for its mainland agriculture and industries, but also for its merchant marine, its army, and its navy, both within Europe and beyond.'? The European trade involved both

the development of commercial links between the Baltic and the Mediterranean and the maintenance of trading interests against foreign competitors such as the Spanish, the French, and the British. These dual activities were so labour-intensive that the Dutch could '9 C. R. Boxer, The Dutch Sea-borne Empire, 1600-1800 (London, 1965).

| 166 Jan Lucassen | never have upheld their position for so long if they had had to rely upon the natural growth of their own population. Moreover, as in many other countries, the Dutch could not compel their own subjects to respond to the demand for labour, because it was only during the Napoleonic wars that compulsory military service was introduced to the Netherlands.*° The Republic of the United Provinces had to rely on volunteers in its pursuit of military goals. The need for soldiers was especially great during the period of French aggrandizement under Louis XIV. Whereas the normal peacetime strength of the army was about 30,000 and double in years of war, during the wars with France the number of men under arms ranged between 80,000 and more than 100,000. A total of 1,000,000 young men may have

served the Republic as soldiers during the two centuries of its existence.*! Although statistics are lacking, it seems reasonable to suppose that the majority of these soldiers were foreign. As well as the complete regiments from Scotland, the south of Germany, and

Switzerland that were hired by the Republic, Dutch recruitment officers also enlisted individual mercenaries who came principally from German-speaking states but also from France, Scotland, and England. To facilitate such varied recruitment, the law of the Republic

required that oaths of loyalty be drawn up in German, French, and

English, as well as Dutch. Although scarce and incomplete, the information that survives suggests that the activities of the Republic within Europe alone created employment for hundreds of thousands of foreigners who were ready to serve under arms. So desperate were they for work that they would often accept wages which were half 20 H. Amersfoort, Koning en Kanton. De Nederlandse staat en het einde van de Zwitserse

krijgsdienst hier te lande 1814-1829 (The Hague, 1988); J. R. Bruijn and J. Lucassen (eds.), Op de schepen der Oost-Indische Compagnie. Vijf artikelen van 7. de Hullu ingeleid, bewerkt en voorzien van een studie over de werkgelegenheid bij de VOC (Groningen, 1980),

14—18, 137—g. Only in 1829 did the last Swiss mercenaries leave the Netherlands. 71 This estimate is based on the following considerations. If peacetime soldiers served an average of 8 years (cf. A. Corvisier, L ‘Armée francaise de la fin du XVIe siécle au ministére de Choiseul. Le soldat (Paris, 1964), 605), 700,000 men would have been needed. In addition, extra soldiers had to be recruited at certain times (see Bruijn and Lucassen (eds.), Op de schepen, 138): a minimum (i.e. assuming all the soldiers survived the duration of a campaign) of ¢.30,000 in the 1st decade of the 17th cent., 20,000 in the 2nd, 30,000 in the 4th, and 60,000 in the 7th, an additional 70,000 ¢.1700, 50,000 in the 1740s, and maybe 20,000 in the 1770s. This gives a total of nearly 300,000 extra troops. See M. Bundi, Biindner Kriegsdienste in Holland um roo. Eine Studie zu den Beziehungen zwischen Holland und Graubtinden von 1693 bis 1730 (Chur, 1972); W. Hirzel, ‘Tanta est fiducia gentis’. Les Régiments suisses au service des Pays-Bas (Coppet,

1972); M. Howard, War in European History (Oxford, 1976), 44ff. and 55; and Amersfoort, Koning en Kanton.

Dutch Emigration 167 those earned by civilians, and, as we shall see in a later section, an even greater number of foreigners were engaged in Dutch military service in their empire beyond Europe. Besides those foreigners who served the Dutch Republic as soldiers,

there were those who accepted work as sailors. The gross number of foreigners employed in the various Dutch fleets over the entire period was in the region of 500,000 men. The vast majority of these fall in

the category of labour migrants, since they intended to enter the Dutch labour market for a limited period. However, half of them ultimately became transmigrants, ending their short lives far away from home, often in the Dutch empire in Asia. A significant amount of work on Dutch ships was already available at the outset of the

seventeenth century, and it grew quickly thereafter. As many as 50,000 sailors were employed at any given time during the last quarter of the seventeenth and the first quarter of the eighteenth century, and figures remained at this high level until the outset of the Napoleonic War, when they fell sharply. Although employment for

sailors remained reasonably constant over time, it was not always evenly distributed among the various maritime services. The number

of sailors employed by the VOC, for example, grew spectacularly from 2,000 (6 per cent of the total) at the beginning to more than

11,000 (25 per cent) around 1770. In seeking to determine the number of these sailors who were foreigners, it is necessary to look at the different sectors: the Dutch navy; the Dutch merchant marine in

the North Sea, the Baltic, the Mediterranean, and the Atlantic; and the Dutch fishing and whaling fleets. In considering foreign involvement in each of these sectors, we must take account of the general principle that seems to have governed recruitment into the Dutch maritime services: the bigger the ships and the longer the voyages, the

lower the remuneration and the higher the percentage of foreigners employed. The application of this rule means that the overwhelming majority of foreigners in Dutch maritime employment—soldiers as

well as sailors—served with the VOC, whose role in the labour market will be considered after the discussion of the services closer to home. As with the army, the navy of the Dutch Republic regularly provided

opportunities for a significant number of foreigners.** During the 2 JR. Bruijn, ‘Zeevarenden’, Maritieme Geschiedenis der Nederlanden, 3 (Bussum, 1977), 146-90; Bruijn and Lucassen (eds.), Op de schepen, 19. If we take the strength

of the navy to have averaged ¢.3,000 for 1600-1850 and the average duration of

168 Jan Lucassen eighteenth century half or more of the crews came from outside the

Republic, and even in 1821 35 per cent had to be recruited from outside the Netherlands and Belgium, then united in a short-lived kingdom. Only in the middle of the nineteenth century did foreigners

gradually disappear from the Dutch fleet. A rough estimate of the total number of foreigners needed to maintain Dutch power at sea during the whole period 1600-1850 would be about 30,000-— 40,000.

We can also estimate the number of foreigners employed by the merchant fleet. Our assumption concerning the relationship between the duration of voyages and the percentage of non-Dutch crew leads us to suggest that, in the case of the West Indies Company (WIC) and related companies sailing to Africa and America, we may expect between 30 per cent and 40 per cent of crews to have been foreign. That figure would have been somewhat lower for ships sailing to the Mediterranean, and probably fairly small for those sailing to western and northern European ports. The scanty evidence available confirms this. Of those employed by the slave-traders of the Middelburgse Commercie-Compagnie between 1732 and 1808, 35 per cent were foreigners, most of them Germans and Scandinavians.** Van Royen has calculated that for the period 1700-10 the merchant fleet needed to supplement its Dutch crews with foreign sailors to the extent of

between 20 per cent and 25 per cent, mainly to cover the trade between the Baltic and Archangel in the north and France and Portugal in the south.** This suggests that the total number of service to have been 10 years (data are lacking, but this seems reasonable given that the average length of service for French soldiers was 8 years), this implies that 300 new recruits were needed each year, which in turn suggests that the total number employed by the navy during the whole period was 75,000. Table 3.1 in Lucassen, Dutch Long Distance Migration, Appendix 3, suggests that the percentage of sailors and soldiers employed by the VOC who were foreigners was about 50%. We may reasonably apply this percentage to the Dutch navy as well.

23 Bruijn and Lucassen (eds.), Op de schepen, 20. See also J. T. H. Verhees-van Meer, De Zeeuwse kaapvaart tijdens de Spaanse Successieoorlog 1702-1713 (Middelburg,

1986), 47-55. 4 P. C. van Royen, Zeevarenden op de koopvaardijvloot omstreeks 1700 (Amsterdam,

1987), 183-4; idem, ‘Manning the Merchant Marine. The Dutch Labour Market around 1700’, International Journal of Maritime History, 1 (1989), 2-29. For other data on the merchant fleet see Bruijn, ‘Zeevarenden’, 157 (this study draws on a small sample of 337 ships with a total crew of 2,982; the author shows that the Dutch component was 70% for those sailing to the North Sea and the Baltic, 74% for those

sailing to south-western parts of Europe, and 55-6% for those sailing to other destinations). See also E. van Eyck van Heslinga, Van Compagnie naar koopvaardij. De scheepvaartverbindingen van de Bataafse Republieck met de kolonién in Azié 1795-1806 (Amsterdam, 1988), 199 (where data on crews sailing to the Dutch East Indies in the

Dutch Emigration 169 foreign sailors employed by the Dutch merchant fleet may well have

been more than 60,000 for the entire period 1600-1850.” ~ We can be fairly brief about the two remaining sectors. Recruitment for the fisheries was probably a purely Dutch affair, while whaling may have given work to a few thousand seasonal migrants from north

Germany at the end of the seventeenth and during the first half of the eighteenth centuries.*°

LABOUR MIGRATION AND EMIGRATION TO THE EAST

Dutch vessels had been travelling to the East Indies since 1595. In 1602 the VOC was granted a monopoly by the States General of voyages and trade east of the Cape. At its height the Dutch empire in Asia, based in Batavia on Eastern Java, ruled the Cape, parts of the Malabar coast of India, the coastal regions of Ceylon and Malacca, many parts of Indonesia, and for a time part of Taiwan (see Map 7.1). In addition, it managed many trading posts, from the Red Sea

port of Mocha and Persian Basra in the west to Deshima, near Nagasaki, in Japan.*’ The management of this empire required the recruitment of numerous men, not only to maintain contacts between the Netherlands and Asia, but also for the conduct of trade within

Asia and for the defence of Dutch interests there in the face of challenges from European and Asian competitors. In all, for the first half of the 19th cent. are given); J. E. Oosterling, Het korvet ‘Lynx’ in ZuidAmerika, de Filippijnen en Oost-Indté, 1823-1825. De Koninklyke Marine als instrument van het ‘politiek systhema’ van koning Willem I (Zutphen, 1989), 80; P. C. van Royen, ‘Moedernegotie en kraamkamer. Schippers en scheepsvolk op de Nederlandse vrachtvaart in Europese wateren vanaf de zeventiende tot in de negentiende eeuw’, Tijdschrift

voor Leegeschiedenis, 9 (1990), 27-48; P. de Buck and J. T. Lindblad, ‘Navigatie en negotie. De galjootsregisters als bron bij het onderzoek naar de geschiedenis van de Oostzeehandel in de achttiende eeuw’, Tijdschrift voor Zeegeschiedenis, 9 (1990), 3-26, and Sogner, ‘Young in Europe’. 25 If we assume average levels of employment to have been at least 20,000, and the

average duration of employment to have been 15-20 years, the level of annual recruitment would have been at least 1,000, 25% of which would have been accounted for by foreigners. This represents a figure of around 250 per year, or 62,500 for the whole period. 26 See Lucassen, Dutch Long Distance Migration, Appendix 2. According to the definitions used here, migrants working in the whaling sector are classed as migrant labourers rather than labour migrants, because of the seasonal nature of the work. 27 JR. Bruijn et al, Dutch—Asiatic Shipping in the 17th and 18th Centuries (The Hague, 1987).

170 Jan Lucassen

oc , BLACK SEA D, . Zz oMED/y7, !) Sus D> a qeomyrna as

>

SS} . GIBRALTAR Ve, FS Aleppo 5 ALGERIAon, NV¢SEA SYRIA PERSIA

AS THE CANARIES S Viel >Basrae Ormuz 3 Arguin (1634-78) (then French) Nn ARABIA CAPE VERDE S -.. Se, ,¢)

MADERIA = om

Y

(1) SOLE,

(1628-74) % o

ISLANDS

°" Goeree*Ga,, \ Mocha S

» COAST EAST AFRICA

Ark, SLAVE

I \d-~°ganag a Ouidah

Boutry { CONGO ,

(Fort Batensteyn) S30 Thomé &

(1640-1872) (1642-48) &

Chama (1640-1872) (then

Elmina (1637-1872) Portuguese) | INDIAN

Morée (Fort Nassau) (1611-1867) Luanda (1642-48)

Cormantine (then Portuguese) 5 (Fort Amsterdam) rs) (1665-1867) G

Accra =

(Fort Crévecoeur) (1650-1867) Christianborg (Danish)

ATLANTIC OCEAN

The Cape of Good Hope (1652)

Map 7.1 The Dutch in Africa and Asia

$ (a q

Dutch Emigration 17!

R U S Ss { A \ Pekinge

° CP JAPAN

CHINA x Nagasaki

Agra f PACIFIC

See tual Canton TAIWAN ; OCEAN Piplia ° Fort Zeelandia Surat Macao (1623-1661) ARABIAN INDIA 6, (Portuguese)

Goa PHILIPPINES

SEA Masulipatnam

(Portuguese) %Pulicat (Fort Geldria) SIAM Manila (Spanish)

Cannonnore (1662) S Madras (English) (1613) we | Cranganare Nogapetnamm Paty Cochin(1665968, (1663)J ¥%, Jaffna (1680) (1658) ne,

Tuticorin (1658 afina " 4 Colombo (1656) parcaloa * Perak

(Sl cevion |

a . Malacca,(1641) o> AN Ternate (1605) a

’ % ambi BORNEO og iidore (1605)

‘ > & > ° CELEBES “> a >

Palembang % Arnboina (1605) OCEAN Batavia Mataséar BANDA gg UZ 1619) (1666) Solor- SEA , Fort

Sultanate of Bantam Doss as SS Nassat

from 1682) &>

(under Dutch control YAVA xD Samor (1609)

7/74 Territory controlled by the Dutch

= Fortified Dutch bases

4 Dutch trading factories (unfortified)

e Other trading centres d

172 Jan Lucassen seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, around 1,000,000 people (soldiers included, since the company had a monopoly on ferrying people to the Cape of Good Hope and eastwards) were shipped by the company to the Indies; only one-third of this number was registered as returning to the Netherlands.*® This does not mean that

two-thirds of those leaving never returned, as some authors have maintained. Recent research into the ships manned in the eighteenth

century by those employed by the Delft branch of the VOC have shown that more Delft-based ‘VOC servants’ signed up for a second or subsequent voyage than was previously thought.””? An even more important result of this research is that it allows one to calculate the different return rates to the Netherlands for soldiers and sailors. For the inhabitants of Delft, they were respectively 30.2 per cent and 59.3 per cent. Apparently soldiers were much more vulnerable than sailors, and since foreigners were more highly represented among the soldiers employed by the VOC than among the sailors, their chances of seeing Europe again were much lower than those of their Dutch colleagues.

To conclude, of those employed by the VOC, around 235,000, or nearly half, of its Dutch employees and around 255,000 of its 475,000

foreign employees left the Netherlands never to return to Europe.°” Most of the foreigners were Germans and Scandinavians, but it is difficult to think of a nationality not represented. Those foreigners who did return either settled in the Netherlands or returned home, some to write their memoirs.~!

Why, since the risks associated with going to the tropics were widely known, did migrants choose to face the dangers of the sea and a hazardous disease environment instead of remaining in one of the 28 J. R. Bruijn, ‘De personeelsbehoefte van de VOC overzee en aan boord, bezien in Aziatisch en Nederlands perspectief’, Bijdragen en Mededelingen betreffende de Geschiedenis der Nederlanden, 91 (1976), 218-48; Bruijn et al., Dutch—Astatic Shipping,

143-72. 29 K. L. van Schouwenburg, ‘Het personeel op de schepen van de Kamer Delft der VOC in de eerste helft der 18e eeuw’, Tijdschrift voor Zeegeschiedenis, 7 (1988), 76-93;

8 (1989), 179-86.

30 The majority of them died during their years in the Indies. Nearly 95,000 European employees of the VOC died in the hospital in Batavia between 1725 and 1786, an average of over 1,500 per year. See Bruijn, ‘De personeelsbehoefte’, 225. 3! See examples in S. P. Honoré Naber (ed.), Reisebeschreibungen von deutschen Beamten und Kriegsleuten 1m Dhienste der Niederlindischen West- und Ost-Indischen Kompagnien 1602-1797 (The Hague, 1930-2). For additional information on German VOC mercenaries see J. Prinz, Das wiirttembergische Kapregiment 1786-1808. Die Tragédie einer Séldnerschar (Stuttgart, 1932); for Swiss mercenaries see A. Zehnder, Unter Hollands Flagge in Ost-Indien (Lucerne, 1924).

Dutch Emigration 173 richest countries of the world? And in particular for the foreigners among them, why did they choose to become transmigrants, using Amsterdam or other VOC ports as stepping-stones between poor inland Germany and the promise offered by the Indies? Of course, apart from being driven by sheer poverty, those signing up with the VOC also had positive reasons for so doing. It was not so much that wages were attractive as that seamen were allowed to take merchandise

back to Europe and sell it themselves, if they were lucky enough to

survive their years in the Indies. Those who did not return died either during the voyage or in the Indies, mostly as a consequence of

disease. Only a few managed to establish families and contribute to the small European and Eurasian communities at the Cape, in Batavia, or in one of the other trading posts established by the VOC. By the time the company was dissolved, however, there were only a handful of settlements with a substantial European population. Most were at the Cape of Good Hope, where, 150 years after its establishment, the free burgher population numbered 16,000.°” In the more tropical climate of Batavia, the centre of the VOC empire in the East Indies, there were only 2,037 inhabitants of European origin in 1811,

and of these only 552 were born in Europe.*° The settlements in Ceylon contained even fewer Europeans.** In all other VOC outposts the number of European settlers was insignificant.*

LABOUR MIGRATION AND EMIGRATION TO THE WEST

Dutch involvement in the Americas and Africa was of a completely different nature from its involvement in East Asia. It was, for example, 32 1. Marquard, The Story of South Africa (London, 1968), 56. 33-J. G. Taylor, The Social World of Batavia. European and Eurasian in Dutch Asia (Madison, Wis., 1983), 97 (her figure of 2,028 seems to be incorrect). See F. Spooner, ‘Batavia, 1673-1790: A City of Colonial Growth and Migration’, in I. A. Glazier and L. de Rosa (eds.), Migration across Time and Nations. Population Mobility in Historical Contexts (New York, 1986), 30-57, esp. 43 for data relating to 1691-1790 showing that the figure of 2,034 for 1760 was nearly halved by 1790. 34 J. van Goor, Jan Kompenie as Schoolmaster. Dutch Education in Ceylon 1690-1795

(Utrecht, 1978), 16-18. 3° See F. S. Gaastra, ‘De VOC in Azié’, Algemene Geschiedenis der Nederlanden, 9 (Haarlem, 1980), 424-67, esp. 443, which suggests that in 1780 VOC employees were

distributed as follows: 20% in Ceylon, 19% in Batavia, 10% on the eastern coast of

Java, and 9% at the Cape, leaving 7% on ships and 35% in twenty-one other settlements and trading posts.

174 Jan Lucassen 7 EL;

!ONTARIO LAKE | — | Albany

S

oa

{ ||(Fort Oranje)(1614)7] (1624) 42 ay Fort Nassau 2

TTS Fort de Goede Hoop (1633) —M New York Long Island

Delaware. 7 (Nieuw Amsterdam) ¢% (Lange Eiland) Newcastle (1626)% Brooklyn (Breukelen)

(Nieuw Amstel) (1646) (1656)? Fort Nassau

(1626)

=~ > Lewes (Swanendaal) (1631) o),

\,oeNEW cS Se NETHERLANDS Ww? (pre 1669)

. a) pr no © CARIBBEAN of Oe a Ss oe ATLANTIC SEA Ss PEP 2g OCEAN Seon otoc-|FAX Or oe Ry 9, . SS PS iS we"or 6 ©Cay “> o Vs>2.@

Willemstad «OO! A, Knotter and J. L. van Zanden, ‘Immigratie en arbeidsmarkt in Amsterdam in de 17e eeuw’, Tijdschrift voor Sociale Geschiedenis, 13 (1987), 403-31.

Dutch Emigration 181 TABLE 7.1. Long-distance foreign migration to the core regions of the Dutch Republic and its colonies: estimates c.1600—1800

Type of migrant Number | Migrant labourers 150,000

soldiers 600,000 navy 35,000

Labour migrants

sailors 60,000

VOC (sailors and soldiers) 475,000

domestic servants ?

Immigrants refugees — 150,000| others 350,000

Transmigrants to the Americas! 10,000

Total 1,830,000 + ? ''Transmigrants to Asia and Africa are included in the VOC figures.

seasonal workers yearly and totalling around 150,000 by 1800.” During the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, migrants not only went to ‘pull’-areas within the Republic. In addition, migrant labourers and emigrants travelled more widely within the Dutch sphere of influence. They were attracted by the prospect of work in

the Republic, in the army and navy, wherever needed, and in the Dutch empire in Asia and America. The numbers going to Asia were large: 500,000 migrated permanently to the East Indies, compared with maybe 15,000 to South America and the Caribbean, and another 10,000 to North America. Table 7.1 summarizes the figures arrived at so far.

It is clear that terms like ‘emigration’ and ‘immigration’ are in- __ adequate. Before 1800 more than half of these transatlantic migrants were born outside the Netherlands. Most of them should therefore be considered to be transmigrants, who simply used the Republic as a >? This figure assumes that workers migrated annually for an average of 25 years; thus between 1675 and 1850 seven ‘generations’, numbering 30,000 persons per year, left for the North Sea coast.

182 Jan Lucassen stopping-off point prior to seeking work in its empire overseas. This peculiar pattern of a world-wide Dutch labour market vanished in the nineteenth century. All migrants to the Netherlands were lured there by the prospect of opportunities either in the country itself or in its colonial empire overseas. The narrow coastal strip where most of the economic activity in the country was focused was a mere 15,000 square kilometres

in size, an area much smaller than Greater London before the Second World War. It was there that modern, capital-intensive agricul-

ture, industry, energy extraction, trade, and economic services were based, and from there that Dutch colonial power spread throughout much of the world. In 1585, as Jonathan Israel has stated, Antwerp’s

position as ‘the first general entrepét in the modern world’? was usurped by Amsterdam, 150 kilometres to the north, and Amsterdam became the centre of the world economy. Amsterdam was no mere imitation of Antwerp, however. To quote Israel again, ‘Antwerp and its immediate hinterland did not dispose of a large merchant fleet of its own, or any major means of transportation of goods.’ Amsterdam

and the Dutch Republic did. This Dutch-dominated world trading system was to last until 1740. As Israel concludes in his book on Dutch trade, ‘Nowhere else in the early modern world was the close economic collaboration of a network of maritime towns, inland manu-

facturing towns, fishing ports, and inland specialized agriculture anything like so intricately organized and federated as in the Dutch Republic during the seventeenth century.’ The demographic basis for such an explosion of activities seemed

to be rather narrow. In the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries 1,500,000 inhabitants lived in the coastal provinces. Of course, as many historians have rightly stressed, raw materials from all over the

world could be concentrated on this tiny spot and processed and redistributed efficiently. Furthermore, cheap capital was abundantly available; interest rates in the Republic were the lowest in Europe. Historians seem to have underestimated the importance of labour in explaining the basis of the Dutch economic miracle, however. It is

therefore interesting to quote at length Sir William Petty, who in 1671-2 wrote in his Political Arithmetic:

the Hollanders do rid their hands of two Trades, which are of greatest turmoil and danger, and yet of least profit; the first whereof is that of a °3 All quotations from Israel, Dutch Primag’, 404-15.

Dutch Emigration 183 common and private Soldier, for such they can hire from England, Scotland and Germany, to venture their lives for Six pence a day, whilst themselves safely and quietly follow such Trades, whereby the meanest of them gain six times as much, and withal by this entertaining of Strangers for Soldiers; their Country becomes more and more peopled, forasmuch as the children of such

Strangers, are Hollanders and take to Trades, whilst new Strangers are admitted ad infinitum. [...| The other Trade of which the Hollanders have rid their Hands, is the old Patriarchal Trade of being Cow-keepers, and in great measure of that which concerns ploughing and Sowing of Corn, having

put that Employment upon the Danes and Polanders, from whom they have their Young Cattle and Corn.°*

Petty is by no means exhaustive in his list, as we have seen. As we now know, for each economically active person born in the Republic, there was another, a foreigner.°’ Such a person might be skilled or unskilled, earn higher wages than the average Dutch labourer or lower. What all the migrants had in common was this: they spent the most productive years of their lives working in the Netherlands or in its overseas empire. Their labour productivity was exceptionally high,

for they spent neither their unproductive youth nor—at least the majority—their unproductive old age in the Netherlands. The migrant labourers were the most productive of all, since they came only to work and left when the work was finished. Geographically, one may discern several partially overlapping concentric circles around the Republic, more or less reflecting the various functions of migrants. Excluding internal migration, which has not

been discussed here, it would appear that there is one circle with a diameter of 200—300 kilometres representing the area within which migrant labour was recruited. A larger one, about 500 kilometres in diameter,’° marks the extent of the area from which the better-paid

labour migrants were drawn.°’ Lesser-paid labour migrants were drawn from further afield. Particular groups came from even further 66. C. H. Hull (ed.), The Economic Writings of Sir William Petty (Cambridge, 1899), i, 200-7.

°° if we add up all migrant labourers, labour migrants, and immigrants, we reach a total of nearly 2m. (cf. Table 7.1), particularly if we include domestic servants for whom figures are lacking completely (but cf. n. 73 for Venice). We may compare them to six generations of the core region’s average population of 1.5m., giving a total of gm. Dutch men and women. We assume that, roughly, not even one-quarter of this gm. were economically active males. °© The south of Scandinavia, though more distant, is also included because of its relatively easy access to the Republic by sea. >” Especially from seafaring provinces.

184 Jan Lucassen

. QS>

WA"Main of departuremotives of immigrants witharea economic ay ;

FF 7 YW a cy, fe: Wile Mrs

= Main area of attraction 5 4

I Fe a . , Vk 4b

:3

4a

é 4agv7) Na fo, Ni ome. Ly

1 Recruitment area of migrant labourers : “29

2 Recruitment area of better-paid labour migrants ‘ .

3 Recruitment area of lesser-paid labour migrants )

4a Recruitment area of Jewish immigrants 4b Recruitment area of Huguenots 4c Recruitment area of refugees from the Southern Netherlands

Map 7.3 Dutch Recruitment of Foreign Labour

away; they were mostly the Sephardi Jews who had extensive contacts in the Mediterranean and Atlantic coastal regions. Most of the immi-

grants, however, came from the eastern part of the first and second circles (see Map 7.3). Although it is not the subject of this study, it is important to point out that the Dutch economy precipitated labour movements outside

Europe too. Not only were 500,000 slaves shipped from Africa,

Dutch Emigration 185 mainly to the Dutch Caribbean plantations,°® but there were also slaves and indentured labourers in the Dutch East Indies. During the eighteenth century the VOC increasingly employed Asian soldiers, and somewhat later also sailors, mostly Chinese.°’ This pattern continued until the nineteenth century. It was not until well into that century that slave labour was replaced by contract labour. So in addition to the labour input of European migrants, the Dutch economy was buoyed up by the enforced, or otherwise, labour of African and Asian populations.

The waning of the Dutch empire did not mean the sudden disappearance of all foreigners from the labour market in Holland and its colonies. Immigration diminished gradually from about 1800, but the real low point came much later. Many forms of labour migration, especially in colonial trade and warfare, continued even longer, as did the influx of migrant labourers. CONCLUSIONS

To what degree was the Netherlands unique as a focus of attraction for migrants? And is it possible to identify other regions in seventeenthand eighteenth-century Europe where, as in Holland, ‘for each econ-

omically active person [...] there was another, a foreigner’? If we examine the different types of migrant, it appears that none is unique to the Netherlands. Indeed, we can find examples anywhere. There

were at least five other regions in western Europe before 1800 in which migrant labourers were concentrated in numbers as significant as, or even more significant than, those along the Belgian, the Dutch,

and the German North Sea coast.°° The migration of sailors and servants was also important elsewhere, though quantitative data for most countries are lacking. More is known about the numbers of soldiers involved and the role played by mercenaries.°’ It is clear from these data that in 1700 only Sweden, and during the Seven °8 J. M. Postma, The Dutch in the Atlantic Slave Trade 1600-1815 (Cambridge, 1990); see also Unger, ‘Bijdragen’, P. C. Emmer, “De slavenhandel van en naar Nieuw-Nederland’, Economisch- en Soctaal-Historisch Jaarboek, 35 (1972), 94-147; Postma, ‘West African Exports’, and Emmer, ‘Engeland’. >? Bruijn and Lucassen (eds.), Op de schepen, 22. °° Lucassen, Migrant Labour, 107 ff. 6l A. Corvisier, Armées et sociétés en Europe de 1494 4 1789 (Paris, 1976), 126; C. Tilly, Coercion, Capital and European States, AD gg0-1990 (Cambridge, Mass., 1990), 79:

186 jan Lucassen Years War only Prussia, were able to recruit more soldiers relative to

the size of their populations than the Dutch Republic could at the zenith of its power. At the same time, one should bear in mind, as Michael Howard suggests, that ‘the Dutch..., almost alone among the states of the early seventeenth century [kept] their forces under arms during the year’.°” Further, colonial migration was part and parcel of colonialism and imperialism; if we restrict ourselves to considering colonial troops, however, even in the nineteenth century

the size of the Dutch military force in the East Indies was greater

, than that of any other comparable European military force in any other country in tropical Asia excepting India.® In short, in many cases the level of migration to the Dutch Republic

in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries was as high or even higher than that in the direction of any other country. Between 1600

and 1800 the simultaneous occurrence of movement by different types of migrants—migrant labourers, sailors, soldiers, servants, as well as immigrants and transmigrants to the colonies—seems to be

unique to the Dutch Republic. This uniqueness was even more remarkable in relation to the size of the population of the receiving

country. The numbers of immigrants relative to the size of the indigenous populations were far higher in the Dutch Republic than elsewhere. Two different aspects of this conclusion need to be stressed. First,

this economic and geographical unity, attracting many and various migrants over such a long period, was at the same time a political unity, an independent state. A comparison with other contemporaneous poles of attraction presents difficulties therefore. Of course, all great urban centres were dependent on large-scale immigration, but as a rule these cities were either not independent or did not play an independent role in international and colonial politics comparable with that played by the Dutch Republic.°* On the other hand, states that could afford to be involved in international and colonial politics were, as a rule, much larger and more populous; the relative importance of immigration was consequently less.°°

Second, as a consequence of both the country’s size and the 2 Howard, War, 55. °3 P. D. Curtin, Death by Migration. Europe’s Encounter with the Tropical World in the Nineteenth Century (Cambridge, 1989), 5. °* De Vries, European Urbanization.

®° Only the population figures for Portugal in the 17th and 18th cent. are of the same order of magnitude as those for the Dutch Republic. In the case of Portugal,

Dutch Emigration 187 relatively large degree of immigration, the indigenous population of the Republic was constantly confronted by foreigners. This was certainly true for those in power, concentrated as they were in the large cities in the west. Given the fact that during the sixteenth to the eighteenth centuries all large nation-states, like Spain, England, and France, experienced significant migration flows, and that these flows can be shown to have

been far less significant than those that characterized the Dutch Republic, in which countries, if any, was migration as significant as in the Dutch Republic?

The importance in migration of the combination of population density, high degree of urbanization, and state formation in one geographical and political unity may become clear if we compare Amsterdam with its commercial predecessor as the maritime centre of Western Europe, sixteenth-century Antwerp. We see in the case of Antwerp a far weaker pattern of migration. In fact, Antwerp had few of the advantages that Amsterdam had in attracting migrants. As early

as the late Middle Ages, there were flows of migrant labourers to Flanders (to the west and south-west of Antwerp) and Zeeland (north of Antwerp).°° There is also evidence that other labour migrants, and especially immigrants, settled there.°’ This was on a much smaller scale than the later migration to the Dutch Republic, however, largely because Antwerp lacked a genuine merchant fleet and colonies of its

own, and because the political dependence of Antwerp and the southern Netherlands on Spain prevented it from establishing an autonomous army and navy.

We have to turn further south to find anywhere in the sixteenth century that shared many of the characteristics of Dutch migration history in the centuries to come: the Venetian Republic. Such a comparison between the republics of Venice and the United Provinces

and their respective capitals is hardly new of course: Peter Burke quotes a Venetian author from the beginning of the seventeenth century calling Amsterdam ‘the image of Venice in the days when it

was rising’.°° Indeed, in the sixteenth century, by which time the however, the figures and variety of immigration lag far behind those of their northern competitor. °° Lucassen, Migrant Labour, 162-3. °” J. van Roey, ‘De bevolking’, in Antwerpen in de XVle ceuw (Antwerp, 1975),

95-108, esp. 96-100. 8 P. Burke, Venice and Amsterdam. A Study of Seventeenth-Century Elites (London, , 1974), 11; see also E. O. G. Haitsma Mulier, The Myth of Venice and Dutch Republican Thought in the Seventeenth Century (Assen, 1990).

188 Jan Lucassen Venetian Republic had expanded considerably, Venice had a popu-

lation similar to that of the Dutch Republic later, and a degree of urbanization and maritime, colonial, and economic characteristics (including export industries and a combination of high wages and low interest rates) similar to those of the later Dutch Republic.°’ Migrant labour, especially from the more remote and mountainous

parts of the mainland and from adjacent border regions in Italy and Switzerland, was certainly present in the Venetian Republic, but it is hard to quantify.’? Like migrant labour, urban immigration in Venice is documented well qualitatively but poorly quantitatively.’!

Two ethnic minorities, later to be important in Dutch cities, especially Amsterdam, were of considerable significance to Venice: the Armenians and the Jews.’? There was also a degree of servant labour migration (though the data on this are, as in the Dutch case, poor’®), and of labour migration

by soldiers and sailors (who have been much better studied by historians). Like all northern Italian states, prior to 1400 Venice made extensive use of condottiert and their mercenaries. Of course, the Republic particularly needed men for the wharves, the merchant ©? See F. C. Lane, Venice. A Maritime Republic (Baltimore, 1973). For the population of Venice see R. T. Rapp, Industry and Economic Decline in Seventeenth-Century Venice

(Cambridge, Mass., 1976), 34-42; B. Pullan (ed.), Crisis and Change in the Venetian Economy in the Sixteenth and Seventeenth Centuries (London, 1968), 150, 161; and idem, Rich and Poor in Renaissance Venice. The Social Institutions of a Catholic State, to 1620 (Cambridge, Mass., 1971), 27.

© Examples are given in D. Sella, ‘Au dossier des migrations montagnardes: exemple de la Lombardie au XVIle siécle’, in Mélanges en Vhonneur de Fernand Braudel. Histoire economique du monde meéditerranéen 1450-1650 (Paris, 1973), 547-54, esp. 549-51; Lucassen, Migrant Labour, 249, 252-4 (c.1800 the former Republic of Venice became part of the Napoleonic Kingdom of Italy), and 307 n. 56.

Cf. A. Lazzarini, ‘L’emigrazione temporanea dalla montagna veneta nel secondo ottocento’, Richerche di Storie Sociale e Religiosa, 10 (1976), 387-436, which provides a few data on earlier periods, and D. Kaiser, Fast ein Volk von Zuckerbackern? Biindner Konditoren, Cafetiers und Hoteliers in europdischen Landen bis zum Ersten Weltkrieg (Zurich, 1985).

71 For immigration see Pullan (ed.), Crisis, 155, 159-62; Rapp, Industry, 42; Lane, Venice, 395, 401; and R. Mackenney, Tradesmen and Traders. The World of the Guilds in

Venice and Europe, c.1250-c.1650 (Totowa, NJ, 1987), 112. On confectioners see Kaiser, Fast ein Volk.

: 72 On the Armenians see P. D. Curtin, Cross-Cultural Trade in World History (Cambridge, 1984), 182~206; on the Jews see Lane, Venice, 299~-304; Pullan, Rich and Poor, 431 ff; and Israel, European Jewry.

* In 1563 7-8% of the population of the Venetian Republic were servants; of these it is not known what proportion were labour migrants. See Lane, Venice, 332. Many Venetian female servants came e.g. from Vicenza and Verona.

Dutch Emigration 189 marine, and the navy.’* The navy expanded rapidly during the sixteenth century; the forces engaged in the campaigns of 1538 and 1571 were four to five times larger than those of the 1420s, and it is hardly surprising that manning these fleets proved to be increasingly difficult, so difficult that the Venetians had to switch from recruiting volunteer galeotti to conscripting Cretans and Dalmatians, and later on men from the Venetian mainland itself; from 1545 convicts and in particular slaves were forced into the navy.’? What is even more important is that on the Turkish side the situation was exactly the same. In fact, Venetians and Ottomans could not afford to rely on a free labour market; both competed fiercely to capture as many ablebodied Balkans as possible for their navies.’° It was not only in their navy that the Venetians used imported slaves; in industry, transport, and domestic service, slaves made up part of the labour force, as did

indentured servants.’’ |

We may conclude, therefore, that the Venetian Republic depended on the migration of labour in the sixteenth century perhaps as much

as the Dutch Republic did one century later. Unlike the Dutch Republic, though, the Venetian Republic had recourse to unfree labour—slaves and indentured servants. Given these similarities and

differences, one might ask whether Venice represents an earlier phase in the mobilization of labour under merchant capitalism, a system that found its apogee in the Dutch Republic? Or did Venice simply have too fierce and too close a competitor in the international labour market, forcing it to resort to unfree labour? The high degree of reliance on free labour in the Dutch labour market—even press-ganging, common in England, was unknown— was possibly reflected in a different context as well: the mobilization of labour in the colonies. The Dutch Atlantic slave-trade lagged far behind that of Great Britain and Portugal.”® The different patterns of development that characterized the large ™ Lane, Venice, 231-45 (army), 355 ff. (wharves, esp. the Arsenal), 366 (merchant marine).

” Lane, Venice, 364 ff.; Pullan (ed.), Crisis, 152-3. 7 Lane, Venice, 374. 7” Possibly another difference between Venice and Amsterdam that relates to the degree of freedom in the labour market is one discussed by several authors in dealing

with the barring of foreigners from the Venetian trade guilds. The evidence so far is inconclusive. See Lane, Venice, 319-21; Rapp, [ndustry, 42-8; and Mackenney, Tradesmen, 111-13. 78 Postma, Dutch, 294-303.

19O Jan Lucassen European nation-states on the one hand and the two smaller maritime

republics on the other fit well into two recent models of European demographic and urban history, those of Charles Tilly and Jan de Vries. Tilly has eloquently and convincingly argued that European demographic growth from the Middle Ages to the late nineteenth century was caused predominantly by the proletarianization of the countryside, induced by work opportunities in modernizing capitalist

agriculture and above all in proto-industry.’? According to Tilly, migration played an important role in this process in two ways.°° First, early modern European proletarianization led to net migration

losses of European proletarians, who left for colonies settled by whites; this is clearest in the cases of Spain, England, and southern Germany. Secondly, proletarianization had major mobilizing effects on the rural population, not only in the form of this out-of-Europe migration but especially on small-distance and temporal or seasonal migration, followed by long-distance migration during the nineteenth century. The Dutch and Venetian experiences support Tilly’s model, though

they represent early, intensive examples and also offer interesting variations. In the Dutch case his theory concerning the effect of proletarianization on migration is confirmed by the extent of naval, military, and colonial transmigration. Secondly, in both the Dutch ‘ and the Venetian republics proletarianization had a considerable effect on rural populations. In particular, the function of seasonal migrant labour in preventing permanent emigration for many generations, the role of the state in employing labour migrants—in the Venetian case even by force—and the extent of temporal migration need to be stressed here. De Vries’s urbanization model allows us to identify the differences

in the paths taken by the two republics from those of the large nation-states of Western Europe. He divides European urban history into three periods: ‘the long sixteenth century’, from 1500 to 1600 in

the Mediterranean and to 1650 in the north; ‘the age of the rural proletariat’, from 1600/50 to 1750; and ‘the new urbanization’, from

1750 to 1800/s0.°' It is tempting to place the Venetian migration system and the growth phase of the Dutch migration system within the first of these, in which state building ‘had the effect of under9 Tilly, ‘Demographic Origins’; see also De Vries, European Urbanization, 238-41. 80 Tilly, ‘Demographic Origins’, 44-7; De Vries, European Urbanization, 212-13. 8! De Vries, European Urbanization, 254 ff.

Dutch Emigration Ig! mining the independence and autonomy of many cities and subordinating their economic interests to those of the Renaissance monarchies’, a development that for the time being did not hinder the growth and economic success of the two republics—rather, the contrary.**

De Vries’s hypothesis concerning migration patterns is therefore supported by our conclusions. He wrote: Although little is known about this, one is tempted to speculate that where the level of urbanization was high, as in northern Italy and the Low Countries,

the size and regularity of this hazardous demand for labour might have evoked a permanent expectation of migration to the city among agrarian households in the region, fashioning, as it were, well-trodden migration paths to connect supply and demand.*?

We might add, however, that ‘region’ must be considered in a geographically wide sense.

If we accept De Vries’s interpretation of the development of European urbanization, in which the prominent role played by the small Venetian and Dutch republics is confined to the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, then we might apply a similar periodization to European migration history. Similarly, the Venetian and the Dutch

migration systems had no successors of their kind, as the great European nation-states took over their leading role in migration history after the turn of the nineteenth century.** Petty’s observation

that ‘A small Territory, and even a few People, may by Situation, Trade and Policy, be made equivalent to a greater; and that convenience for Shipping, and Water-carriage, do most eminently and fundamentally conduce thereunto’? was one that was essentially relevant only to the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. 82 It is also tempting to place the enduring Venetian and especially the Dutch migration systems well into the 1gth cent. within the second period. 83 De Vries, European Urbanization, 218—19. See also 248: ‘It is society, usually best viewed in a regional context, that is developing via the mobilization of its resources by individuals with access to an urban system.’ 84 See also C. Tilly, ‘Cities and States in Europe, 1000-1800’, Theory and Society, 18 (1989), 563-84. 85 Hull (ed.), Economic Writings, 268.

Transatlantic Migration from the _ German-Speaking Parts of Central Europe, 1600-1500: Proportions, Structures, and Explanations GEORG FERTIG

In 1732, the financial chamber of government in Baden-Durlach was

bewildered by an application for emigration to North America: ‘It seems to be quite strange to us that these four subjects from Graben could resolve to move with their wives and children to this strange and remote country.’ Their indignation was far from exceptional. Seventeen years later, the pastor of Lichtenau, an Upper Rhenish town, recorded the emigration of five families to Pennsylvania. He

added:

Also, about 30,000 souls have been counted, who went along with them from Alsace, Switzerland, Breisgau and Swabia. ... The dear Lord knows, if those have all arrived in Pennsylvania or have been guided and sold elsewhere. If

one had not spoken to them in a candid manner and pointed the danger out to them, even more would have gone away.”

Sensational in scale, hardly comprehensible in motivation, irresponsible, dangerous, and all in all deplorable—this is the reaction of most contemporaries to the migration of German speakers to British

North America. But was it correct? In this chapter, I shall first address the question of scale: how many men and women did actually

emigrate from the Rhinelands to British North America, and how many stayed at home or moved to other places?” I shall then discuss ' W. Hacker, Auswanderungen aus Baden und dem Breisgau: Obere und mittlere rechtsseitige Oberrheinlande im 18. Jahrhundert archivalisch dokumentiert (Stuttgart, 1980), 114. 2 Ibid. 158. Hacker’s text contains an obvious misreading which I have corrected. > My focus is the German-speaking parts of central Europe: i.e. of the Holy Roman Empire and of the Swiss Confederacy, not ‘Germany’. Sometimes, however, I shall use the term “German’ as a convenient substitute for ‘German-speaking’.

German Emigration 193 the social context of migration in preindustrial south-west Germany

and Switzerland: the different patterns and norms of migration behaviour which characterized both domestic and _ transatlantic migration. Finally, I will discuss explanations that might be given for the migratory behaviour which the Baden-Durlach financial chamber

had such difficulty in understanding. I

The high figure, reported by the pastor of Lichtenau, of 30,000 emigrants to America from a relatively small area and in a single year in itself poses an interesting problem: how far are numbers in migration history meant to be exactly that—namely, numbers—and

to what degree are they used as metaphors for something very different—namely, the relative importance the author wishes to ascribe to a specific phenomenon? Obviously, the pastor thought of transatlantic migration as something very important, exceptional,

and problematic. Thus, he used the very big number of 30,000 to characterize a movement he had actually never measured. This symbolic use of numbers to illustrate the phenomenon is in no way limited to observers of that time: as recently as 1975, one of the most eminent historians of European society stated that in early modern

German towns ‘migration approached zero’.* This statement did not imply, of course, that nobody ever moved before the Industrial Revolution. It meant only that German society—in towns as well as in the countryside—should be characterized as rooted, stable, and sedentary. Indeed, it was common wisdom until the 1980s that ‘zero’ migration was the norm for all European communities prior to the onset of the Industrial Revolution. But apart from this general impression, what are the correct numbers? In recent years, it has been clearly established that both Switzerland

and Germany participated in the long European history of spatial as well as social mobility.> However, even rough estimates of the * E. Shorter, The Making of the Modern Family (New York, 1975), 288, summarizing the findings of M. Walker, German Home Towns: Community, State, and General Estate, 1648-1871 (Ithaca, NY, 1971). > H. U. Pfister, Die Auswanderung aus dem Knonauer Amt 1648-1750. Ihr Ausmass,

thre Strukturen und thre Bedingungen (Zurich, 1987); G. Jaritz and A. Miller (eds.), Migration in der Feudalgesellschafi, Studien zur historischen Sozialwissenschaft, 8 (Frankfurt, 1988); W. Schulze (ed.), Standische Gesellschaft und soziale Mobilitat, Schrif-

194 Georg Fertig proportions of migration are not possible before the end of the sixteenth century. After that date, state and church officials observed the German population and its movements more closely. Since the Thirty Years War, discussion about the spectacular scale of middle-

and long-distance movement of peoples has been a live political issue, and registration by the churches of every baptism, marriage, and -burial of Christians also dates from that time. If we wish to estimate how many people from within each German community moved from their place of origin and how many remained at home between 1600 and 1800, then Ortssippenbiicher, or family reconstitutions based on these parish registers, would seem the best source

of information. Based on the number of births, Arthur E. Imhof provides the proportion of out-migration for the period between 1740 and 1779. In a study of six areas, each consisting of up to seventeen parishes, this proportion ranges from 10.5 per cent (Wiirttemberg) to 27.8 per cent (Eastern Frisia). However, Imhof has excluded from his data-set those families where the husband or the wife did not die in the area under study, so the true proportion of migrants was certainly higher. And the reason why many of these people died at their places

of birth was simply that they died at a very young age, since only every second individual born ever reached the age of twenty-five.° For some other rural areas, out-migration of surviving children has been estimated at 40—50 per cent in the seventeenth century, and 35 per cent in the eighteenth century.’ Finally, in the case of Gobrichen, a village in the northern part of Baden-Durlach, a machine-readable family reconstitution presents the opportunity to calculate migration

figures based on births as well as on persons and couples who married in Gobrichen. Of the 553 individuals who married and had children in that parish between 1561 and 1749, 68 per cent were born in Gobrichen, and 57 per cent (and after 1625, when the burial records are more complete, 69 per cent) died there. If we study the behaviour of couples, rather than individuals, it transpires that of the ten des historischen Kollegs, Kolloquien 12 (Munich, 1989); I. Matschinegg and A. Miiller, ‘Migration—Wanderung—Mobilitét in Spatmittelalter und Friihneuzeit’, Medium Aevum Quotidianum, 21 (1990), 3-92; S. Hochstadt, ‘Migration in Preindustrial Germany’, Central European History, 16 (1983), 195—224; P. Moraw (ed.),

vob een im Spatmittelalter, Zeitschrift fiir historische Forschung, Beiheft 1 (Berlin, °s a E. Imhof, Lebenserwartungen in Deutschland vom 17. bis 19. fahrhundert/Life Expectancies in Germany from the 17th to the 19th Century (Weinheim, 1990), 62-3, 72. ” Hochstadt, ‘Migration’, 209.

German Emigration 195 304 married couples who can be identified as belonging to the village of Godbrichen for any length of time between 1625 and 1749, 19 per cent were through-migrants and only 18 per cent couples where both husband and wife were baptized as well as buried in Gobrichen. In 34 per cent of the cases both husband and wife subsequently moved away from Gobrichen, and in only 44 per cent of all cases did both

partners live out their lives in the village and were buried there. Looking at the experience of individuals, we find that of the 959 children who were baptized in Gébrichen between 1625 and 1749, 452 did not reach the age of 14, and of the remaining 507, 70 per cent died in their home village.®

If these numbers from Gdbrichen are not entirely atypical, we might say that roughly every third adult individual in seventeenthand eighteenth-century Germany changed his or her place of residence during their lives; this is a conservative, if crude, estimate. It means that the number of migrants between 1600 and 1800 certainly

has to be counted in tens of millions. For the eighteenth century alone, we might, for the moment, assume that during all that century, roughly 46,000,000 adults lived in the Empire and Switzerland, and that about 15,000,000 of these became migrants at some time in their lives.’ 8 E. Hahner, Ortssippenbuch Gobrichen, Badische Ortssippenbiicher, 53 (Gébrichen,

1985). I have made this village family reconstitution machine-readable for families

founded prior to 1750. For more extensive documentation, see my dissertation ‘Wanderungsmotivation und landliche Gesellschaft im 18. Jahrhundert: Vom Oberrhein nach Nordamerika’ (Free Univ. of Berlin Ph.D. dissertation, 1993). J. Knodel, Demographic Behavior in the Past: A Study of Fourteen German Village Populations in the Eighteenth and Nineteenth Centuries, Cambridge Studies in Population, Economy and Society in Past Time, 6 (Cambridge, 1988), 15, is not quite correct in saying that ‘the

one major aspect of demographic behaviour for which the village genealogies are particularly ill-suited is migration’. This holds true for the question of when exactly a

given individual migrated, but not for the fact of migration or non-migration in general. For the idea of linking baptism and burial entries to estimate the extent of geographic mobility in family reconstitutions, cf. D. Souden, ‘Movers and Stayers in Family Reconstitution Populations’, Local Population Studies, 33 (Autumn 1984), 11-28. ? C. Clark, Population Growth and Land Use (London, 1968), 64, estimates 15.5m.

inhabitants in 1700, 18m. in 1750, and 23m. in 1800, for the territories that are today covered by the republics of Germany and Austria. For the Holy Roman Empire in its contemporary borders, plus the Swiss Confederacy, we might assume an average population during the 18th cent. of c.2om. Of these, about 30% would be 14 years old or younger, leaving 14m. adults. It would take about 43 years for these to enter and leave a stationary population of adults, given the mortality risks given by Imhof, Life Expectancies, for 1750 (for calculations, I have used his table 8.5.2.3, Proportion Surviving); so during 100 years there might have been about 46m. adults in several generations. This estimate should be understood as very tentative.

196 Georg Fertig Only a small minority of these many millions were long-distance

migrants. In Gdbrichen, for instance, only thirty-nine out of 553 marriage partners between 1561 and 1749 were born more than 35 kilometres (22 miles) away. However, long-distance migrations have attracted most public and historiographic attention. Gross numbers

for these are hard to give, because contemporaries did not record statistics of migration centrally. The substantial German emigration

to the Netherlands is discussed by Jan Lucassen in the previous chapter, and he has shown that a great many of those who made an initial move to the Netherlands subsequently travelled as far afield

as the Dutch East Indies. Some other estimates of long-distance migration have been collected by Hans Fenske.'° He puts immigration

into Germany after the Thirty Years War in the range of several hundreds of thousands, and estimates that 350,000 German emigrants

went to Hungary, 300,000 to Prussia, 125,000 to North America, 50,000 to Poland, 37,000 to Russia, and 5,000 to Spain, all between

the 1680s and 1800. It is by no means clear, however, how these numbers have been calculated. There has been a certain tendency among traditional migration historians to overestimate the extent of a given migration under study; for instance, it was once thought that

up to 2,000,000 Huguenots were driven out of France after 1685, whereas it has now been established that the correct number is at most 300,000 and possibly as low as 130,000.'’ What reliable sources do we actually have to estimate the number of German speakers who

migrated to British North America or the United States before 1800? Generally speaking, we can use sources in the homelands, in the areas of destination, and in the countries traversed by the emigrants.

In Germany and Switzerland there are only dispersed sources relevant to our question. Lists and statistics of emigration were compiled in only a few cases during the eighteenth century.'* Most '0-H. Fenske, ‘International Migration: Germany in the Eighteenth Century’, Central European History, 13 (1980), 334, 344—6.

"J. Butler, The Huguenots in America: A Refugee People in New World Society (Cambridge, Mass., 1983), 23-7. '2 The largest single set of such sources are the lists of emigrants compiled by Zurich pastors in 1744; Staatsarchiv Ziirich A174(1) lists c.2,266 emigrants to Pennsylvania and South Carolina. See the translation of these lists in A. B. Faust, Lists of Swiss Emigrants in the Eighteenth Century to the American Colonies (2 vols., Washington,

DC, 1920, repr. in 1 vol., Baltimore, 1968), i, and the dissertation by A. Blocher, Die Eigenart der Ziircher Auswanderer nach Amerika 1734-1744 (Zurich, 1976).

German Emigration 197 available data have been compiled by twentieth-century local historians and genealogists, who have scoured parish registers and official records for names of emigrants.'? These published lists of emigrants vary in reliability, and do not treat more than fragments of the south-west German and Swiss area, which was split up into a multitude of jurisdictions at the time.'* Certainly, they are far from complete. An individual emigrant could have been registered on different levels of the early modern bureaucracy, and most published

emigrant lists are based on only one level. Annette K. Burgert, for instance, after evaluating local parish registers (Kirchenbiicher)

and ship lists, cites 624 cases in her volume on emigrants from the northern Kraichgau. Werner Hacker has examined the central government records on emigration for an area with forty-one parishes, from which 545 of Burgert’s family groups or single migrants originated.’ Of these 545, only forty-three can be identified in Hacker’s

lists, which implies that 92 per cent of the emigrant groups covered by Burgert—we had better not try to estimate how many even Burgert could not find—either travelled to America without complying with

the requests of early modern bureaucracy or their documents have been lost. This leads us to the suspicion that even the 3,250 cases of migration to North America recorded in Hacker’s volumes represent only a small fraction of the tens of thousands of individuals who actually emigrated to America from the territories he covered.

A second group of sources had their origin in countries through

which the transatlantic migrants travelled: the Netherlands and England. English sources are available in the spectacular year of 1709, when thousands of impoverished ‘Palatines’ hoped to be trans'S The largest group of such compilations is to be found in the works of W. Hacker; see Bibliography. See also the samplers edited by D. Yoder: Pennsylvania German Immigrants, 1709-1786 (Baltimore, 1980); Rhineland Emigrants (Baltimore, 1981). A. K. Burgert, Eighteenth-Century Emigrants from German-Speaking Lands to North America,

Publications of the Pennsylvania German Society, 16, 19 (Breinigsville, Pa., 1983, 1985). K. Ehmann, Die Auswanderung in die Neuenglandstaaten aus Orten des Enzkretses

im 18. Jahrhundert, Siidwestdeutsche Blatter fiir Familienkunde, Sonderheft 1977 (Stuttgart, 1977). '4 For a very critical review of Hacker’s last work see K. Scherer, Zeitschrift fiir die Geschichte des Oberrheins, 137 (1989), 546—8; see also the more balanced review by A.

Fogleman, ‘Progress and Possibilities in Migration Studies: The Contributions of Werner Hacker to the Study of Early German Migration to Pennsylvania’, Pennsylvania FMistory, 56 (1989), 318—29. Ehmann, Die Auswanderung, is especially unreliable; only a

minority of the emigrants listed by him for specific villages even lived there. 'S Burgert, Eighteenth-Century Emigrants i, Hacker, Kurpfalzische Auswanderer.

198 Georg Fertig ported to (South) Carolina free of charge. Because these groups were

supported by public means, there are a number of lists and contemporary estimates for them.'® Walter Knittle’s estimate of 13,500 emigrants is generally accepted. He assumes that very few ‘Palatines’

except those enumerated in the lists went to England.’’ Of these 13,500, only about 3,000 reached America, mostly New York. Another 3,000 or so are known to have settled in Ireland, and at least 2,000 Catholics were sent back by the English authorities.

No lists of transmigrants to North America were recorded by Dutch authorities. However, for some years we know the number of passports that were issued to the merchants involved in shipment of Germans to North America: in 1735, 300 or 400; in 1753, 3,000; in

1764, g0o or 1,000; and in 1749, 1750, and 1751, an unknown number. A total of 10,000 might be a reasonable estimate; but again,

this does not help much in making even an informed guess about the total number of persons involved. Another Dutch source is the large number of ‘charter parties’ drawn up in Rotterdam between shipowners or captains, on the one hand, and merchants who were expecting more German emigrants to North America than they could

accommodate in their own ships, on the other. These contracts account for approximately 17,000 persons between 1718 and 1763.’” The third group of sources—those from North America—are far more rewarding. The most exact assessments of German migration to North America are made possible by the three sets of passenger lists recorded in Philadelphia between 1727 and 1776 and published by '© The lists have been printed in W. A. Knittle, Early Eighteenth-Century Palatine Emigration (Philadelphia, 1937), 248-74, and in New York Genealogical and Biographical

Records, 40 (1909), 49-54, 93-100, 160-7, 241-8; 42 (1910), 10-19. '7 Knittle, Palatine Emigration, 66. '8 Gemeentelijke archiefdienst Rotterdam, OSA 2783, 3 July 1764. '? Gemeentelijke archiefdienst Rotterdam, ONA. In the Rotterdam data, 18 ships are mentioned outside formal contracts; i.e. in testimonies, powers of attorney, etc. These have been left out. In 9 of the 66 transport agreements that could be used in this figure, the number of persons who arrived in Philadelphia is known. For 26 others, number of freights is given; and for 27 ships, it has been estimated using the number of tuns, which is highly correlated with the number of freights (assuming that the number of freights equals the number of tuns times 1.17 minus 36.8; this regression formula explains 74 per cent of the variance, but it should be seen as a very tentative makeshift because it is based on a subsample of only 24 cases, and the variables are not normally distributed). Where the number of persons is not given in the Philadelphia ship lists, it is calculated from the number of freights using a multiplicator of 1.43, as proposed by M. S. Wokeck, ‘A Tide of Alien Tongues: The Flow and Ebb of German Immigration to Pennsylvania, 1683-1776’ (Temple Univ., Philadelphia, Ph.D. dissertation, 1983), 117.

German Emigration 199 Strassburger and Hinke.*? They contain the signatures of 26,175 men with Swiss or German names. These data have been used by Marianne S. Wokeck to estimate a gross number of Germanspeaking immigrants to Philadelphia of 70,492 people between 1727 and 1775.”' This number derives from the records left by 334 ships which arrived at Philadelphia harbour during this time and fulfilled the Pennsylvanian requests of registration. The figure depends on the validity of the multiplicators employed by Wokeck; these derive from

those ships which provided details of the number of passengers— men, women, and children—they conveyed, as well as on the number

of ‘freights’. Controlling for changing ratios of adult men to passengers and ‘freights’, Aaron Fogleman has recently estimated that there were only 65,513 Philadelphia German immigrants between

1727 and 1776.7* | |

The number of German-speaking migrants who travelled to British

North America on ships that did not supply ship lists remains an open question. Such migrants can be divided into three groups: those travelling to Philadelphia before 1727, those travelling on ships that arrived in Philadelphia but whose records have been lost, and those

travelling to other ports. Some indications of their respective size

might be given by the Rotterdam material. The number of the first group was certainly not very significant. Wokeck mentions 798

passengers on nine ships to Philadelphia prior to 1727.”° Six additional ships are mentioned in the Rotterdam archives; especially during the early 1720s German immigration into Philadelphia was probably greater than Strassburger and Hinke thought.”* The size of 20 R. B. Strassburger and W. J. Hinke (eds.), Pennsylvania German Pioneers. A Publication of the Original Lists of Arrivals in the Port of Philadelphia from 1727 to 1808 (3

vols., Norristown, Pa., 1934).

“1 Wokeck, ‘Tide of Alien Tongues’, 118. See also Eadem, ‘The Flow and the Composition of German Immigration to Philadelphia, 1727-1775’, Pennsylvania Magazine of History and Biography, 105 (1981), 249-78. 22 Fogelman’s overall estimate for the period before 1776 is 66,733, 1,000 before

1720 and another 2,161 from 1720 to 1729. I assume the latter figure includes the 1,941 passengers who arrived, according to Strassburger and Hinke (eds.), Pioneers, i. 768, between 1727 and 1729, plus an additional 220 before the beginning of the ship lists in 1727. (For a ship with 240 passengers that arrived 30 Aug. 1720, see ibid., i, p. xix). A. Fogelman, ‘Migrations to the Thirteen British North American Colonies, 1700-1775: New Estimates’, Journal of Interdisciplinary History, 22 (1992), 702. Dr Fogelman kindly made his research note available to me before publication. 23 Wokeck, ‘Tide of Alien Tongues’, 111. 2+ Gemeentelijke archiefdienst Rotterdam, ONA 1826/156, 162 (1718, ships _ Edward, Mary Sloop), ONA 2090/316 (1719, Royal George), ONA 2095/445 (1721, John & Catherine), OSA 2783 de 1722 (De Wereldkloot), ONA 1529/53 (1725, York).

200 Georg Fertig the second group is totally unknown to date, and has been neglected by most authors, because it has so far been generally accepted that the abjuration lists—the C lists printed by Strassburger and Hinke— are basically complete. But this is not the case. Wokeck mentions eighteen more ships, six of them wrecked or misrouted, destined for Philadelphia between 1727 and 1775.” However, she thinks it is only because these ships carried very few or mostly ill passengers that they

are not included in the ship lists.*° But Strassburger and Hinke themselves mention—in the A or captain’s lists—two ships with considerable numbers of passengers that are not contained in the C lists.*’ Moreover, in 1741 and after 1766 the C lists were signed in different places, frequently in the private houses of city officials; several pages have been cut out of the sixth volume, and there is an entirely atypical gap between 30 September and 25 November 1740.7°

Also, in Rotterdam there is evidence of eleven additional ships, destined expressly to the port of Philadelphia, between 1727 and 1775.” It seems that even the best source we have on German emigration to Pennsylvania is less reliable than we _ previously thought. Even harder to estimate is the size of the third group, the migrants who went to places in British North America other than Pennsylvania.

A rather tentative estimate could again be made on the basis of the

Rotterdam charter parties; out of fifty-three charter parties after 1727, accounting for about 14,974 individuals, only thirty-nine, with some 11,961 people, were registered in Philadelphia, while the rest seem to have sailed to other British North American destinations at 2° Wokeck, ‘Tide of Alien Tongues’, 130 n. 9. 2© Wokeck, ‘Harnessing the Lure of the “Best Poor Man’s Country”: The Dynamics of German-Speaking Immigration to British North America, 1683-1783’, in I. Altman and J. Horn (eds.), ‘To Make America’: European Emigration in the Early Modern Period (Berkeley, Calif., 1992), 227. In this later publication, she already gives the number of additional ships as thirty-one, not eighteen. 7 Strassburger and Hinke (eds.), Pioneers, ship 229 A, Recovery, which landed in

Wilmington, Del., on 23 Oct. 1754 with 83 men; ship 233 A, 7wo Brothers, which landed in Philadelphia in 1754 with 106 men. 28 Ibid. i, pp. xxv—xxviii.

79 These include both charter parties and other documents. Gemeentelijke archief-

dienst Rotterdam, ONA 2332/143 (1736, Adventure), ONA 2770/102 (1742, St Marcus), ONA 2770/102 (1742, Mary Gold), ONA 2337/187 (1743, Phoenix), ONA 2740/49 (1744, Rupert), ONA 2342/152 (1747, Janet & fanet), ONA 2343/98 (1748, john & Alexander), ONA 2144/124 (1749, Patience & Margaret), ONA 2147/189 (1751, Good Intent), ONA 2779/108 (1751, Scarborrough), ONA 2348/50 (1754, 2 Gebroeders).

German Emigration 201 points between Halifax and Georgia.°? This could mean that about 20 per cent of all German immigrants to British North America went to destinations other than Pennsylvania.*! The first federal census of 1790 provides an additional starting-point wherewith to estimate the

size of the third group, those Germans who had settled in the mainland colonies other than Pennsylvania. Fogleman has recently argued that in 1790, 21 per cent of all Americans of German descent lived in New England, New York, South Carolina, Georgia, and those parts of the other states that were not settled by ‘Pennsylvania Dutch’. Extending this ratio to the original number of immigrants to Philadelphia and other ports, respectively, he concludes that total immigration between 1700 and 1775 was 84,400 persons of German and Swiss descent, a number that we may reasonably accept. The

proportion of 21 per cent used by Fogelman is supported by our

Rotterdam findings. It may be, however, that colonies like South | Carolina are underrepresented in this figure; and a big question mark still stands over those ships bound for Philadelphia, but not registered there.°* For the years following 1775, 3,000 German troops who remained in the United States after the War of Independence and about 3,600 German immigrants to the United States between 1783 and 1789 leave us with an overall estimate of 91,000 3° Seven charter parties after 1727 were expressly destined for Philadelphia, but were not registered there. They have been left out.

1 However, the 95% confidence limits of this estimate are about +12%, and it may overestimate the actual number of migrants to peripheral colonies. This is because the Rotterdam contracts probably make mention of ships that never actually sailed, and

because it is possible that established merchants were reluctant to risk their own vessels for journeys to new destinations with which they had had no previous trading experience, thus creating an overrepresentation of peripheral colonies in the charter parties.

2 Fogelman, ‘Migrations’, 701: 59,027 and 222,283 persons, respectively. Fogelman’s proposal is based on the surname analysis carried out by Purvis. This analysis, like that of Purvis’ predecessors Hansen and Barker, is based on the idea that the distribution of a subset of certain ‘German’ names in the census lists can be used as an indicator for the distribution of all ‘Germans’ in the USA. Taking the subsets from Pennsylvanian sources, as both Purvis and Barker and Hansen have done, could produce a bias towards Pennsylvania, because names are regionally highly differentiated in Switzerland and Germany, as was the preference for specific settlements among emigrants. See T. Purvis, “The European Ancestry of the United States Population, 1790, William & Mary Quarterly, 3rd ser. 41 (1984), 85-101; American Council of Learned Societies, ‘Report of the Committee on Linguistic and National Stocks in the Population of the United States’, in American Historical Association, Annual Report for the Year 1931 (Washington, DC, 1932), i. 107—25 (this report is based on studies by H. F. Barker and M. L. Hansen).

202 Georg Fertig German and Swiss migrants to North America prior to 1790.°° The

validity of this figure can, to some extent, be checked against the American census figure for 1790. Thomas Purvis has suggested that

the number of people of German origin then stood at 281,245.°* This figure included people born in the United States to German immigrant parents; if we allow for a plausible decennial rate of natural increase of 30 per cent, our original estimate of 91,000 German migrants would have produced 267,500 American citizens with German names, which is not too different from Purvis’s figure. To produce a number like that given by Purvis with the maximum and minimum growth rates of 34.5 per cent and 25 per cent given by Henry Gemery, it would have taken 112,500 or 82,000 immigrants, respectively.*> It seems that reasonable estimates for German immigration prior to 1790 should lie within this range. In the last decade of the century, about 5,100 Swiss and Germans

immigrated into the United States.°° Finally, an overall passage mortality of 5.5 per cent would leave us with an estimate of 101,385,

or roughly 100,000 emigrants from 1683 to 1800, which has the advantage of being a round number.°®’ However, it rests almost entirely on one source, the ship lists preserved in Philadelphia, and it

does not take into account the unknown number of arrivals in that port whose records have been lost. However important an instalment it may have been in the peopling

of British North America with Europeans, the German emigration to American destinations was insignificant when considered in the context of total German migration in the eighteenth century (see Table 8.1). Those who did go to North America did not come from a spatially fixed, traditional German society. Therefore, the emigration 33 Fogelman, ‘Migrations’, 704. H.-J. Grabbe, ‘Besonderheiten der europdischen

Einwanderung in die USA wahrend der friihen nationalen Periode 1783-1820’, Amerikastudien/American Studies, 33 (1988), 276.

34 T. Purvis, ‘The Pennsylvania Dutch and the German-American Diaspora in 1790’, Journal of Cultural Geography, 6 (1986), 81-99.

> H. Gemery, ‘European Immigration to North America, 1700-1820: Numbers

and Quasi-Numbers’, Perspectives in American History, NS 1 (1984), 298. I have assumed

that the timing of arrivals was the same as that proposed by Fogleman, ‘Migrations’, 702. I have neglected the ‘young’ age structure of the German immigrants and the high proportion of redemptioners among them, two characteristics that tend to cancel one another out. 36 Grabbe, ‘Besonderheiten’, 276.

37 Farley Grubb, ‘Morbidity and Mortality on the North Atlantic Passage: Eighteenth-Century German Immigration’, Journal of Interdisciplinary History, 17 (1987), 571.

German Emigration 203 TABLE 8.1. Empire and Confederacy in the eighteenth century: rough estimates of population and migration (adults of several generations)

Population Number Percentage

Total 46,000,000 100

Migrants to all destinations 15,000,000 33

Migrants to Eastern Europe 516,000 I.I Migrants to North America 70,000 0.2 Note: The table gives numbers of adult migrants only. | have assumed that with emigrants to both British North America and eastern Europe, the proportion of children was roughly 30%, as in F. Grubb, “German Immigration to Pennsylvania, 1709 to 1820’, fournal of Interdisciplinary History, 20 (1990), 421, for the American case (33.1% for 1727-38, 27.9% for 1785-1804).

to America should not be interpreted in terms of destabilization, mobilization, and crisis. Rather, we should see departure from the home community as being almost the norm for an individual born in eighteenth-century Germany. When emigration to America is viewed in this context, it appears that the proportion of Germans who chose British North America as their future home approached zero per cent of the total population of German-speaking Europe.

I]

Table 8.1, which shows the relative proportions of those who engaged in some form of migration and those who remained in their place of origin, does not allow us to characterize German premodern society as ‘stable’ in the geographical sense. However, the old view of a fixed society before the Industrial Revolution was not entirely misleading.

The population did not float freely, and spatial, as well as social, mobility was regulated. However, the regulations were not intended to prevent migration; or if they were, they achieved but little success.

Regulations did not function as a floodgate against mobility, but rather as channels for it. Spatial mobility was possible for everybody. However, from the authorities’ point of view, it had to be justified,

204 Georg Fertig and it had legal consequences. I shall now discuss some of the most important ‘channels’ of spatial mobility, before I turn to the question of how these patterns were extended to British North America.*° As such a channel, we might consider the regulations of civil status that the legal system provided for migrants. If a person wished to leave his or her place of residence permanently, outstanding debts

had-to be paid, and several kinds of mutual obligations with the ruling powers had to be cancelled. People leaving the Gerichtsherrschaft (jurisdiction), for instance, had to pay an Abzug (leaving tax) of 10 per

cent of their taxable estate; and it was equally costly to solve one’s Leibeigenschaft (villeinage). However, it was common practice among

early modern bureaucrats to manumit those villeins who wanted to leave their home territory, so it appears that this form of personal bondage, with few exceptions, did not prevent mobility.°? In some territories, the inhabitants even had a right to emigrate, and others formed a network of mutual treaties, which granted the freedom of Abzug to their respective subjects. For immigrants, three different forms of status were possible: Birger, Hintersasse, and Aufenthalt. The

municipalities—towns and villages—were able to accept Burgers or

full citizens. These had to be able to fulfil the duties of a citizen, especially to pay their taxes and to contribute to the collective work obligations of the community. Therefore, a minimum wealth or a

useful profession was required, and it was not possible for every immigrant to become a citizen. However, the status of a Hintersasse

or denizen with limited rights and obligations was more open to migrants. In Gébrichen, this was the normal status for first-generation immigrants, especially for men who came with their wives. Finally, even without being accepted as a Burger or Hintersasse and without

severing connections with the home municipality, a person could legally sojourn (sich aufhalten) under the protection of the Landesherr

(sovereign).*? The status of a Hintersasse was probably the most 38 Compare also the discussion of channels of social mobility in early modern society in W. Schulze (ed.), Stdndische Gesellschaft.

3? The only exception I have found in the Margravate of Baden-Durlach, e.g., occurred in the context of quarrels between the village of Dietlingen and the financial

branch of local government (Generallandesarchiv Karlsruhe 171/2791). On the bureaucratic procedures linked to emigration, see Hacker, Baden und Breisgau, 43-1606.

40 These observations apply to the legal system of Baden-Durlach, which was not atypical for early modern Germany; see Land-Recht der Fiirstenthummer und Landen der Marggraffschaffien Baaden und Hachberg...(Durlach, 1710); Landes-Ordnung der Fiirstenthummer und Landen der Marggraffschaffien Baaden und Hachberg...(Durlach, 1715); Rudolf Carlebach, Badische Rechtsgeschichte i, ii (Heidelberg, 1906, 1909).

German Emigration 205 important channel for couples who migrated after their marriage. It is

clear from Swiss and German sources that the moving of entire families was a frequent form of internal migration, and that this was facilitated by the ready availability of the status of Hintersassen."|

Another form of migration was permitted to unmarried young women and men, who travelled over considerable distances looking for work as servants. The authorities tried to use servitude (Gesindedienst) as a means of controlling the labour market. Servants, other than day-labourers, had fixed contracts of six months, and were not

permitted to stop working even if they had earned sufficient pay to satisfy their needs. By such means, servitude was employed to increase the available labour force, which, if we are to judge from the social critiques of the time, was as scarce a commodity as food during

the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. By ordering parents to send into servitude those of their children whose labour they did not

need, the authorities also tried to change the relations within the family. Whereas it had been customary since the Middle Ages that children were allowed to take money from their parents for their labour, now a family economy based on wageless labour was favoured.** Apart from the moral function of servitude, the employment of servants depended strongly on the settlement patterns and the main agricultural products of the area in question. Especially in areas where cattle breeding or dispersed farming prevailed, the need for continuous labour and thus the proportion of servants was high. As Michael Mitterauer has shown, using data from Austria, such areas had a low rate of demographic reproduction, and therefore tended to import servants.*? In these areas of strong demand for 4! e.g., seventy-three out of the ninety known cases of migration between 1634 and

1750 from the Knonauer Amt to the Ziircher Oberland, both areas at a distance of c.35 km (20 miles) from each other, situated in the canton of Zurich, involved whole families. The remaining seventeen instances were young men who married outside: Pfister, Knonauer Amt, 206. In Gobrichen, a third of those couples who married and had children in the village out-migrated. *2 Landes-Ordnung (Baden-Durlach), pt. 9, title 4-5. The ‘ideology of the house’ (Sabean) is one of the most intensely discussed topics in European social history. An extensive discussion of the most important literature is to be found in D. W. Sabean, Property, Production and Family in Neckarhausen, 1700-1870, Cambridge Studies in Social Anthropology, 73 (Cambridge, 1990), 88—123. For the right of children, if older than 6, to be paid by their father for their services, see R. Sprenger, ‘Aspekte sozialen Schutzes in der Bauernfamilie des Hoch- und Spatmittelalters’, in T. Ehlert (ed.), Haushalt und Familie in Mittelalter und friiher Neuzeit (Sigmaringen, 1991), 94. 43M. Mitterauer, ‘Formen landlicher Familienwirtschaft: Historische Okotypen und familiale Arbeitsorganisation im 6sterreichischen Raum’, in Mitterauer and J.

206 Georg Fertig labour, the yearly markets were a common method for arranging employments, and some developed into proper servant markets. In the cities, servant brokers who traded in young women were also common.** Independently, systems of seasonal migrant labour developed in many regions where short-term workers were demanded

for hay or grain harvesting, sometimes over distances of several hundreds of miles.* Professional specialization created other ‘channels’ of mobility. Specialists of any kind were not very likely to find work for all their lifetime in one village or town. Also, some professional and artisan groups required people to travel from home for formal education, or forced people to leave because of guild restrictions on the number

of masters in a particular trade in a given area, leading to the well-known migrations of journeymen. But herdsmen and teachers, pastors and officials, glass-blowers and miners, merchants and small traders, jesters, musicians, and scholars, all had to move from their place of origin if they wanted to make a living.*° Ehmer (eds.), Familienstruktur und Arbeitsorganisation tn lindlichen Gesellschafien (Vienna,

1980), 217, 307-11. In Gobrichen, the proportion of servants was 7% in 1699, while in nearby Joéhlingen it was 10% in 1732 (Generallandesarchiv Karlsruhe 171/1512 and 229/49583). In Franconia, another emigration area, it was 10% in wealthy rural

areas and up to 20% in the cities: E. Schubert, Arme Leute, Bettler und Gauner im Franken des 18. Jahrhunderts, Darstellungen aus der Frankischen Geschichte, 26 (Neustadt a. d. Aisch, 1983), 114. In comparison to those areas where servants were imported, these percentages are low (Mitterauer, ‘Formen’, 194-7). 44 P. Beck, ‘Der Junggesindemarkt (das Hiitkinderwesen) in Oberschwaben—ein - Kulturbild’, Didzesanarchiv von Schwaben, 23 (1905), 133; P. Neu, ‘Die Gesindemarkte der Siideifel’, Rheinische Vierteljahrsblatter, 32 (1968), 514-15; R. Engelsing, ‘Der Arbeitsmarkt der Dienstboten im 17., 18. und 19. Jahrhundert’, in H. Kellenbenz (ed.), Wirtschafispolitik und Arbeitsmarkt: Bericht tiber die 4. Arbeitstagung der Gesellschaft fiir Sozial- und Wirtschafisgeschichte in Wien am 14. und 15. April 1971 (Munich, 1974),

170-4. * Unfortunately, the routes of these workers were not recorded exactly before 1865; they certainly did not remain stable over the centuries. See I. Weber-Kellermann, Erntebrauch in der landlichen Arbeitswelt des 19. Jahrhunderts auf Grund der Mannhardtbefragung in Deutschland von 1865, Ver6ffentlichungen des Instituts fiir mitteleuropdische Volksforschung an der Philipps-Universitat Marburg-Lahn, A2 (Marburg, 1965), 287—

308, and map 3: ‘Wege der Ernte-Wanderarbeiter’. At least the ‘North Sea System’ has existed since the 17th cent.; see J. Lucassen, Migrant Labour in Europe 1600-1900: The Drift to the North Sea (London, 1987).

*© On the Church as a channel for social and spatial mobility see W. Reinhard, ‘Kirche als Mobilitétskanal der friihneuzeitlichen Gesellschaft’, in Schulze (ed.), Standische Gesellschaft, 333-51. R. Reith, ‘Arbeitsmigration und Gruppenkultur deutscher Handwerksgesellen im 18. und friihen 19. Jahrhundert’, Scripta Mercaturae,

23 (1989), 1-35, gives more literature on journeymen. See also the volumes on premodern migration edited by Moraw (Unterwegssein) and by Jaritz and Miller

German Emigration 207 We can hardly explain all these urban and rural migrations if we see them only as symptoms of crisis because, to a large degree, they performed an indispensable function within society.*’ This also held true for the movement of the substantial part of the population, that belonged to the vagrant marginal classes, possibly as much as 8 per cent in the eighteenth century. People within this category made their living by performing a wide variety of tasks, ranging from killing rats

and cleaning chimneys to selling books and almanacs to peasants.” Official endeavours to prevent mobility struck such occasional workers

most heavily. What made their lives especially difficult was not that they frequently had to rely on alms to survive—this was true even for some members of the nobility, for many pastors, and for poor citizens—but that they were herrenlos, people without a lord, and thus

without protection. |

When account is taken of all these developments, it becomes clear that authorities in the early modern period were working towards the

creation of a closed territory, a closed set of competences, and a closed body of subjects. Such tendencies towards the creation of a more fixed society led eventually to the formation of the modern territorial state. Although the authorities within these states were far from omnipotent during this period, vagrants were frequently expelled from the territories, while efforts were made to retain subjects within their native territory. Although these efforts to control

both immigration and emigration proved to be largely futile, they could be effective in particular situations, and reached a macabre peak in the Zigeunerstreifen, the systematic hunting and killing of gypsies by officials of Hohenzollern-Bayreuth and other territories in the eighteenth century.*? The ‘channel’ of mobility offered by occasional jobs and begging was therefore one of the most dangerous options open to early modern migrants in Germany. (Feudalgesellschaft), as well as the bibliography by Matschinegg and Miller in ‘Migration— Wanderung—Mobilitat’. *” In an English context, this point has been made very clearly by P. Clark and D. Souden in their introduction to Migration and Society in Early Modern England (London,

eC Kiker Menschen auf der Strafe (Gottingen, 1983), 20-7. See also E. Schubert, ‘Mobilitét ohne Chance: Die Ausgrenzung des fahrenden Volkes’, in Schulze (ed.), Standische Gesellschaft, 113-64; F. Graus, ‘Die Randstandigen’, in Moraw (ed.), Unterwegssein, 93-104; R. Scribner, ‘Mobility: Voluntary or Enforced? Vagrants in

gg ere in the Sixteenth Century’, in Jaritz and Miiller (eds.), Feudalgesellschaft, 4s Schubert, ‘Mobilitét ohne Chance’, 136.

208 Georg Fertig A fifth type of migration was created by the Reformation and its consequences. In 1555, the Treaty of Augsburg had, for Catholics and Lutherans, established the principle of “cuius regio eius religio’; that is, the principle that the rulers of territories could dictate the religious allegiance of their subjects. Under this arrangement the right to emigrate was granted to Lutherans and Catholics, so that individuals not satisfied with the confessional loyalty of their particular state might take up residence under a ruler who professed the same religion as themselves. This satisfied the migratory needs of many Germans who were discontented for religious reasons; but the situation was further complicated by the fact that only certain

specified religions—Catholicism, Lutheranism, and after 1648 Calvinism—were granted full rights within the Empire. The establishment of territorial Churches meant, therefore, that people attached to denominations other than those which enjoyed state recognition had nowhere to settle where they might enjoy full legal rights. Both voluntary and enforced migration was especially common among such

marginalized groups, and the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries experienced some continuous religious migration as well as some large-scale, long-distance migrations triggered by confessional considerations. Pietists and Mennonites found homes in the Netherlands, the Palatinate, Hessian states, Prussia, and Russia; Huguenots were absorbed in Prussia and other Protestant countries after the revocation

of the Edict of Nantes; and Lutherans who had been driven out of Salzburg caused a sensation in the Protestant world. Church leadership of emigrant groups was not limited to cases of expulsion:

in Zurich, for instance, emigrations to Brandenburg and to North America were organized by pastors.°” Emigrants of this religious kind

were in the minds of the officials of Baden-Durlach when, in 1768, they decreed that ‘Emigranten’—along with nobles, officers, and pastors—should be given higher alms than paupers or incapacited artisans.”!

Yet another type of migration came into being because of the military ambitions of the emerging territorial states. To supply their armies, officials recruited hundreds of thousands of soldiers, many

of them from beyond the confines of their own territories. This increased the levels of mobility and mortality both among the soldiers °° Pfister, Knonauer Amt, 117-20, 144-5. >! General-Reskript, 20 Apr. 1768, in C. F. Gerstlacher, Sammlung aller BadenDurlachischen ... Verordnungen ii (Karlsruhe, 1774), 94-8.

German Emigration 209 themselves and among those civilians who fled from them, were killed by them, or contracted diseases spread by the military. Recruit-

ing soldiers sometimes involved what contemporaries described as ‘kidnapping’.°* Recruiters tended to make exaggerated promises, to use force, or to get their victims drunk, in order to enlist them.°’ The number of Swiss engaged in foreign services as soldiers was up to

50,000 persons per year in the seventeenth century, and Prussia alone brought about 26,000 foreign recruits within her boundaries around 1740. The Netherlands, too, had a large demand for soldiers and sailors, and during the American War of Independence thousands of ‘Hessian’ soldiers were recruited for service in North America by the British.°*

Finally, the populationist doctrine, that the wealth of a state depended on the number of its inhabitants, gained much acceptance among European leaders after the devastations of the Thirty Years War. Although those possessions of Austria, Prussia, Britain, and Russia that lay outside the boundaries of the Holy Roman Empire are

the best-known long-distance destinations, Denmark, Spain, and France, too, recruited Germans; and inside the Empire, Brunswick, Prussia, and the Knights of the Empire encouraged immigrants, as did the numerous newly founded cities of the absolutist age.” Officials even tried to populate those parts of their territories that seemed to be less populated than they thought appropriate, by inducing immigration from more densely populated areas of the same state. 56 2 Menschenrduber was how the bishop of Wiirzburg, Friedrich Karl von Schénborn, labelled the Prussian enlisters: Schubert, Arme Leute, 434.

°3 For the fate of a young Swiss who was abducted to Prussia, see U. Braker, Lebensgeschichte und natiirliche Ebentheuer des Armen Mannes 1m Tockenburg (Zurich,

1789; repr. Munich, 1965), 75-95. >4 M. Mattmiiller, Bevélkerungsgeschichte der Schweiz, Basler Beitrage zur Geschichts-

wissenschaft, 154 (Basel, 1927), i/1. 321; Frederick II of Prussia, ‘Histoire de mon temps’ (1775), in J. D. E. Preuss (ed.), Guvres de Frédéric le Grand ii (Berlin, 1856), 1. On the migration of German soldiers to the Netherlands and to the Dutch East Indies, see Ch. 7.

>> The most comprehensive general survey for some important areas of origin and destination is A. Scheuerbrandt, ‘Die Auswanderung aus dem heutigen BadenWiirttemberg nach PreuBen, in den habsburgischen Siidosten, nach RuBland und Nordamerika zwischen 1683 und 1811’, in Historischer Atlas von Baden-Wiirttemberg, Erlauterungen (Stuttgart, 1972-88), comments re vol. v (1985), map 12. °° A. Straub, Das badische Oberland im 18 Jahrhundert: Die Transformation einer bauerlichen Gesellschaft vor der Industrialisierung, Historische Studien, 429 (Husum, 1977); 27.

210 Georg Fertig As Bernard Bailyn has suggested, emigration to British North America should be understood within the context of such “domestic mobility patterns’.°’ Mass migration from the Rhinelands to British

North America evolved as an extension and modification of the traditional ‘channels’ of mobility. This evolution occurred in three partly parallel phases. Especially before 1683, German migration to North America was just a kind of spill-over. From a society as mobile

as that of Germany, it was quite natural that some people would find their way to America, if only through other countries that had

established contacts with British North America. In 1683, when Francis Daniel Pastorius, founder of Germantown, arrived in Penn-

sylvania, he ‘encountered some High Germans, that have lived in this country for 20 years’.°° There was much wishful thinking involved in Pastorius’s project of a ‘separate little province’ for his ‘nation’, even if this term should be understood in a corporate, not an ethnic, sense, because it included Dutch-speaking New Christians, | but excluded German-speaking Old Christians.”’ In fact, as Stephanie Wolf has shown, Germantown developed into a bilingual, multidenominational, and highly mobile village.°° Pastorius’s project must be seen in the context of the mobility of religious minorities. However, it should also be counted among transatlantic migrations of a second type, one that we might label ‘trial-and-error-migrations’: projects with ambitious, if not very realistic, intentions, organized by official institutions, private entrepreneurs, and religious groups. One such case is the spectacular emigration of 1709, when over 13,000 Palatines migrated to England, hoping to be transported to Carolina. The whole affair started in 1706, when Josuah Harrsch, a Palatine pastor, first published his description of Carolina—where, in fact, he

had never been. In 1708, Harrsch (or ‘Kocherthal’, as he called himself) migrated to England with a small group, and was sent to

20. |

New York by the British authorities. In a new edition of his book on 57 B. Bailyn, The Peopling of British North America: An Introduction (London, 1987),

°8 (F. D. Pastorius] N. N., Sichere Nachricht auf? America/wegen der Landschaffi Pennsylvania/von einem dorthin gereifften Teutschen/de dato Philadelphia, den 7. Martu 1684 (s.1., s.a.), 4. >? Thid. 6. 60'S. G. Wolf, Urban Village. Population, Community and Family Structure in Germantown, Pennsylvania, 1683-1800 (Princeton, NJ, 1976); Eadem, ‘Hyphenated America: The Creation of an Eighteenth-Century German-American Culture’, in F. Trommler and J. McVeigh (eds.), America and the Germans: An Assessment of a Three-Hundred-Year History i (Philadelphia, 1985), 66-84.

German Emigration 211 Carolina, an anonymous member of Kocherthal’s group described in highly positive terms the good treatment that they had been accorded in the German and Dutch towns through which they had passed and in England itself.°’ He acknowledged that they had frequently been given money, food, and free passage, and this is entirely plausible, because such hospitality was customarily accorded to emigrant groups who were co-religionists whenever they were accompanied by pastors.

Kocherthal’s migration was therefore a successful combination of pastors’ mobility, religious emigration, and collective alms-seeking.°

In the following year, after one of the coldest winters of the early

modern era, thousands of Palatines followed the pattern set by Kocherthal. They, too, expected to be fed by the Dutch and English, and to be transported to Carolina. Since the English authorities had not invited them, this experiment turned out badly. Only a minority

of the emigrants was sent to New York or North Carolina, nobody to | South Carolina, their original destination, or to Pennsylvania, while

some were despatched to Ireland, and a large proportion back to the Continent. As a consequence of this disappointment, German migration to the Carolinas and to New York never become a continuous stream in the eighteenth century. However, what Marianne Wokeck has described as a pattern of ‘unsustained flows’ continued over the century. By this phrase Wokeck means an initial strong lure

to settle in a particular place that subsequently ‘failed for some reason to generate direct immigration over the long term’.® Some of

these projects involved the recruitment of non-agrarian labour by entrepreneurs. This, of course, was not unusual in Europe, and was consistent, for instance, with the attempt made in 1694 by the textile

manufacturer Joseph Orelli to recruit workers from Switzerland for his newly erected crepe factory in Electoral Brandenburgian Friedrichstadt.°* In the case of North America, the recruitment of Siegerland miners for settlement in Germanna, Virginia, falls in the same category, as does the recruitment of Low German glass-blowers 6! [J. Harrsch] Kocherthal, Auffiihrlich- und umstandlicher Bericht von der beriihmten

oneal Carolina..., 4th edn. (Frankfurt, 1709; repr. Neustadt a. d. WeinstraBe, "se In 1736, Pastor Moritz Gotschi of Zurich used the same ‘channel’ of migration to North America with the help of alms: H. U. Pfister, “Ziircher Auswanderung nach

Amerika 1734/1735—Die Reisegruppe um Pfarrer Moritz Géotschi’, Zircher Taschenbuch auf das fahr 1986 (Zurich, 1985), 45-99. °3 Wokeck, ‘Harnessing the Lure’, 225. 64 Pfister, Knonauer Amt, 126.

212 Georg Fertig by Johann Christian Amelung and the ambitious attempt by Peter Hasenclever to establish ironworks in New Jersey.® Again and again,

a colony or a private investor tried to attract Swiss or Germans for settlements that had been founded upon rather questionable assumptions. Jean-Pierre Pury of Neuchatel, for instance, subscribed to the theory that under the thirty-third degree of latitude the climate must be the best in the world, because that degree is exactly between the equator and the polar circle; and on this basis he chose the site for his colony of Purysburgh in South Carolina. Although Purysburgh

oe did attract several hundred immigrants around 1734, emigration was not sustained in the long run because the site was unsuitable.® The founders of Broad Bay, Massachusetts, on the other hand, thought that German migrants had a desire to ‘know who will be their loving and helpful lord in America’.°’ However, their repeated efforts to brand the transport of emigrants to Pennsylvania as materialistic and

disorderly failed to convince large numbers of German subjects, whose need for Obrigkeit turned out to be limited. While errors of this kind did not have severe consequences, the fate of projects like that

of Cayenne between 1763 and 1764 shows that especially the first migrants to a given destination did not always balance the chances and risks of their decisions wisely. Out of more than 10,000 Acadians

and Germans who arrived at the Iles du Diable, less than 1,000 survived.°® All in all, we might see these ‘trial-and-error-migrations’

as a process of collective exploration. While until 1709, many Germans still thought of Pennsylvania and Carolina as islands, after © R. E. Myers, ‘The Story of Germanna’, Filson Club Historical Quarterly, 48 (1974), 27-42; D. M. Quynn, ‘Johann Friedrich Amelung at New Bremen’, Maryland Fistorical Magazine 42, 3 (Sept. 1948), 1-25: A. Hasenclever (ed.), Peter Hasenclever aus Remscheid-Ehringhausen, ein deutscher Kaufmann des 18. Jahrhunderts. Seine Biographie, Briefe und Denkschriften (Gotha, 1922).

66 J.-P. Pury, ‘Memorial Presented to His Grace My Lord the Duke of Newcastle upon the Present Condition of Carolina, and the Means of its Amelioration’ (18 July 1724), in T. R. Reese (ed.), The Most Delightful Country of the Universe: Promotional Literature of the Colony of Georgia 1717-1734 (Savannah, Ga., 1972), 55-65; Pfister, Knonauer Amt, 142. ©” Eine leyder wahrhaffie Traurige Geschicht und Beschreibung, Wie im ndchst abgewichenen Monat fFulit, dieses noch lauffenden 1754ten fahrs, ein grosses Schiff nach WestIndien mit 468 Personen, welche von Rotterdamm in die Neue Welt abgefahren, zwischen Pensylvanien und Philadelphia aber jammerlich untergegangen, und zerscheittert, mithin schier alle darauf befundene Seelen ein lamentables Ende genommen (s.1., 1754), not paginated. 68 R. Selig, Rautige Schafe und geizige Hirten: Studien zur Auswanderung aus dem Hochstift Wirzburg und ihren Ursachen, Mainfrankische Studien, 43 (Wiirzburg, 1986), 204.

German Emigration 213 1730 this belief is found only in a few bureaucratic documents, which suggests that Germans were learning from experience.” Although we do not know what the various European and American options looked like in the eyes of the emigrants who considered them

during the eighteenth century, Pennsylvania, ‘the best poor man’s country’, obviously proved to be more attractive than most other destinations in America. When we compare German and Penn-

sylvanian farms, the difference is indeed striking. An average landowner in Gobrichen, for instance, held about g hectares (22 acres), whereas an average farm in south-east Pennsylvania was 50 hectares (125 acres). In Germany, peasants could expect to harvest three grains of wheat for every seed they sowed, in Pennsylvania a crop yield of ten to one was normal.’° Nevertheless, badly informed German officials depicted Pennsylvania as ‘rough, stony, mountainous, cold, and barren’.’’ For immigrants who left Europe before the 1740s and had some money of their own, the chances of upward mobility were especially good.’ The advantages of conditions in

Pennsylvania over those in Germany have not been emphasized strongly in most of the German historiography on the subject, in part because these advantages were not part of the perspective German bureaucrats took on emigration. Also, the German and Swiss authorities were given to gross exaggeration of the physical dangers of the voyage, especially to Pennsylvania. Whereas in 1750 the Wiirttemberg

council of government prophesied ‘destruction to be expected’ by emigrants to Pennsylvania, the shipwreck rate was in fact only about 1.5 per cent, and passage mortality on completed voyages seems to 69 For examples of Pennsylvania being called an island by German bureaucrats, see

Staatsarchiv Marburg 80 i-ii, xxxii A Nr. 1 (Hanau, 1738) and 86 S 1975, fol. 9 (Hanau, 1754). After 1711, I have not found this terminology in any German pamphlet on North America or in any emigrant letter. 70 J. T. Lemon, The Best Poor Man’s Country: A Geographical Study of Early Southeastern

Pennsylvania (Baltimore, 1972), 152-3. Cf. R. Beck, Naturale Okonomie. Unterfinning: Bauerliche Wirtschaft in einem oberbayerischen Dorf des friihen 18. Fahrhunderts, Forschungshefte, 11 (Munich, 1986), the most thorough study of agriculture in an early modern German village.

“| As the government of Baden-Durlach put it: Generallandesarchiv Karlsruhe 74/84, 4 Nov. 1737. For another case of badly informed officials—and well-informed emigrants (from Hanau)—see H. Freeden and G. Smolka, ‘Deutsche Auswanderung im 18. Jahrhundert’, first pub. 1937, repr. in H. Herder (ed.), Hessisches Auswandererbuch, 2nd edn. (Frankfurt, 1984), 116-18.

72 M. Haberlein, ‘Vom Oberrhein zum Susquehanna: Studien zur badischen Auswanderung nach Pennsylvania im 18. Jahrhundert’ (Univ. of Augsburg, Ph.D. dissertation, 1990), 196-238. I wish to thank Dr Hiaberlein, who made his work available to me.

214 Georg Fertig have been no more than 3.8 per cent.’> The German and Swiss preference for Pennsylvania cannot be explained by the quality of the land alone. Colonial North America was generally attractive when compared to Germany. For instance, wages in North America proved to be higher than in Germany, and the demographic regime promised

far better chances of reproduction.’* Two additional factors were crucial in producing the ‘self-generating momentum’ (M. Wokeck) that made it possible for the migration to Pennsylvania, as opposed to

other North American destinations, to enter the third phase, that of mass migration. These factors were the existence of a network of informal connections between Pennsylvania and the Rhinelands and

the availability of credit.” The first of these was a consequence of the steady, if numerically small, stream of religious groups to Pennsylvania.’° This, by the 1730s, had not been sufficient to turn Pennsylvania into a country where everybody lived up to the spiritual ideals of its first New Christian inhabitants. Instead, as the Germantown printer Christopher Sower and some other pietists complained in 1738: since there were not many of [these first inhabitants], and the news spread, little by little many others arrived, of whom the majority acted against the very aim of the esteemed founder. They sought to gain much property and land and at the same time accumulated much wealth. Thus... many Germans who heard of this were enticed and persuaded and have migrated here and are still doing so every year because of ungodly purposes in order to become rich and grand.”’

For the arrival of Germans who did not share their values, Sower and

| his fellow pietists blamed the ‘newlanders’, earlier migrants to the 73, W. von Hippel, Auswanderung aus Stidwestdeutschland, Industrielle Welt, 36 (Stuttgart, 1984), 300; Grubb, ‘Morbidity and Mortality’, 570.

* A, EBer, ‘Die Lohn-Preis-Entwicklung fiir landwirtschaftliche Arbeiter in Deutschland, England und Nordamerika im 18. Jahrhundert’, in K. Tenfelde (ed.), Arbeiter und Arbeiterbewegung im Vergleich, Historische Zeitschrift, Sonderheft 15 (Munich, 1986), 101-36. Gemery, ‘European Immigration’, 298, gives a decennial natural increase of about 30% (2.6% annually) for British North America, whereas in Wiirttemberg even an annual increase of 0.7% (if allowance is made for a negative migration balance, 0.9%) has been labelled ‘remarkably high’ (von Hippel, Siidwestdeutschland, 29).

7 Wokeck, ‘Harnessing the Lure’, 219. “© A number of between 3,239 and 4,016 German-speaking radical pietists and anabaptists immigrating into the Thirteen Colonies has been estimated by Fogleman. See table 5.1 of ‘Hopeful Journeys: German Immigration and Settlement in Greater Pennsylvania, 1717-1775 (Univ. of Michigan Ph. dissertation, 1991).

” Letter from Pennsylvania printed Frankfurt, 1739, English trans. in D. F. Durnbaugh, 7he Brethren in Colonial America (Elgin, Ill., 1967), 45.

| German Emigration 215 ‘new land’ who had returned to Europe for such business matters as

| transporting letters, trading, and collecting inheritances. We should | not take the then frequent disparagements of ‘selfish’ newlanders too | seriously, because while they did not meet Sower’s standards, they | were hardly more materialistic than the average German peasant. | However, Sower had grasped the irony of Pastorius’s experiment | correctly; instead of escaping European ‘Babylon’, the German pietists : had helped their more materialistic compatriots explore the thisworldly opportunities they were offered in North America.”

Once this more pragmatic German-speaking community had evolved in the vicinity of Philadelphia, travel to and from this destination had become routine. We might characterize the composition of this third-phase large-scale migration that reached its peak between

1749 and 1754 as a movement dominated at first by families and only after 1785 by single young men. Its male participants were increasingly able to apply a signature, and peasants, as opposed to artisans, played a decreasing part.’”

The process by which this ‘prototype of a transatlantic mass migration’ (M. Wokeck) developed out of increasing routine contact and more accurate information was, in a European context, far from unique.*” It was quite usual for some migration movements that were

at first highly experimental and controlled to turn, after the first successes, into more spontaneous and self-generating streams. The depopulation, for example, of the Electoral Palatinate had induced the Elector several times between 1651 and 1663 to make an attempt to recall subjects who had emigrated to other states. At the same time, he invited foreign subjects to settle in his land, promising them freedom from taxes and soccage provided they took over farms that had been left fallow. But instead of wealthy farmers, many servants and artisans—mostly from Switzerland, but also from Tyrol and the Spanish Netherlands—flocked into the Palatinate, creating a lasting tradition of migration.®! ’8 As early as 1701, Pennsylvanian radical pietists described the worldly attitudes of some new compatriots in harsh terms: ‘A lazy dog, who has nothing left and still wants

to eat well, joins the travel and thinks in America he will measure the wine in cans. This is the riff-raff that travels to America, a righteous Christian proves himself in a different manner’: Wahrhafftiger Bericht des in derer Schwarmer und gute Tage wehler Hertzen fest-stehenden gelobten Landes Pensylvanien...(no publisher, 1701), not paginated. 79 Grubb, ‘German Immigration’. 8° Wokeck, ‘German Immigration to Colonial America: Prototype of a Transatlantic Mass Migration’, in Trommler and McVeigh (eds.), America and the Germans, i. 3-13. 8! Pfister, Knonauer Amt, 71~-7.

216 Georg Fertig Travel to Pennsylvania, however, was far more expensive than travel from Switzerland to the Palatinate. A way of financing the passage was necessary before the movement of small organized groups and the occasional spill-over of individual migrants could turn into a migration of considerable numbers. ‘Redemptioner’ migration solved the problem; that is, the transport on credit of passengers who were expected to serve a variable term with a Pennsylvanian master

who paid off their debts. About half of all German immigrants entered servitude for terms between two and five years, during which period the members of most families managed to stay together.®” From a British point of view, this was a modification of indentured

servitude; but from a German point of view, it was similar to Gesindedienst and servant markets. The consequences of this innovation for the passage market can be seen in the absolute number

of immigrants arriving in Philadelphia, which increased sharply between 1727 and 1754.®° Also, the development of transport fares shows how credit made mass transport possible. For the passengers themselves, as Farley Grubb has shown, fares from Rotterdam to Philadelphia stayed constant at about £5 or £6 over the whole period before 1770, with higher prices during wars than in times of peace.** However, as we can see from the contracts that have been preserved in Rotterdam, the prices payable by the merchants of Rotterdam to

| the shipowners underwent a sharp decline after 1730, which brought this price down to £1 or £2 per freight.®° This might be explained by the fact that the tonnage of the ships used in this traffic increased and

that they carried more passengers and were more densely packed than in the early years.°° The Rotterdam sources also support the 82 F. Grubb, ‘The Incidence of Servitude in Trans-Atlantic Migration, 1771-1804’, Explorations in Economic History, 22 (1985), 316-39; idem, “The Auction of Redemptioner Servants, Philadelphia, 1771-1804: An Economic Analysis’, Journal of Economic History, 48 (1988), 583-603. 83 Wokeck, ‘Harnessing the Lure’, fig. 7.1 (p. 207) gives estimates of the annual arrivals.

84 F. Grubb, ‘The Market Structure of Shipping German Immigrants to Colonial America’, Pennsylvania Magazine of History and Biography, 111 (1987), 46. Only after

1770 did the fares increase to approx. £15 per freight. |

85 Gemeentelijke archiefdienst Rotterdam, ONA. In the few contracts extant before 1730, both merchants and passengers had been charged £5-—8 by the shipowners. By

contrast with these earlier contracts, the numerous charter parties of the 1730s to 1750s let the freighter pay the food and accommodation of the passengers. This explains part of the price difference.

86 Wokeck, “Tide of Alien Tongues’, 173, 176; Gemeentelijke archiefdienst Rotterdam, ONA.

German Emigration 217 point made by Grubb, that there was no monopolization of the passage market. We should therefore be rather surprised if the British merchants of Rotterdam, attacked so frequently in the older literature

for being ‘selfish’, actually had any chance of cheating their poor German passengers systematically.®’ Instead, the diminished costs of transatlantic transport that the merchants enjoyed when, after 1730, they could operate on a larger scale were at least partly passed on to

the passengers. This was done not by decreasing the prices the passengers had to pay, but by accepting more and poorer passengers on credit even at the increased risk of never being paid.®® Thus, by offering to transport large numbers of redemptioners, the merchants expanded the sections of the German population that were able to migrate to North America.®” But the risk of carrying poorer Germans

and Swiss to Philadelphia only paid off as long as Pennsylvania masters bought the service of German redemptioners in large numbers. After the French and Indian War had virtually stopped immigration, this unique type of transatlantic labour brokerage did not emerge again, because the demand for labour in Philadelphia had decreased severely.””

The everyday character of German migration to Pennsylvania in this third phase can also be seen in the processes of cultural transfer

and the integration of Germans in North America. Special attention : has been given to the customs of inheritance, as English intestate law did not provide equal division among all male and female children as

south-west German practice did. Although the legal system was different in the new environment, it was possible for Germans to settle their inheritance matters according to their own sense of what was right.”! Germans preserved their own domestic customs, 87 Grubb, ‘Market Structure’. 58 Notices of captains requiring the payment of outstanding passage debts were

frequently printed in the German-language newspapers of Philadelphia; e.g., Pensylvanische Berichte, 16 Feb. 1754, 30 Apr. 1757, 25 Apr. 1760. 89 Wokeck, ‘Harnessing the Lure’, 217—19. The decreasing wealth of immigrants

from Baden-Durlach, especially during the period of mass migration from 1749 to 1754, has been verified by Haberlein, ‘Oberrhein’, 204. I observed the same phenomenon in the forty-three cases listed in the works of both Hacker and Burgert on the Palatine Kraichgau. °° For the consequences of the economic recession of the 1760s on the Philadelphia labour market see S. V. Salinger, ‘7Jo Serve Well and Faithfully’: Labor and Indentured

: Servants in Pennsylvania, 1682—1800 (Cambridge, 1987), 134-5. 71 A. G. Roeber, ‘The Origins and Transfer of German-American Concepts of Property and Inheritance’, Perspectives in American History, NS 3 (1987), 115-71.

218 Georg Fertig language, and religion, while adapting successfully to the needs of economic and legal-political interaction with their English-speaking

neighbours. Both preservation and adaptation were ensured by German-American networks of communication, operated by pastors,

merchants, and printers, with the result that on the eve of the American revolution, the German-language printer Henry Miller of Philadelphia could assume that his Pennsylvania-German readers would comprehend the new American political arguments he translated in his paper Wochentlicher Philadelphischer Staatsbote.?” While the

occasional spill-over migration of the seventeenth century and the organized trial-and-error migrations of the early eighteenth century seem to have brought German transatlantic migrants into a puzzling, possibly dangerous, and adventuresome new environment, by midcentury the mass migration to Philadelphia can best be viewed as yet another migration option available to most people who lived in the Rhinelands. III

By stating that migration was normal in preindustrial central Europe, and that transatlantic migration was neither in its numbers nor in its

structures unusual, we still have not explained why a considerable number of men and women decided to migrate to North America during the eighteenth century. Explanations of migration have their own histories, to be sure. Contemporaries who took up a State or Church perspective and shunned the idea of spatial mobility tried very early to find out what had gone wrong. They attributed the

undesirable and in their eyes irrational behaviour of individual emigrants to numerous factors, and they developed Malthusian ad hoc

theories that explained to them the destabilization of an apparently immobile world of the past. Many of these eighteenth-century ex-

planations have found their way into historiography, and I shall 92 A. G. Roeber, ‘“The Origin of Whatever is not English among Us”: The Dutch-speaking and the German-speaking Peoples of Colonial British America’, in B. Bailyn and P. D. Morgan (eds.), Strangers within the Realm: Cultural Margins of the First British Empire (Chapel Hill, NC, 1991), 220-84. See also A. G. Roeber, ‘In German Ways? Problems and Potentials of Eighteenth-Century German Social and Emigration History’, William & Mary Quarterly, 3rd ser. 44 (1987), 750-74; W. P. Adams, “The

Colonial German-language Press and the American Revolution’, in B. Bailyn and J. B. Pench (eds.), The Press and the American Revolution (Worcester, Mass., 1980), 151-228.

German Emigration 219 discuss some of them before attempting to address the question of migrant motivation from the point of view of today’s observer. Very few migrants have handed down any comments on what they hoped to achieve in North America. The intention to ‘improve one’s luck’ or to look for ‘better nourishment’ have been stereotype formulas for internal as well as external migrations.”> ‘Nourishment’, indeed,

had been the standard justification for spatial mobility in German society since the Middle Ages.’* This value performed a similar function to ‘virtue’ vis-d-vis social mobility; while German society was, in fact, not immobile in the social or spatial sense, the idea that people should remain satisfied with their station in life was a commonplace in legal and religious discourse. ‘Virtue’ could thus legitimize upward mobility, and ‘nourishment’—or the lack of it— could justify physical movement.” Religious objectives like the hope of finding a new Canaan in America, so as to be able to live without being confronted by sinful people, and thus to escape the expected destruction of European ‘Babylon’ were, as noted, crucial to Pastorius and the small religious groups that settled in Pennsylvania. However,

these groups accounted for a very small part of the emigration to British North America; nevertheless, religious justifications and exhortations such as theirs abound in promotional pamphlets, even where the settlement project in question was clearly economic in intent.”° 3 Johannes Hoffmann of Holzhausen in Nassau-Dillenburg hoped in 1709, ‘sein Glick zu verbessern’. J. Goebel (ed.), ‘Briefe [in fact applications for manumission] Deutscher Auswanderer aus dem Jahre 1709’, Deutsch-Amerikanische Geschichtsblatter, 12 (1912), p. 147. ‘Bessere Nahrung’ was the description Eberwein Richter of Herborn

gave of his objectives: Goebel (ed.), ‘Briefe’, 132. Friedrich Wei moved with his family from R6tteln to Gébrichen in 1697 ‘to get a better living and nourishment’, as recorded by the pastor: Hahner, Ortsstppenbuch Goébrichen, no. 3620. For a more extensive analysis of the contemporary discourse on causes of emigration, see ch. 9 of my dissertation.

4 See e.g. the Weistum of Helfant (1600): ‘When a poor man [i.e. subject] is not able to nourish himself here and wants to move away, he shall settle up with his lord and neighbours in all matters and move wherever he wants to’: J. Grimm, Deutsche Rechtsalterthiimer, 4th edn. (1899; repr. East Berlin, 1956), i. 137. »° On virtue see Schulze, ‘Die standische Gesellschaft des 16./17. Jahnhunderts als Problem von Statik und Dynamick’, in Schulze (ed.), Standische Gesellschaft, 1-17 (p. 14). On nourishment, see R. Blickle, ‘Nahrung und Eigentum als Kategorien in der stindischen Gesellschaft’, ibid. 73-93. © ¢.g., the apparently commercial project of Byrd and Jenner could not do without religious arguments. [Samuel Jenner], N.N., Neu-gefundenes Eden...(n.p., 1737). While promising a profit of up to 100% of the capital invested to the participants (p. 208), this remarkable publication justified the proposal with the intention to ‘choose a

220 Georg Fertig This resort to religious imperatives was necessary because emigration was a violation of State and Church norms. Not only did it require official approval in most territories, it was also prohibited - many times, albeit without much success. Such legislation can be likened to the outlawing of other widespread peasant practices such as dances, wedding feasts, or spinning in spinning-rooms, which were also considered reprehensible by moralists.

The causes of the undesirable resort to migration were discussed in many texts. Church texts on emigration, including promotional pamphlets written by pastors, regularly called for a thorough examination of the conscience of the migrants. In these texts, emigration was never justified unless it was forced upon people by persecution

or by distress that might be interpreted as a sign from Heaven.” Government authorities who interrogated migrants were reinforcing the moral strictness of the pastors. In their interrogations the officials similarly attempted to elucidate the ‘causes’ of this deviant behaviour, and quite often arrived at the conclusion that ‘the applicants do not have a justified cause to leave the country’.”® Very few interrogations of German-speaking emigrants to British North America have been handed down to us, but in those which have we witness the painstaking effort made to determine what lay behind the decision to migrate

so that it could be clearly established whether it was morally justified.” Two examples of the debates that took place between officials and would-be migrants will be sufficient to elucidate the issues. Johannes Kleinefeller, a 60-year-old wealthy peasant from Lohrhaupten in place where there are less people and therefore less malice’ (pp. 9-10). See also (Harrsch], Carolina. 97 THarrsch], Carolina, 37. °8 Goebel (ed.), ‘Briefe’, 147.

»? The following interrogations of migrants to British North America have been published: (Hanau, 1748): Herder (ed.); Freeden and Smolka, ‘Deutsche Auswanderung’, 2nd edition; Frankfurt, 1984. 116-18; (Weilburg, 1709): J. Goebel, ‘Neue Dokumente zur Geschichte der Massenauswanderung im Jahre 1709’, DeutschAmertkanische Geschichtsblatter, 13 (1913), 181-201; (Basel and Bern, 1742; Basel, 1738): A. B. Faust, ‘Documents in Swiss Archives relating to Emigration to American Colonies in the Eighteenth Century’, American Historical Review, 22 (1916-17), 99Io1, 106-8, 128; (Basel, 1738, 1742, 1749): idem, ‘Unpublished Documents on Emigration from the Archives of Switzerland’, Deutsch-Amerikanische Geschichtsblatter, —

18-19 (1918-19), 13-22. See also the interrogation of emigrants to West Prussia, Wiirttemberg 1781, in von Hippel, Stidwestdeutschland, 307-9, and the interrogations conducted by Friedrich List, Wiirttemberg 1817, in G. Moltmann (ed.), Aufbruch nach Amerika, 2nd edn. (Stuttgart, 1989).

German Emigration 221 Hessia, who had sold his goods for 1707 florins (£284.5) and discharged his debts, was asked by the official Amtmann Wannemacher

on 1 February 1751, ‘what moved him to his intended emigration, and what causes he had to give for it’. His answer, as recorded by the Amtmann, was: 1) Because the taxes he had to pay were not calculated in nominal value, but

in metal value...2) Because wood-cutting in the forests was limited. 3) Although he could not complain about the taxes on land, the rules concerning fish would limit the irrigation of their meadows, so he had losses in his meadows because he was not permitted to use them as before.

_ When further asked, “Who had induced him to emigrate?’, Kleinefeller answered that “Nobody had induced him but he had made his decision based on the causes mentioned above’.!”°

Hans Bar of Bruderalbis in the canton of Zurich revealed his circumstances to have been quite different from those of Kleinefeller when he was interrogated by the official Landvogt Scheuchzer on 27 July 1734. He declared that He was still unmarried, it would be better if he went at this time than when he was married and had children, also, their farm would not be divided into many parts, his parents were content as well and let him have his free will, he was a linen weaver and hoped to get by with the help of God, our Lord could preserve him wherever he was, he had already got a passport, and he had it in his will and mind to travel there, and behaved in a quite boorish manner.!°!

| Although neither man attempted to shift the responsibility for his decision on to any tempters, the young weaver behaved quite differently from the old peasant in his conflict with the officials. Kleinefeller, who was joined in his statement by his son-in-law and three more emigrants, accepted the official’s negative value-judgement on

emigration, but he blamed the policies of the government for his decision to emigrate. Bar, on the other hand, showed himself to be altogether more casual, and admitted of no moral scruples over his decision. In responding to Landvogt Scheuchzer, Bar first pointed to his personal economic prospects (he could not expect a considerable inheritance); he then referred to other authorities who had endorsed his decision (his parents, God, and the Zurich government, which 100 Staatsarchiv Marburg, Best. 80 Hanauer Geheimer Rat xxxii A7. '9! Staatsarchiv Ziirich B VII 19.17: Landvogtei Knonau, Gerichtsbuch June 1733July 1737, pp. 217-220. See also Pfister, Knonauer Amt, 318-109.

222 Georg Fertig had given him a passport); and finally he made mention of his ‘will’

and ‘mind’ thus implying that it was his own wilfulness that had brought him to emigrate. This latter admission explains why his interrogator concluded that he was boorish. A third way of dealing with the interrogators was used by Bar’s companion Barbeli Frei, who explained neither why she was forced to move nor why she had a right to move, but simply declared that ‘she would rather like to stay

at home’. Seven weeks after being interrogated, she got married in

London.’

More examples could be given, but they would all point to the concern of interrogators to identify which institutions or individuals | should be held responsible for the phenomenon of emigration, which was accepted as a moral evil. While not sharing the value-judgement inherent in such discourse, we should see these discussions as the product of a society that was in fact mobile, but that interpreted its

mobility as an adverse reflection of its moral condition, and as a pointer to the need for reform. The reasons given in our examples—

the decreasing value of coins, limited use of wood and water, a specific inheritance system, poverty, and an irrational ‘spirit of emieration’ being responsible for the emigration—should not be treated as objective observations that could be brought together in a laundry list of causes, but as causal constructions that need to be subjected to critical scrutiny. This also holds true for the frequent statements of

emigrants that they were ‘forced’ to emigrate by heavy taxes or poverty, and for the Malthusian explanations emerging very early in official reports on emigration. The Amtmann of Steinau argued in

this fashion in his report on the emigration from Schliichtern to Lithuania which he sent to the Hanau government on 6 August 1740: “The general causes why it looks so bad at Schliichtern that even the better sort has to suffer are due in my humble opinion to the fact that 1) the number of inhabitants is too high.’!°° This type of explanation,

which assumes emigration to be the consequence of a reduced standard of living due to overpopulation has gained wide acceptance

among many more recent observers.!°* | 102 See Pfister, Knonauer Amt, 143.

'03 Staatsarchiv Marburg, Best. 80 Hanauer Geheimer Rat XXXII Au, p. 17. For emigrants who stated that they were forced to emigrate, see Goebel (ed.), ‘Briefe’, 130 and passim.

10+ For an equivalent statement in Wiirttemberg 1781, see von Hippel, Siidwestdeutschland, 311-15. "

German Emigration 223 Our purpose in seeking an explanation for migration is clearly different from that of contemporaries, who were principally concerned

with the moral and socio-political aspects of the subject. These value-laden concerns, so vital in the eighteenth century, now seem irrelevant, and historians are concerned rather to explain why German

people of apparently similar circumstances responded in so many different ways to various challenges. More specifically, we wish to explain why the rate of migration varied from year to year and from

decade to decade, why particular areas of origin were linked to particular areas of destination, and why some individuals chose to migrate while others remained at home. The answers to these questions would seem to be most readily available in the biographical situations of individual migrants, so we shall look at the experiences

together. |

of some individuals the details of whose careers can be pieced

Mattheus Eichhorn of Goébrichen, who in 1742 decided, together with his wife, his children, and his sister, the widow Barbara Giessin,

to move to British North America, does not seem to have been interrogated as to what had provoked him to the ‘mad lecherousness

to move away’.'°? We may assume that his answers would have been part of the spectrum discussed above. But even without any knowledge of Eichhorn’s intentions or justifications, a discussion of

the factors that might have made him and so many of his contemporaries behave in this still remarkable way might be appropriate. It would, for instance, be very plausible to explain Eichhorn’s decision by pointing to his economic situation: of 26.4 hectares (65.2 acres) owned by his father, a farmer, Eichhorn inherited only 4.2 hectares (10.4 acres). Broad Bay, Maine, where he ended up, obviously offered chances of upward mobility, and he was mentioned, as a tanner, in a

Maine deed of 1753 as being in possession of 40.5 hectares (100 acres). We might also speculate about family circumstances that could have induced him to emigrate. Eichhorn was the son of a Thuringian immigrant and his maid, and it seems likely that he had had an unhappy childhood since his father was alleged to have beaten both his wives severely, and there were rumours that the first wife of Eichhorn senior, Mattheus’s stepmother, and one of her babies died

of maltreatment. Independently of this, the promotional pamphlet 105 As formulated by the Wiirttemberg government on 8 Sept. 1717: von Hippel, Stidwestdeutschland, 286. For sources on Eichhorn, see ch. 3 of my dissertation.

224 Georg Fertig printed by Samuel Waldo in nearby Speyer in 1741 may also have played a part in bringing Mattheus Eichhorn to head for America, as may the increase in grain prices during these years, the growth of the Gobrichen population since the end of the Thirty Years War, or the deplorable fact that war broke out again in 1740. Anybody ready to accept such factors as ‘causes’ of emigration will

have to deal with the fact that Mattheus’s brother Hans Jerg, who had the same background and lived in the same time and place, did not emigrate, although he had good reason to leave Gobrichen since he was a poor day-labourer who did not even manage to get his daughter married, and since the young men of the village mocked him as being a cuckold. Why did Hans Jerg not join Mattheus instead of remaining in Gobrichen, where he died in 1765? Obviously, isolated

biographies do not enable us to establish which variables were important in determining emigration decisions. What we can do, however, is make comparisons—among persons, times, and places. The models based on such more or less systematic comparisons will always be of a statistical nature because there will be exceptions. A single Hans Jerg Eichhorn will not allow for a ruling out of all the hypotheses that might be illustrated by the case of Mattheus. But his case makes it clear that migrants had choices open to them. One possible aspect of comparison is the temporal distribution of

migration to British North America. The short-term rhythms of migration to British North America depended largely on the seasons:

a departure in spring was best, because it facilitated an arrival in Philadelphia before winter. Less-informed organizers like the Swiss pastor Moritz Gotschi decided to depart in the autumn. Under the

best conditions, such an arrangement might result in a delay at Rotterdam until the next spring; in the worst case, it meant shipwreck in winter storms.'°° Newlanders were also influential in determining the rhythm of the departure of migrants. They helped small or large numbers of emigrants choose more reasonable times of the year for

travel, and this was to their own advantage, because by guiding emigrants to Rotterdam, the newlander might receive a free passage

| across the Atlantic or even a premium.!°’ Correlations between the number of passengers arriving in Philadelphia in a given year and socio-economical variables in the areas 106 Pfister, Knonauer Amt, 155. K. Wust, ‘William Byrd II and the Shipwreck of the Oliver’, Swiss American Historical Society Newsletter, 20/2 (June 1984), 3-19. 107 Pfister, Knonauer Amt, 153, 158—61.

German Emigration 225 of departure as well as arrival can also be tested with the help of time series analysis. Grain prices in Germany and an index of wholesale prices in Philadelphia have been suggested by several scholars working on later periods as important determinants of the migration flow.!” The pressure from demographic crises may also have increased the propensity to emigrate, though mortality peaks in south-west Germany varied considerably even within small areas. Use of data from nine

Wiirttemberg parishes is therefore just a stopgap measure because more demographic data from the area of emigration are simply not available at the moment.!” Lastly, a correlation between the ends of wars and increasing migration should be expected.

The most striking result of a time series analysis of the yearly arrivals of German passengers in Philadelphia between 1727 and 1776 is the very high first-order serial correlation of these data.''®

This means that if we want to predict the number of Germanspeaking immigrants into Philadelphia in a given year, our best bet is to look not at the levels of external push- and pull-factors, but at the level of the immigrant stream itself in the preceding year. Wokeck’s thesis that transatlantic migration was ‘self-generating’ can thus be

corroborated from a quantitative viewpoint. In a second step of analysis, the differences between passenger numbers of the given year and of the preceding year have been correlated with external socio-economic variables. The whole model, which is given in Table

8.2, explains 40 per cent of the yearly variance in German immigration, and is highly significant. It indicates that bad harvests or deteriorating living conditions in Europe and increasing economic activity in America may have had some rather small influence in determining the short-term ebb and flow of immigration to Philadelphia. War and peace—that is, the availability of safe travel to Pennsylvania—played a much more decisive role.

Another subject for comparative investigation is the spatial distribution of emigration areas. Some characteristics of the migrants’ homelands obviously made emigration to North America more likely.

The territories from which migrants came were traditionally Pro108 Von Hippel, Siidwestdeutschland, 148-50; Grabbe, ‘Besonderheiten’, 282. 109 The parishes are Altensteig, Assamstadt, Berneck, Bondorf, Gaildorf, Métzingen, Miinster-Unterrot, Tailfingen, and Unterjettingen. The mortality index I have used is

a simple addition of the number of burials from these parishes. I wish to thank R. Spree who has made some of these data available to me. 10 The annual arrivals in Philadelphia are from Wokeck, ‘Tide of Alien Tongues’. First-order serial correlation, r = 0.66, Durbin—Watson statistics = 0.6741.

226 Georg Fertig TABLE 8.2. Determinants of yearly changes in numbers of immigrants at Philadelphia

DF B T(B=0) Prob>|T| 8B type II semi-partial r?

Intercept 1 —67.5501 —0.384 0.7029 0.0000 War* I -—1,789.6978 —2.821 0.0072 —0.3489 0.1117

Rye prices” 1 609.5131 2.161 0.0363 0.2637 0.0655 2557 Lag 1° 1 69.0012 2.159 0.0365 0.2593 0.0054 Mort. Lag 19 1 9.3471 2.054 0.0461 0.2542 0.0592 Durbin-Watson=2.5062 — PROB(DW=o0.9608 — Model DF=4 — Error

DF=43-F=7.068 — Prob) F=0.0002 — r?=0.3967 — Adjusted r*=0.3405 Note: *‘War’: I have used a dummy coding of war and peace in America. ° Sources for the rye prices are Moritz J. Elsas, Umniff einer Geschichte der Preise und Léhne in Deutschland ii (Leiden, 1949), 467-468 (Frankfurt rye prices), and 553-555 (Speyer rye prices), and Straub, Badisches Oberland, 165-166 (Miillheim rye prices). I have used an average from these price series. “‘Z557 Lag 1’: The colonial price index of the preceding year, see United States, Bureau of the Census, Historical Statistics of the United States, Colonial Times to 1970, bicentennial edition (Washington, 1975), series Z557. “‘Mort. Lag 1’: south-west German mortality index of preceding year, see Nn. 109.

testant, thus making their inhabitants more acceptable to British authorities, and in some of the territories there were anabaptist traditions, thus facilitating contacts with the Quakers of Pennsylvania

and the merchants of Rotterdam. In most of the areas, a manorial

system existed, which meant that no landed gentry used their bondsmen as servants, as in the territories east of the river Elbe. The south-west German type of serfdom has been labelled a “bagatelle’ by some scholars, and it certainly did not prevent mobility.'’’ Moreover, most areas that gave rise to high levels of emigration to America were situated in the catchment area of the river Rhine, which was the most important route of travel to Rotterdam.

The effects of recruitment and ‘population pressure’ are much more controversial. In most of the areas whence migrants to America came, property was customarily divided equally between all daughters

7/1 (1981), 69-90. ,

'!! For a thorough discussion of this issue, see W. TroBbach, ‘“‘Siidwestdeutsche Leibeigenschaft” in der Friihen Neuzeit—eine Bagatelle?’, Geschichte und Gesellschaft,

German Emigration 227 and sons, a consequence of the relatively strong property rights of peasants in these areas, which were criticized sharply by many observers because, as it seemed to them, it enabled poor men and women to marry, although it would be better if they were prevented from doing so.''* In fact, subdivision and intensive agriculture made it possible for a denser and more rapidly growing population to live in south-west Germany than in other areas. Together with seventeenthcentury immigration from Switzerland, the natural increase resulted in a doubling of the population during the eighteenth century, so that the average farmer owned ever smaller pieces of land. This brings Wolfgang von Hippel to suggest that it was these ‘push’ factors which brought about large-scale emigration.'!’ Instead of laying emphasis

on the dynamics of pauperism and ‘overpopulation’, as does von Hippel, Hans Fenske argues that living conditions in areas of emigration were no worse than elsewhere, and that ‘countrymen with a low level of knowledge who are scarcely able to look beyond their native region do not leave their homeland spontaneously just because

the winter has been extremely hard’.''* While thus rejecting an exaggerated emphasis on agricultural crises, Fenske advances a ‘pull’

explanation which hinges on the argument that the business of emigrant recruitment did not pay in thinly populated areas, with the result that recruiters concentrated on the densely populated areas.

To some degree both the pull and the push interpretations are misleading. There are, as we saw, weighty arguments for von Hippel’s contention that economic conditions in a given area determined how many people emigrated from that area, and he has been able, for the

nineteenth century, to verify the correlation between agrarian production per head of population and emigration intensity.''? Comparable data for the eighteenth century are not available, but in the six districts of Baden-Durlach (excluding the district of Karlsruhe 112 Qn the spatial distribution of inheritance practices in Germany see H. Rohm, ‘Die Vererbung des landwirtschaftlichen Grundeigentums in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland, 1959/60’, in E. Otremba (ed.) Aflas der Deutschen Agrarlandschafi (Wiesbaden, 1962-71), 2nd instalment, 1965. There are some areas of traditional unpartitioned inheritance among the areas of emigration to British North America, e.g.

Ulm and the Odenwald. For a classical critique of real partition first published in 1842, see F. List, ‘Die Ackerverfassung, die Zwergwirtschaft und die Auswanderung’, in List, Schnifien, Reden, Briefe, eds. Edgar Salin, Artur Sommer, and Otto Stiihler, v (Berlin, 1928), 418-547.

113 Von Hippel, Siidwestdeutschland, 62-3 and passim. "I+ Fenske, ‘Germany’, 337, 339. "IS Von Hippel, Siidwestdeutschland, 204-6.

228 Georg Fertig with the newly founded capital) a remarkably strong correlation existed

between an indicator of population increase and an indicator of | emigration intensity. As all these Oberdmter were situated along the

main travel route from Switzerland to Rotterdam, differences in information or recruitment intensity are not very likely.''® Obviously

the differential distribution of population and resources had some influence on the differential distribution of emigration over space. But in stating that the “decisive cause’ of the propensity to emigrate lay in population growth and the limited possibilities of extended cultivation, von Hippel neglects the ubiquitous scarcity of goods, the ubiquitous population growth, and the ubiquitous mobility in preindustrial Germany.''’ Fenske’s ‘pull’ explanation of the spatial distribution of emigration,

on the other hand, ignores the ability of German-speaking peasants ‘to look beyond their native region’, which is evident not only from

their high mobility but also from their culture. Texts about the outside world abound in German peasants’ almanacs, and, as was observed correctly in 1806 by Johann Peter Hebel, ‘the peasant too is interested in what happens outside of his bounds’.'!® It was precisely this ability to learn about the outside world which enabled German peasants to react in a flexible and informed way to the information available to them and to emigrate more frequently from those areas

where the difference from the ‘best poor man’s country’ was most evident. These peasants did not need the sometimes dubious new116 As an indicator of emigration intensity, I have used the number of emigration cases to all destinations as listed in the register of places in Hacker, Baden und Breisgau, divided by the number of inhabitants of the districts (Oberamter) in 1786 as given in P. L. Roeder, Geographisches Statistisch-Topographisches Lexicon von Schwaben, 2nd edn. (Ulm, 1800), i, 15. As an indicator of population increase, I have used the number of inhabitants in 1786 divided by the number of households in 1701 as given in Generallandesarchiv Karlsruhe 180/272. Spearman’s p = 0.89. This correlation is significant at a 0.05 level. 117 Von Hippel, Siidwestdeutschland, 63. The concept of ‘overpopulation’ being the real cause of emigration implicitly assumes a process whereby a society that was once able to adjust the reproductive behaviour of its members to the available economical scope loses this ability and so becomes destabilized. It can be demonstrated that such a

society and, thus, such a process of destabilization, has never existed—at least in Gobrichen. For a more thorough discussion, see G. Fertig, ‘“Um Anhoffung besserer Nahrung willen”—Der lokale und motivationale Hintergrund von Auswanderung nach Britisch-Nordamerika im 18. Jahrhundert’, Beitrage zur historischen Sozialkunde, 22 (1992), 111-20, and my dissertation, ch. 6. 118 Kalender im Wandel der Zeiten: Eine Ausstellung der Badischen Landesbibliothek zur

Erinnerung an die Kalenderreform durch Papst Gregor XIII. im Jahr 1582 (Karlsruhe, 1982), 124-5.

German Emigration 229 landers to become mobile, but these visitors made emigration to North America a less adventuresome undertaking. Indeed, the unscrupulous emigration agent conning the dumb peasant in the interests of merchants and landowners is one of the most doubtful stereotypes in migration history. The biggest endeavours to recruit

emigrants to North America, including lots of printed promotional | pamphlets, were made on behalf of less successful settlement schemes

like those of South Carolina or New England, while very few such

costly advertising campaigns were required to attract settlers to Pennsylvania after 1702.''? The grade of professionalism reached by the newlanders has not yet been clarified, unless we accept all the accusations made by contemporaries against these ‘soul-sellers’ and

‘men-thieves’. ‘There is no evidence at all that the money earned or saved by the newlanders through recruitment was more than supplemental to the income earned from letter transportation, international trade, and debt collection. Neither is there evidence to sustain the allegation that their choice of destinations in Europe

depended on the opportunities for recruitment rather than the residence of their individual relatives, friends, and customers.!7° Although there were certainly some swindlers among the newlanders,

we should avoid confusing the information which penetrated the German countryside through the travels of large numbers of new-

landers with that disseminated by professional recruiters such as . the emigration agents Jacob Friedrich Curtius or Jacob Friedrich Heerbrand, who officially worked for specific merchants in Rotterdam.'*! The newlanders did not smuggle human beings in a 119 1). Falckner, Curieuse Nachricht von Pensylvania ... (Frankfurt, 1702). After this publication, almost all German literature on Pennsylvania is of a warning character.

, !20 Von Hippel depicts the newlanders in a very negative way: Siidwestdeutschland, 67-79. See also the discussions in Hiaberlein, ‘Oberrhein’, 120-6; Pfister, Knonauer Amt, 139-40, 158-63; and the interrogations reprinted in von Hippel, Sidwestdeutschland, 290-3; Faust, ‘Archives of Switzerland’, 21-8; idem, ‘Swiss Archives’, g8—114, 127-8. See also the influential description provided by Christopher Sower in Pensylvanische Berichte, 16 Oct. 1749. These sources indicate the following proportions

of the newlander business (calculated in £): trade could yield up to 100% profit per season on the capital invested (£166 in one case); migrants did not pay anything for the services of the newlander; merchants used to let them have free passage (in the value of £7, one way), and may have paid them a premium of 8s. or 1os. per freight for

recruitment in some cases. In Sower’s and Miller’s papers, the price for letter transportation (each way) is frequently given as half a crown or about 4s. Newlanders could transport dozens of letters in each direction.

'21 Gemeentelijke archiefdienst Rotterdam ONA 2279/108, 14 May 1751; Rotterdam ONA 2699/8, 8 Jan. 1752 and ONA 2699/2204, Dec. 1752; see also von Hippel, Stidwestdeutschland, 76-8, 306.

230 Georg Fertig Hambur

Cologne Wittgenstein Salzerheiden Sj ®Niederasphe Liineburg

Neustadte Heidelberg Z Zweibrucken Speyer 2. Ansbach Kusele Weisenheime ®°\. Mannheim Schweigern Naenb

: Wattweil Palaty stSinsheim \@-~Ohringen Saarbrucken attweller anda "Ate © eNeuenstein

Weissenburg Bretten° Heilbronn *Schwabisch Hall e Karlsruhe

® / **Durlach e

® / Pforzheim sor

© Hohenwettersbach e Bietigheim Korb

.? e Bischweiler Stuttgart Elingen

v Calwe &€ 9? Kirchheim % % eWeilheim

®trasbourg S togTiibingens,-° ie ~~

. ® Reutli Freudenstadt . singer Sulz & *. Balingen

Rosenfeld® © 35; ks eZillhausen ~— Frequency of

eS ; Ebingen occurrence in advertisements (type-size) (frequency)

Hanau 1

Bingen 2-4

Basel 5-9

Mainz 10a.m.

Switzerland ~ 0 90 Niederdorfe _ °Zell Bern] {Thun Albisriedenee Zurich Tm Basel

Map 8.1 Destinations of ‘newlanders’, 1746-68 Notes: Names of regions have been included on the map if they occur at least five times; ‘Palatinate’, e.g., occurred nineteen times. Sources: Advertisements in [C. Sower, Sen./Jun.], Pensylvanische Berichte, 1746-62, and [H. Miller], Wochentlicher Philadelphischer Staatsbote, 1762-8. 1 wish to thank Dr Hans-Joachim Kammer for the cartography.

German Emigration 231 manner harmful to society; nor did they usually advise migrants to move to destinations that would provide them with no real opportunity to improve themselves.

A more appropriate interpretation points to Marianne Wokeck’s

observation that a ‘self-generating momentum’ led to the mass migration to Pennsylvania, and that the endeavours of the newlanders

facilitated, rather than created, that migration. The geographical pattern of newlander travels can be seen in Map 8.1, which has been

constructed from the advertisements of newlanders published in Philadelphia newspapers, in which they offered to transport letters or to collect debts in particular places in the Rhineland. Although just a small proportion of all newlander travels can be established in this way, the map does indicate the more important areas of the German-

speaking Rhineland from which emigrants to Pennsylvania were drawn.!? This pattern, on the one hand, reflects the places of origin of the earlier migrants for whom the newlanders now transported letters or

collected debts. On the other hand, these travellers created a network of information and communication between rural south-west Germany and Pennsylvania which made migration easier after the migratory relationship between the two areas had already been established. The role of the newlanders is therefore comparable to that of the ‘poepenbode’ (German messenger) and ‘tichelbode’ (brick messenger) who fostered communication between the Netherlands and northern Germany.'*° Another of the unsolved problems in migration history relates to the factors that can be used to distinguish between migrants and nonmigrants at a given place and time.'** To date, in the case of German and Swiss migration to British North America, no difference in the economic status of migrants and their neighbours who remained at home can be demonstrated, although emigration has frequently been

attributed to poverty.'”? The age of prospective migrants seems to 122 The density of these travels was certainly much higher; only one out of 130 newlanders travelling in 1749 could be traced in the advertisements. See Sower’s article on the newlanders in Pensylvanische Berichte, 16 Oct. 1749, and the advertisement of Johannes Hinge in the same issue of his paper. 123 Lucassen, Migrant Labour, 53, 82. '24 G. Raeithel, ‘Go West’. Ein psychohistorischer Versuch iiber die Amerikaner (Frank-

es Phaberlein, ‘Oberrhein’, 74; Blocher, Ziircher Auswanderer. To my knowledge, Blocher is the first to discover that non-migrants and migrants from central Europe

232 Georg Fertig have had some influence, because a higher proportion of adult German migrants to North America than of adult rural Germans in

general was in the age-group from 21 to 30 years.'*° Unmarried males were also more than twice as likely as unmarried women to move to Pennsylvania.'*’ Recently it has been observed that those who were literate, especially in their teens and twenties, had a higher propensity to emigrate to Pennsylvania than illiterates, because the 71

per cent literacy of German immigrants to Philadelphia is much higher than the 55 per cent literacy assumed for the entire German population. !”°

A difference in personality types has also been proposed in response

to the apparent lack of differences in the situations of migrants and non-migrants.'”? However, this suggestion is not verifiable from the extant evidence; moreover, it lacks plausibility to conclude from the similar external socio-economic situations of migrants and nonmigrants that there must exist an internal psychological difference between the two groups. On the individual level, the strongest difference obviously lay in the migratory decisions of a given person’s spouse, parents, or siblings. Although this does not help us much in

searching for an external ‘true cause’ of the emigration, it corroborates the suggested self-generating dynamics of early modern large-scale migration. In my own attempt to compare emigrants and non-migrants in the village of Gébrichen around 1740 through the to British North America were approximately equal in economic status—which is surprising from the traditional viewpoint that assumes poverty to be the main cause of emigration. Blocher places much emphasis on various ‘dissociating factors’ like previous residential mobility, death of relatives, illegitimate pregnancy, etc., that seem to have made social outsiders in the Swiss village of Stadel more likely to emigrate to South Carolina between 1734 and 1744 (pp. 121-6). However, from the data given by Blocher, a rather low correlation, , of 0.26 can be calculated. 126 45.2% of the adult (i.e. 15 and older) male German immigrants 1730-54 were between 21 and 30, while only 32.2% of the adult male rural population of western

Germany seems to have been between 20 and 29 in the decade 1740-9; among women, the high proportion of 26-—30-year-olds (20.8%) is remarkable, as compared to 11.9% in Germany: Grubb, ‘German Immigration’, 427, and my own calculations based on Imhof, Life Expectancies, 447-8 (population at risk). '27 Of 4,568 German immigrants between 1727 and 1738, 18.1% were single adult males, but only 8.0% were single adult females. Married couples and their children

accounted for 38.9% and 33.1% of the immigrants, respectively: Grubb, ‘German Immigration’, 421. '28 F. Grubb, ‘Colonial Immigrant Literacy: An Economic Analysis of Pennsylvania-

| German Evidence, 1727-1775’, Explorations in Economic History, 24 (1987), 63-76. 129 Raeithel, ‘Go West’, Pfister, Knonauer Amt, 325-6. A similar approach is used by Selig, Wiirzburg, 195.

German Emigration 233 use of genealogical and tax list data, I have therefore aggregated the data on a household level.'°° I have then tested the influence of four

types of variables: first, the level of participation in the village’s godparentship networks and political institutions; second, those traits

of behaviour that have frequently been attributed to a modern mentality—namely, birth control, extra-, and premarital pregnancy; third, access to resources, especially acreage per head of surviving children; and finally the migration behaviour of the individual villagers

and their parents.'°! As dependent variables, I have used a dichotomous variable indicating the choice of British North America by any

household member and the proportion of those surviving children who did not stay in the village. The rank correlations between these two sets of variables lie in the range o—0.51. In Gobrichen agrarian property had virtually no influence on the household level.'°* This means that the poor were not condemned to emigrate. Non-agrarian 130 Sources are Hahner, Ortssippenbuch Gébrichen, the local parish registers, and Generallandesarchiv Karlsruhe 66/2909. For a more thorough discussion, see my dissertation, Ch. 8. The number of households was forty-six. For cross-validation, data

from the neighbouring village of Bauschlott have also been analysed. Sources: E. Hahner, Ortsstppenbuch Bauschlott, Badische Ortssippenbiicher, 58 (Bauschlott, 1991);

Generallandesarchiv Karlsnuhe 66/637-—41. Here the number of households was sixty-four. To exclude the possibility of errors due to the small number of observations, | tested the correlations, using Spearman’s p, Fisher’s exact test, and Wilcoxon’s Z, as

appropriate. However, the concept of significance should be used with utmost care with household data, because the observations are not independent of each other.

'31 The indicator of birth control I used was first proposed by U. Pfister, ‘Die Anfange von Geburtenbeschrinkung in Europa: Wege zu einer umfassenderen Analyse’, in P. Borscheid and H. J. Teuteberg (eds.), Ehe, Liebe, Tod. Zum Wandel der Familie, der Geschlechts- und Generationsbeziehungen in der Friihen Neuzeit, Studien zur

Geschichte des Alltags, 1 (Miinster, 1983), 213-32. '32 In Gdbrichen, acreage in 1736 had no influence (Spearman’s p = —0.21 with emigration to America, p = ~—o.10 with general out-migration). Divided by the number of surviving children, its influence on both emigration to America (p = —0.16) and general out-migration (p = —o0.26), remain insignificant. In Bauschlott, the picture is different. Though irrelevant to emigration to North America (p = —0.14 and —o.10), acreage and acreage per surviving children decreased the number of outmigrants from a given household in general (9 = —0.48 and p = —0.58, significant at a 0.01 level). In the Palatine town of Eppingen, I found a comparable pattern. The families of later migrants to Pennsylvania (Annette K. Burgert, Emigrants from Eppingen to America in the Eighteenth and Nineteenth Centuries (Myerstown, Pa., 1987)) did not own significantly less land or capital than the other households, according to the tax lists of 1701 and 1747 (Stadtarchiv Eppingen, B157-—8). The only clear pattern is that Catholics and Jews in this town of diverse religions did not emigrate, the movement

being confined to Reformed, Lutherans, and households of unstable religious adherence: K. Diefenbacher, Ortssippenbuch Eppingen, Badische Ortssippenbiicher, 52 (Lahn, 1984).

234 Georg Fertig trades, political offices, a high number of relatives living in the village, and the prestige that might be indicated by frequent godparentships do not appear to have had any influence.'*’ Of the three

households where birth control seems to have been practised, all children remained at home, and premarital pregnancy did not indicate

a mobile mentality of the family.'°* It was only when the father, though not the mother, was an immigrant into Gobrichen, that outmigration to North America and other long- or short-distance destinations became more likely.'°°

The temporal, spatial, and individual distribution of emigration to British North America will not be explained by an anthropology that

attributes a rooted character to the rural population in the early modern era. It seems that Germans did not emigrate in those years when agricultural crisis did not seem to leave them any other choice,

but did so when they had a reasonable opportunity and acceptable conditions for doing so. For people living near to the transport system

of the Rhine or those for whom the difference between their agricultural resources and those in Pennsylvania was especially high, the

likelihood of emigration increased. But it was not the poorest of the poor, the maladjusted, or the villagers with a low status who departed, but rather young, literate, and male persons from all strata of society, and possibly the children of immigrants. It was not flight from devastating circumstances that suddenly made a traditional life impossible, but rather a flexible, informed orientation towards the

achievement of Nahrung that made these people move. Not only merchants and city dwellers, but also peasants and villagers were capable of behaving in a way that is usually ascribed to the homo oeconomicus. We should dismiss the idea that men and women like

Mattheus Eichhorn, Barbeli Frei, and Johannes Kleinefeller lost, '33 5 or b < 0.21 or negative in all cases, both in Gébrichen and Bauschlott. 134 5 or & = 0.51 (America, the appropriate Fisher’s exact test is significant at a 0.01 level); p = 0.45 (all destinations, the appropriate Wilcoxon rank-sum test is significant at a 0.01 level). The data from Bauschlott may cautiously be interpreted as a corroboration of the correlation between immigration and migration to America, as here a very weak, but slightly significant, correlation, @ = 0.23 (significant at a 0.10 level) can

be observed. However, the father’s immigration had no influence on general outmigration in Bauschlott (p = 0.05), and in Eppingen, immigration had no influence on migration to America, either.

German Emigration 235 through the impact of dislocating circumstances, a natural or traditional disposition to remain fixed to their places of origin.'*°

Traditionally, the German peasant has been seen as being of a stable mentality, bound to the soil, and subject to a dynamics of population pressure. 1?” This analysis of German-speaking migration has shown this stereotype to be false, and has led us to the conclusion that large-scale migration from Germany to British North America

can be explained only by the peasants’ ability to behave in an innovative, flexible, and informed way, by their tradition of mobility, and by a self-generating dynamics.!°° 136 The concept that men are in principle rooted in one place and that migration is an exception is fundamental to most theories of migration. For an alternative paradigm see D. Kubat and H.-J. Hoffmann-Nowotny, ‘Migration: Towards a New Paradigm’,

International Social Science Fournal, 33 (1981), 307-29. . '37 This view has been very clearly stated by G. Ipsen, the most seminal anti-liberal German population theorist: Ipsen, Blut und Boden (Das preufsische Erbhofrecht), Kieler

Vortrage tiber Volkstums- und Grenzlandfragen und den nordisch-baltischen Raum (Neumiinster, 1933), 15.

'38- The author wishes to thank Nicholas Canny, Aaron Fogelman, Dieter Polloczek, A. G. Roeber, and Julius Speicher for helpful and critical comments on earlier drafts of this chapter. This chapter summarizes part of the findings of the author’s dissertation, which has been supported by a doctoral research grant from the state of Berlin and by the continuous encouragement of Willi Paul Adams.

9 Manon’s Fellow Exiles: Emigration from France to North America before 1763 PETER MOOGK

PREJUDICES AGAINST THE COLONIES

The Histoire du Chevalier des Grieux et de Manon Lescaut (1731)

inspired two operas of that name. When Abbé Antoine-Francois Prévost wrote this story of a courtesan, Manon, who was exiled to Louisiana and followed by her noble lover, he expressed a widespread French view of overseas emigration. The view was that permanent resettlement in the colonies was an option that no free person would willingly accept, no matter what adversity he or she faced at home. The story was a tragedy because des Grieux’s passion for Manon drove him into colonial exile. Since the American colonies were a place of cruel exile, it followed that individuals who settled there must have done so under compulsion. It was always assumed

that French colonials were the offspring of exiled criminals and prostitutes and other social outcasts. Jacques Cartier’s 1540 commission to draw fifty men from prison for use as colonists in Canada seemed to set a pattern, at least as far as the peoples of France were concerned. Speaking of Martinique in 1691, Robert Challes wrote: ‘the first founders were only a random sweeping of rogues and sluts, led by two bastards.’’ English speakers shared this prejudice. When

the prison-house at Quebec, in which British captives were held, caught fire in 1746, local townsfolk shouted that the prisoners in the yard ought to have been left in the building to fry, since they had undoubtedly started the fire. An American colonial among the prisoners wrote: ‘what Else could be Expected of the Canadians, when Quoted in P. Pluchon (ed.), Histoire des Antilles et de la Guyane (Toulouse, 1982), 163.

Emigration from France 237

“TSS Zo 8

HUDSON . . D

BAY

é ce ' RUPERT'S | LAND caps sre 7)

sf S pagal & CANADA He St. .

‘ Vv

Vv

Jean Awl Royale \iQuebec A= 7 Louisbourg

( csyCOTIA fe we a Ort \ ve CAN ve > ATLANTIC eu Ox Montreal Ae ACADIA

PAYS DES

New Orleans OCEAN ~/

x4

GULF OF >

MEXICO a7 BY

\ .4\*“yk .

- SS ae

NN ST. DOMINGUE Map g.1 French North America

238 Peter Moogk Hither from all parts of France they come The Spew and Vomit of their Jayls at home.”

The writer shared the French preconception about the colonials’ villainous ancestors. This preconception applied to New France, a seventeenth-century foundation, as much as to Louisiana.

The actual number of criminals transported to France’s North American colonies was small. From 1721 to 1749 some 720 minor offenders, such as poachers and sellers of untaxed salt, were exiled to New France. They were a small fraction of a migration of around 27,000 persons from France, and they arrived long after the northern colony was well established. Louisiana, the southern colony, was

really settled by Europeans in the eighteenth century. Of 7,020 persons who sailed for Louisiana from France in 1717-21, just 18.2 per cent were petty criminals.’ Among the voluntary departures, 2 Journal of a Captive, 1745-1748’, in I. M. Calder (ed.), Colonial Captivities, Marches and Fourneys (New York, 1935), 55.

3G. R. Conrad (ed.), Immigration and War: Louisiana, 1718-1721 (Lafayette, Ind., 1970), 51. There is no precise account of European migration to Louisiana. Estimates of the movement from Europe to both colonies are unavailable, because there is no

comprehensive source on migration to the French colonies. France had a royal bureaucracy which produced a flood of statistical documents, that can seduce the incautious researcher. Such records were written to satisfy official policies, and are often false. For example, the notarial archives in France contain indentures for workers hired to serve in the American colonies. There are gaps in the 17th-cent. files and, from 1720 onward, deeds were falsified to appear to meet official requirements that each outward-bound ship carry so many workers to the colonies. Some 18th-cent. documents are also fragmentary. Ships’ passenger rolls deposited

with the port admiralty of La Rochelle and Nantes in the 17th cent. survive, but embarkation lists for the other major ports usually begin in 1749, late in the history of

the French North American colonies. Muster rolls for soldiers recruited for the

colonial service by the Ministére de la Marine and the Compagnie des Indes exist for short

periods, but continuous runs are unusual. Once in the colonies, migrants were well recorded. Nominal censuses for New France began in 1666 and, because occupations were given, the indentured workers can be identified. Newcomers’ geographic origins were noted in church records when these people married or died in the colony. The passion of French Canadians for family history means that information from parish registers has been consolidated and published in genealogical dictionaries, which facilitate tracing the history of several generations of a colonial family. — While the extensive work of French-Canadian genealogists allows identification of individual settlers and their families, collective portraits of migrants have been slow to appear. When family historians lift their gaze above their sainted ancestors, it seldom goes beyond migrants from the same province of France. As a consequence, we know more about various provincial contingents than about the entire migration from France to North America.

Emigration from France 239 whether soldiers or indentured servants, there were some who could claim, like George Barrington of New South Wales, that they were ‘True patriots all; for, be it understood, We left our country for our country’s good.’

The proportion of certified rogues was greater for the southern colonies; yet here too the numbers were exaggerated. Shipments of vagabonds, deserters, gypsies, and filles publiques, such as Manon, to

Louisiana took place only in 1717-21. Far more numerous were Swiss soldiers and other German-speaking settlers brought out in the same period. The acceptance of so many Protestants may have confirmed the view of pious French Roman Catholics that their colonies were indeed the dumping ground for Europe’s human refuse, yet these German speakers were voluntary exiles. © Although there was some truth to the belief that France’s colonies were peopled by exiled criminals, that conviction overshadowed the fact that a greater number of respectable people had settled there. In the 1660s Pierre Boucher, a Canadien, was asked in France ‘if justice is provided there; if there is no debauchery since, it is said, a quantity of ne’erdowells and loose women were sent there?’* Criminals were

not dispatched to New France in the seventeenth century, yet people | assumed that they must have been sent there. The persistent assumption that social outcasts had populated France’s American possessions was one of the barriers to large-scale French colonization abroad. Overseas migration was a last, desperate option to be con-

sidered only by those who could no longer make a living in their place of birth. The myth that the French colonies were entirely populated by criminals sustained that repugnance for transatlantic emigration.

Reconstruction of the migration to the St Lawrence valley and the resultant European population has been undertaken in the last two decades by historical demographers of the Université de Montreal; but their interest is confined to that one region of New

France, and they discount immigration from sources other than France. Their reconstructed statistics are presented as indisputable fact rather than informed conjecture. There is a reluctance to accept the limits of historical knowledge imposed by incomplete sources. * P. Boucher, Histoire véritable et naturelle... de la Nouvelle France (Paris, 1664), 155.

240 Peter Moogk INTERNAL MIGRATION WITHIN FRANCE AND EMIGRATION

Because North America was but one possible destination for those already cut loose from their ancestral community, we should look at the migration patterns within France at the time of overseas colonization to identify potential recruits. Migration in preindustrial France took place on several levels. Church records of marriages and burials, in which the subject’s place of birth was identified, show how mobile the population was in the old regime. There was a constant inter-

change of people between neighbouring towns and contiguous parishes, and matrimony was a major cause of it. Choice of a marriage partner from an adjacent community might cause relocation within a

radius of a few kilometres. Marriage was also the principal cause of geographic mobility among the poor nobles of upper Brittany in 1590-1710, yet they seldom moved more than 7 kilometres.’ Studies of an eighteenth-century parish in Anjou and of villages in Ile-deFrance in 1750-1849 found that half the residents married outside their small community. The smaller the village, the greater the likelihood of exogamy. Only 10 per cent of the families, however, moved permanently away from the general locality of birth.° Short-range movement of men and women within a region seems to have been normal in rural areas, and existed apart from permanent outward migration. It did not disrupt the stability of agricultural villages. Peasants were firmly anchored to their land as long as it sustained life. People occupying infertile land occasionally worked elsewhere to

supplement their meagre returns, rather than abandon their original home. Those living in the forests of Perche helped bring in the crops of Beauce, while men from the mountainous areas of south-central France sought temporary work as harvesters in the more fertile plains of Languedoc and Aquitaine. These seasonal migrants in search of

farm work resembled the fishermen and whalers of France who worked in North American waters, sometimes for a season, sometimes for more than a year. The further the place of work from home, > M. Nassiet, ‘Une Etude de mobilité géographique a l’époque moderne: la petite noblesse de Haute-Bretagne’, Annales de démographie historique (1986), 235—49.

© F. Lebrun, ‘Mobilité de la population en Anjou au XVIlIle siécle’, Annales de démographie historique (1970), 223-6; M. Rozat, ‘Les Echanges de population entre villages voisins: le cas d’Antony et sa couronne’, Annales de démographie historique (1977), 21-48.

Emigration from France 241 the longer the absence would be; it could extend up to two years. These cyclic movements constitute the second level of migration. The migrants always intended to return home, and the money they earned helped maintain relatives who stayed behind. Despite this, departures of migrant workers could evolve into permanent relocation—a third level of migration. As population pressure built up in the mountainous south-west during the late sixteenth century, French subjects crossed the Pyrenees and settled in Spain’s Catalonia. Historical demographers have estimated that from 10 to 20 per cent

of Catalonia’s adult male population in 1570-1620 originated in France.’ There was a simultaneous movement of people from the Auvergne to Valencia, further down Spain’s Mediterranean coast.® Permanent departures by entire agricultural populations were exceptional events, precipitated by prolonged famine or war. The permanent migration of people from countryside and village into cities was not exceptional. Seepage into towns was constant; farmers’ sons were often sent to learn a trade from urban craftsmen, and country girls became domestic servants in the cities. Large towns

and cities grew as much by the absorption of migrants as by the natural increase of residents. Rural migrants replenished urban populations, which lost proportionately more people to epidemics. The provinces of Flanders and Normandy and the Massif Central contributed heavily to this continuing migration into the towns. Their populations had long ago outgrown the soil’s capacity to feed all, and

out-migration was the customary fate of the human surplus. In towns : the refugees could find work as servants or semi-skilled workers or

sustenance as beggars. The great cities of Bordeaux and Lyons were magnets for wanderers. Looking at the marriage records of Bordeaux, Jean-Pierre Poussou found that 40 per cent of the grooms and 25 per cent of the brides in 1737-91 had been born outside this

metropolis of the south-west.” The recruiting area of a city was proportionate to its size. Paris, the greatest metropolis, drew residents

from the entire kingdom and beyond. There it was proverbial that migrants from Limousin provided construction workers, and Savoy 7 J. Nadal and E. Giralt, La Population catalane de 1553 a@ 1717: l’immigration frangaise et les autres facteurs de son developpement (Paris, 1960).

8 A. Poitrineau, ‘La Immigracién francesa en el reino de Valencia (siglos XVI- XIX)’, Moneda y Credito, 137 (1976), 103-33. ” Jean-Pierre Bardet’s note on ‘L’Immigration bordelaise, 1737-1791’, Annales de

démographie historique (1979), 445-55. |

242 Peter Moogk was known as the supplier of chimney-sweeps. In the 1770s LouisSébastien Mercier observed that in Paris ‘the Savoyards are shoe-

cleaners, floor-polishers, and sawyers; those from Auvergne are almost all water-carriers; the Limousins are masons; the Lyonnais are usually porters and sedan-chair carriers; Normans are stonecutters, pavers, and thread pedlars’.'° Because cities contained so many uprooted people, and because townsfolk were more loosely attached to their birthplace than were country dwellers, cities were the best recruiting ground for overseas emigrants. One-way migration of people between states was a stage beyond

the resettlement of provincials in cities. The dispersion of skilled

French artisans and servants into Spain, the Italian states, the German principalities, and the Netherlands was noted by contemporaries, but it has not been comprehensively studied. ‘Tracing French wig-makers, gentlemen’s tailors, dancing masters, tutors, and lackeys

to their places of origin would be a formidable task. With few exceptions, French scholarly interest in international migration reflects current preoccupations, and is more concerned with foreigners moving into modern France than with individual departures from early modern France. Exceptional mass emigrations have been studied. The most infamous one was the result of religious

intolerance. In the seventeenth century, and especially after the revocation of the Edict of Nantes in 1685, from 130,000 to 250,000 French Protestants fled to adjacent England, Switzerland, RhinelandPalatinate, and the Dutch Republic. Secondary migrations carried these Huguenots to South Africa, Ireland, and British North America. Marcel Trudel observed that during the seventeenth century there were more French speakers in New York Province than in nearby New France. Louis XIV was not disposed to accept Protestants as

settlers in the French colonies, and the Huguenots, for their part, had no love for the monarch who had outlawed their faith. Thus French Calvinists played only a small role in the settlement of French America. The other exceptional migration that has received scholarly attention is the exodus of over 60,000 royalist émigrés from France in the 1790s. A few of these people appeared in Louisiana and Canada,

even though these colonies were no longer French possessions, but most remained poised in England and other European countries, awaiting restoration of the French monarchy. 10 J. Kaplow (ed.), Le Tableau de Paris (Paris, 1979), 144.

Emigration from France 243 Internal migration within France touched all social classes, although geographic mobility was affected by occupation. Peasants were least

likely to undertake long voyages or to move permanently to another region. Merchants were highly mobile. Tradesmen, especially unemployed textile and clothing workers, were numerous among the wandering population. They were searching for work, and provided

many recruits for the army. As for itinerant beggars, their lives are poorly documented. Among the gueux forains who died at La

Rochelle, there were people who had travelled more than 500 kilometres from Mons diocese and from Arles.'! The full extent of the vagrant population on the highways of France, apart from journeymen-craftsmen on their compagnonnage tour, is unknown. Beggars, gypsies, and other itinerants were feared, and they were often driven from towns during food shortages. As a consequence, we know very little of their lives and origins apart from those admitted to hospices or confined to workhouses. Some vagabonds were forcibly

dispatched to the colonies, and others probably joined the flow of overseas emigrants, even if no recruit ever acknowledged himself to be a beggar.'” To sum up, the peoples of Bourbon France were not sedentary and immobile. Geographic movement was a normal state of affairs. Countryfolk moved back and forth between neighbouring villages, and in some areas, such as the Alps and Pyrenees, there was an established pattern of seasonal migration over long distances to earn income to maintain households. Seasonal migration sometimes evolved into permanent resettlement, as it did in the relocation of people from south-western France in Spain. The one-way flow of rural folk into the kingdom’s cities was so constant that the migrants

cannot have deluded themselves for long with the expectation of going home. In the case of the American colonies, men indentured in

French ports were drawn from internal migrants seeking work in coastal cities. Strange as it may seem to us, these overseas workers retained the outlook of seasonal and temporary migrants. Most never

abandoned the hope of returning home, and only a fraction of the "' P. Moogk, ‘Reluctant Exiles: Emigrants from France in Canada before 1760’, William & Mary Quarterly, 3rd ser., 46 (1989), 463-505.

12 A summary of pre-1970 French demographic studies on migration and the remaining problems is provided by J. P. Poussou, ‘Les Mouvements migratoires en France et a partir de la France de la fin du XVe siécle au début du XIXe siécle: approches pour une synthése’, Annales de démographie historique (1970), 11-78.

244 Peter Moogk contract workers brought to French North America ever became permanent settlers. For those who arrived in the colonies to settle there for life would have required a fundamental change in outlook.

MIGRANTS AND COLONIAL RECRUITS

The connection between existing migration patterns within France and emigration to the overseas possessions is evident from the nature of the people enrolled as indentured workers or as soldiers for the colonies. Townsfolk were disproportionately represented in the net migration to seventeenth-century New France. Over half the migrants to Canada were from towns at a time when France’s urban population constituted only about 15 per cent of the king’s subjects. From a sample of 44 persons who made a permanent home in New France,

R. C. Harris observed that ‘about half of the immigrants were artisans, whereas agricultural people probably were not more than quarter, and may have been less than one fifth of the total’.’* Leslie P. Choquette, working with a larger sample of 10,538 emigrants to New France over a longer period, noted that ‘less than a quarter of the emigrants declared themselves villagers and that slightly over a third claimed to inhabit the countryside. Of the city dwellers, who

together made up nearly two thirds of the overall sample, 35.5 per cent came from towns [with] under 10,000 [residents] and the remaining 64.5 per cent from large cities.’'*

Atlantic seaports, as cities, had taken in part of the kingdom’s floating population. During Louis XIV’s reign, La Rochelle was the principal port of embarkation for the North American colonies. Onethird of the men indentured there before 1716 came from regions beyond the port or the surrounding province of Aunis and adjacent

Saintonge.'°? It was not that the recruiters had gone into the provinces, but rather that the provincials had come to the seaports. Summing up the geographic origins of the French emigrants to the St Lawrence valley in 1608-1759, Hubert Charbonneau and 13 R. C. Harris, ‘The French Background of Immigrants to Canada before 1700’, Cahiers de géographie du Québec, 16 (1972), 312-24.

'4 L. P. Choquette, ‘French Emigration to Canada in the 17th and 18th Centuries’ (Harvard Univ. Ph.D. thesis, 1988), 168. 'S G. Debien, ‘Les Engagés pour les Antilles (1634-1715), Revue d’histoire des colonies, 38 (1951), ch. 4.

Emigration from France 245 Normand Robert wrote: ‘Besides Paris, the main regions of emigration lay in the hinterlands of the major ports of embarkation: La Rochelle,

Bordeaux, Rouen, Dieppe, Saint-Malo, Granville.... Prior to 1670 Normandy ranked first, but it was later superseded by the Ile-deFrance [encompassing Paris]. Along with Poitou-Charentes, these three areas contributed two-thirds of the 17th century immigrants.’!°

With the exception of those from Ile-de-France, most came from provinces along the Atlantic coast. One coastal province, Normandy— long an exporter of people—was also a notable supplier of emigrants to North America.

Despite being inland, Paris supplied a tenth of all emigrants to ‘Canada’, as the St Lawrence valley-Great Lakes colony was called. That was because the metropolis itself was the destination of many newcomers. Its role was also inflated by the fact that most of the 850 filles du roi sent as potential brides to New France in 1663-73 were drawn from a Paris hospice for orphans.'’ Rouen’s catchment area and La Rochelle’s zone of attraction for migrants explain the numbers

of Normans and Aunisiens. The seaports of Nantes and St Malo drew the Bretons. It appears that the long-established migration to the cities was the principal source of voluntary passengers for the colonies. The only anomaly is the representation from the inland provinces of Poitou and Perche. Promixity to La Rochelle is not the entire answer. [he clue lies in recruitment methods.

RECRUITING METHODS IN GERMANY AND FRANCE

The enthusiasm of French merchants and shipowners for transport-

ing indentured workers (engagés) to the American colonies was confined to the decade 1655-65. Thereafter interest in this traffic waned. After 1698 each ship dispatched to the West Indies was required by law to carry a small quota of workers, based on its tonnage. This law was amplified and, in 1714, extended to vessels

destined for New France. Two later restatements of the law and | official reports of widespread evasion bore witness to the merchants’ 16 R. C. Harris (ed.), Historical Atlas of Canada, i: Beginning to 1800 (Toronto, 1987), 118-19; Plate 45: “The French origins of the Canadian population, 16081759’, by Hubert Charbonneau and Normand Robert. 17'S. Dumas, Les Filles du roi en Nouvelle-France: étude historique avec répertoire biographique (Quebec, 1972), 35—60.

246 Peter Moogk dislike of this obligation.'? On the other hand, the lower classes’ resistance to indentured service in the colonies was weakening; in the

seventeenth century employers had to promise recruits a prepaid

return passage to France. Eighteenth-century recruiters could dispense with that reassurance, and still find candidates. Nor was recruiting costly.

- Recruiting methods in the French seaports were simple: an oral announcement in a public place preceded by a drum roll or a trumpet

call to attract attention. An agent might address people leaving church after Mass if the priest had not included a recruiting notice among his public announcements. Seventeenth-century recruiters seem to have relied on word of mouth, although a few posters and

pamphlets were printed to describe the new lands or emigrants’ experiences. Published missionaries’ letters provided favourable accounts of the colonies, and some historians consider these printed accounts to be recruiting literature, even if the readership was limited to educated and pious gentry.!? The lower classes were semi-literate,

and written notices might have seemed useless, although more pamphlets, handbills, and posters would have combated the French colonies’ low reputation in popular lore. Tales of extreme heat and cold, of deadly sicknesses, and of hostile natives in the overseas territories had seeped back to France. The spoken word remained the principal means of publicity. At Caen, Normandy, in 1697, one enterprising recruiter went to the /dpital-général, or hospice, and asked the young men there if they wanted to go to Saint-Domingue; some did.*° At public announcements, listeners were directed to a well-known inn or tavern to be enrolled for service in the colonies.

The next stage is described in the indentures that survive in French notarial archives. Candidates were asked about their origins and skills; the annual salary offered was based on qualifications, age, and physique. No one would work for just food, shelter, and clothing. Up to the late 1650s, workers were promised a free passage back to '8 The story of the struggle between shipowners and the royal administration over the transportation of engagés is contained in Moogk, ‘Reluctant Exiles’, 491-6. '? One 17th-cent. propaganda poster has been found by J. Leber and G. Debien, ‘La Propagande et le recrutement pour les colonies d’Amérique au XVIlIe siécle’, in

Institut francais d’Haiti, Conjonction, 48 (1953), 60-90. I am indebted to Philip Boucher of the University of Alabama for this reference.

20 Report of the intendant at Caen to the Contréleur Général, 3 Dec. 1697, from Archives nationales de France, série G7, 213, quoted by Choquette, ‘French Emigration to Canada’, 421.

Emigration from France 247 France and, in the eighteenth century, men with unusual and desired

skills could still demand that assurance. The duration of French indentures seldom exceeded three years, and the contract workers became known as ‘trente-six-mois’ in the colonies. The recruit was given a cash advance to buy clothes and small necessities, and then quartered in a hostelry until the ship’s departure. Because contract workers sometimes fled with their advance, it was wise to put them

on board the vessel as soon as possible. That precaution did not prevent escapes, but it did make undetected flight more difficult. In France there was nothing like the elaborate recruiting system

developed by Rotterdam merchants—many of them English speakers—to draw German-speaking migrants from territories drained by the Rhine. From that port Germans were shipped to British North America, where their services were sold by the ship’s captain to colonial employers. In Reise nach Pennsylvanien im fahr 1750 (1756), Gottlieb Mittelberger described the ‘Newlanders’ who travelled through the German principalities as emigration promoters

and who were paid a commission by merchant-shippers for each person they delivered to Rotterdam. The recruiters were portrayed as cheats and liars, and they were called Menschendiebe (people thieves) or Seelenverkauefer (traffickers in souls). Mittelberger described in vivid terms the fate of innocent dupes who were sold into three to six

years of harsh servitude in America to repay their passage. The deceptions employed and the complaints of the Rhineland princes,

who were losing useful subjects to emigration, moved the Holy Roman Emperor to issue a decree in July 1768 against indenturing workers for foreign lands.*! Port authorities at Bremen, Hamburg, and Liibeck saw free emigrants who paid their passage as a good source of revenue, and pursued only those who secretly hired redemptioners and indentured workers. One German recruiter’s methods were well documented, because his activities were denounced by an aggrieved Hamburg notary who expected to draw up the emigrants’ indentures and was offended

when another notary got the job. The recruiter was the object of detailed investigation by several jurisdictions. We also have his version of events, because his papers ended up in two Canadian archives. His case is a superbly documented example of recruitment *1 Staatsarchiv Bremen, 2-H, IV, 9: Edict of Emperor Joseph II at Vienna, 7 July 1768.

248 Peter Moogk methods. Albrecht Ulrich Moll, who called himself “William Berczy’, was hired by Patrick Colquhoun, an associate of Sir William Pulteney

of London, who had bought the 1,100,o00-acre Genesee tract in New York State in 1791. The land speculators hoped to sell farm lots after opening up the tract with pioneer colonists. Berczy was

empowered to ‘hire... Two hundred German servants of good moral characters’ with farming experience to undertake this task.” After arrival in Hamburg, Berczy and a fellow recruiter published three pamphlets: a prospectus outlining the terms offered by the associates, a flattering account of the Genesee district, and a translation of Benjamin Franklin’s Remarks for the Information of those who wish to become Settlers in America. It was assumed that potential colonists were literate, and Berczy worried about published accounts

of events in the United States: ‘We had in the public pappers [sc] an account of a defeat of the Americans by the Indians ...I am in fear

that such news should have some influence on the minde of the People here.’ It was also assumed that the emigrants would write home about their experiences; the recruiter noted some hesitant candidates in Germany who would await ‘with great impatience the

effect and the news of the first transport,...which will certainly come next Year’.”4 Berczy employed recruiting agents to supplement his own efforts in

spreading the word, and he had two ships provisioned and ready to carry his recruits to Philadelphia and New York City. He intended to enrol thousands of recruits over the years, and might have succeeded had he not been denounced to the Hamburg Senate and to the royal courts of Denmark and Prussia. Under external pressure, Hamburg’s

administration passed a law in May 1792 against the further recruiting of craftsmen and countryfolk for far-away lands, such as New York State.*° 22 Rochester Historical Society, Publication Series, 2 (1942), 253-60. 23 Archives de l'Université de Montréal, Collection Baby, Papiers Berczy (hereafter AUM, CB, PB), boite 11441, registre 76a, 37: Berczy at Bremen to Patrick Colquhoun, 9 Feb. 1792. 24 AUM, CB, PB, boite 11441, registre 76a, 9: Berczy at Hamburg to Colquhoun

in London, 4 Jan. 1792. *° The story of Berczy’s recruiting activities has been reconstructed by H. Dippel,

‘German Emigration to the Genesee Country in 1792: An Episode in GermanAmerican Migration’, in H. L. Trefousse (ed.), Germany and America: Essays on Problems of International Relations and Immigration (New York, 1980), 161-9, and by B.

Stock, ‘William Berczy als “Seelenverkauefer”’, in K. R. Guerttler and E. Mornin, (eds.), German-Canadian Studies: Interrelations & Interactions, Annals, 6 (1987), 109-27.

Emigration from France 249 This episode at Hamburg in 1792 shows the various means used

to promote emigration: informative pamphlets addressed to the population, private correspondence to generate a chain migration, and subagents who spread the net for potential recruits inland. Some volunteers were gathered from outside the city, although a company agent in the United States complained that the recruits came from the ‘crouds of foreigners, whom poverty, idleness, and necessities of every kind, induce to resort to that mercantile city, with a view to emigration’.“° Merchant-suppliers and ship-brokers, who profited

from the traffic in emigrants, were willing partners in Berczy’s venture. The fact that both his emigrant ships were able to leave Hamburg—one after the May 1792 interdict—suggests that the port authorities had no desire to enforce the imperial decree of 1768. Although he was a newcomer to immigrant recruiting, Berczy had the advantage of operating in German-speaking states, which had a tradition of permanent emigration to distant lands. Berczy claimed

that he had acquired some knowledge of colonization in pioneer German settlements in Croatia. Eastern Europe had been a field for German resettlement, and emigration to the New World diverted only a part of that pre-existing outflow westward. He was also operat-

ing in a port where recruitment mechanisms already existed; he did not have to invent them. Long-distance emigration was going on

continuously; local merchants and notaries knew the customary - procedures—even ways of evading the laws, such as the enrolment of indentured servants as nominally free passengers. Berczy had longterm plans and, with backing from the Pulteney associates, he might well have created a flood of German emigration to New York State had he not angered one notary.

Early seventeenth-century recruiters in France operated with no set pattern and on a smaller scale. Diversity in approach matched the

variety of recruiters. Colonial landowners or their agents sought , specialists, and hired individual workers throughout France. Less

selective were the merchant shipowners and ship captains who intended to sell their workers’ contracts in the colonies; brawn rather than skill was what they sought. They usually did all their recruiting in the seaports. Finally, there were the agents of colonial monopoly companies, whose tastes encompassed both the skilled and the un26 Charles Williamson’s account, as reported by the Duke de La RochefoucauldLiancourt, Travels through the United States of North America...in 1795, 1796, and 1797, 2nd edn. (3 vols., London, 1800), i. 237.

250 Peter Moogk | : skilled. Because young bachelors were mobile, and because largescale recruiters preferred single men, the migration to French North America was overwhelmingly male. Only 12.3 per cent of the people arriving from France in Canada during the seventeenth century were female,”’ and only 18.6 per cent of the adults dispatched to Louisiana in 1717-21 were women.”® Fewer than 200 were the notorious filles publiques.

Individual colonial landowners were more selective; they also went

inland from the French seaports to find labourers. In the early seventeenth century, gentleman-seigneurs seeking colonists for their estates in Canada went to their home communities in Perche, where they were known, enlisted a few score people, and were then gone for ever. The Montreal associates sought recruits in Anjou, especially at La Fléche, the home of one of the associate-recruiters, in 1653 and

1659, and then disappeared from France. In the early 1700s the Louisiana grantees also sought people from their home neighbourhood, while agents of the Compagnie d’Occident (later des Indes) signed

up workers in the ports.2? Merchants operating in seaports came closest to establishing a pattern for raising emigrants. In the 1650s and 1660s they hired large numbers of able-bodied, single men whose contracts were to be sold in the colonies. When the French crown subsidized the transportation of several thousand engagés to

New France in 1662-71, it first entrusted recruitment to royal officials, and then resorted to the merchant shipowners, since they had greater experience in hiring and transporting servants to the American possessions. A weakness of this approach was its lack of continuity; a recruiter would appear unexpectedly, and take those who were available. A prospective emigrant who could not pay for the

transatlantic passage—the cost was beyond the means of most workers—could never be certain of being hired that year. In the 1650s the Compagnie de la terre ferme de Amérique enticed

settlers to Cayenne (Guyana) with pamphlets, in the manner of English emigration promoters.°° This precedent was followed for a 27 H. Charbonneau et al., Naissance d’une population: les francais établis au Canada au XVIle siécle (Paris, 1987), 15. 28 Conrad (ed.), Immigration and War, 51. 29 G. Giraud, Histoire de la Louisiane francaise: l’époque de John Law (Paris, 1966),

“30 P. P. Boucher, ‘A Colonial Company at the Time of the Fronde: The Compagnie de la terre ferme de I’Amérique ou France equinoxiale’, Terrae Incognitae: Annals of the Society for the History of Discoveries, 11 (1979), 43-58. The more numerous pamphlets

Emigration from France 251 brief period by John Law’s Compagnie de la Louisiane ou d’Occident

(1717-20). In 1708 Louisiana was populated by 279 persons, including 122 soldiers and eighty Amerindian slaves. The population was falling when, in 1712, the colony’s resources were granted to a

monopoly company under Antoine Crozat, and then, in 1717, to Law’s enterprise. 1,280 petty criminals and 160 filles de joie were transported to the colony, but the Compagnie d’Occident/des Indes did

not intend to rely on forced emigration from France. In reports and ‘letters’ published in the Nouveau Mercure, the swampy abode of

snakes and catfish was recast as an earthly paradise and an E1 Dorado. The natives were said to be friendly, the soil capable of bearing two crops a year; trade prospects were unlimited, and silver deposits awaited exploitation. The company had German translations of these reports published, although foreign gazettes were reprinting the propaganda voluntarily.*! The result was that 80 per cent of the 7,020 people who sailed to Louisiana in the next four years did so freely. As many engagés (2,462) were in this flood as were dispatched

to New France in the entire seventeenth century. Unfortunately, Louisiana was not as advertised, and about 2,000 emigrants died or deserted. After the collapse of Law’s paper empire, he and the colony were savagely ridiculed. One Dutch satirical engraving described Louisiana as ‘Mississippi or the renowned Land of Gold through the imagination of the Wind-Trade’. The total number of indentured workers, or engagés, hired for service in France’s American colonies was small, especially when compared with overland migrations out of the kingdom. The two principal French ports of embarkation for the Americas were La Rochelle and Bordeaux. In 1634-1715, when the Rochelais dominated the colonial trade, 6,100 engagés were signed up before local

notaries. The number recruited in 1715-72 fell to 1,200.°* La Rochelle had been eclipsed by Bordeaux, where 8,500 workers were

indentured for the colonies in 1698—1774.°° Fewer than a tenth

1968), 400-10. ,

and tracts written by Englishmen in the 17th cent. to promote colonial settlement are discussed by C. Bridenbaugh, Vexed and Troubled Englishmen 15g0—1642 (New York,

31M. Allain, ‘L’ Immigration francaise en Louisiane, 1718-1721’, Revue d'histoire de l’Amérique francaise, 28/4 (1975), 555-64; M. Giraud, Histoire de la Louisiane francaise,

3 Debien, ‘Les Engagés pour les Antilles’, introduction, 7—13. 33 C. H. de Lemps, ‘Indentured Servants Bound for the French Antilles in the Seventeenth and Eighteenth Centuries’, in I. Altman and J. Horn (eds.), ‘To Make

252 Peter Moogk of these recruits were destined for New France and Louisiana; most went to the French West Indies. Other ports, such as Dieppe, Granville, St Malo, and Bayonnne, participated in colonial trade as junior partners. Gabriel Debien inventoried 6,000 indentures from

Nantes made in 1632-1732 and found only eighteen for New France.** There are some losses to notarial files of the early seventeenth century, but these are offset by the falsification of deeds after

1720 to outwardly satisfy the legal requirement for transporting engagés on vessels. If the notarial records of all French ports serving the Americas could be found, it is unlikely that the total number of

engages’ indentures would exceed 37,000, which is about half the number of German emigrants arriving in Philadelphia in the eighteenth century before the American Revolution. Most of the German newcomers had travelled to North America to stay.

THE EMIGRANTS’ FLIGHT BACK TO FRANCE

What German recruiters, such as Berczy, realized was that family migration was essential to the success of permanent colonization. The preponderance of married couples and families showed good judgement. Men with wives or other relatives in the new land were

more likely to remain there. From Hamburg he reported to the Genesee Company associates: “Till now I have very few Wommen! but some of my Young men are now Search[ing] for Wifes.’*? The search must have been successful, because the 132 persons aboard the first vessel dispatched to Philadelphia included three new brides and only twenty-eight single persons.°° When seeking an explanation of why 327 out of 532 emigrants from La Rochelle stayed in New France, Jacques Mathieu and Lina Gouger found that 53 per cent of the permanent settlers had come with relatives or had joined relatives America’: European Emigration in the Early Modern Period (Berkeley, Calif., 1991), 172-203. The same volume contains a detailed study by L. Choquette on recruiters for New France at La Rochelle. 34 G. Debien, ‘Les Engagés pour le Canada partis de Nantes (1725-—1732)’, Revue a’histoire de l’Amérique francaise, 33 (1980), 583-6.

35 AUM, CB, PB, boite 11441, registre 76a, 3: Berczy to Patrick Colquhoun in London, 3 Dec. 1791. 3° R. B. Strassburger, Pennsylvania German Pioneers (3 vols., Norristown, Pa., 1934), IN. 50-1.

Emigration from France 253 already in the colony.°’ Agents for Law’s company made an effort to

attract families to Louisiana; but French recruiters were rarely so diligent.

The importance of marriage and kinship in rooting emigrants in a colony was learned the hard way by the Montreal associates, whose bachelor recruits left the colony once their service was done. The lesson was applied in 1659 when the associates recruited 109 people in France. The contingent included families and single women. The families were subject to a redemption bond, and since the recruiters were from Champagne, close to Rhineland-Palatinate, they may have been inspired by a German example. This was an aberration; only about 250 families emigrated to Canada in the entire French regime—

most before 1663. Colonial recruiters and French merchantspeculators preferred to hire single men under a fixed-term service contract. Such indentures were easier to sell in the American colonies.

The French crown subsidized the transportation of indentured workers to New France under the delusion that it was sending future settlers to the colony. ‘These men saw themselves as migrant workers whose absence from home was temporary, and most attempted to return to France. Louis XIV and his administrators were dismayed by the colony’s modest population growth, and instructed officials in Canada to hinder former engagés who wished to return to France; but two out of every three still managed to slip past the administrative barriers.*°

The consequence of the pervasive migrant worker outlook is apparent in the low figures for the white population of the French American colonies in the mid-eighteenth century: 4,100 in Louisiana in 1746, 55,010 in New France in 1754, 12,860 in Saint-Domingue

in 1754, 12,450 in Martinique in 1767, and 1,000 in Cayenne in 1769. In Louisiana there was a slightly larger number of blacks (4,730), and in the Caribbean colonies the African population outnumbered the Europeans by a very large margin. Even allowing for the high mortality of whites in the tropical climate, it is apparent that most indentured workers deserted the colonies once their term of service had expired.

The flight of indentured servants back to France shows the per37 J. Mathieu and L. Gouger, ‘Transferts de population’, Annales de Bretagne et des pays de l’ouest, go/4 (1988), 337-45. 38 Moogk, ‘Reluctant Exiles’, 481-4.

254 Peter Moogk sistence of a migrant labour tradition; it also reflected the difficulties of colonial life. Canadian winters had a fearsome reputation. Baron de Lahontan averred that one needed glass eyes, a body of brass, and

brandy for blood to survive in the icy colony. In the seventeenth century, hostile Iroquois Amerindians terrified the white population. Unwary cultivators were killed or captured by surprise forays from

the surrounding forest. “This is how these barbarians make war’; wrote one nun, ‘they attack, then retire into the woods where the French cannot go.’ Male captives faced prolonged torture by fire and knife, ending with ritual cannibalism after death. Accounts of Iroquoian warfare and the fate of captives were published in France, and may have reached the unlettered through martyr sermons describing the meritorious agonies of captured Jesuit missionaries in Canada.” The Iroquois threat ended in 1701. At the same time, the sexes in New France’s European population achieved numerical parity. The earlier preponderance of males made it difficult to find wives, and contributed to the outflow of emigrants

back to France. On Saint-Domingue there were more than two European males for each white woman in the 1750s. Former French engages who survived the sultry and sickly climate of the West Indies,

moreover, had few chances of advancement in white society. An oligarchy of large planters, wealthy merchants, and high officials dominated the islands. There was no prospect of becoming a selfsufficient and independent farmer, as in Canada. At most, poor whites, or petits blancs, could aspire to be plantation overseers, shop-

keepers, or artisans. In the last two occupations, they faced competition from mulattos and free blacks. The remaining petits blancs responded with racial discrimination; laws were passed to segregate and hamper the gens de couleur.

The market for white indentured workers in French America, especially where African slaves provided the labouring force, was small in the eighteenth century. Hiring engagés in France for sale to colonists no longer made economic sense. Bordeaux merchants complained about the legal obligation to carry workers to the colonies,

and in 1723 the port’s chamber of commerce repeated its argument that ‘the engagés are no longer useful in any way whatsoever; the country [in the Americas] is sufficiently populated and we can no 39 J. Marshall (trans.), Word from New France: The Selected Letters of Marie de l’Incarnation (Toronto, 1967), 263.

, 40 I am indebted to Dr Winstanley Briggs for this suggestion.

Emigration from France 255 longer find employment for them and so they become pirates and vagabonds in the islands’.*' The French crown wanted to increase the white population, however, so that there would be sufficient militiamen to deal with slave insurrections and foreign invasion. Louisiana too had a plantation economy and relied on slave labour,

and this reduced the market for indentured European workers as well as the employment prospects of former engagés. None the less, German settlers introduced in 1717 and augmented in later years,

as well as Acadian exiles brought into the colony in 1765-9 by the Spanish administration, established themselves as independent farmers. Socially, Louisiana was half-way between New France, an

agrarian colony of smallholders, and the slave-worked plantation -economy of the West Indies. Modern experience leads us to expect independent, self-financed

emigrants to be dominant; but among French emigrants they were rare birds, and birds of passage at that. Embarkation lists for passengers departing from some French ports exist, and they seem to offer a comprehensive picture of the people going to the American colonies. But the lists, alas, usually date from the second half of the eighteenth century; nor are they exhaustive, and, in my experience, they also contain false entries for engagés who never arrived in the colonies. Jean-Pierre Poussou used the lists for Bordeaux, however, and estimated that about 35,000 passengers embarked in 1715-72. Deducting travellers who went back and forth and returning colonials,

he reached a figure of 26,000 or 27,000 actual departures to the colonies.*” In addition to indentured workers and soldiers, the largest group, there were commercial agents, junior officials, and colonists’

relations going out to make their fortune in the West Indies. Only Bayonne and St Malo sent more people to North America than to the

West Indies (ggo versus sixty in 1749-59), and most of these were employed in the cod fishery. The surviving passenger lists indicate that more than 100,000 people sailed across the Atlantic Ocean to French America; but they were usually transients, not prospective settlers.

"Rich as a Creole’ was a byword for splendour in France, and wealth’s allure drew Europeans to the Antilles. The intention of independent voyagers was always to return to France, their fortune *! Departmental Archives, Gironde, C, 4269, quoted by Huetz de Lemps, ‘Indentured Servants’, 189. 42 Poussou, ‘Les Mouvements migratoires’, 54.

256 Peter Moogk made, and to establish themselves as persons of property and distinction. They were not intending colonists; only a minority sank roots into Creole society. The principal source of white settlers for the American colonies in the eighteenth century was not this tidal movement of fortune-seekers, but humble soldiers recruited by the Muinistére de la Marine or the Compagnie des Indes.

SOLDIER-COLONISTS

The armies of France were both rivals and a complement to the recruiters of free emigrants. Military recruiters enlisted the very people who might have become engagés for the colonies. From a peacetime strength of 20,000 in the 1660s, the standing army of France increased to 300,000 by 1710. When Intendant Jean Talon at Quebec received only a fraction of the indentured workers promised for 1667, he was inclined to blame army recruiters for the deficiency. The parallel between military enlistments and engagements for the

Americas does not stop here. André Corvisier noted the role of the army in increasing geographic mobility. Military service entailed travel outside one’s province; it also attracted people who had already

moved from their place of birth and a disproportionate number of townsfolk.** Inevitably, some soldiers were sent to the colonies. Corvisier’s study of men enrolled by the Compagnie des Indes for

colonial service is of great interest to us. Of 1,005 enrolled in 1755—6, he found that 43.2 per cent were countryfolk, whereas 56.8 per cent came from towns or cities. About a quarter of the rural men belonged to families that had left their place of origin, and nearly a fifth of the townsmen were similarly uprooted. Corvisier observed a history of greater mobility among recruits for colonial garrisons than

among the king’s regular troops. The most mobile members were also the ones most likely to marry in a colonial posting and to settle there. They were still a small minority: 4.6 per cent of all recruits; the

great majority, like the royal troops, returned to their home region after receiving their discharge.** They were emigrants, it is true, but they had the same mentality as seasonal or temporary migrants. 43 A. Corvisier, ‘Service militaire et mobilité géographique au XVIIle siécle’, Annales de démographie historique (1970), 185-204. 4 A. Corvisier, Les Troupes de la Compagnie des Indes (Paris, 1968).

Emigration from France 257 The French crown drew colonial settlers from the troops it sent out from France. In 1667-8 men of the Carignan-Saliéres Regiment were offered a bounty and a discharge to settle in New France. A third of them, 450, accepted the offer. A royal ordinance of May 1698 provided additional incentives to soldier-settlers who married a colonial woman: clothing, a year’s pay, and land in Canada. In the

seventeenth century, more than 1,000 colonists were discharged soldiers. From 1683 onward, the Compagnies franches de la Marine, raised by the Ministry of the Navy for colonial service, were stationed in the Americas. In the early eighteenth century there were twentyeight companies, comprising 2,000 soldiers, scattered throughout the length of New France. Thirteen companies were posted to Louisiana, and they probably contributed a similar proportion to the established

white population. When the traffic in contract workers faltered in the eighteenth century, these soldiers remained a reliable source of European colonists. Some 2,000 settled in New France. Six battalions of French regular troops dispatched to the colony during the Seven Years War also left a genetic legacy, licit and otherwise. Using two well-documented battalions as a base, Yves Landry found that 15

per cent of the men married and settled in Canada after the withdrawal of their regiments in October 1760. Projected for all the

regular battalions, this suggests that at least 700 more soldiercolonists, in addition to veterans of the 7roupes de la Marine, remained in the colony.*°

Although only a quarter of all soldiers established themselves in

New France, as opposed to a third of indentured workers, their greater numbers meant a more substantial contribution, of 3,300 colonists by comparison with 1,200 former engagés who became Canadiens. Because living conditions in New France were closer to

those in Europe and it was easier to find a marriage partner, the proportion of soldiers who stayed was probably higher than it was in the southern colonies. The soldiers’ contribution to the white population of Louisiana or the West Indies is yet to be studied. The troops, unlike civilian newcomers, were drawn from a wider geographic range, and represented the inland provinces of France as well as the Atlantic seaboard and Paris region. * Y. Landry, ‘La Population militaire au Canada pendant la Guerre de Sept Ans’, Annales de démographie historique (1978), 337-51; idem, ‘Mortalité, nuptialité et canadienisation des troupes francaises de la Guerre de Sept Ans’, Histoire sociale/Social History, 12 (1979), 298-315.

258 Peter Moogk , CONCLUSION Reconstructing the story of French migration to North America is like assembling a jig-saw puzzle with only half the pieces. The result is full of gaps and necessarily impressionistic. France, with its population of more than 20,000,000, had the people to establish overseas

colonies. Internal migration within France had created a pool of prospective recruits for the colonies, and the armed forces drew heavily from that pool. The loss of potential candidates for indentured

labour does not explain the gradual decline of colonial service contracts in the eighteenth century. That decline was greater in trade

with New France than in West Indian commerce. Whereas professional recruiters played a crucial role in creating and maintaining a

flow of civilian workers to the British American colonies, private recruiting in France for colonial employers remained episodic and unpredictable. The crown intervened briefly to encourage emigration to Canada and, in 1748—56, to Louisiana. With the exception of John Law’s Mississippi enterprise, emigration propaganda was primitive and ineffectual in France. Its greatest success was in Alsace, which belonged culturally to the German-speaking Rhineland, an area with a tradition of permanent emigration.

Speculative indenturing would have died out entirely had it not been sustained by legislation from 1699 onward. Even then, shipowners and maritime outfitters evaded the laws. They pleaded that it was difficult to find recruits, but their reluctance in the 1720s to accept minor offenders from the king’s prisons in place of engagés

showed their true sentiments. French merchants considered the traffic in indentured workers a bother with small financial returns. They did not imitate the merchants operating in Rotterdam, and offer poor French families redemption contracts in return for their passage. Their eyes were fixed on the greater profits in transporting West African slaves to the Caribbean islands. In their defence, it might be said that the market for white workers in French America, especially for unskilled labourers, had collapsed since the seventeenth century. The flow of migrants within France was never continuously diverted

to the colonies. The popular view of the North American colonies as a wretched retreat for social outcasts did not disappear. Little information—much less accurate information—on the overseas possessions reached the French labouring classes. One worker heard

Emigration from France 259 about Canada from a minor colonial official who was visiting Paris, while another man consulted sailors for a description of Louisiana and New France.*° Engagés, whose reluctance to emigrate was overcome, still saw themselves as temporary exiles from their province of birth. Since upland people had a tradition of seasonal work migration, one might wonder why workers from the coastal plain of France’s

Atlantic coast also behaved like migrant workers. Here one must underline the fact that the French system of indentured labour and the engagés belonged to a tradition that was distinct from indentured servitude in the British colonies. Gabriel Debien’s suggestion, made in 1952, that French colonial work indentures originated with the cod fishery’s wintering contracts offers an explanation.*’ The terms of French indentures, an average of three years’ service with a salary

and, in the earlier accords, promise of a return passage, are very different from English contracts, which were a form of assisted emigration. Surviving private letters show that relatives in France also regarded permanent resettlement abroad as unnatural, and even as a

repudiation of family obligations to those at home. To an engagébecome-settler in Montreal, one father in France wrote: ‘I find it very strange to have a child whom [| have cherished more than myself and

who has no desire at all for me. I believed that I would have the happiness of seeing him [again] within four or five years of his departure.’ The father appealed to the recipient’s sense of filial duty, and laid a number of material inducements before him, to urge him to come home from Canada.*®

By default, colonial garrison troops became a major source of settlers, yet soldiers who had not married in the colony were inclined to return to France. As a consequence, the French colonies of New

France and Louisiana were territorial giants with small, scattered European populations. The paucity of settlers made them militarily vulnerable and economically weak. From a metropolitan perspective, they were a liability. This explains the French government’s willing-

ness to transfer Louisiana to Spain in 1762 and to surrender New 4© Archives nationales du Québec, Collection de piéces judiciaires et notariales, 62e liasse, no. 3289: Petition of Etienne Courtin in 1698. S. K. Stevens et al. (eds.), Travels in New France by 7.C.B. (Harrisburg, Pa., 1941), 1-2. 47 G. Debien, ‘Les Engagés pour le Canada au XVIle siécle, vus de La Rochelle’, Revue d’histoire de l’'Amérique francaise, 6/2 (Sept. 1952), 196.

48 R. J. Auger, La Grande Recrue de 1653 (Montreal, 1955), 103-4. See also Moogk, ‘Reluctant Exiles’, 484-7, for more examples of reproachful and plaintive letters addressed to emigrants in the French colonies.

260 Peter Moogk France to Britain in 1763, at the end of the Seven Years War. To sum up the history of emigration from France to French North America, few of Manon Lescaut’s countrymen were called to the colonies, and fewer still chose to remain.

Conclusion

IO

In Search of a Better Home? European Overseas Migration, 1500-1500 NICHOLAS CANNY

One of the more piquant entries in the records of the General Court of Colonial Virginia is that concerning the case of Thomas Hall who

claimed to be both man and woman. The issue came to court because Hall had taken to wearing women’s clothing when in search

of sexual adventure, and because he had denied the findings of a series of self-appointed physical inspectors who had pronounced that he was ‘a perfect man’. The court ordered a further examination of his privates, and satisfied itself that Hall had the physical attributes

of a man. However, in the face of Hall’s insistence that he also possessed female sexual organs and did not have ‘the use of the man’s part’, it was decreed by the court that Hall was both man and woman, and that he should thereafter go dressed in man’s apparel, ‘only his head to be attired in a coyfe and croscloth with an apron before him’. This case, which may warrant the attention of historians of sexuality, is of relevance to our present purpose because the details provided by Hall of his career, prior to the court hearing of 1629, gives us an insight into the extent to which regular geographic movement in search of employment was the dominating feature of the lives of those who became servants in seventeenth-century Virginia.

In his testimony Hall stated that he had been born in Newcastle upon Tyne, had been christened Thomasine, and had been dressed in ‘women’s apparell’ until the age of twelve. Then he was sent to London, where he lived with an aunt until “Cales accon’, by which we can take him to have meant one of the three expeditions to La Rochelle mounted by the English between 1625 and 1627. On that occasion Hall’s brother was conscripted into the navy, and our hero or heroine, wishing to join the fray, cut his hair, assumed men’s

264 Nicholas Canny clothing, ‘and went over as a soldier in the Isle of Ree being in the habit of a man’. On his return from the front, Hall disembarked at Plymouth, where he again dressed himself in woman’s attire, took up a woman’s employment, ‘and made bone lace and did other work with his needle’. ‘Shortly after’ he perceived new opportunity in a ship which was bound from Plymouth to Virginia, so he changed ‘into the habit of a man’, and enlisted as a servant for the colony. There he

appears to have changed his employer as frequently as he did his attire, until the court order of 1629 required that he remain attached to one place and “give sureties for good behaviour from one quarter court to another’.’

Hall’s mobility, which we can detail because of the testimony which he gave in court, was remarkable but not exceptional, as is clear from recent published work on the spatial mobility of England’s poor during the early modern centuries.* What is most significant is that his restlessness long pre-dated his voyage to America; it also emerges from his account that his ultimate journey to Virginia took place only because of the chance arrival at Plymouth of a ship bound for America. It is also clear from Hall’s statement that his every move was explained by his quest for work; and it appears that his occasional

switches between male and female attire, at least while he was in Europe, were an expedient to procure profitable employment. Perhaps it was only his arrival in the overwhelmingly male settler com-

, munity in Virginia which suggested to Hall that sexual adventure, as well as economic advantage, could be gained by his assuming the appearance of a woman. While few of the surviving records concerning European ventures

overseas are as colourful as that which relates to Thomas Hall, its real significance is that it illustrates the point that the promotion of English settlement in North America served principally to broaden the range of destinations open to those who were already extremely mobile in search of employment. What these possibilities were in the

seventeenth century emerges clearly from another document, this time the will of Mascall Giles, a clergyman from Wartling, Sussex. ' H. R. Mcllwaine (ed.), Minutes of the Council and General Court of Colonial Virginia 1622-32 (Richmond, Va., 1924), 194-6, 8 Apr. 1629. It is possible that

a1025. continental expedition was in the English attack on Cadiz, which was also in 2p Clark and D. Souden (eds.), Migration and Society in Early Modern England (London, 1987).

Conclusion 265 Giles made provision for three children in his will: a son Edward, a daughter Mercy, and a son Samuel. Mercy appears to have been his favourite child, and seemed destined to remain in England with a legacy of £60, which was to become hers either on her twenty-first birthday or on the day of her marriage. The son Edward was the least favoured, and was awarded ‘5s and no more, unless he is transported into New England, Virginia or the Barbados to serve a master for a term of years’, after which term of service he would receive a further

£3. The other son, Samuel, was given title to the £50 which the Reverend Giles had ‘adventured on the service of Ireland’, presumably the Cromwellian settlement, on condition that “he goes over and lives there, and gives his sister Mercy the property called Sparthan in Ditchling’.°

Opportunities such as these were to alter and extend geographically over the next two centuries, but all Englishmen who, like the Reverend Giles, were concerned to find a niche for their children _ during those two centuries, could rely on the overseas territories which were then coming under English government control to provide

fresh career openings for their sons, if not for their daughters. Similar opportunities were open to the sons of other European colonizing powers of the early modern centuries, and some European groups which ventured overseas, most notably the Spaniards, actually improved their circumstances in a rapid and enduring manner.

We now know in a way that contemporaries did not that the Spanish experience was exceptional for two principal reasons: first, because Spanish colonists in Central and South America encountered complex societies whose lower social orders could be converted into

a pliable work-force by the Spaniards; and second, because the Spaniards in America settled principally in developed upland regions that carried no major health hazards for Europeans. This meant that

the total migration of about 750,000 Spaniards to the Americas during three centuries of colonial rule produced a stable Spanish society that sustained itself both through natural increase, which was accelerated by marriages between Spanish men and native American

women and through continued migration from Spain. The bulk of this migration, as we have learned from Nicolas Sanchez Albornoz (Chapter 3), occurred before 1650, with peak migration, averaging 3 The will of Mescall Giles of Wartling, Sussex clerk (London, Principal Probate Registry), Will—Register Books, 278 Brent, 3-—4°; consulted on microfilm at the Colonial Williamsburg Foundation, microfilm S.R.4310.

266 Nicholas Canny 3,900 a year, during the first half of the seventeenth century. The majority of the migrants, as was the case with all European preindustrial migrations, were male, but most also were skilled artisans and professionals who had the opportunity to establish secure positions for themselves in New Spain at a time when opportunities were shrinking for such people in Spain itself. Those who migrated over-

seas from Spain were certainly seeking to improve their circumstances, but they could also be seen to have discovered a place where

it was desirable to settle and to have attained social and economic advancement in the colonies that would not have been available to them had they remained at home.* The colonial success of Spain, to which many observers attributed

the military prowess of the Spanish monarchy throughout the full

course of the century ¢.1550-c.1650, acted as a spur to other European governments to become more deeply involved in colonial

enterprises. None, however, was to meet with the same success as Spain, at least in the short term; nor was any to concentrate as single-mindedly on the Americas as did Spain. The success attained

by individual Spaniards also acted as an inspiration to people in other European lands, and helps to explain the shift of millions of Europeans to overseas locations during the three centuries of the early modern period. The paths followed by these individuals were in many cases determined by their governments’ colonial enterprises; but they were influenced also by the availability of shipping to overseas locations. Then, as large numbers of people left their European

homes to make careers in other parts of the world, they left open positions, which they themselves were frequently unwilling to fill, to people from the more impoverished areas of Europe. Thus transoceanic movement quickened the movement of Europeans across

frontiers within Europe itself. Also, as people from the great colonizing countries of Europe became better acquainted with * For a reliable recent statement on Spanish colonial endeavour see G. V. Scammell, The World Encompassed: The first European Maritime Empires, c800—1650 (London, 1981), 301-69; see also idem, The First Imperial Age: European Overseas Expansion, ¢.1400—1715 (London, 1989). More detailed considerations of the specifics of Spanish emigration have been published in I. Altman, ‘A New World in the Old: Local Society and Spanish Emigration to the Indies’, and A. P. Jacobs, ‘Legal and Illegal Emigration from Seville, 1550-1650’, both in I. Altman and J. Horn (eds.), ‘To Make America’: European Emigration in the Early Modern Period (Berkeley, Calif., 1991), 30-59 and

59-85; see also I. Altman, Emigrants and Society: Extremadura and America in the

Sixteenth Century (Berkeley, Calif., 1989).

Conclusion 267 the options open to them, they became more discerning as to which destination they would settle in. Thus, some less desirable destinations were left open to the destitute from Europe’s poorer countries, even where these countries were not themselves involved in colonial enterprises. This was especially the case whenever a largescale migration of Europeans was necessary to create a labour force in a colonial context. When their efforts to find European labourers

failed them, the promoters of colonization usually satisfied their labour requirements through the capture or purchase of African slaves. The phenomenon of European overseas migration during the early modern period is therefore a complex one, and while all Europeans who ventured beyond the confines of their native lands went in the hope of improving their circumstances, many experienced

conditions which cannot have been less arduous than they would have had to endure had they remained at home.

If, in attempting to present a general portrait of this European phenomenon, we place the Spaniards at one extreme, then we should

place their close neighbours, the Portuguese, at the other. The Portuguese were certainly the leaders in the modern exploration of the Atlantic, and they led all others in the race to Asia around the coast of Africa. Indeed, it was probably in recognition of the fact that Portuguese navigators had such a head start on him that Columbus solicited sponsorship for his ambition to reach Asia by sailing westwards into the Atlantic. As the Portuguese crept slowly southwards along the coast of Africa during the fifteenth century, they marked their passage with the establishment of fortified trading positions, and this same procedure was followed once they had rounded the Cape to the eastern coast of Africa, and once they had crossed the Indian ocean to reach the continent of Asia. These fortified positions were

required to establish and maintain Portuguese control over trade in gold, slaves, and spices, but their cumulative consequence for Portugal was that they created an enormous demand for soldiers and traders to occupy these positions, as well as for mariners and shipwrights to sail and maintain their vessels. The incomplete character of the surviving sources makes it impossible to calculate the total

number of Portuguese people required to meet these obligations, but Vitorino Magalhaes Godinho, who is the leading authority on the subject, believes that some 100,000—150,000 Portuguese were stationed beyond the shores of their metropolis at any one time in the

sixteenth century. The demand which the maintenance of such an

268 Nicholas Canny establishment placed upon the population of Portugal was all the greater because these positions were almost invariably located in lowlying coastal locations, which were especially hazardous to the health and lives of Europeans.”

At the same time as they were exploring the coast of Africa, the Portuguese were also penetrating deep into the Atlantic, and had already founded successful colonies in both the Madeira islands and the Azores during the fifteenth century.° This expansion into the Atlantic led logically to their successes in establishing positions in the Amazon region and along the tropical coast of present-day Brazil. As

in Africa, the Portuguese erected trading stations, and set about asserting their political and spiritual authority over the primitive but warlike peoples they encountered in the region. Colonization was also in the minds of the Portuguese, who soon recognized the possibility

of producing sugar in these regions, and by the second half of the sixteenth century, Portuguese Brazil was the world’s leading producer of sugar. This boom persisted into the second half of the seventeenth century, by which time Brazil was also becoming famous as a source

of gold. Both developments created a demand for administrators, soldiers, settlers, and missionaries, even when the basic labour requirements were met by subdued Amerindians or imported slaves. Again, however, as in Africa and Asia, the Portuguese were up against an unhealthy environment which was especially hostile to Europeans, and the problem of peopling the settlement was further exacerbated by the return to Portugal of those who survived and made good. The sources relating to the outflow of people from Portugal do not, as was noted, lend themselves to precise enumeration, but the estimates that have been made point to a total migration

during the period 1500-1760 of between 1,000,000 and 1,500,000 people. Of these, about 280,000 people would have emigrated be> For summary statements on the Portuguese achievements see A. J. R. RussellWood, A World on the Move: The Portuguese in Africa, Asia and America, 1415-1818 (Manchester, 1992); S. Subrahmanyam, The Portuguese Empire in Asia, 1500-1700: A Political and Economic History (London 1993); Scammell, World Encompassed, 225-98; idem, First Imperial Age, V. M. Godhino, ‘L’Emigration Pourtugaise, xve—xx siécles:

une constante structurale et les réponses aux changements du monde’, Revista de Historia Economica e Social, 1 (1978), 5-32; idem, ‘Portuguese Emigration from the Fifteenth to the Twentieth Century: Constants and Changes’, in P. C. Emmer and M. Morner (eds.), European Expansion and Migration: Essays on the Intercontinental Migration from Africa, Asia and Europe (New York, 1992), 13-48. ° I. M. Dos Santos, “Acores: Etapas, Ritmos e Formas da Urbanizacao’, Estudos de Historia de Portugal, 11, sécs, XVI-XX (1983), 71-91.

Conclusion 269 tween 1500 and 1580, and a further 300,000 people between 1580 and 1640, while the greatest number, up to 600,000 people, seem to have left Portugal between 1700 and 1760.’ At first sight this migration does not appear significantly different from the Spanish migration described by Sanchez-Albornoz. They were both on a grand scale, with 1,000,000—1,500,000 Portuguese leaving for foreign destinations, as opposed to 750,000 Spaniards during the course of three centuries. The figures even appear similar for the first two centuries when they are broken down by century, with 280,000 Portuguese as opposed to about 240,000 Spaniards leaving for overseas destinations during the sixteenth century, and 300,000 Portuguese as opposed to 195,000 Spaniards during the first half of the seventeenth century.® In both cases, most migrants were male, but this was more decidedly true in the Portuguese than in the Spanish case. The differences between the migrations only become evident when they are subjected to closer scrutiny.

The first real difference is that the Portuguese migration was drawn from a much smaller population base, since the population of Portugal probably did not much exceed 1,000,000 people during the period 1500-1650, and certainly never exceeded 3,000,000 during the entire period 1500-1800.” It is only when the Portuguese migration is considered in this light that we can appreciate what a broad spectrum of the young adult male population of Portugal was being drawn to the colonies, whereas it was principally a skilled and pro-

fessional population that was being attracted to New Spain. The high percentage of young males who voluntarily left Portugal is a measure of the limited opportunity that existed in that country; further evidence of how desperate these young men were for career

openings is their willingness to accept the harsh conditions that pertained in any of the destinations open to Portuguese migrants. 7 See Godhino, ‘L’Emigration Pourtugaise’, idem, ‘Portuguese Emigration’; also J. Serrao, A Emigracao Portuguesa, 3rd edn. (Lisbon, 1977); Russell-Wood, World on the

Move, 58-122, esp. 58-62. $ See the material on Portugal cited in n. 7 above and Ch. 3. See also W. Reinhard, “The European Discovery of the World and its Economic Effects on the Pre-Industrial Society, 1500-1800. The West: Economic Change in the Atlantic Triangle’, in Hans Pohl (ed.), Papers of the Tenth International Economic History Congress (Stuttgart, 1990),

24-42, esp. 27-30. > The accepted estimates for Portuguese population are those offered in Godhino, ‘L’Emigration Pourtugaise’; this allows for between 1,000,000 and 1,400,000 in the early 16th cent., a figure based on the census of 1527-31 which calculated that there were 280,000 households in Portugal.

270 Nicholas Canny The most formidable obstacle in any of the possible situations would have been the health risks, and we can take it that the overwhelming majority of Portuguese emigrés lived short, arduous, disease-ridden

lives in the tropics. In this respect also, their experience was very different from that of the Spaniards. Moreover, the Portuguese were

also slow, because of the shortness of their lives and the harsh conditions, to create a Creole society. Thus a Portuguese society overseas continued to exist only because it was constantly replenished

by fresh emigrants.'° Why people continued to emigrate when they faced almost certain early death in their new environment is a

question that we cannot answer with any certainty. The lack of opportunity at home may go some way to explain it, but we must also

bear in mind that relatively few people during the early modern centuries thought statistically, and the back-migration to Portugal of a small number who had struck it rich in the colonies possibly made a far greater impression upon young men in search of a career than did the early deaths of the thousands who were soon forgotten. Another

factor which may explain the continued outflow of people from Portugal over such a long period of time is that the vast majority of emigrants in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries were attracted to Africa and Asia rather than America. Stories about the fabulous riches of the East may have been sufficient to counter any rumours of the grim realities there, and the Portuguese did not go to Brazil in very large numbers until the bulk of their Asian acquisitions had fallen into Dutch hands. In this respect again, the Portuguese migration overseas was very different from that of the Spanish, and the Portuguese did not establish a numerous presence in America until they had acquired sufficient slaves to undertake the more arduous and more hazardous employment there.”? The Portuguese migration flow was therefore different from that of Spain, because it was less skilled, because it encountered less 10 S. B. Schwartz, ‘The Formation of a Colonial Identity in Brazil’, in N. Canny and A. Pagden (eds.), Colonial Identity in the Atlantic World, 1500-1800 (Princeton, NJ,

oP aid Pam also indebted to R. Rowland et al., ‘Contexts of Long-Distance Migration: Portugal and Brazil: Rapport Collectif’ paper given to the session on ‘Long-Distance-Migrations, 1500-1900’ of the Seventeenth International Congress of Historical Sciences, Madrid, 1990; the points raised in this paragraph are sustained by the conclusions of Godhino (in his papers cited in n. 5), although he makes scant

reference to the phenomenon of high mortality rates suffered by the Portuguese overseas.

Conclusion 271 favourable conditions overseas, and because the majority of migrants,

in the years prior to 1650, made their way to African and Asian destinations rather than to America. The Portuguese experience was also associated from the outset and in all areas with the harsh use of African slaves. In several of these respects the Dutch experience of colonization, as described by Jan Lucassen (Chapter 7), was closer

to that of the Portuguese than that of the Spanish. This is not _ surprising, because much of what was the Dutch overseas empire of the seventeenth century, especially in its African and Asian dimensions, had been recently seized from the Portuguese. Then, in sub-

sequent decades, the vast Dutch trading empire in Asia, centred upon Batavia (present-day Jakarta), was based upon the trading routes and positions that had been wrested from the Portuguese. The main-

tenance of this empire presented the same problem to the Dutch as

it had done to the Portuguese, not least in its drain on human resources. High mortality rates among the mariners who kept the ships afloat, as well as among the soldiers who defended their positions on land, meant that about 1,000,000 people had to be shipped overseas by the Dutch East India Company during the period between the early seventeenth century and the middle of the nineteenth century. At first sight this figure suggests that the Netherlands must have been drained of its productive manpower in the same manner as

Portugal had been, but, as we learn from Lucassen, this was not in fact the case, because more than half of those who ventured overseas on Dutch ships were foreign nationals, usually Germans and

Scandinavians. And, as Lucassen points out, foreigners were proportionately more numerous among the ranks of the soldiers where the risk of death was greatest. At the same time, the Dutch attempted to set up colonies in the West Indies, as well as in North and South America, but the Atlantic always remained of secondary interest to them. To this extent, once again, their experience replicated that of the Portuguese, whom they imitated also in their heavy involvement with slavery. However, unlike the Portuguese, they prevented emigration from placing a strain upon their domestic economy by devising

the stratagem of having foreigners undertake the more hazardous employments both in their trading empire in Europe and in that further afield.’” '2 See Ch. 7; also, for a recent appraisal of Dutch colonial endeavour, Scammell, World Encompassed, 373-433; tdem, First Imperial Age.

272 Nicholas Canny When account is taken of this latter factor, a second polarity can be identified, this time between the Portuguese authorities, who seemed reckless with all human life, and the Dutch, who assigned the highrisk tasks to foreigners who were more impoverished, and therefore

more desperate for employment, than themselves. The Spanish, who were fortunate enough to strike upon a healthful environment

to which to emigrate, were not up against this problem, and the authorities jealously confined migration opportunities in New Spain to their own subjects. However, one consequence of their success in America was that in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries a series of Spanish rulers engaged upon an ambitious foreign policy such as could not have been imagined by their predecessors. To make this policy a reality, the Spaniards built up an army which became the

largest fighting force in Europe of its time. This was comprised largely of foreign recruits from poorer and less developed areas of Europe who identified with the Catholic cause that was being championed by the Spanish monarchs. One significant element within that army consisted of Irish Catholics; similarly a Scottish presence

was maintained within the Protestant armies that were mobilized in

continental Europe to counter the ambitions of the Habsburgs.'° When this aspect of migration is taken into account, we can see that the position of the Spaniards was similar to that of the Dutch, except that the human wastage was in their armies in Europe, rather than

their foreign colonies. The Dutch also, as Lucassen has shown, invited intra-European migration of various kinds, including that into their army and navy. The migration experience of England, the fourth major European

, colonizing power, does not appear to fit neatly with either kind, although, by the eighteenth century, the pattern of migration associated with English colonial endeavour had come close to that of the Dutch. Before then, and certainly in the early part of the seventeenth

century, the English promoters of colonization seemed almost as reckless as the Portuguese with human life, including the lives of their own people. The health risks of both the Chesapeake and the West Indies, the two principal transatlantic destinations for English '3 Brendan Jennings (ed.), Wild Geese in Spanish Flanders (Dublin, 1964); G. Henry, “The Emerging Identity of an Irish Military Group in the Spanish Netherlands’, in R. V. Comerford, M. Cullen, J. Hill and C. Lennon (eds.), Religion Conflict and Coexistence in Ireland: Essays Presented to Monsignor Patrick 7. Corish (Dublin, 1990), 53-77. idem, The Insh Military Community in Spanish Flanders, 1586-1621 (Dublin, 1992). See also Ch. 5 and 6.

Conclusion 273 migrants in the seventeenth century, proved lethal for Europeans, with the result that some, albeit a relatively small number of English people, migrated to New England. However, it now appears that more English migrants went to Ireland (180,000) than to the Chesapeake (116,000) during the course of the seventeenth century (see Chapter 4). Furthermore, the generally accepted estimate of 190,000 English migrants to the West Indies in the seventeenth century seems exces-

sively high, because it makes no allowance for the considerable number of Irish servants who, as we know from the work of Dr Hilary Beckles, were a decidedly visible and truculent element of the population there during the second half of the seventeenth century.’* This situation was brought about by the displacement of English by Irish migrants who, during the 1650s and 1660s, were, in the words

of Louis Cullen (Chapter 6) ‘probably ...the main single stream of white immigrants’ into the British West Indies. The explanation for this development would seem to be that people in England who were

contemplating emigration began to be more discerning as regards what course of action to follow, once better information on prospects

and conditions became available to them. As a consequence, the promoters of English plantations were forced to dispatch relatively more Irish servants to the West Indies and relatively more Scots to the Chesapeake with each passing decade of the late seventeenth century, while assigning an increasing number of African slaves to each of those destinations. This trend persisted during the course of the eighteenth century. Then the only English people who emigrated

to the West Indies were plantation owners and managers, together with a small number of artisans with highly specialized skills; while the task of populating the ever expanding frontier regions of mainland British America was, as we learn from Bernard Bailyn’s Voyagers

to the West, left largely to Scottish and Irish settlers. During the eighteenth century also, the work-force recruited for the southern mainland colonies, as for the West Indies, was made up mostly of African slaves. This means that English migrants of the eighteenth century featured significantly only in the longer-established settlements on mainland America, and then usually to take up skilled employment at higher wages than they could command at home.’ 14 H. McD. Beckles, White Servitude and Black Slavery in Barbados, 1627-1715 (Knoxville, Tenn., 1989). "> B. Bailyn, Voyagers to the West: Emigration from Britain to America on the Eve of the Revolution (London, 1986).

274 Nicholas Canny By the eighteenth century, England had also become a military and

naval power of the first rank, and many of its forces were recruited

not only in Scotland but even in the Protestant principalities of northern Europe. Such resources, when added to those drawn from England itself, still did not satisfy England’s appetite for fighting men, and the need was so great that England was forced, in 1793, to rescind the ban against Irish Catholics serving in the crown forces, not that a great number of Irish Catholics hadn’t served unofficially

in both the army and the navy long before that date. England’s requirements for a European work-force in its expanding empire in Asia, especially in India, never matched those of the Dutch, and the total presence in India, both civil and military, prior to 1756 never exceeded 1,000 men at one time. These servants of the East India Company included Scots as well as English; but even if we discount the Scottish element and give due weight to a high mortality rate, the total migration cannot have been anything like that sponsored by the Dutch. After the defeat at Plassey in 1756, the East India Company aspired to maintain a much stronger presence of European officers and men, and a total of 6,500 men were shipped out to India during the single decade 1762-72. Despite such aspirations and efforts, the targets were never met, and the English interest in India became increasingly reliant upon sepoys raised and trained in India.'° When account is taken of all English overseas activities during the

course of two centuries, it appears that English migration habits conformed closely to the Dutch model, with the more hazardous occupations and destinations being left to people other than English. In so far as English experience differed at all from that of the Dutch,

it was only during the interval 1620-50. At that time England was neither a major political power nor a wealthy society, and it was enduring a prolonged economic recession which actually effected a drop in the gross population of the country.'’ Under such circumstances it is not surprising that those at the margins of English society

should have taken themselves off to such hazardous destinations 16 J, Brewer, The Sinews of Power: War, Money and the English State, 1688-1783 (New York, 1989); T. Bartlett, ‘Army and Society in Eighteenth-Century Ireland’, in W. A. Maguire (ed.), Kings in Conflict: the Revolutionary War in Ireland and its Aftermath,

1689-1750 (Belfast, 1990), 173-92; P. J. Marshall, East India Fortunes (Oxford, 1976), 14-25. I wish to acknowledge the advice of Professor P. J. Marshall on the British presence in India. 17 E. A. Wrigley and R. S. Schofield, The Population History of England, 1541-1871 (London, 1981).

Conclusion 275 as the West Indies and the Chesapeake. Economic conditions in England improved significantly in the second half of the seventeenth century, however, and both employment opportunities at home and

per capita income had increased dramatically by the close of the century. An improving economy meant that there was every reason for English people to think twice before venturing abroad; and this explains why the Scots, the Irish, and the ubiquitous African slaves featured so prominently in the later phase of migration to England’s overseas possessions.

Even during this latter phase of English overseas migration, more English people than French were travelling as emigrants to overseas possessions, despite the fact that French emigration was being drawn

from an altogether greater population base which never dropped below 20,000,000 people during these two centuries. The poor reputation of the colonies, the lack of an adequate recruiting structure, and the competing demands of an ever expanding army are advanced

by Peter Moogk as the reasons why no more than 35,000 French people could be persuaded to contract their labour as indentured servants for the colonies (Chapter g). Of these, a great number entered upon agreements which entitled them to free passage back to France after three years of service in the colonies.'® This low figure of 35,000 appears all the more surprising in light of what is known of the very real poverty and the high level of geographic mobility that prevailed within France in both the seventeenth and the eighteenth centuries.’? A further aspect of the French failure to mobilize free emigrants for its colonies was that, unlike the Dutch and the English,

they did not entice foreigners to fill the positions that were not attractive to French people. Here perhaps the demands of the French army militated against recruitment for the colonies, as is suggested by Irish Catholic migration to France from the late seventeenth century

forward to the 1750s. At its peak in the 1730s, according to Louis Cullen’s estimates, this migration accounted for an annual intake into

the French army of 1,000 men in the ranks, together with perhaps 200 officers, as compared with the trickle of Irish people who made '8 See also L. Choquette, ‘Recruitment of French Emigrants to Canada, 16001760’, in Altman and Horn (eds.), ‘To Make America’, 131-71; C. H. de Lemps, ‘Indentured Servants Bound for the French Antilles in the Seventeenth and Eighteenth Centuries’, in Altman and Horn (eds.), ‘To Make America’, 172-203. 19 OQ. H. Hufton, The Poor in Eighteenth-Century France, 1750-1789 (Oxford, 1974),

esp. 69-107, 219-45.

276 Nicholas Canny their way to the French West Indies (Chapter 6). The relatively minor involvement of France in European overseas migration is best illustrated when we compare the number of French people who did travel across the Atlantic over the course of two centuries (perhaps

something over 50,000 if we take account of military as well as indentured emigrants) with at least 130,000 French Protestants who chose exile during but two decades after 1685, in preference to the forced conformity in religion demanded by the government of Louis

XIV. Some of these emigrés did, it is true, make their careers in colonies, but more frequently in the overseas colonies of Protestant

England than those of Catholic France. The only real success of France.in mobilizing people to meet the labour needs of its colonies

was therefore in the procurement of African slaves for the sugar plantations of the French Antilles. These, supplemented by some European plantation managers, servants, and artisans, satisfied French requirements in that area, because in the French Caribbean islands,

as distinct from those of the English, sugar production, after the Dutch model, was implemented almost from the moment the islands

were acquired. The economic activity promoted by the French in Canada, based largely on fur trapping and trading, as well as fishing and farming a narrow strip along the banks of the St Lawrence river, did not create a significant demand for European labour. This suggests that the apparently anomalous low participation by the French in long-distance overseas migration is explained more by the lack of opportunity for white workers in the French possessions abroad than

by any reluctance of the French to translate themselves to foreign destinations. Moreover, conditions in France were not so bad that people would go in large numbers to places abroad where they might be even worse, while service in French military forces provided ample opportunity for any young Frenchmen who were driven by the spirit

of adventure.”” |

All the major colonizing powers (including even France if we take account of the Huguenots who left France, and the foreign nationals

who were attracted to service in the French army) were therefore responsible for promoting or triggering large-scale European migrations during the sixteenth, seventeenth, and eighteenth centuries. Some of this was low-risk betterment migration, but most of it was a 20 See references in n. 18 above and L. Dechéne, Habitants et marchands au xvite siecle (Paris, 1974).

Conclusion 277 high-risk subsistence migration. Migration of the first kind usually involved artisans and professionals, who decided to uproot themselves not because they were destitute but because they realized that their talents would fetch better rewards abroad than they would at home. By contrast, migration of the second kind usually involved people with low levels of skill, who resorted to emigration probably

because of the meagre conditions and limited opportunities that existed in their home societies. Those involved in betterment emig-

ration, such as the Spanish settlers in New Spain of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries and the English migrants to the Middle Atlantic colonies of the eighteenth century, usually came from colonizing powers, whereas those associated with subsistence emigration, whether into the armies of the great European powers or to low-lying tropical colonies, usually came from impoverished areas of Europe which were not directly involved with colonization. Such distinctions are not absolute, however, and we find that some of the emigration from England to its colonies and most of that of Portugal

can be depicted as subsistence migration. On the other hand, we also find that some eighteenth-century migrants from Scotland and Ireland, two countries associated with subsistence migration, were in fact professionals who quickly becames involved in the promotion of

colonial ventures (see Chapters 5 and 6).*' It would be equally invalid to depict betterment emigration as motivated entirely by pull

factors and subsistence migration by push factors. Those professionals and artisans who embarked for foreign destinations where they hoped to better themselves were usually aware that opportunities

at home were shrinking for people with their precise skills. To this extent such people could be said to have been pushed to emigrate, although they usually had a fairly clear understanding of what to expect at the other end. Betterment emigrants can certainly be portrayed as reasonably well informed about what lay ahead of them, but those who became subsistence emigrants were not entirely ignorant of their possibilities of success either. Would-be emigrants were always eager for information about the places where they hoped to settle or anxious to learn of the careers that they hoped to pursue. In general, they expected those of their community who had preceded them to provide them with some knowledge of their experiences. The “1 See T. Truxes, Irish-American Trade, 1660-1783 (Cambridge, 1988), esp. 127-47.

278 Nicholas Canny fact that such considerations played a role in helping the poor and destitute to arrive at a decision shows that the pull factor exerted some influence on them too. It should be remembered, however, that the existence of poverty did not always result in emigration, and that dislocations have occurred in European society which have resulted in famine rather than mass emigration. This prompts the conclusion that emigration occurs only where knowledge of better prospects exists, and where transport is in place to convey prospective migrants to their new home. Indeed, the transport factor was so important that

it appears from the experience of the early modern centuries that persistent long-distance migration occurred only where it was profitable for merchants to promote it. Here, European exploitation of

, the resources of America, North and South, was crucial, because the existence of cargo vessels to convey the commodities of America to Europe provided cheap berths for Europeans who wished to travel in the opposite direction. The two factors—information and transport—are especially important in explaining the decided shifts in mass migration patterns that occurred over time. The Portuguese, as we saw, were especially

attracted to Asia and Africa during their earlier phase of colonial endeavour, and apparently had a low opinion of the opportunities which America offered. The balance in Portuguese migration had shifted decidedly in favour of South America by the eighteenth century, because people had become informed of the mining opportunities that existed there and because transport to America was more readily available. Similarly in the case of German Rhineland mig-

ration. This was an area that had experienced rapid population increase during the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries, and was persistently troubled by religious turmoil and military invasion during the

next two centuries. The initial outlets were the Netherlands, which

frequently led to Asia, and the underpopulated areas of eastern Europe, which had been undergoing a process of planned development, linked to German migration, for centuries. Then, suddenly in the eighteenth century, the possibility of emigrating to the Middle Atlantic colonies of North America presented itself, and, as Chapter 8 shows, increasing numbers were willing to gamble on this new prospect and reject the advice of their social leaders. ‘They were ready to do so because the promoters of this venture engaged upon an effective propaganda campaign and because transport was readily

Conclusion 279 available through the ports of the Netherlands.** This eighteenthcentury migration quickly established its own stock-factor, which made it self-sustaining and which facilitated the great German emigration to North America of the nineteenth century. The pattern of Irish Catholic migration is remarkably similar with a well-established popular movement to continental military service gradually giving way in the eighteenth century to a sizeable emigration to North America. Once more, the shift occurred because people had become aware of

the opportunities that North America offered and because cheap shipping was available.**? Favourable mortality rates in North America

ensured that enduring kinship and communal connections between home and migrant communities were quickly established, thereby preparing the way for the mass Irish exodus to North America of the nineteenth century. Such examples could be multiplied: together they make the point that the European encounter with America at the end of the fifteenth century increased the migration opportunities open to Europeans, already a very mobile people, but that American destinations became preferred by European migrants only after it had become clear that they presented better opportunities than existed elsewhere, and after it became feasible to travel to those destinations in large numbers. It was only for the Spaniards that America became the land of opportunity so soon after first contact with it. For most other migrating peoples in western Europe—Scots, Irish, English, Germans, and Portuguese—America did not present decidedly better prospects than more traditional destinations until some point in the middle of the eighteenth century. Until then, the vast majority of Europeans who left their homelands were bound for destinations either within Europe itself or within the continents of Africa and Asia which, as we saw in Chapter 2, had been attracting significant European settlement

since at least the eleventh century. This more traditional type of migration greatly expanded, first, because the increased scale of warfare within Europe created more demand for fighting men, and second, because growing European knowledge of the coastal areas of Africa and Asia created new trading opportunities for Europeans 22 See M. Wokeck, ‘Promoters and Passengers: The German Immigrant Trade’, in

R. S: un and M. M. Dunn (eds.), The World of William Penn (Philadelphia, 1986), 259-O1. ue See Ch. 6 and Truxes, /rish American Trade, 127-47.

280 Nicholas Canny which, when exploited, had to be serviced and defended. The vast majority of people who headed for these more traditional destinations

seem to have been motivated by the desire to find an acceptable occupation niche which would provide them with some opportunity of improving their circumstances should they return to their country or village of origin. We know, in a way that these migrants did not, that the statistical probability of their realizing their ambitions was very remote; but they knew, in a way that we can hardly appreciate, that their sights would always remain fixed on their place of origin and that it was only there that they could conceive themselves making a permanent home. Those Europeans of the sixteenth, seventeenth, and even the early eighteenth centuries who struck out for the more speculative prospects

that America offered do not appear to have been motivated in a significantly different way from those who migrated across frontiers

within Europe or travelled to Africa or Asia. It is true that a significant minority of Spaniards and some English groups crossed the Atlantic in family units, thereby suggesting that their ambition from the outset was to establish a new and better home in America than was possible for them in Europe. Historians who have studied such family migrants, however, find that their eyes too remained firmly

fixed on their places of origin, and that some of them returned enriched to Europe to enjoy a social position that had previously been denied them.** The fact that the overwhelming majority of Europeans who travelled to America during this long period were young, single, and male suggests that their ambitions would not have been different

from the very similar element who found their way into European armies or to trading outposts in Africa and Asia. Those who went to America were also driven by need and by the spirit of adventure, and we can take it that their hope, when they set out from home, was to

make their fortune and return. Some, as we know, realized this ambition, while the vast majority failed dismally; yet a third element

met with modest success which made it possible for them to get married and establish a home and family albeit in a foreign location rather than their place of origin.*” This occurred only where the local 4 The study that addresses such questions most satisfactorily is Altman, Emigrants and Society, esp. 247-74; see also D. Cressy, Coming Over: Migration and Communication

between England and New England in the Seventeenth Century (Cambridge, 1987),

a Altman, Emigrants and Society, 165-209. Altman has been able to arrive at

Conclusion 281 environment and economy facilitated the establishment of a colony of settlement, and such colonies were rare indeed before the eighteenth century.

Colonies of settlement in the Americas became much more numerous after the mid-eighteenth century, and the ambitions of European migrants began to change accordingly. The emergence of such colonies, which attracted an ever increasing percentage of European migrants to American destinations from the middle of the eighteenth century, is explained partly by the fact that settlers had overcome the environmental hazards that had previously made life so perilous for Europeans, but partly also because the promoters of European colonies had found non-European peoples—American

Indian and African, or (in the nineteenth century) Chinese and Indian workers—to undertake the more arduous employments in various American locations. The promoters of European trade and empire in Asia had resort to similar stratagems, which goes to prove

that European involvement overseas had increasing global consequences. European ventures overseas had been global from the outset, in that Europeans willingly ventured to, and established them-

selves in, all parts of the world that were accessible to them; but their endeavours assumed a still more global dimension when the deployment of African and Asian labour forces became necessary to the fulfilment of European colonial ambitions.”

Such labour deployment, which spelled disaster for the nonEuropeans involved, made life in the colonies less taxing for European settlers, and this was immediately reflected in the more even sex ratio

among Europeans migrating to American destinations after about 1750. A better sex balance was achieved initially by the inclusion of more family units among the emigrants; but the nineteenth century witnessed the departure from Europe for American destinations of increasing numbers of young single women, although in all cases, except the Irish emigration of the nineteenth century, men remained conclusions about motivation because migrants from Extremadura, and from Spain generally, included a significant number of literate people. 26 PC. Emmer, ‘European Expansion and Migration: The European Colonial Past and Intercontinental Migration; an Overview’, in Emmer and Morner (eds.), European Expansion and Migration, 1-12. I would like to thank Pieter Emmer for discussion on this topic, but see also P. C. Emmer, ‘Immigration into the Caribbean: The Introduction of Chinese and East Indian Indentured Laborers between 1839-1917’, in Emmer and Morner (eds.), European Expansion and Migration, 245-76.

282 Nicholas Canny a distinct majority.*” This phenomenon is presumably explained by a growing awareness among Europe’s poor that they could better improve their circumstances by emigrating permanently to America rather than hankering after some dramatic reversal of their fortunes at home. While an increasing number of emigrants thought in this

way, not all were in agreement with them, and many Europeans, throughout the nineteenth century, still engaged on long-distance migration with a view to making their fortune abroad and returning to invest their earnings in their local community. The difference in this respect from the earlier centuries was that a greater number of those who set out with this ambition in mind had the opportunity to realize

it.2* Another aspect of continuity into the nineteenth century was that the inter-continental migration of Europeans was occurring simultaneously with long-distance and seasonal migration within

Europe itself. Such migration seems also to have increased in scale during the nineteenth century, and improved transport facilities meant that migratory workers within Europe could travel longer distances within Europe or could even cross the Atlantic on a seasonal itinerary.~”

Why individuals chose one form of emigration over another must remain speculative, because appraisals of motivation were seldom stated at the moment when emigrants departed from home. Because of such uncertainties, the concern of the essays in this volume has

been to establish what can be known with some certainty about the entire phenomenon of European overseas migration, 15001800. The questions that have been answered—how many people went? from what countries? of what gender and quality? and to what

destinations?—raise another set of questions that have not been 77 On Ireland see D. Fitzpatrick, Jrish Emigration, 1801-1921 (Dundalk, 1984); W. J. Smyth, ‘Irish Emigration, 1700-1920’, in Emmer and MoOrner (eds.), European Expansion and Migration, 49-78; on more general European Migration see J. D. Gould, ‘European Inter-Continental Emigration 1815-1914: Patterns and Causes’, journal of European Economic History, 8 (1979), 593-679; idem, ‘European InterContinental Emigration. The Road Home: Return Migration from the U.S.A’, Journal of European Economic History, 9 (1980), 41-111; idem, ‘European Inter-Continental Emigration: The Role of “Diffusion” and “Feedback”’, Journal of European Economic History, 9 (1980), 267-315. 28 Gould, ‘European Inter-Continental Emigration, the Road Home’. 79 J. Lucassen, Migrant Labour in Europe, 1600-1900 (London 1987); L. Fontaine, Le Voyage et la mémoire: colporteurs de I’Oisans au xix® siecle (Lyon, 1984); C. O Grada,

‘Seasonal Migration and Post-Famine Adjustment in the West of Ireland’, Studia Hibernica, 13 (1973), 48-76.

Conclusion 283 addressed. Most of these relate to the consequences for Europe of the loss of population through emigration. In some societies, contemporary observers welcomed the departure of young unemployed adult men, who might otherwise have been a threat to the social order, and, as Louis Cullen has pointed out in relation to Ireland, the emigration of younger sons was sometimes perceived as necessary for the economic survival of their relatives. ‘The departure of young men in their productive years must also have created labour shortages in particular regions, unless those departing were replaced by workers

who moved in to take their place. The numbers who left Ireland in the seventeenth century were certainly made good by the settlement there of English and Scots, and those who left the Netherlands for overseas destinations were consistently replaced by migratory workers of various kinds. This still leaves open the question of how Scotland compensated for the loss of so many of its young men in the prime of life, and we are left wondering whether the African slaves who were

set to farming in Portugal°’ were as efficient workers as the young Portuguese men who ventured their lives abroad. And even if we ignore the economic consequences for various European societies of

the loss of those who must have been their most venturesome, imaginative risk-takers, what about the social consequences? The steady outflow of young men (few of whom ever returned) from a narrow population base must have deprived many young women in Europe of the opportunity to marry, and must have had grave demographic consequences for particular areas within Europe if not

for Europe in general. The fact that these questions now come to mind is in itself proof that a collective investigation of Europeans on the move, 1500-1800, was long overdue. 3° See the articles by Godhino cited in n. 5.

Bibliography Chapter 4 Canny English Migration AKENSON, DONALD H., ‘Why the Accepted Estimates of the Ethnicity of the American People, 1790, are Unacceptable’, contribution to “The Population of the United States, 1790: A Symposium’, William & Mary Quarterly, 3rd

ser., 41 (1984), 102—19; see also 125-9). ALLEN, Davip GrRaySON, In English Ways: The Movement of Societies and the

Transferal of English Local Law and Customs to Massachusetts Bay in the Seventeenth Century (Chapel Hill, NC, 1981). ALTMAN, IDA, and Horn, JAMES (eds.), ‘Jo Make America’: European Emigration in the Early Modern Period (Berkeley, Calif., 1991). AMES, SuSIE M. (ed.), County Court Records of Accomack Northampton, Virginia, 1632-40 (Washington, DC, 1954). ——(ed.), County Court Records of Accomack Northampton, 1640-45 (Charlottesville, Va., 1973). ANDERSON, VIRGINIA DEJOHN, New England's Generation: The Great Migration

and the Formation of Society and Culture in the Seventeenth Century (Cambridge, 1991). APPELBY, JOHN C. (ed.), 4A Calendar of Material Relating to Ireland from the High Court of Admiralty Examinations, 1536-1641 (Dublin, 1992). BAILYN, BERNARD, The Peopling of British North America: An Introduction (New York, 1986). —— Voyagers to the West: Emigration from Britain to America on the Eve of the Revolution (London, 1986).

——and MorGan, Puiip D. (eds.), Strangers within the Realm: Cultural Margins of the First British Empire (Cbapel Hill, NC, 1991). BARKER, HOWARD F., and HANSEN, Marcus L., ‘Report of the Committee on Linguistic and National Stocks in the Population of the United States’,

in American Historical Association, Annual Report for the Year 1931 (Washington, DC, 1932), i. 107-441. BECKLES, Hitary McD., White Servitude and Black Slavery in Barbados, 1627-1715 (Knoxville, Tenn. 1989). CAMPBELL, MILDRED, ‘Social Origins of Some Early Americans’, in James Morton Smith (ed.), Seventeenth-Century America: Essays in Colonial History

(Chapel Hill, NC, 1959), 63-89. ——‘Response’ to David Galenson, ‘“Middling People” or “Common Sort”?’, William & Mary Quarterly, 3rd ser., 35 (1978), 524-40.

English Migration 285 CANNY, NICHOLAS, Kingdom and Colony: Ireland in the Atlantic World, 15601800 (Baltimore, 1988).

— “The British Atlantic World: Working towards a Definition’, Historical Journal, 33 (1990), 479-97. —— “The 1641 Depositions as a Source for the Writing of Social History: County Cork as a Case Study’, in Patrick O’Flanagan and Cornelius G. Buttimer (eds.), County Cork: History and Society (Dublin, 1993), 249-308.

— “The Marginal Kingdom: Ireland as a Problem in the First British Empire’, in Bernard Bailyn and Philip Morgan (eds.), Strangers within the Realm: Cultural Margins of the First British Empire (Chapel Hill, NC, 1991), 35-606.

Carr, Lots GREEN, “The Development of the Maryland Orphans’ Court, 1654-1715’, in Aubrey Land, Lois Green Carr, and Edward C. Papenfuse (eds.), Law, Society and Politics in Early Maryland (Baltimore, 1977), 41-62. — — MENARD, RUSSELL R., and WALSH, LoRENA S., Robert Cole’s World: Agriculture and Society in Early Maryland (Chapel Hill, NC, 1991). ——— MorGan, Puiuip D., and Russo, JEAN B. (eds.), Colonial Chesapeake Society (Chapel Hill, NC, 1989). CASSEDY, JAMES H., Demography in Early America: Beginnings of the Statistical Mind, 1600-1800 (Cambridge, Mass., 1969). CLARKE, AIDAN, “The 1641 Depositions’, in Peter Fox (ed.), Treasures of the Library of Trinity College, Dublin (Dublin, 1986), 111-22. Cressy, Davip, Coming Over: Migration and Communication between England and New England in the Seventeenth Century (Cambridge, 1987). CurTIN, Puiuip D., The Atlantic Slave Trade: A Census (Madison, Wis., 1969). DE WOLFE, BARBARA, ‘Discoveries of America: Letters of British Emigrants to America on the Eve of the Revolution’, Perspecttves in American History,

NS 3 (1986), 1-80. Doy.E, Davip NoEL, [reland, Irishmen and the American Revolution, 1760-1820 (Dublin, 1981). DUNN, RICHARD S., Sugar and Slaves: The Rise of the Planter Class in the English West Indies (Chapel Hill, NC, 1972).

——and DuNN, Mary Maptes (eds.), The World of William Penn (Philadelphia, 1986). EKIRCH, A. ROGER, Bound for America: The Transportation of British Convicts to

the Colonies, 1718-1775 (Oxford, 1987). , EMMER, PIETER C. (ed.), Colonialism and Migration: Indentured Labour Before and After Slavery (Dordrecht, 1986). FISCHER, David HackETT, Albion’s Seed: Four British Folkways in America

(Oxford, 1989). FOGELMAN, AARON, ‘Migration to the Thirteen British North American Colonies, 1700-1775: New Estimates’, Journal of Interdisciplinary History,

22 (1992), 691-709.

286 Bibliography —— ‘The Peopling of Early America: Two Studies by Bernard Bailyn’, Comparative Studies in Society and History, 31 (1989), 605-14. FOSTER, STEPHEN, and BREEN, T. H., ‘Moving to the New World: The Character of Early Massachusetts Immigration’, William & Mary Quarterly,

3rd ser., 30 (1973), 189-222; repr. in T. H. Breen (ed.), Punrttans and Adventurers: Change and Persistence in Early America (New York and Oxford,

1980), 46-67. Fox, PETER, Treasures of the Library of Trinity College, Dublin (Dublin, 1986).

GALENSON, Davin, ‘““Middling People” or “Common Sort’’?: The Social

Origins of some Early Americans Re-examined’, William © Mary Quarterly, 3rd ser., 35 (1978), 499-524. — ‘Reply’ to Mildred Campbell, William & Mary Quarterly, 3rd ser., 36 (1979), 277-86, —— White Servitude in Colonial America: An Economic Analysis (Cambridge, 1981). GEMERY, HENRY A., ‘Emigration from the British Isles to the New World, 1630-1700: Inferences from Colonial Populations’, Research in Economic

History, 5 (1980), 179-231. —— ‘European Emigration to North America, 1700-1820: Numbers and Quasi-Numbers’, Perspectives in American History, NS 1 (1984), 283-342. —— ‘Markets for Migrants: English Indentured Servitude and Emigration in

the Seventeenth and Eighteenth Centuries’, in P. C. Emmer (ed.), Colonialism and Migration: Indentured Labour Before and After Slavery (Dordrecht, 1986), 33-54. GILLESPIE, RAYMOND, Colonial Ulster: The Settlement of East Ulster, 1600-1641

(Cork, 1985). ——(ed.), Settlement and Survival on an Ulster Estate: The Brownlow Leasebook, 1667-1711 (Belfast, 1988).

GREENE, JACK P., Pursuits of Happiness: The Social Development of Early Modern British Colonies and the Formation of American Culture (Chapel Hill, NC, 1988). ——and Po te, J. R. (eds.), Colonial British America: Essays in the New Fitstory of the Early Modern Era (Baltimore, 1984). GwyYNNn, AuBREY, SJ, ‘Documents Relating to the Irish in the West Indies’, Analecta Hibernica, 4 (1932), 233-5. Hansen, Marcus Lee, The Atlantic Migration, 1607-1860: A History of the Continuing Settlement of the United States (Cambridge, Mass., 1951). HEYRMAN, CHRISTINE LEIGH, Commerce and Culture: The Mantime Communities of Colonial Massachusetts, 1690-1750 (New York, 1984).

Horn, JAMES, ‘Adapting to a New World: A Comparative Study of Local

Society in England and Maryland, 1650-1700’, in Lois Green Carr, Philip D. Morgan, and Jean B. Russo (eds.), Colonial Chesapeake Society (Chapel Hill, NC, 1989), 133-75.

English Migration 287 ——‘“To Parts Beyond the Seas”: Free Emigration to the Chesapeake in the Seventeenth Century’, in Ida Altman and James Horn (eds.), ‘Jo Make America’: European Emigration in the Early Modern Period (Berkeley, Calif.,

1991), 85-130. —— ‘Servant Emigration to the Chesapeake in the Seventeenth Century’, in

Thad W. Tate and David L. Ammerman (eds.), The Chesapeake in the Seventeenth Century: Essays on Anglo-American Society (Chapel Hill, NC,

1979), 51-95. INNES, STEPHEN, Labor in a New Land: Economy and Society in SeventeenthCentury Springfield (Princeton, NJ, 1983).

Jones, F. C., ‘The Pre-Sugar Era of European Settlement in Barbados’, Journal of Caribbean History, 1 (1970), 1-22. KLEpP, SUSAN E. (ed.), The Demographic History of the Philadelphia Region,

1600-1800, Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society, 133/2 (Philadelphia, 1989). LAND, AUBREY C., Carr, Lois GREEN, and PAPENFUSE, EDWarD C. (eds.), Law, Society and Politics in Early Maryland (Baltimore, 1977). LORIMER, JOYCE (ed.), English and Irish Settlement on the River Amazon, 1550-1642 (London, 1989).

MacaFEE, W. A., ‘The Movement of British Settlers into Ulster during the Seventeenth Century’, Familia, 2 (1992), 94-111. McCartuHy MorroGH, MICHAEL, The Munster Plantation, 1583-1641

(Oxford, 1985). McCuSsKER, JOHN J., and MENARD, RUSSELL R. (eds.), The Economy of British

America, 1607-1789 (Chapel Hill, NC, 1985). McDONALD, FORREST, and MCDONALD, ELLEN SHapIRO, “The Ethnic Origins of the American People, 1790’, William & Mary Quarterly, 3rd

ser., 37 (1980), 179-99. ——contribution to ‘The Population of the United States, 1790: A Symposium’, William & Mary Quarterly, 3rd ser., 41 (1984), 129-35. McILwaIneg, H. R. (ed.), Minutes of the Council and General Court of Colonial Virginia, 1622—32 and 1670-76 (Richmond, Va., 1924). MENARD, RUSSELL R., ‘British Migration to the Chesapeake Colonies in the

Seventeenth Century’, in Lois Green Carr, Philip D. Morgan, and Jean B. Russo (eds.), Colonial Chesapeake Society (Chapel Hill, NC, 1989), 99132. MILLER, Perry, The New England Mind: The Seventeenth Century (Cambridge,

Mass., 1939). —— The New England Mind: From Colony to Province (Cambridge, Mass., 1952). Moopy, T. W., The Londonderry Plantation, 1609-1641 (Belfast, 1939).

—— MarrTIN, F. X., and Byrne, F. J. (eds.), 4 New History of Ireland, iii: Early Modern Ireland, 1534-1691 (Oxford, 1976).

288 Bibliography ——and VAUGHAN, W. E. (eds.), A New History of Ireland, iv: E1ghteenthCentury Ireland, 1691-1800 (Oxford, 1986). MorGan, EDMUND S., American Slavery: American Freedom: The Ordeal of Colonial Virginia (New York, 1975). Morris, RICHARD B., Government and Labor in Early America (New York, 1936). O’FLANAGAN, PATRICK, and BUTTIMER, CORNELIUS G. (eds.), County Cork:

History and Society (Dublin, 1993). PENDER, SEAMUS (ed.), 4 ‘Census’ of Ireland circa 1659 with Supplementary Material from the Poll Money Ordinances, 1660-1661 (Dublin, 1939). PERCEVAL-MAXWELL, M., The Scottish Migration to Ulster in the Reign of James

I (London, 1973). PETTY, SIR WILLIAM, The Political Anatomy of Ireland [1672] (London, 1691).

PILsworTH, N. J., ‘Census or Poll Tax’, Journal of Royal Society of Anti-

quarians of Ireland, 73 (1943), 22-4. | PoTTeR, J., “The Growth of Population in America, 1700-1860’, in D. V. | Glass and D. E. C. Eversley (eds.), Population in History: Essays in Historical Demography (London, 1965), 631-88. Purvis, THOMAS L., “The European Ancestry of the United States Population, 1790’, contribution to “The Population of the United States, 1790: A Symposium’, William & Mary Quarterly, 3rd ser., 41 (1984), 85-101; see also 119-25. , ROBINSON, PHILIP, The Plantation of Ulster: British Settlement in an Insh Landscape, 1600-1670 (Dublin, 1984). RUTMAN, DARRETT B., and RUTMAN, ANITA H., A Place in Time: Middlesex County, Virginia, 1650-1750 (New York, 1984).

—— ‘“Now-Wives and Sons—in-Law”: Parental Death in a SeventeenthCentury Virginia County’, in Thad W. Tate and David L. Ammerman (eds.), The Chesapeake in the Seventeenth Century: Essays on Anglo-American

Society (Chapel Hill, NC, 1979), 153-82. SHILTON, DorROTHY O., and HOLWORTHY, RICHARD (eds.), High Court of Admiralty Examinations MS vol. 53, 1637-8 (New York, 1932).

SIMINGTON, R. C., ‘“Census” of Ireland, c.1659—The Term Titulado’, Analecta Hibernica, 12 (1943), 177-8. SMITH, ABBOT EMERSON, Colonists in Bondage: White Servitude and Convict

Labor in America, 1607-1776 (Chapel Hill, NC, 1947; paperback edn., New York, 1971).

SMITH, DANIEL ScOTT, “The Estimates of Early American Historical Demographers: Two Steps Forward, One Step Back, What Steps in the Future?’, Historical Methods, 12 (1979), 24-38. SMITH, JAMES Morton (ed.), Seventeenth-Century America: Essays in Colonial History (Chapel Hill, NC, 1959; paperback edn., New York, 1972). SMYTH, W. J., ‘Making the Documents of Conquest Speak: The Transfor-

mation of Property, Society, and Settlement in Seventeenth-Century

Scottish Migration 289 Counties Tipperary and Kilkenny’, in P. Gulliver and M. Silverman (eds.), Approaching the Past (New York, 1992), 236-90. —— ‘Society and Settlement in Seventeenth Century Ireland: The Evidence of the ‘1659 Census”’’, in W. J. Smyth and Kevin Whelan (eds.), Common Ground: Essays on the Historical Geography of Ireland Presented to T. Jones Hughes (Cork, 1988), 55-83. ——and WHELAN, KEVIN (eds.), Common Ground: Essays on the Historical Geography of Ireland Presented to T. Jones Hughes (Cork, 1988).

SOUDEN, Davin, ‘ “Rogues, Whores and Vagabonds’’?? Indentured Servant

Emigrants to North America and the Case of Mid-Seventeenth-Century Bristol’, Social History, 30 (1978), 23-41; repr. in Peter Clark and David Souden (eds.), Migration and Society in Early Modern England (London, 1987), 150-71.

1979). |

TATE, THAD W., and AMMERMAN, DaAvID L. (eds.), The Chesapeake in the Seventeenth Century: Essays on Anglo-American Society (Chapel Hill, NC,

THIRSK, JOAN, and Cooper, J. P. (eds.), Seventeenth-Century Economic Documents (Oxford, 1972). TyYACK, NORMAN C. P., ‘Migration from East Anglia to New England before 1660’ (Univ. of London Ph.D. thesis, 1951). WALSH, LORENA S., and MENARD, RUSSELL R., ‘Death in the Chesapeake: Two Life Tables for Men in Early Colonial Maryland’, Maryland Historical Magazine, 69 (1964), 214-17. WELLS, ROBERT V., The Population of the British Colonies in America Before 1776: A Survey of Census Data (Princeton, NJ, 1975).

WERTENBAKER, THOMAS J., Patrician and Plebeian in Virginia, or the

Origin and Development of the Social Classes of the Old Dominion (Charlottesville, Va., 1910). WOKECK, MARIANNE, ‘German and Irish Immigration to Colonial Philadelphia’, in Susan E. Klepp (ed.), The Demographic History of the Philadelphia

Region, 1600-1800, Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society, 133/2 (Philadelphia, 1989), 128-44. ——— ‘Promoters and Passengers: ‘The German Immigrant Trade’, in Richard

S. Dunn and Mary Maples Dunn (eds.), The World of William Penn (Philadelphia, 1986), 259-81. WRIGLEY, E. A., and SCHOFIELD, R. S., The Population History of England, 1541-1871 (London, 1981).

Chapter 5 Smout, Landsman, Devine Scottish Migration ABERG, A., ‘Scottish Soldiers in the Swedish Armies in the Sixteenth and Seventeenth Centuries’, in G. Simpson (ed.), Scotland and Scandinavia, 800-1800 (Edinburgh, 1990), 90-9.

290 Bibliography ApaM, M., ‘The Causes of the Highland Emigrations of 1783-1803’, Scottish Historical Review, 17 (1920), 73-89.

—— ‘Eighteenth-Century Highland Landlords and the Poverty Problem’, Scottish Historical Review, 19 (1921-2), 161-79.

— ‘The Highland Emigration of 1770’, Scottish Historical Review, 16 (1919), 280-93. ANON., A Plan Agreed upon by a Great Many Farmers and Others, in the Shires of Dumbarton, Clydesdale, Renfrew etc. (Paisley, 1772). ANON., Remarks on the Earl of Selkirk’s Observations of the Highlands (Edinburgh, 1806). ASPINWALL, Bo, ‘The Scots in the United States’, in R. A. Cage (ed.), The

Scot Abroad; Labour, Capital, Enterprise, 1750-1914 (London, 1985), 80-

III. BAILYN, B., Voyagers to the West: A Passage in the Peopling of America on the Eve

of the Revolution (New York, 1986). , BARKER, H. F., and HANSEN, M. L., ‘Report of Committee on Linguistic and

National Stocks in the Population of the United States’, in American Historical Association, Annual Report for the Year 1931 (Washington, DC, 1932), 1. 107-441.

Berry, R. B., “The Role of Hebridean Landlords in Early NineteenthCentury Emigration’ (Univ. of Strathclyde history department, BA thesis, 1979).

BIEGANSKA, A., ‘A Note on the Scots in Poland, 1550-1800’, in T. C. Smout (ed.), Scotland and Europe, 200-1850 (Edinburgh, 1986), 157-65. Borowy, W., Scots in Old Poland (Edinburgh, 1941). Brock, W. R., Scotus Americanus: A Survey of the Sources for Links between Scotland and America in the Eighteenth Century (Edinburgh, 1982). Brown, W., The Good Americans: The Loyalists in the American Revolution (New York, 1969).

BuMSTED, J. M., ‘Highland Emigration to the Island of St John and the Scottish Catholic Church, 1769-1774’, Dalhousie Review, 58 (1978), 511-27. ——The People’s Clearance: Highland Emigration to British North America, 1770-1815 (Edinburgh, 1982). BUTTERFIELD, L. H. (ed.), John Witherspoon Comes to America (Princeton, NJ, 1953). CaGE, R., ‘The Scots in England’, in R. Cage (ed.), The Scots Abroad: Labour, Capital, Enterprise, 1750-1914 (London, 1985), 29-45. CAMERON, V. R., Emigrants from Scotland to America, 1774-1775 (Baltimore, 1965). COLpDEN, C., Letters and Papers of Cadwallader Colden (g vols., New York,

1918-37). CONTAMINE, P., ‘Scottish Soldiers in France in the Second Half of the

Scottish Migration 291 Fifteenth century’, in G. Simpson (ed.), The Scottish Soldier Abroad 12471967 (Edinburgh, 1991).

CULLEN, L. M., ‘Population Trends in Seventeenth-Century Ireland’, Economic and Social Review, 6 (1975), 149-65.

DevINE, T. M., The Great Highland Famine: Hunger, Emigration and the Scottish Highlands in the Nineteenth Century (Edinburgh, 1988).

——‘Social Responses to Agrarian “Improvement”: The Highland and Lowland Clearances in Scotland’, in R. A. Houston and I. D. Whyte (eds.), Scottish Society, 500-1500 (Cambridge, 1990), 148-68. —— The Tobacco Lords: A Study of the Tobacco Merchants of Glasgow and their Trading Activities, c.1740-1790 (Edinburgh, 1975). ——/(ed.), Scottish Emigration and Scottish Society (Edinburgh, 1992).

——(ed.), A Scottish Firm in Virginia, 1767-1777: W. Cunninghame and Company (Edinburgh, 1984).

DE WoLFE, B., ‘Discoveries of America: Letters of British Emigrants to America on the Eve of the Revolution’, Perspectives in American History, NS

3 (1986), 1-80. Dosson, D., “Scottish Emigration to Colonial America, 1607-1785’ (Univ. of St Andrews M. Phil. thesis, 1988). DOoNALDSON, G., The Scot Overseas (London, 1966). DONALDSON, J., Money Increased and Credit Raised (Edinburgh, 1705). Douc tas, T. (LORD SELKIRK), Observations on the Present State of the Highlands of Scotland (London, 1805).

Dow, J., ‘Skotter in Sixteenth-Century Scania’, Scottish Historical Review, 11

(1965), 34-51. EASTERBY, J. H., History of the Saint Andrew’s Society of Charleston, South Carolina, 1729-1929 (Charleston, SC, 1929). ExIRCH, A. R., “The Transportation of Scottish Criminals to America during

| the Eighteenth Century’, Journal of British Studies, 24 (1985), 366-74. FALLON, J. A., “Scottish Mercenaries in the Service of Denmark and Sweden, 1626-1632’ (Glasgow Univ. Ph.D. thesis, 1972). FERGUSON, J. (ed.), Papers Illustrating the History of the Scots Brigade in the Service of the United Netherlands, 1572-1782 (3 vols., Edinburgh, 1899IgOl).

1989). |

FEwsTER, J. M., “The Keelmen of Tyneside in the Eighteenth Century’, Durham Unwersity Journal, 50 (1957), 24-33. FINGERHUT, E. R., “The Assimilation of Immigrants on the Frontier of New York, 1764-1776 (Columbia Univ. Ph.D. thesis, 1962). FISCHER, D. H., Albion’s Seed: Four British Folkways in America (New York, FIscHER, T. A., The Scots in Eastern and Western Prussia (Edinburgh, 1907). —— The Scots in Germany (Edinburgh, 1902). — The Scots in Sweden (Edinburgh, 1907).

292 Bibliography FLINN, M. W., ‘Malthus, Emigration and Potatoes in the Scottish Northwest, 1770-1870’, in L. M. Cullen and T. C. Smout (eds.), Comparative Aspects of Irish and Scottish Economic and Social History (Edinburgh, 1977),

47-64. —— et al. (eds.), Scottish Population History from the Seventeenth Century to the 1930s (Cambridge, 1977). FOSKETT, R., ‘Some Scottish Episcopalians in the North American Colonies,

-1675-—1750°, Records of the Scottish Church History Society, 14 (1963),

135-50. ——GIBSON, A. J., and SmMoutT, T. C., Prices, Food and Wages in Scotland, 1550-1780 (Cambridge, forthcoming).

GILLESPIE, R., Colonial Ulster: The Settlement of East Ulster, 1600-1641 (Cork, 1985). GRAGE, E.-B., ‘Scottish Merchants in Gothenburg, 1621-1850’, in T. C. Smout (ed.), Scotland and Europe 1200-1850 (Edinburgh, 1986), 112-27. GRAHAM, I. C. C., Colonists from Scotland: Emigration to North America, 1707-1753 (Ithaca, NY, 1956). GRAHAM, W., False Prophets Unmasked: A Sermon, Preached and now Published, at the Desire of the Committee of the Protestant Association in Newcastle Upon Tyne (Glasgow, 1780).

Gray, M., ‘Scottish Emigration: The Social Impact of Agrarian Change in the Rural Lowlands, 1775-1875’, Perspectives in American History, 7 (1973), 95-174. GREENE, J. P., Pursuits of Happiness: Social Development of Early Modern

NC, 1988). |

British Colonies and the Formation of American Culture (Chapel Hill, Harvey, A., ‘Journal of Colonel Alexander Harvey of Scotland and Barnet, Vermont’, Proceedings of the Vermont Historical Society (1921-3), 199-262. Haws, C., Scots in the Old Dominion (Edinburgh, 1980).

Hayes, J., ‘Scottish Officers in the British Army, 1714-1763’, Scottish Historical Review, 37 (1958), 23-33Historical Catalogue of the St Andrew’s Society of Philadelphia, with Biographical Sketches of Deceased Members 1749-1909 (2 vols., Philadelphia, 1907-13).

Hook, A., Scotland and America: A Study of Cultural Relations, 1750-1535 (Glasgow, 1975).

Houston, R. A., and WITHERS, C. W. J., ‘Population Mobility in Scotland and Europe, 1690-1900: A Comparative Perspective’, Annales de démographie historique (1990), 285-308.

Howe L, R., Newcastle-upon-Tyne and the Puritan Revolution (Oxford, 1967). HUNTER, J., The Making of the Crofting Community (Edinburgh, 1976). INsH, G. P., Scottish Colonial Schemes, 1620-1686 (Glasgow, 1922).

Karras, A., “Transatlantic Transients: Scots in Jamaica and the Chesapeake, 1740-1800’ (Univ. of Pennsylvania Ph.D. thesis, 1988).

Scottish Migration 293 LANDSMAN, N. C., ‘John Witherspoon and the Problem of Provincial Identity

in Scottish Evangelical Culture’, in R. B. Sher and J. R. Smitten (eds.), Scotland and America in the Age of the Enlightenment (Edinburgh, 1990),

29-45. —— ‘The Provinces and the Empire: Scotland, the American Colonies, and

the Development of British Provincial Identity’, in L. Stone (ed.), An Imperial State at War: Britain from 1689 to 1815 (London, 1994), 258-87. —— Scotland and its First American Colony, 1683-1765 (Princeton, NJ, 1985).

Leitu, W. F., The Scots Men-at-Arms and Life-Guards in France (Edinburgh, 1882).

Lirucow, W., The Totall Discourse of the Rare Adventures and Painefull Peregrinations of Long Nineteen Yeares Traveyles (Glasgow, 1906).

MacaFeE, W., and MorGan, V., ‘Population in Ulster, 1660-1760’, in P. Roebuck (ed.), Plantation to Partition: Essays in Ulster History in Honour of 7. L. McCracken (Belfast, 1981), 46—63. MacsEAN, W., Biographical Register of St Andrew’s Society of the State of New York (2 vols., New York, 1922).

McDonaLb, F., and McDONALD, E. SHapiro, “The Ethnic Origins of the American People, 1790’, William & Mary Quarterly, 3rd ser., 37 (1980), 179-99. MACcINNES, A. J., ‘Scottish Gaeldom: The First Phase of Clearance’, in T. M. Devine and R. M. Mitchison (eds.), People and Society in Scotland, 1: 1760-1830 (Edinburgh, 1988), 70-90. MACKENZIE, W. C., History of the Outer Hebrides (Paisley, 1903).

MACLEAN, M., ‘In the New Land a New Glengarry: Migration from the Scottish Highlands to Upper Canada, 1750-1820’ (Univ. of Edinburgh Ph.D. thesis, 1982). —— The People of Glengarry: Highlands in Transition, 1745-1820 (Montreal, 1992).

MAcMILLAN, D. S., ‘The “New Men” in Action: Scottish Mercantile and Shipping Operations in the North American Colonies, 1760-1825’, in D. S. Macmillan (ed.), Canadian Business History: Selected Studies, 1497-1971

(Toronto, 1972), 44-103. Meyer, D., The Highland Scots of North Carolina, 1732-1776 (Chapel Hill, NC, 1961). Monro, R., His Expedition with the Worthy Scots Regiment (London, 1637). Moopy, T. W., and VAUGHAN, W. E. (eds.), 4 New History of Ireland: Eighteenth-Century Ireland, 1691-1800 (Oxford, 1986).

Moopy, T. W., Martin, F. X., and Byrne, F. J. (eds.), 4 New History of Treland, iii (Oxford, 1976). Morison, J., The Secession Testimony Abundantly Consistent with Liberty of Conscience (Paisley, 1774).

—— The Crisis: A Discourse on the Aspects of Providence, in November 1777 (Edinburgh, 1778).

294 Bibliography Morrison, J., Scots on the Dyk (Castle Douglas, 1981). Murpocy, A. (ed.), ‘A Scottish Document Concerning Emigration to North Carolina in 1772’, North Carolina Historical Review, 67 (1990), 438-49. PERCEVAL-MAXWELL, M., The Scottish Migration to Ulster in the Reign of James

I (London, 1973).

Prick, J. M., “The Rise of Glasgow in the Chesapeake Tobacco Trade’, Wilham & Mary Quarterly, 3rd ser., 11 (1954), 179-99.

Purvis, T. L., “The European Ancestry of the United States Population, 1790’, William & Mary Quarterly, 3rd ser., 41 (1984), 85-102. Rein, W. S. (ed.), The Scottish Tradition in Canada (Toronto, 1976). RICHARDS, E.., A History of the Highland Clearances (London, 1982).

Rus, T., Should Auld Acquaintance Be Forgot... Scottish-—Danish Relations c.1450—1707 (Odense, 1988).

RILey, E. M. (ed.), The Journal of John Harrower: An Indentured Servant in the Colony of Virginia (Williamsburg, Va., 1963). SAMSONOWICZ, H., ‘Deux formes d’activité commerciale: les Anglais et les Ecossais en Pologne et dans les pays limitophes au XIVe—premiére moitié du XVle siécle, Studia Maritima, 2 (1980). SAUNDERS, W. L. (ed.), The Colonial Records of North Carolina (Raleigh, NC,

1886-90), 489-90. SHERIDAN, R. B., Sugar and Slavery: An Economic History of the British West Indies, 1623-1775 (Baltimore, 1974). SOLTOW, J. H., ‘Scottish Traders in Virginia, 1750-1775’, Economic History

Review, 2nd ser., 12 (1959-60), 83-98. STEUART, A. F. (ed.), Papers Relating to the Scots in Poland, 1576-1793 (Edinburgh, 1915). STEVEN, W., The History of the Scottish Church in Rotterdam (Edinburgh, 1832).

Survey and Report on the Coasts and Central Highlands of Scotland, British Parliamentary Papers, 4 (London, 1802-3), g—1I0. [THoM, W.], 4 Candid Enquiry into the Causes of the Late and the Intended Migrations from Scotland (Glasgow, n.d.). ——JInformation Concerning the Province of North Carolina, Addressed to Emigrants from the Highlands and Western Isles of Scotland (Glasgow, 1773). —Information to Emigrants, being the Copy of a Letter from a Gentleman in North-America (Glasgow, 1773).

——The Present Conduct of the Chieftains and Proprietors of Lands in the

Highlands of Scotland (London, 1773). |

—— Seasonable Advice to the Landholders and Farmers in Scotland (Edinburgh, 1770). Transactions of the Highland and Agricultural Society, 2 (1803), pp. vii—xi.

Tyson, R. E., ‘Contrasting Regimes: Population Growth in Ireland and Scotland during the Eighteenth Century’, in R. A. Houston et al. (eds.),

Trish Migration 295 Conflict and Identity in the Soctal and Economic History of Ireland and Scotland

(Edinburgh, forthcoming). VRIES, J. de, ‘Population and Economy of Preindustrial Netherlands’, Journal of Interdisciplinary History, 15 (1985), 661—82.

WESTERKAMP, M. J., Triumph of the Laity: Scots-Irish Piety and the Great

Awakening, 1625-1760 (Oxford, 1988). , WRIGLEY, E. A., and SCHOFIELD, R. S., The Population History of England, 1541-1871 (London, 1980).

Chapter 6 Cullen Irish Migration ANON., ‘Mallow and its Neighbourhood in 1775’, Journal of the Cork Historical, and Archaeological Society, 27—8 (1921-2), 1-10, 78—86. BAILYN, B., The Peopling of British North America: An Introduction (London, 1987). —— Voyagers to the West: A Passage in the Peopling of North America on the Eve of the Revolution (New York, 1988 edn.).

Bric, M. J., ‘Ireland, Irishmen, and the Broadening of the Late EighteenthCentury Philadelphia Polity’ Qohns Hopkins Univ. Ph.D. dissertation, 1Qgo).

Calendars of State Papers Colonial, America and West Indies, 1669-74. Calendars of State Papers Colonial, America and West Indies, 1677—8o.

Canny, N., ‘In Defence of the Constitution? The Nature of Irish Revolt in the Seventeenth Century’, in L. Bergeron and L. M. Cullen (eds.), Culture et pratiques politiques en France et en Irlande XVI’—XVIIF stécles (Paris, 1991).

CARTER, EDwarpD C., ‘A “Wild Irishman” under every Federalist Bed: Naturalisation in Philadelphia 1789-1806’, Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society, 133/2 (June 1989), 178-89. CHERUBINI, B., ‘Les Acadiens en Guyane francaise, des colons exemplaires pour une colonisation en dilettante’, Bulletin du Centre d’histoire des espaces atlantiques, NS 5 (1990), 157-96. CHILDS, J., Armies and Warfare in Europe, 1648—178g (Manchester, 1982).

CULLEN, L. M., ‘Economic Development 1750-1800’, in T. W. Moody and W. Vaughan (eds.), New History of Ireland, iv (Oxford, 1986), 159-95. —— The Emergence of Modern Ireland, 1600-1900 (London, 1981; 2nd edn.,

Dublin, 1983). |

—— ‘History, Economic Crises and Revolution: Understanding EighteenthCentury France’, Economic History Review, 46/4 (Nov. 1993), 635-57. DERMIGNY, L., Sete de 1666 a 1880: esquisse de l’histoire d’un port (Montpellier, 1955). Dickson, R. J., Ulster Emigration to Colonial America, 1718-1775 (London, 1966).

296 Bibliography DoyLe, David Nok, Ireland, Irishmen and Revolutionary America, 17601820 (Dublin, 1981). Dunaway, W., The Scotch-Insh of Colonial Pennyshania (Chapel Hill, NC, 1944). FERGUSON, JAMES, Papers Illustrating the History of the Scots Brigade in the Service of the United Provinces (2 vols., Edinburgh, 1899).

FOGELMAN, A., ‘Migrations to the 13 American Colonies, 1700-1775: New . Estimates’, Journal of Interdisciplinary History, 22 (1992), 691-709.

GeMERY, H. A., ‘Emigration from the British Isles to the New World, 1630-1700: Inferences from Colonial Populations’, Research in Economic History, 5 (1980), 179-231. GILBERT, A. N., ‘Recruitment and Reform in the East India Company Army, 1760-1800’, Journal of British Studies, 15/1 (Nov. 1975), 89-111. GREEN, E. R. R., Essays in Scotch-Irish History (London, 1969).

GuIBERT, M. C., DErBIEN, G., and Martin, C., “L’Emigration vers la Louisiane (La Rochelle, Nantes, Clairac) (1698-—1754)’, 97° Congres national des soctétés savantes, histoire moderne (Nantes, 1972), ii. 97-136. HENRY, GRAINNE, The Irish Military Community in Spanish Flanders, 1586-— 1621 (Dublin, 1992).

—'‘“Wild Geese” in Spanish Flanders: The First Generation, 1586— 1610’, Lrish Sword, 17 (1989), 189-201. The Great Importance and Necessity of Increasing Tillage... in a Letter Addressed to the Rt. Hon. Fohn Earl Grandison (Dublin, 1755).

Hunt, Owen B., The Irish and the American Revolution: Three Essays (Philadelphia, 1976). Lecky, W. E. H., A History of Ireland in the Eighteenth Century, i. (London, 1892). LOCKHART, AUDREY, Some Aspects of Emigration from Ireland to the North American Colonies between 1660 and 1775 (New York, 1976).

LORIMER, J., English and Irish Settlement on the River Amazon, 1550-1646, Haklyut Society, 2nd ser., 171 (London, 1989). | MANNION, JOHN J., ‘Migration and Upward Mobility: The Meagher Family in Ireland and Newfoundland, 1780-1830’, Irish Economic and Social His-

tory, 15 (1988), 54-70. MEYER, JEAN, Les Européens et les autres de Cortes a Washington (Paris, 1975).

MILLER, KERBY A., Emigrants and Exiles: Ireland and the Irish Exodus to America (New York, 1985).

Mokyr, JOEL, and O Gr&pa, Cormac, ‘The Height of Irishmen and Englishmen in the 1770s: Some Evidence from the East India Company Army Records’, Eighteenth-Century Ireland, 4 (1989), 83-92. Myers, ALBERT C., [mmigration of the Irish Quakers into Pennsylvania 16821750 (Swarthmore, Pa., 1902). PARKER, G., The Thirty Years War (London, 1987).

Dutch Migration 297 PoweER, THOMAS, The Irish in Atlantic Canada, 1780-1900 (Fredericton, New Brunswick, 1991).

SILKE, JOHN J., ‘The Irish Abroad in the Age of the CounterReformation’, in T. W. Moody, F. X. Martin, and F. J. Byrne (eds.),

(Oxford, 1976), 587-633. |

A New History of Ireland, iii: Early Modern Ireland, 1534-1691 Simms, J. G., “The Irish on the Continent, 1691-1800’, in T. W. Moody and W. E. Vaughan (eds.), 4 New History of Ireland, vol w, EighteenthCentury Ireland, 1691-1500 (Oxford, 1986), 629-56. SMITH, A., An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations, ed. W. R. Scott (London, 1921). TRuxES, T. M., Irish-American Trade (Cambridge, 1988).

WoKEck, M., ‘German and Irish Immigration to Colonial Philadelphia’, Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society, 133/2 (June 1989), 128-43.

Chapter 7 Lucassen Dutch Migration ApaMsoN, A. H., Sugar without Slaves. The Political Economy of British Guiana, 1838—1904 (New Haven, Conn., 1972). AMERSFOORT, H., Koning en Kanton. De Nederlandse staat en het einde van de Zwitserse krijgsdienst hier te lande 1814-1529 (The Hague, 1988). BakKER, M., et al., Hugenoten in Groningen (Groningen, 1985). BIENTJES, J., Holland und der Hollander im Urteil deutscher Retsenden 1400-

1800 (Groningen, 1967). BLomM, D. van, ‘Europeesche kolonisatie in Suriname’, in Encyclopaedie van Nederlandsch West-Indié (The Hague, 1914-17), 286-8. BOLSKER-SCHLICHT, F., Die Hollandgdngeret im Osnabriicker Land und im Emsland. Ein Beitrag zur Geschichte der Arbeiterwanderung vom 17. bis zum 19. Jahrhundert (Ségel, 1987). BOOGAART, E. VAN DEN, ‘De Nederlandse expansie in het atlantisch gebied 1590-1674’, in Algemene Geschiedenis der Nederlanden (Haarlem, 1980), vii.

220-54. Bots, H., et al., Vlucht naar de vrijheid. De Hugenoten en de Nederlanden (Amsterdam, 1985). Boxer, C. R., The Dutch Seaborne Empire, 1600—1800 (London, 1965). BRIELS, J., Zuid-Nederlanders in de Republiek 1572-1630. Een demografische en cultuurhistorische studie (St Niklaas, 1985).

Bruyn, J. R., ‘De personeelsbehoefte van de VOC overzee en aan boord, bezien in Aziatisch en Nederlands perspectief’, Bijdragen en Mededelingen betreffende de Geschiedenis der Nederlanden, 91 (1976), 218-48.

298 Bibliography ——‘Zeevarenden’, in Marntieme Geschiedenis der Nederlanden (Bussum, 1977), ili. 146—go. —— and LUCASSEN, J. (eds.), Op de schepen der Oost-Indische Compagnie. Viif artikelen van F. de Hullu ingeleid, bewerkt en voorzien van een studie over de werkgelegenhetd bij de VOC (Groningen, 1980).

——et al.. Dutch—Asiatic Shipping in the wth and Sth Centuries, i (The Hague, 1987).

Buck, P. DE, and LINDBLAD, J. T., ‘Navigatie en negotie. De galjoot-

sregisters als bron bij het onderzoek naar de geschiedenis van de Oostzeehandel in de achttiende eeuw’, Tijdschrift voor Zeegeschiedents, 9

(special issue ‘300 Jaar Directie der Oostersche Handel en Rederijen’) (1990), 3-26. Bunp1, M., Biindner Kriegsdienste in Holland um sjoo. E1ine Studie zu den Beziehungen zwischen Holland und Graubtinden von 1693 bis 1730 (Chur, 1972).

BurKE, P., Venice and Amsterdam. A Study of Seventeenth-Century Elites (London, 1974). COHEN, R., Jews in Another Environment. Surinam in the Second Half of the Eighteenth Century (Leiden, 1991).

—— ‘Patterns of Marriage and Remarriage among the Sephardi Jews of Surinam, 1788-1818’, in R. Cohen (ed.), The fewish Nation in Surinam. Historical Essays (Amsterdam, 1982), 89-100. CorvisiER, A., L’Armée francaise de la fin du XVIle stécle au ministére de Choiseul. Le Soldat (3 vols., Paris, 1964). ——Armeées et sociétés en Europe de 1494 a 1789 (Paris, 1976).

Cruson, C., ‘De Hugenoten als refugiés’, De Gids, 148 (1985), 225-31. CurTIN, P. D., Cross-Cultural Trade in World History (Cambridge, 1984). —— Death by Migration. Europe’s Encounter with the Tropical World in the Nineteenth Century (Cambridge, 1989). Dyk, H. vAN, Rotterdam 1810-1880. Aspecten van een stedelijke samenleving (Schiedam, 1976). EMMER, P. C., ‘De slavenhandel van en naar Nieuw-Nederland’, Economischen Sociaal-Historisch faarboek, 35 (1972), 94-147.

—— ‘Engeland, Nederland, Afrika en de slavenhandel in de negentiende eeuw’, Economisch- en Sociaal-Historisch faarboek, 36 (1973), 146-215, and

37 (1974), 44-144. —— ‘Veranderingen op de Surinaamse arbeidsmarkt gedurende de negentiende eeuw; Smith en Marx in West-Indié’, Economisch- en SoctaalHistorisch Faarboek, 47 (1984), 205-21. Encyclopaedie van Nederlandsch West-Indié (The Hague, 1914-17). HESLINGA, E. VAN, Van Compagnie naar koopvaardy. De scheepvaartverbindingen

van de Bataafse Republick met de kolonién in Azié 1795-1506 (Amsterdam, 1988).

Dutch Migration 299 FUKS-MANSFELD, A. G., De Sefardim in Amsterdam tot 1795. Aspecten van een joodse minderheid in een Hollandse stad (Hilversum, 1989). GAASTRA, F. S., ‘De VOC in Azié’, in Algemene Geschiedenis der Nederlanden,

(Haarlem, 1980), ix. 424-67. GogEJE, C. H. DE, ‘Suriname I. Aardrijkskundig overzicht’, in Encyclopaedie van Nederlandsch West-Indié (The Hague, 1914-17), 663-6. Goor, J. VAN, Jan Kompenie as Schoolmaster. Dutch Education in Ceylon 16g01795 (Utrecht, 1978). HairsMA MuLIer, E. O. G., The Myth of Venice and Dutch Republican Thought in the Seventeenth Century (Assen, 1990). Hart, S., Geschrift en Getal. Een keuze uit de demografisch-, economisch- en sociaal-historische studién op grond van Amsterdamse en Zaanse archwvalia, 1600-1800 (Dordrecht, 1976). HirZe., W., ‘Tanta est fiducia gentis’. Les Régiments sutsses au service des PaysBas (Coppet, 1972). L”>HonorE Naser, S. P. (ed.), Reisebeschretbungen von deutschen Beamten und Kniegsleuten im Dienste der Niederlandischen West- und Ost-Indischen Kompagnien 1602-1797 (13 vols., The Hague, 1930-2). Howarp, M., War in European History (Oxford, 1976).

Hui, C. H. (ed.), The Economic Writings of Sir William Petty (2 vols., Cambridge, 1899). ISRAEL, J. 1., Dutch Primacy in World Trade, 1585-1740 (Oxford, 1989). —— European Jewry in the Age of Mercantilism, 1550-1750 (Oxford, 1989). KAISER, D., Fast ein Volk von Zuckerbackern? Biindner Konditoren, Cafetiers

und Hoteliers in europdischen Landen bis zum Ersten Weltkrieg (Zurich, 1985). KLEINSCHMIDT, E. A., “Broedergemeente’, in Encyclopaedie van Nederlandsch

West-Indié (The Hague, 1914-17), 178-82. KLEIsST, H. vON, Werke und Briefe, i (Strellov, 1978).

KNOTTER, A., and ZANDEN, J. L. VAN, ‘Immigratie en arbeidsmarkt in Amsterdam in de 17e eeuw’, Tijdschrift voor Sociale Geschiedenis, 13 (1987),

403-31. LANE, F. C., Venice. A Maritime Republic (Baltimore, 1973). LAZZARINI, A., “L’emigrazione temporanea della montagna veneta nel secondo ottocento’, Richerche di Storie Sociale e Religiosa, 10 (1976), 387-436. LecoyT, A., L’Emigration européenne: son importance, ses causes, ses effets (Paris, 1861). Lier, R. vAN, Samenleving in een grensgebied. Een sociaal-historische studte van

Suriname (Deventer, 1972). —— ‘The Jewish Community in Surinam: A Historical Survey’, in R. Cohen (ed.), The Jewish Nation in Surinam, Historical Essays (Amsterdam, 1982), I1Q—27.

LINDBLAD, J. T., “The Economic History of Colonial Indonesia: A His-

300 Bibliography toriographical Survey’, Economic and Social History in the Netherlands, 1

(1989), 31-47. LINTUM, C. TE, ‘Emigratie over Rotterdam in de 18e eeuw’, De Gids, 72 (1908), 323-35. LOuRENS, P., and LUCASSEN, J., Lipsker op de Groninger tichelwerken. Een geschiedenis van de Groningse steenindustrie met bijzondere nadruk op de Lipper trekarbeiders 1700-1900 (Groningen, 1987). Lucas, H. S., Netherlanders in America. Dutch Immigration to the United States and Canada, 178g—1950 (Ann Arbor, Mich., 1955). LUCASSEN, J., Migrant Labour in Europe 1600-1900. The Drift to the North Sea (London, 1987).

—— ‘Hannekemaaiersbrieven 1860-1889. Een bijdrage tot de geschiedenis van de arbeidsverhoudingen in de Friese hooibouw’, /t Beaken, 49 (1987),

200-29. — ‘Quellen zur Geschichte der Wanderungen, vor allem der Wanderarbeit, zwischen Deutschland und den Niederlanden vom 17. bis zum 19. Jahrhundert’, in E. Hinrichs and H. van Zon (eds.), Bevolkerungsgeschichte im Vergleich: Studien zu den Niederlanden und Nordwestdeutschland (Aurich,

1988), 75-89. —— Dutch Long Distance Migration: A Concise History, 1600-1900, ISGResearch Paper, 3 (Amsterdam, 1991). ——— and PENNINX, R., Nieuwkomers. Immigranten en hun nakomelingen in Nederland 1550-1985 (Amsterdam, 1985). MACKENNEY, R., Tradesmen and Traders. The World of the Guilds in Venice and Europe, c.1250—c.1650 (Totowa, NJ, 1987).

Mattuus, T. R., An Essay on Population [Introduction by M. P. Fogarty] (London, 1958). MARQUARD, L., The Story of South Africa (London, 1968). MeEngEZzES, M. N., British Policy towards the Amerindians in British Guiana 1803-1873 (Oxford, 1977). NETSCHER, P. M., Geschiedenis van de kolonién Essequebo, Demerary en Berbice, van de vestiging der Nederlanders aldaar tot op onzen tijd (The Hague, 1888). NUSTELING, H. P. H., Welvaart en werkgelegenheid in Amsterdam 1540-1860. Een relaas over de demografie, economie en sociale politiek van een wereldstad (Amsterdam, 1985).

—— ‘The Netherlands and the Huguenot Emigrés’, in J. A. H. Bots and G. H. M. Posthumus Meyjes (eds.), La Révocation de I’Edit de Nantes et les Provinces Unies (Amsterdam, 1986), 17-34. —— ‘Periods and Caesurae in the Demographic History of the Netherlands, 1600-1900’, Economic and Social History in the Netherlands, 1 (1989),

87-117. OomENS, C. A., De loop der bevolking van Nederland in de negentiende eeuw (The Hague, 1989).

Dutch Migration 301 OOSTERLING, J. E., Het korvet ‘Lynx’ in Zuid-Amerika, de Filippijnen en Oost-

Indté, 1823-1525. De Koninklijke Marine als instrument van het ‘politiek systhema’ van koning Willem I (Zutphen, 1989). PETERS, J.,.4 Family from Flanders (London, 1985).

Postma, J., “West African Exports and the Dutch West India Company, 1675-1731, Economisch- en Sociaal-Historisch faarboek, 36 (1973), 5374:

—— The Dutch in the Atlantic Slave Trade 1600-1815 (Cambridge, 1990). | PRINZ, J., Das wiirttembergische Kapregiment 1786-1808. Die Tragédte einer Soldnerschar (Stuttgart, 1932). PULLAN, B., Rich and Poor in Renaissance Venice. The Social Institutions of a Catholic State, to 1620 (Cambridge, Mass., 1971). —— (ed.), Crisis and Change in the Venetian Economy in the Sixteenth and Seventeenth Centuries (London, 1968). Rapp, R. T., Industry and Economic Decline in Seventeenth-Century Venice

(Cambridge, Mass., 1976).

Rens, L. L. E., ‘Analysis of Annals Relating to Early Jewish settlement in Surinam’, in R. Cohen (ed.), The Jewish Nation in Surinam. Historical Essays (Amsterdam, 1982), 29-46. RINK, O. A., Holland on the Hudson. An Economic and Social History of Dutch New York (New York, 1987).

Roey, J. VAN, ‘De bevolking’, in Roey et al., Antwerpen in de XVIe ceuw (Antwerp, 1975), 95-108. Roos J. S., ‘Israélietische gemeenten’, in Encyclopaedie van Nederlandsch West-

Indié (The Hague, 1914-17), 385-90. ROYEN, P. C. VAN, Zeevarenden op de koopvaardijvloot omstreeks 1700 (Amster-

dam, 1987).

—— ‘Manning the Merchant Marine. The Dutch Labour Market about 1700’, [International Journal of Maritime History, 1 (1989), 2-29.

—— ‘Moedernegotie en kraamkamer. Schippers en scheepsvolk op de Nederlandse vrachtvaart in Europese wateren vanaf de zeventiende tot in de negentiende eeuw’, Tijdschrift voor Zeegeschiedenis, g (special issue ‘300

Jaar Directie der Oostersche Handel en Rederijen’) (1990), 27-48. SALOMON, H. P., The ‘De Pinto’ Manuscript. A 17th Century Marrano Family History (Assen, 1975). SANDE LACOSTE, A. C. VAN DER, ‘Krijgsmacht’, in Encyclopaedie van Neder-

landsch West-Indié (The Hague, 1914-17), 420-32. SCHILLING, H., Niederlandische Exulanten im 16. Jahrhundert. Ihre Stellung im Soztalgeftige und im religiésen Leben deutscher und englischer Stadte (Gitersloh, 1972).

SCHOUWENBURG, K. L. van, ‘Het personeel op de schepen van de Kamer Delft der VOC in de eerste helft der 18e eeuw’, Tijdschrift voor Zeegeschiedenis, 7 (1988), 76-93.

302 Bibliography — ‘Het personeel op de schepen van de Kamer Delft der VOC in de tweede helft der 18e eeuw’, Tijdschrift voor Zeegeschiedenis, 8 (1989),

179-86. SELLA, D., ‘Au dossier des migrations montagnardes: l’exemple de la Lombardie au XVIle siécle’, in Mélanges en l’honneur de Fernand Braudel. Histoire économique du monde méditerranéen 1450-1650 (Paris, 1973), 547-54. SOGNER, S., ‘Young in Europe around 1700: Norwegian Sailors and Servant-

- Girls Seeking Employment in Amsterdam’, in Mesurer et comprendre. Meélanges en ’honneur de Jacques Dupaquier (Paris, 1991).

SPOONER, F., ‘Batavia, 1673-1790: A City of Colonial Growth and Migration’, in I. A. Glazier and L. de Rosa (eds.), Migration across Time and Nations. Population Mobility in Historical Contexts (New York, 1986), 30-57.

SWIERENGA, R. P., ‘Exodus Netherlands, Promised Land America. Dutch Immigration and Settlement in the United States’, Bijdragen en Mededelingen betreffende de Geschiedenis der Nederlanden, 97 (1982), 517-47. TANIS, J., “The American Dutch, their Church, and the Revolution’, Bijdragen en Mededelingen betreffende de Geschiedenis der Nederlanden, 97 (1982),

505-16. TAYLor, J. G., The Social World of Batavia. European and Eurasian in Dutch Asta (Madisen, Wisconsin, 1983). TILLy, C., ‘Migration in Modern European History’, in W. H. McNeill and R. S. Adams (eds.) Human Migration: Patterns and Policies (Bloomington,

Ind., 1978), 48-74. —— ‘Demographic Origins of the European Proletariat’, in D. Levine (ed.), Proletarianization and Family History (Orlando, Fla., 1984), 1-61. —— ‘Cities and States in Europe, 1000-1800’, Theory and Society, 18 (1989),

563-84. —— Coercion, Capital and European States, AD 990-1990 (Cambridge, Mass., 19Qo).

UNGER, W. S., “Bijdragen tot de geschiedenis van de Nederlandse slavenhandel’, Economisch-Historisch Jaarboek, 26 (1956), 133-74, and 28 (1961),

3-148. VALK, L. A. VAN DER, “Landverhuizersvervoer via Rotterdam in de negentiende eeuw’, Economisch- en Sociaal-Historish Faarboek, 39 (1976), 148-71. VERHEES-VAN MEkR, J. T. H., De Zeeuwse kaapvaart tijdens de Spaanse Successteoorlog 1702-1713 (Middelburg, 1986). VRIES, J. DE, European Urbanization, 1500-1800 (London, 1922; repr. 1984). WINTER, P. J. VAN, Het aandeel van den Amsterdamschen handel aan den opbouw

) van het Amertkaansche Gemeenebest (Amsterdam, 1927). ZANDEN, J. L. VAN, ‘The Dutch Economic History of the Period 15001940: A Review of the Present State of Affairs’, Economic and Social History

in the Netherlands, 1 (1989), 9-29. ZEHNDER, A., Unter Hollands Flagge in Ost-Indien (Lucerne, 1924).

German Migration 303 Chapter 8 Fertig German Migration ADAMS, WILLI PauL, “The Colonial German-Language Press and the American Revolution’, in Bernard Bailyn and John B. Herch (eds.), The - Press and the American Revolution (Worcester, Mass., 1980), 151-228. American Council of Learned Societies, ‘Report of the Committee on Linguistic and National Stocks in the Population of the United States’, in American Historical Association, Annual Report for the Year 1931 (Washington, DC, 1932), i. 107-25. BAILYN, BERNARD, The Peopling of British North America: An Introduction (New

York, 1986).

BECK, PauL, ‘Der Junggesindemarkt (das _ Hiitkinderwesen) in Oberschwaben—ein Kulturbild’, Didzesanarchiv von Schwaben, 23 (1905),

129-37, 145-50, and 24 (1906), 44-7. , BECK, RAINER, Naturale Okonomie. Unterfinning: Bauerliche Wirtschaft in einem

oberbayerischen Dorf des friihen 18. Jahrhunderts, Forschungshefte, 11 (Munich, 1986). BLICKLE, RENATE, ‘Nahrung und Eigentum als Kategorien in der standischen Gesellschaft’, in W. Schulze (ed.), Standische Gesellschaft und soziale

Mobilitat, Schriften des historischen Kollegs, Kolloquien 12 (Munich, 1989), 73-93. BLOCHER, ANDREASE, Die Eigenart der Ziircher Answanderer nach Amerika 1734-1744 (Zurich, 1976). BRAKER, ULRICH, Lebensgeschichte und natiirliche Ebentheuer des Armen Mannes

am Tockenburg (Zurich, 1789; repr. Munich, 1965). | BURGERT, ANNETTE K., Eighteenth-Century Emigrants from German-Speaking

Lands to North America, Publications of the Pennsylvania German Society, 16, 19 (Breinigsville, Pa., 1983, 1985). —— Emigrants from Eppingen to America in the Eighteenth and Nineteenth Centuries (Myerstown, Pa., 1987). BUTLER, JON, The Huguenots in America: A Refugee People in New World Society

(Cambridge, Mass., 1983). CARLEBACH, RUDOLF, Badische Rechtsgeschichte, i, ii (Heidelberg, 1906, 1909).

CLARK, COLIN, Population Growth and Land Use (London, 1968). CLARK, PETER, and SOUDEN, Davin (eds.), Migration and Society in Early Modern England (London, 1987). DIEFENBACHER, KARL, Ortssippenbuch Eppingen, Badische Ortssippenbiicher,

52 (Lahn, 1984). DURNBAUGH, DONALD F., The Brethren in Colonial America (Elgin, Ill., 1967).

EHMANN, KARL, Die Auswanderung in die Neuenglandstaaten aus Orten des Enzkreises im 18. Jahrhundert, Siidwestdeutsche Blatter fiir Familienkunde, Sonderheft 1977 (Stuttgart, 1977).

304 Bibliography Eine leyder wahrhaffte Traurige Geschicht und Beschreibung, Wie im nachst abgewichenen Monat Juli, dieses noch lauffenden 1754ten Jahrs, ein grosses Schiff nach West-Indien mit 468 Personen, welche von Rotterdamm in die Neue Welt

abgefahren, zwischen Pensyluanien und Philadelphia aber jammerlich untergegangen, und zerschetttert, mithin schier alle darauf befundene Seelen ein lamentables Ende genommen (s.l., 1754).

Exsas, Moritz J., Umrifs einer Geschichte der Preise und Léhne in Deutschland . (2 vols., Leiden, 1936, 1949). ENGELSING, ROLF, “Der Arbeitsmarkt der Dienstboten im 17., 18. und 1g. Jahrhundert’, in Hermann Kellenbenz (ed.), Wirtschafispolitik und Arbeitsmarkt: Bericht tiber die 4. Arbeitstagung der Gesellschaft fiir Sozial- und Wirts-

159-237. ,

chafisgeschichte in Wien am 14. und 15. April 1971 (Munich, 1974), EBER, ALFRED, ‘Die Lohn-Preis-Entwicklung fiir landwirtschaftliche Arbeiter in Deutschland, England und Nordamerika im 18. Jahrhundert’, in Klaus Tenfelde (ed.), Arbeiter und Arbeiterbewegung im Vergleich, Historische Zeitschrift, 15 (Munich, 1986), 101-36. FALCKNER, DANIEL, Curieuse Nachricht von Pensylvania... (Frankfurt, 1702).

Faust, ALBERT B., ‘Documents in Swiss Archives relating to Emigration to American Colonies in the Eighteenth Century’, American Historical Review, 22 (1916-17), 89-132. —— ‘Unpublished Documents on Emigration from the Archives of Switzerland’, Deutsch-Amentkanische Geschichtsblatter, 18/19 (1918-19), 9-68. —— Lists of Swiss Emigrants in the Eighteenth Century to the American Colonies

(2 vols., Washington, DC, 1920; repr. in 1 vol., Baltimore, 1968). FENSKE, HANS, “International Migration: Germany in the Eighteenth Century’, Central European History, 13 (1980), 332-47. FERTIG, GEORG, ‘Wanderungsmotivation und landliche Gesellschaft im 18. Jahrhundert: Vom Oberrhein nach Nordamerika’ (Free Univ. of Berlin Ph.D. dissertation, forthcoming).

—— ‘Um Anhoffung besserer Nahrung willen”—Der lokale und motivationale Hintergrund von Auswanderung nach Britisch-Nordamerika im 18. Jahrhundert’, Bettrage zur historischen Sozialkunde, 22 (1992), 111-20. FOGELMAN, AARON, ‘Progress and Possibilities in Migration Studies: The Contributions of Werner Hacker to the Study of Early German Migration to Pennsylvania’, Pennsylvania History, 56 (1989), 318-29. —— ‘Migrations to the Thirteen British North American Colonies, 17001775: New Estimates’, Journal of Interdisciplinary History, 22 (1992),

691-709. |

_ —— ‘Hopeful Journeys: German Immigration and Settlement in Greater Pennsylvania, 1717-1775’ (Univ. of Michigan Ph.D. dissertation, forth-

, coming).

FREDERICK II OF Prussia, Histoire de mon temps (1775), in Johann D. E. Preuss (ed.), Giuvres de Frédéric le Grand, ii and iii (Berlin, 1856).

German Migration 305 FREEDEN, HERMANN, and SMOLKA, GEORG, ‘Deutsche Auswanderung im

18. Jahrhundert’, first pub. 1937; repr. in Hans Herder (ed.), Hessisches Auswandererbuch, 2nd edn. (Frankfurt, 1984), 111-32. GEMERY, HENrRy, ‘European Immigration to North America, 1700-1820: Numbers and Quasi-Numbers’, Perspecttves 1n American History, NS 1 (1984), 283-342. GERSTLACHER, CARL F., Sammlung aller Baden-Durlachischen . .. Verordnung-

en, ii (Karlsruhe, 1774). GOEBEL, JULIUS, ‘Neue Dokumente zur Geschichte der Massenauswanderung im Jahre 1709’, Deutsch-Amerikanische Geschichtsblatter, 13 (1913),

181-201. —— (ed.), ‘Briefe Deutscher Auswanderer aus dem Jahre 1709’, DeutschAmerikanische Geschichtsblatter, 12 (1912), 124-89. GRABBE, HANS-JURGEN, “Besonderheiten der europdischen Einwanderung

in die USA wiahrend der frithen nationalen Periode 1783-1820’, Amerikastudien / American Studies, 33 (1988), 271-90. GRAUS, FRANTISEK, “Die Randstandigen’, in P. Moraw (ed.), Unterwegssein im

1956).

Spatmittelalter, Zeitschrift fiir historische Forschung, 1 (Berlin, 1985). GRIMM, JACOB, Deutsche Rechtsalterhtimer, 4th edn. (1899; repr. East Berlin, GRUBB, FARLEY, “The Incidence of Servitude in Trans-Atlantic Migration, 1771-1804’, Explorations in Economic History, 22 (1985), 316-39. —— ‘Colonial Immigrant Literacy: An Economic Analysis of PennsylvaniaGerman Evidence, 1727-1775’, Explorations in Economic History, 24 (1987),

63-76. —— ‘The Market Structure of Shipping German Immigrants to Colonial America’, Pennsylvania Magazine of History and Biography, 111 (1987), 27-48. —— ‘Morbidity and Mortality on the North Atlantic Passage: EighteenthCentury German Immigration’, Journal of Interdisciplinary History, 17 (1987), 577-84. —— “The Auction of Redemptioner Servants, Philadelphia, 1771-1804: An Economic Analysis’, fournal of Economic History, 48 (1988), 583-603. —— ‘German Immigration to Pennsylvania, 1709 to 1820’, Journal of Interdisciplinary History, 20 (1990), 417-36. HACKER, WERNER, Auswanderungen aus dem friiheren Hochstifi Speyer nach Stidosteuropa und Ubersee im 18. Jahrhundert: Eine Dokumentation in Regestenform nach Unterlagen des Badischen Generallandesarchivs Karlsruhe, Schriften

zur Wanderungsgeschichte der Pfalzer, 28 (Kaiserslautern, 1969). ——— ‘Auswanderung aus dem Raum der spateren Hohenzollerischen Lande nach Siidosteuropa’, Zeitschrift fiir Hohenzollerische Geschichte, 5 (1969),

45-230. —— Auswanderer vom Oberen Neckar nach Stidosteuropa, Buchreihe der Siidostdeutschen historischen Kommission, 23 (Munich, 1970).

306 Bibliography —— Auswanderungen aus dem stidéstlichen Schwarzwald zwischen Hochrhein,

| Barr und Kinzig insbesondere nach Siidosteuropa 1m 17. und 18. Fahrhundert, Buchreihe der Siidostdeutschen historischen Kommission, 29 (Munich, 1975). —— Auswanderungen aus dem nordlichen Bodenseeraum, Hegau-Bibliothek, 29

(Singen, 1975). —— Auswanderung aus Oberschwaben: Im 17. und 18. Jahrhundert archwrvalisch dokumentiert (Stuttgart, 1977).

——— ‘Auswanderung aus dem Territorium der Reichsstadt Ulm’, Ulm und Oberschwaben, 42-3 (1978), 161-257. —— Auswanderungen aus Baden und dem Breisgau: Obere und mittlere rechtsseitige Oberrheinlande im 18. Jahrhundert archivalisch dokumentiert (Stuttgart, 1980). —— Kurpfalzische Auswanderer vom Unteren Neckar: Rechtsrheinische Gebiete

der Kurpfalz, Sonderveréffentlichung des Stadtarchivs Mannheim, 4

(Stuttgart, 1983). | —— Auswanderungen aus der Rheinpfalz und dem Saarland im 18. Fahrhundert (Sigmaringen, 1987). HABERLEIN, MARK, ‘Vom Oberrhein zum Susquehanna: Studien zur badis-

chen Auswanderung nach Pennsylvania im 18. Jahrhundert’ (Stuttgart Ph.D. dissertation, forthcoming). HAHNER, ERNST, Ortssippenbuch Gobrichen, Badische Ortssippenbiicher, 53 (Gdbrichen, 1985). —— Ortssippenbuch Bauschlott, Badische Ortssippenbiicher, 58 (Bauschlott, 19Q1).

[HARRSCH, JOSUAH], KOCHERTHAL, Aufsfiihrlich- und umstandlicher Bericht

von der beriihmten Landschafft Carolina ..., 4th edn. (Frankfurt, 1709; repr. Neustadt a.d. WeinstraBe, 1983). HASENCLEVER, ADOLF (ed.), Peter Hasenclever aus Remscheid-Ehringhausen, ein

deutscher Kaufmann des 18. Jahrhunderts. Seine Biographie, Briefe und Denkschrifien (Gotha, 1922). HIPpPEL, WOLFGANG VON, Auswanderung aus Stidwestdeutschland, Industrielle

Welt, 36 (Stuttgart, 1984). HOcHSTADT, STEVE, ‘Migration in Preindustrial Germany’, Central European

History, 16 (1983), 195-224. IMHOF, ARTHUR E., Lebenserwartungen in Deutschland vom 17. bis 19. fahr-

hundert/Life Expectancies in Germany from the 17th to the 19th Century (Weinheim, 1990). IPSEN, GUNTHER, Blut und Boden (Das preufvische Erbhofrecht), Kieler Vortrage

iiber Volkstums- und Grenzlandfragen und den nordisch-baltischen Raum, 2 (Neumiinster, 1933). JARITZ, GERHARD, and MULLER, ALBERT (eds.), Migration in der Feudalgesell-

| schaft, Studien zur historischen Sozialwissenschaft, 8 (Frankfurt, 1988).

German Migration 307 [ JENNER, SAMUEL] N. N., Neu-gefundenes Eden... (n.p., 1737). Kalender im Wandel der Zeiten: Eine Ausstellung der Badischen Landesbibliothek zur Erinnerung an die Kalenderreform durch Papst Gregor XIII. im Jahr 1582

(Karlsruhe, 1982).

phia, 1937). |

KNITTLE, WALTER A., Early Eighteenth-Century Palatine Emigration (PhiladelKNODEL, JOHN, Demographic Behaviour in the Past: A Study of Fourteen German

Village Populations in the Eighteenth and Nineteenth Centuries, Cambridge Studies in Population, Economy and Society in Past Time, 6 (Cambridge, 1988). KuBAT, DANIEL, and HOFFMANN-NowotTny, HANS-JOACHIM, ‘Migration: Towards a New Paradigm’, /nternational Social Science fournal 33 (1981),

307-29. KUTHER, CARSTEN, Menschen auf der Strafve (Gottingen, 1983). Land-Recht der Fiirstenthummer und Landen der Marggraffschaffien Baaden und

Hachberg ... (Durlach, 1710). }

Landes-Ordnung der Fiirstenthummer und Landen der Marggraffschafften Baaden

und Hachberg...(Durlach, 1715). LEMON, JAMES T., The Best Poor Man’s Country: A Geographical Study of Early Southeastern Pennsylvania (Baltimore, 1972).

List, FRIEDRICH, “Die Ackerverfassung, die Zwergwirtschaft und die Auswanderung’, in List, Schriften, Reden, Briefe, eds. Edgar Salin, Artur Sommer, and Otto Stihler, v (Berlin, 1928), 418-547. LUCASSEN, JAN, Migrant Labour in Europe 1600-1900: The Drift to the North Sea (London, 1987). MATTMULLER, Markus, Bevolkerungsgeschichte der Schweiz, Basler Beitrage

zur Geschichtswissenschaft, 154 (Basel, 1987), i/1. MITTERAUER, MICHAEL, ‘Formen landlicher Familienwirtschaft: Historische Okotypen und familiale Arbeitsorganisation im dsterreichischen Raum’, in Mitterauer and Joseph Ehmer (eds.), Famuiltenstruktur und Arbeitsorganisation in landlichen Gesellschaften (Vienna, 1980), 185-323. MOLTMANN, GUNTER, Aufbruch nach Amerika, 2nd edn. (Stuttgart, 1989).

Moraw, PETER (ed.), Unterwegssein im Spdtmittelalter, Zeitschrift fiir historische Forschung, 1 (Berlin, 1985). MATSCHINEGG, INGRID, and MULLER, ALBERT, ‘Migration—Wanderung— Mobilitaét in Spatmittelalter und Friithneuzeit’, Medium Aevum Quotidianum,

21 (1990), 3-92. Myers, RAYMOND E., “The Story of Germanna’, Filson Club Historical Quarterly, 48 (1974), 27-42. Neu, PETER, ‘Die Gesindemarkte der Siideifel’, Rheinische Vierteljahrsblatter,

32 (1968), 498-522. New York Genealogical and Biographical Records, 40 (1909), 49-54, 93—100,

160-7, 241-8; 42 (1910), Io—19.

308 Bibliography [PASTORIUS, FRANZ DANIEL], N. N., Sichere Nachricht aufS America wegen der Landschafft Pennsylvania von einem dorthin gereifgten Teutschen de dato Philadelphia, den 7. Martii 1684 (s.1., s.a.). Pensylvanische Berichte.

PFISTER, HANS ULRICH, Die Auswanderung aus dem Knonauer Amt 16481750. [hr Ausmass, thre Strukturen und ihre Bedingungen (Zurich, 1987). —— ‘Ziircher Auswanderung nach Amerika 1734/1735—Die Reisegruppe .um Pfarrer Moritz Gotschi’, Ziircher Taschenbuch auf das Fahr 1986 (Zurich,

1985), 45-99. —— ‘Die Anfange von Geburtenbeschrankung in Europa: Wege zu einer umfassenderen Analyse’, in Peter Borscheid and Hans J. ‘Teuteberg (eds.), Ehe, Liebe, Tod. Zum Wandel der Familie, der Geschlechts- und Generationsbeziehungen in der Frithen Neuzeit, Studien zur Geschichte des Alltags, 1

(Miinster, 1983), 213-32. Purvis, THOMAS, “The European Ancestry of the United States Population, 1790’, William & Mary Quarterly, 3rd ser. 41 (1984), 85-101.

—— “The Pennsylvania Dutch and the German-American Diaspora in 1790’, fournal of Cultural Geography, 6 (1986), 81-99. PuRY, JEAN-PIERRE, ‘Memorial Presented to His Grace My Lord the Duke

of Newcastle upon the Present Condition of Carolina, and the Means of its Amelioration’ (18 July 1724), in Trevor R. Reese (ed.), The Most Delightful Country of the Universe: Promotional Literature of the Colony of Georgia 1717-1734 (Savannah, Ga., 1972) 55—65.

QuyNn, Dorotuy M., ‘Johann Friedrich Amelung at New Bremen’, Marnland Historical Magazine, 42/3 (Sept. 1948), 1-25. RAEITHEL, GERT, ‘Go West’. Ein psychohistorischer Versuch tiber die Amerikaner

(Frankfurt, 1981). REINHARD, WOLFGANG, ‘Kirche als Mobilitéatskanal der friihneuzeitlichen Gesellschaft’, in W. Schulze (ed.), Standische Gesellschaft und soztale Mobilitat, Schriften des historischen Kollegs, Kolloquien 12 (Munich, 1989), 333-51. REITH, REINHOLD, ‘Arbeitsmigration und Gruppenkultur deutscher Handwerksgesellen im 18. und friihen 19. Jahrhundert’, Scripta Mercaturae, 23 (1989), 1-35. ROEBER, A. G., ‘In German Ways? Problems and Potentials of EighteenthCentury German Social and Emigration History’, William & Mary Quarterly, 3rd ser., 44 (1987), 750-74. —— “The Origins and Transfer of German-American Concepts of Property and Inheritance’, Perspectives in American History, NS 3 (1987), 115-71.

—— ‘The Origin of Whatever is not English among Us”: The DutchSpeaking and the German-Speaking Peoples of Colonial British America’, in Bernard Bailyn and Philip D. Morgan (eds.), Strangers within the Realm:

Cultural Margins of the First British Empire (Chapel Hill, NC, 1991), 220-84.

German Migration 309 ROEDER, PHILIPP L., Geographisches Statistisch-Topographisches Lexicon von

Schwaben, 2nd edn. (2 vols., Ulm, 1800). ROHM, HELMUT, ‘Die Vererbung des landwirtschaftlichen Grundeigentums in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland, 1959/60’, in E. Otremba (ed.), Aflas der Deutschen Agrarlandschaft (4 instalments, Wiesbaden, 1962-71; 2nd

instalment, 1965). ,

SABEAN, DAVID WARREN, Property, Production and Family in Neckarhausen,

1700-1570, Cambridge Studies in Social Anthropology, 73 (Cambridge, 1QQoO).

SALINGER, SHARON V., ‘To Serve Well and Faithfully’: Labor and Indentured Servants in Pennsylvania, 1682-1800 (Cambridge, 1987). SCHERER, KARL, review of Rheinpfalz und Saarland by Wemer Hacker, Zeitschrift fiir die Geschichte des Oberrheins, 137 (1989), 546-8. SCHEUERBRANDT, ARNOLD, ‘Die Auswanderung aus dem heutigen Baden-

Wiirttemberg nach Preufen, in den habsburgischen Siidosten, nach RuBland und Nordamerika zwischen 1683 und 1811’, in Aistorischer Ailas von Baden-Wiirttemberg, Erlduterungen (Stuttgart, 1972-88), comments vol. v (1985), map 12. SCHUBERT, ERNST, Arme Leute, Bettler und Gauner im Franken des 18. Fahrhunderts, Darstellungen aus der Frankischen Geschichte, 26 (Neustadt a. d. Aisch, 1983).

—— ‘Mobilitat ohne Chance: Die Ausgrenzung des fahrenden Volkes’, in Winfried Schulze (ed.), Standische Gesellschaft und soziale Mobilitat, Schrif-

ten des historischen Kollegs, Kolloquien 12 (Munich, 1989), 113-64. SCHULZE, WINFRIED, ‘Die standische Gesellschaft des 16./17. Jahrhunderts als Problem von Statik und Dynamik’, in Schulze (ed.), Standische Gesellschaft und soziale Mobilitat, Schriften des historischen Kollegs, Kolloquien

12 (Munich, 1989) 1-17. — (ed.), Standische Gesellschaft und soziale Mobilitat, Schriften des historischen Kollegs, Kolloquien 12 (Munich, 1989). SCRIBNER, ROBERT, ‘Mobility: Voluntary or Enforced? Vagrants in Wiirttem-

berg in the Sixteenth Century’, in Gerhard Jaritz and Albert Miiller (eds.), Migration in der Feudalgesellschaft, Studien zur historischen Sozialwissenschaft, 8 (Frankfurt, 1988), 65-88. SELIG, ROBERT, Rautige Schafe und geizige Hirten: Studien zur Auswanderung aus dem Hochstift Wiirzburg und ihren Ursachen, Mainfrankische Studien, 43

(Wiirzburg, 1986). SHORTER, EDWARD, The Making of the Modern Family (New York, 1975).

SOUDEN, Davin, ‘Movers and Stayers in Family Reconstitution Populations’, Local Population Studies, 33 (Autumn 1984), 11-28. SPRENGER, REINHARD, ‘Aspekte sozialen Schutzes in der Bauernfamilie des Hoch- und Spatmittelalters’, in Trude Ehlert (ed.), Haushalt und Familie in Mittelalter und friiher Neuzeit (Sigmaringen, 1991), 91-105. STRASSBURGER, RALPH B., and HINKE, WILLIAM J. (eds.), Pennsylvania

310 Bibliography German Pioneers. A Publication of the Original Lists of Arrivals in the Port of Philadelphia from 1727 to 1508 (3 vols., Norristown, Pa., 1934). STRAUB, ALFRED, Das badische Oberland im 18. Jahrhundert: Die Transformation einer bdauerlichen Gesellschaft vor der Industrialisierung, Historische

Studien, 429 (Husum, 1977). TROMMLER, FRANK, and MCVEIGH, JOSEPH (eds.), America and the Germans: An Assessment of a Three-Hundred-Year History (2 vols., Philadelphia, 1985).

TROBBACH, WERNER, ‘“‘Siidwestdeutsche Leibeigenschaft” in der Friihen Neuzeit—eine Bagatelle?’, Geschichte und Gesellschaft, 7/1 (1981), 69-90. United States, Bureau of the Census, Historical Statistics of the United States, Colonial Times to 1970. bicentennial edn. (Washington, DC, 1975). Wahrhaffiiger Bericht des in derer Schwarmer und gute Tage wehler Hertzen fest-

stehenden gelobten Landes Pensylvanien...(no publisher, 1701), not paginated. WALKER, MAck, German Home Towns: Community, State, and General Estate, 1648—1871 (Ithaca, NY, 1971). WEBER-KELLERMANN, INGEBORG, Erntebrauch in der landlichen Arbeitswelt des 19. Jahrhunderts auf Grund der Mannhardtbefragung in Deutschland von 1865,

Veroffentlichungen des Instituts fiir mitteleuropdische Volksforschung an der Philipps-Universitat Marburg-Lahn, A2 (Marburg, 1965). Wochentlicher Philadelphischer Staatsbote.

WOKECK, MARIANNE, “The Flow and the Composition of German Immigration to Philadelphia, 1727-1775’, Pennsylvania Magazine of History and Biography, 105 (1981), 249-78. —— ‘A Tide of Alien Tongues: The Flow and Ebb of German Immigration

to Pennsylvania, 1683-1776 (Temple Univ., Philadelphia Ph.D. dissertation, 1983). —— “German Immigration to Colonial America: Prototype of a Transatlantic Mass Migration’, in Frank Trommler and Joseph McVeigh (eds.), America and the Germans: An Assessment of a Three-Hundred-Year History (Philadelphia, 1985), 1. 3-13.

—— ‘Harnessing the Lure of the “Best Poor Man’s Country”: The Dynamics of German-Speaking Immigration to British North America, 1683—1783’, in Ida Altman and James Horn (eds.), ‘To Make America’: European Emigration in the Early Modern Period (Berkeley, Calif., 1992),

204-43. Wo LF, STEPHANIE GRAUMAN, Urban Village. Population, Community and Family Structure in Germantown, Pennsylvania, 1683-1800 (Princeton, NJ, 1976).

——‘Hyphenated America: The Creation of an FEighteenth-Century German-American Culture’, in Frank Trommler and Joseph McVeigh (eds.), America and the Germans: An Assessment of a Three-Hundred-Year History (Philadelphia, 1985), i. 66-84.

French Migration 311 Wust, Kaus, ‘William Byrd II and the Shipwreck of the Oliver’, Swiss Amencan Historical Society Newsletter, 20/2 (June 1984), 3-19. YODER, Don (ed.), Pennsylvania German Immigrants, 1709-1786 (Baltimore, 1980).

—— (ed.), Rhineland Emigrants (Baltimore, 1981).

Chapterg Moogk | French Migration

ALLAIN, M., ‘L’Immigration francaise en Louisiane, 1718-1721’, Revue d'histoire de l’'Amérique francaise, 28/4 (1975), 555—64. ALTMAN, I., and Horn, J. (eds.), “To Make America’: European Emigration in the Early Modern Period (Berkeley, Calif., 1991). AUGER, R. J., La Grande Recrue de 1653 (Montreal, 1955).

BARDET, J. P., ‘L’Immigration bordelaise, 1737-17917, Annales de démographie historique (1979), 445-55. BEDARD, M. A., Les Protestants en Nouvelle-France (Quebec, 1978).

BoucHER, P. P., ‘A Colonial Company at the Time of the Fronde: The

1978).

Compagnie de la terre ferme de |’Amérique ou France equinoxiale’, Terrae Incognitae: The Annals of the Society for the History of Discoveries, 11 (1979),

43-58.

BRIDENBAUGH, C., Vexed and Troubled Englishmen 1590-1642 (New York, CAMPEAU, L., Les Cent Assoctés et le peuplement de la Nouwvelle-France (1633-

1663) (Montreal, 1974).

CHARBONNEAU, H., and LANpry, Y., ‘La Politique démographique en Nouvelle-France’, Annales de démographie historique (1979), 29-57. —— et al., Natssance d’une population: les francais établis au Canada au XVIle siecle (Paris, 1987).

CHOQUETTE, L. P., ‘French Emigration to Canada in the 17th and 18th Centuries’ (Harvard Univ. D. Phil. thesis, 1988). ConraD, G. R. (ed.), /mmigration and War: Louisiana, 1718-1721 (Lafayette, Ind., 1970). CorRVISIER, A., Les Troupes de la Compagnie des Indes (Paris, 1968).

DEBIEN, G., ‘Engagés pour le Canada partis de Nantes (1725—1732)’, Revue d'histoire de l’'Amérique francaise, 33 (1980), 583-6. —— ‘Engagés pour le Canada au XVIlIe siécle, vus de La Rochelle’, Revue d'histoire de l'Amérique francaise, 6 (1952-3), 177-233, 374-407.

—— ‘La Propagande et le recrutement pour les colonies d’Amérique au XVIle siécle’, Conjonction, 48 (1953), 60—g0. —— ‘Les Engagés pour les Antilles (1634-1715)’, Revue d’histoire des colonies/ d’outre-mer, 38 (1951), entire issue.

312 Bibliography Dumas, S., Les Filles du roi en Nouvelle-France: étude historique avec répertoire biographique (Quebec, 1972). FLINN, M. W., The European Demographic System, 1500-1820 (Baltimore, 1981).

GAUCHER, M., DELAFosse, M., and DEBIEN, G., ‘Les Engagés pour le Canada au XVIIlIe siecle’, Revue d’histotre de l’'Amérique francatse, 13 (1959-

60), 247-61, 402-21, 550-61; 14 (1960-1), 87-108, 246-58, 430-40, - 583-602. GopBouT, A., ‘Les Emigrants de 1664’, Mémoires de la Société généalogique canadienne-francatse, 4 (1951), 217-25. —— Les Passagers du Saint-André (Montreal, 1964).

Harris, R. C., “The French Background of Immigrants to Canada before 1700’, Cahiers de géographie du Québec, 16 (1972), 312-24. —— (ed.), Historical Atlas of Canada, i. Beginning to 1800 (Toronto, 1987).

HvuETZ DE Lemps, C., ‘Les Engagés du Bazadais au XVIIIle siécle’, Les Cahters du Bazadats, 10 (May 1966), 26-38. LANDRY, Y., ‘Mortalité, nuptialité et canadienisation des troupes francaises de la Guerre de Sept Ans’, Histoire sociale/Social History, 12 (1979), 298-315. —— Orphelines en France, pionniéres au Canada: les filles du roi au XVIIe siécle

(Montreal, 1992).

—— ‘La Population militaire au Canada pendant la Guerre de Sept Ans’, Annales de démographie historique (1978), 337-51. LEBRUN, F., ‘Mobilité de la population en Anjou au XVIIle siécle’, Annales de démographie historique (1970), 223-6. MATHIEU, J., and GOUGER, L., “Transferts de population [vers le Canada]’, Annales de Bretagne et des pays de l’ouest, g0/4 (1988), 337-45. MONTAGNE, P., Tourouvre de les Fuchereau: un chapitre de l’émigration percheronne au Canada (Quebec, 1965).

Mooack, P., ‘Reluctant Exiles: Emigrants from France in Canada before 1760’, William and Mary Quarterly, 46 (1989), 463-505. NADAL, J., and GrRALT, E., La Population catalane de 1553 a 1717: l'immigration francaise et les autres facteurs de son developpement (Paris, 1960).

Nassiet, M., ‘Une Etude de mobilité géographique a l’époque moderne: la petite noblesse de Haute-Bretagne’, Annales de démographie historique (1986), 235-49. POITRINEAU, A., ‘La immigracién francesa en el reino de Valencia (siglos XVI—XIX)’, Moneda y Credito, 137 (1976), 103-33.

Poussou, J. P., ‘Les Mouvements migratoires en France et a partir de la France de la fin du XVe siécle au début du XIXe siécle; approches pour une synthése,’ Annales de démographie historique (1970), 11-78. PROULX, G., Entre France et Nouvelle-France (Laprairie, 1984).

RozaT, M., ‘Les echanges de population entre villages voisins: le cas

| French Migration 313 d’Antony et sa couronne’, Annales de démographie historique (1977),

21-48. SALONE, E., La colonisation de la Nouvelle France (Paris, 1907). ‘TREFOUSSE, H. L. (ed.), Germany and America: Essays on Problems of International Relations and Immigration (New York, 1980).

=

Index Figures in italic relate to information taken from the maps.

Abdie 83 92, 94, 95, 99, 100, IOI, 102, 103, :

Aberdeenshire 79, 82, 83 105, 107, 111, 273; and Spanish

Abzug 204 settlement in 27, 31, 32, 36, 265,

Acadia 212, 237, 255 266, 267, 269, 272, 277, 279; see also Accomack—Northampton county 69 America, British North; America,

Acre 19 South and entries for individual

Admiralty, High Court of 60 countries

Adolphus, Gustavus 84 America, British North 49, 184; 237;

Afflossen 84 historiography of migration 39, 40, Africa 4, 5,9, 13, 36, 54, 86, 154, 168, 42; motivation of emigrants to 210, 173, 176, 178, 184, 253, 254, 258, 235; quality of emigrants to 44, 267, 270, 271, 273, 275, 276, 278, 52-3, 54, 55, 59, 57, 66, 67, 73, 204,

279, 280, 281, 283 259, 264; scale of migration 1-2, agents, emigration 229 43, 45, 46, 50, 51, 58, 69, 224, 233;

ages of migrants 231,250 see also entries for America; America,

agriculturists 176 South; England; Britain and entries Aksarai 18 for other countries Albion’s Seed 40 America, South 178, 181, 265, 271, 278

Alexandria 11 America, United States of 112 Almaligh 18 Amerindians: new research on 5; relations Alps 121, 243 with white population 36, 254, 265; Alsace 192, 230, 258 use as source of labour 31, 32, 251,

Amalfi ro 254, 268, 281 Amazon 59, 113, 118, 126, 268 Amiens, Peace of (1801) 102

ambassadors 80, 158 Amsterdam: commercial ties with New

Amelung, Johann Christian 212 York 2; comparison with Antwerp America 49, 174, 230, 237; Dutch 182, 187; Jewish community 158, settlement of, and migration to 154, 175, 188; and statistics of migration

175, 176, 178, 179, 180, 181, 271; flows 159, 160, 161, 173 economic development of 1, 106; Anabaptists 226 French possessions in 236, 238, Andalusia 28, 35 239, 240, 242, 243, 244, 249, 250, Anderson, Virginia Dejohn 41 251, 253, 254, 255, 256, 258, 260; Andes 26, 31 and German migration 192, 197, Anjou 240, 250 198, 199, 200, 201, 202, 203, 208, anthropology 5 209, 211, 212, 214, 217, 218, 220, Antigua 127 223, 226, 228, 231, 234, 247, 279; Antilia Island 14 and Irish migration 74, 113, 114, Antilles 255, 276 128-9, 229, 273; motivation for Antioch 18, 19 migration to 213, 219, 225, 278, amimann 221,222

280, 281, 282; and Portuguese Antrim 77, 78, 80,87,127 migration to and settlement in 268, Antwerp 156, 182, 187

269, 270, 271; Scandinavian Appalachian Mountains 52, 57 settlement in 16; and Scottish Aquitaine 240 migration to 76, 78, 84, 86, 90, 91, Aragon 23

316 Index Archangel 168 emigrants 95, 210; emphasis on Archive of the Indies 26 diversity of British emigration 51; Arctic Ocean 89 English migration 57, 75; Argentina 34 methodology 56, 92, 115; peripheral Argyllshire 79, 80, 84, 101, 109 settlement 94, 273; quality of

Arles 243 migrants 52, 59, 63; regional

Armenia 188 patterns of British settlement 102, armies 121, 122, 127, 133, 154, 181, 144, 147; scale of migration from _ 187, 258, 279, 280; see also entries for Britain 58, 102, 116

individual couninies Balearic Islands 35, 36

artisans 66, 68, 69, 72,97, 159, 215, 266, Balkans 189

276, 277 Baltic Sea 23, 24, 165, 167, 168 Artois 155 Bandonbridge 68 Aruba 174,177 bankers 143

Ascalon 19 Baptists 158 Asia: Dutch activities in 154, 167, 169, Bar, Hans 221, 222

181, 185, 186; early European Barbados 44, 49, 60, 86, 87, 126, 265 contacts with 9g, 10, 11, 17, 18; Barker, Howard 98 English empire in 274; Portuguese Barrington, George 239

settlement in 267, 270, 278; Barry, John 148

preference of European settlers over Basel 176, 230 American locations 279, 280; useof | Basque country 35

native labour by settlers 281 Basra 169, 170-1

Astrakhan 18 Batavia 169, 170-1, 173, 271

Atlantic Ocean 170-1, 174, 237; coastal Bayle, Pierre 157,158 settlement in colonies 32, 36, 97, Bayonne 252, 255 184; commercial significance of 58, Beauce 240 146, 148, 167, 244; crossing by Beckles, Dr Hilary 60, 273 family groups 280; Dutch activities begging 207, 241, 243 in 271; early exploration of 9, 10, Beit-Jibrin 19 13, 14; English activities in 39, 45; Belgium 155, 160, 163, 164, 168, 185 French activities in 255, 257, 276; Berbice 174, 177

island settlements 17, 24; ‘Berczy, William’ 248, 249, 252 Portuguese activities in 267, 268; Berehaven 133 scale of migration across 49, 63, Bergen 82 113; Spanish activities in 26; supply Bergen-op-Zoom 77

of labour across 118, 224 Béthencourt, Jean de 17

Auchindore 83 betterment migration 276, 277 Aufenthalt 204 bible 156 Augsburg, Treaty of 208 birth rates 48, 49 Aunis 244 Black Death 21, 24 Australia 112 black migration 50, 55, 56, 86, 253, 2543 Austria 123, 135, 158, 205, 209 see also slavery

Auvergne 241, 242 Black, Joseph 120

Avars 10 Boccaccio, Giovanni 12

Ayrshire 78, 79, 84, 133 Bohemia 84 Azores 13, 14,17, 268 Bonaire 174, 177

bachelors 250 255

Bordeaux 77, 136, 241, 245, 251, 254,

Baden-Durlach 192, 193, 194, 208, 227 borders, national 165

Baghdad 20 bosnegers 177

bailetoun 110, III Boston 49, 93, 96 Bailyn, Bernard: domestic pressures on Boswell 94

Index 317 Boucher, Pierre 239 Calvinism 155, 208, 242

Bourbon dynasty 243 Campbell, Mildred 42, 43, 44

Boxer, Charles 165 Campveere 77

Boyd-Bowman, P. 28-29 Canaan 210, 236 Brabant, North 164 Canada: family settlement in 253; female Bracciolini, Poggio 13 settlement in 250; French activities Braidstane 78 iN 237, 242, 257, 258, 259, 276; Brandenburg 208, 211 missionary activity in 254; Scottish

Brabant 155, 165 ‘Canada’ 245

brandy 127 settlement in 94, 99, 105, 112;

Brasil Island 14 urban background of settlers 244, Brazil 174, 175, 177, 179, 268, 270 245

Bremen 247 Canada, Upper 104, 105

Bresigau 192 canadiens 257

bricks 164 Canary Islands 13, 17, 24, 34, 36, 170-1 Bristol 14, 44, 52, 56, 133 Cantillon, Bernard 130

Bristol Channel 119 canvas 127

Britain: army 96-7, 104, 106, 109, 125, Cape Cod 179 128, 129, 135, 141, 147, 209; navy Cape of Good Hope 169, 770-1, 172,

104, 217; Overseas possessions I-2, 173, 267 30, 34, 100, 102, 112, 115, 116, 136, Cape Verde Islands 17, 70-1 177, 259, 260; relations with Ireland Capitaine Bleu, 114 117, 144, 145; see also entries for Carignan-Saliéres regiment 257 England, Ireland, Scotland, Wales Carmen de Patagones 34

Brittany 243 Carolina 2, 91, 93, 94, 95, 99, 210, 211,

Brittany, upper 240 212 Brooke, Robert 141 211 Brown, Gilbert 84 Carolina, South 50, 198, 201, 211, 212, Brownlow estate 62 228 Broad Bay 212, 223 Carolina, North 80, 96, 101, 103, 105,

Bruderalbis 221 Caribbean, see West Indies Brunel, Oliver 156 Cartier, Jacques 236

Bruges 77, 156 Carr, Lois 70

Brunswick 209 Caspian Sea 10, 170-1 Brussels 112, 156 Cassedy, J. H. 46 Buchanan family 95 Cathay 12,14 Buenos Aires 35 Castille 17, 23, 24, 35

Bullock Harbour 129 Catalonia 19, 35, 145, 147, 241 ‘Biillow affair’ 176_ Catholic Church: influence in French Bumstead, J. M. 94, 108, 109 East India Company 113;

Biirger 204 involvement in European politics , Burgert, Annette K. 197 272; involvement in migration 107;

burgherrecht 178 and military recruitment 125, 126, burghers 156, 157 129; and proselytism 158; and

burials 240 religious persecution 73, 75, 148, Burke, Peter 185 156, 276 butchers 67 Catholic Committee 134, 143 Byrne, Edward 143 Catholic Convention 143 cattle 108, 110

Cadiz 136 Cayenne 174, 212, 250 Caen 246 census 46 Cairo 20 Ceylon 169, 170-1, 173

Calicut 13 Challes, Robert 236

318 Index Chamberlain 80 condottiert 188

Champagne 253 Connacht, province of 79, 120, 123, 135 Charbonneau, Hubert 244 Constantinople 11

Channel, English 3 Connemara 129

Charlemagne 23 Conti, Nicolo 12 Charles II, King of England 87 contract workers 247 Charleston 99 Convention, Catholic 143 Chesapeake 49: comparison with Irish Coole 69 settlement 273; health hazards 272; Copenhagen 77

’ historiography of settlement 48; Cordoba 23 motives of settlers 64, 275; position Cork, county 65, 66, 67, 69, 117, 123,

of religious minorities 75; scale of 131, 132, 133, 135 migration to 50, 53, 54,55» 573 Cork, city 177, 132

settlement of servants 44, 45; Corvisier, André 256

99 courts of justice 69

Scottish settlement in 68, 69, 73,93, | Counter-Reformation 156

children 29, 131 courts, royal 248

chimney sweeps 242 covenants 85, 87 China 12, 18, 185, 281 Cracow 77, 80

Choiseul, colonization project of 114-15 — craftsmen 77, 241

Choquette, Leslie P. 244 credit 214, 216

Christian IV 84 Creole society 32, 33, 256, 270

cities 160, 244 Cressy David 41

civil servants 36 Crete 189

clanship 109 criminals 3, 4, 42, 58, 59, 63, 121, 189, Clare 117, 123, 137, 139 236, 238, 239, 251

class, social 30, 100 Croatia 249

clergy 24, 67, 74, 83, 99, 100, 143, 144, croft system 110 206, 207, 208, 210, 218, 220, 224 Cromwell, Oliver 60, 61, 62, 86, 87, 126

Cloncurry, Lord 143 Crozat, Antoine 251

Clyde, River 105 crusades 11 coal mines 85 Cuba 34 Cole, Robert 72-73 Cullen, Louis 58, 59, 87, 273, 275, 283 Colonial Virginia, General Court of 69, Cumberland 133

263 Cunningham, district of 79

colonization 25, 34, 36, 73, 118, 131, Curacgao 174,177

154, 238, 253, 256, 265 Curtin, Philip D. 46

Colonists in Bondage 42, 43 Curtius, Jacob Friedrich 229

Colquhoun, Patrick 248 cyclical migration 241 Columbus, Christopher 9, 10, 24, 26, Cyprus 20

267 , Czechoslovakia 158

Comenians 158

Commerce 96 dairy farming 67

Committee, Catholic 134, 143 Dalmatia 189

Compagnie des Indes, see Compagnie de la Dangar, Giles 69

Loutsiane ou d’Occident Danish—Sweden War (1611-13) 82

250 Danzig 77, 81

Compagnie de la terre ferme de l’Amerique Danube River 3

Compagnie de la Louisiane ou d’Occident Darien 86

250, 251, 256 Debien, Gabriel 252, 259

Compagnie franches de la Marine 257 Decameron 12

compagnonnage tour 243 Delaware ports 116, 139, 140, 148

Compostell 22 Delaware river 2, 50, 174, 179

Index 319 Delaware valley 75, 128 North America 67-73; and Dutch

Delft 172 migration patterns 156, 158, 168,

Demerrara 174, 177 175; and French migration patterns Denmark 2, 77, 78, 82, 83, 84, 209, 248 133, 242, 276; and German

depositions 65, 69 migration patterns 197, 198, 210, deserters 124, 239 211; historiography of migration

Deshima 169 from 39-47, 53-6, 57-8;

de Sphaera Mundi 9g migration to North America 39, Devine, T. M. 77, 120 48-9, 50-1, 178, 279; migration to Dieppe 77, 245, 252 and from Scotland 76, 81, 83, 84-6, discrimination 114,148 88-9, 90, 92, 93, 98, 99, 112; navy

disease 124 2, 4, 146, 189, 263; Norman

Ditchling 265 conquest of 22, 23, 24; rule in Wales

doctors 99 25; settlement in, and relations with, Dobson, D. 86 Ireland 59-60, 61-3, 64-7, 80, Dominicans 12 118, 119, 129, 132, 147, 283; Dordrecht, Synod of 156 settlement in West Indies 59-61,

Down 78, 87 63, 126; type and scale of migration

Dowse, Captain 74 from 21, 50, 52, 56-7, 58-9, 63-4,

Drenthe 164 73-5, 187, 190, 264, 265, 272-5,

Dublin 60, 77, 119, 129, 132, 133, 141, 277, 280; see also entries under Britain,

143 Scotland, Ireland, Wales

Dublin Castle 123 Enlightenment, the 120

Durham 85 enlistment 122, 124, 125 Dutch Reformed Church 156, 179 entrepreneurs 64

Episcopalians gg, 119

East India Company: Dutch 85, 156, Ericsson, Leif 16 167, 169, 172, 173, 175, 178, 181, Essay on population 159 271,274; English 113,141;French — Essequibo 174, 177

113, 136 Estonia 23

East Indies 127, 159, 169, 173, 175,178, | ethnography 5

180, 181, 185, 186, 196 Europe: ambitions of migrants 281;

East Jersey, 91 comparison with overseas migrant

Edinburgh 79, 92, 112, 127 locations 213, 257; consequences of

education 93, 99, 100, III migration 283; Dutch Empire in Fichorn, Hans Jerg 224 154, 161, 165, 184; economic

Eichorn, Mattheus 223, 224, 234 circumstances in 58, 187, 225, 264,

Eighty Years War 155, 156 271, 278, 282; ‘European Babylon’

Ekirch, A. Roger 58 215, 219; general demographic

Elbe, river 226 patterns 5,57, 190, 191, 193, 218;

Elizabeth I, Queen of England 78 internal movements of population 3,

Elsinore 77 145, 153, 160, 185, 249; Irish

Emigrants, Register of 56, 58 movement to mainland 113, 120;

‘emigration mania’ 2 military activity in 11, 121, 122, 272, emigration, rate of 36, 94, 97, 120, 138, 274; religious persecution in 158;

139, 140, 146, 193, 202 return of emigrants from 172, 173;

Empire, Holy Roman 208, 209, 247 Scottish movement to mainland 76,

Empire, Knights of the 209 QO, 100, 112, 114, 147; see also entnies

Ems 163 for individual countries engagés 245, 250, 251, 252, 254, 257, evangelicals 95 258, 259 Extremadura 28 England 71; army 3, 83; comparison

between settlements in Ireland and Fallon, J. A. 82-3, 84

320 Index families 41, 90, 94, 111, 126, 140, 142, Friesland 162, 163, 164, 165 205, 215, 216, 233, 252, 253, 258, Frisia, East 194

280 Froude, James Anthony 134 famine 278 fruit farming 67 Famine, Irish (1846-8) 137, 138, 140, Fuesland 161 142

farmers 67, 78, 82, 92, 137, 162, 163, Gaels 77, 78, 80

215, 241, 254 , Galenson, David 43, 44, 45, 46, 50, 51,

female migration 29, 30, 44, 81, 131, 63

283 galeotti 189

~ 161, 165, 206, 232, 250, 253, 281, Galicia 34

Fenske, Hans 196, 227, 228 galloglass 77

Fermanagh 66, 80 Galveston 34

fermetoun III Galway 177, 126, 129, 130, 131 Fertig, George 75 Gama, Vasco da 13

Fife 78, 79, 80, 81, 83, 142 Gardar 16

filles de joie 251 garrisons 259

filles publiques 239, 250 Gdansk 160

Fingerhut, Eugene 94, 95 Gemery, Henry 53,54, 55, 56, 58, 59,

Finland 23 60, 63, 202 Fischer, David Hackett 40 Genesee company 252

fishing 14, 67, 103, 106, 109, 167, 240 Genoa 10, 13 Flanders 19, 24, 121, 123, 155,162,165, gentry 106, 110, 118, 137, 142, 144, 226

187, 241 geographers 26 ‘flight of the wild geese’ 123 Georgia 94, 101, 105, 201

Florida 2, 34 gerichtsherrschaft 204 Fogelman, Aaron 199, 201 Germanna 211

Fort Kijloveral, see Essequibo Germantown 210

Foulis, James 127 Germany 230; and the development of

France 237; colonial activity 4, 17, 34, trading links 14, 77, 168, 169; 35, 127, 259; French embassy in internal migration 3, 21; migration London 144; and immigration 160, to and from Dutch areas 156, 159, 209; internal migration 21, 22, 160, 172, 173; migration to and from

240-4, 258; involvement in France 242, 247, 249, 251, 252,

Crusades 19; involvement in trade 253, 258; and migration to North 134, 136, 146, 165, 168; military America 144, 145, 176, 218-35, activity 77, 84, 89, 121, 123, 124, 239; and military activity 2, 147, 125, 129, 131, 133, 135, 138, 142, 166; movements to eastern Europe 143, 166, 256—7; nature of migrants 23, 24; religious aspects of migration

30, 236-9, 244-5, 257, 258; 158, 179, 180; scale of migration 42, recruitment of migrants 245-52; 47, 50, 190, 192-203, 271, 278, religious persecution 74, 196; return 279; seasonal migration 162, 185;

of migrants 252-6; and revolution types of migration 203-18 103, 105; scale of migration 2, 3, gesindedienst 205

187, 275, 276 Ghent 156

Franklin, Benjamin 258 Giessin, Barbara 223

Franciscans 12 Giles, Edward 265

Frei, Barbeli 222, 234 Giles, Mascal 264-5 French and Indian War, see Seven Years Giles, Mercy 265

War Giles, Samuel 265

226 119g

Friedrichstadt 211 Gillespie, Raymond 62 Friends, Society of 75, 130, 158, 179, Glasgow 79, 92, 93, 95, 96, 97, 105, 112,

Index 321 Glasgow University 119 Helluland 16

Glascock, Robert 71,72 Henderson, Thomas 78

glassblowers 206, 211 Hennessy, Richard (officer) 133, 134

Glass, Henry 96 Hennessy, Richard (merchant) 134, 136

Glen, Henry 96 herdsmen 206

‘Glorious Revolution’ 88 Herjolfsson, Bjarni 16 Goébrichen 194, 195, 196, 204, 213, 223, Hernhutters 158

224, 232, 233, 234 herrenlos 207

Godinho, Vitorino Magalhaes, see Hessia 208, 209, 221 Magalhaes Godinho, Vitorino Hinke, W.J. 199, 200

Gomarus 156 hinterassen 204, 205 Gookin, Captain John 71 Hippel, Wolgang von 227, 228 Gookin, Daniel 74 Hispaniola 26

Gothenburg 82 Histoire du Chevalier des Grieux et de Manon

Gouger, Lina 252 Lescaut 236

Govan 95 Hohenzollern-Bayreuth 207

Graben 192 Holland province: labour market in 163, Graham, I. C. C. 102 164, 185; loss of population from

grain 17, 110, 162, 224, 225 85, 159; scale of immigration 161;

Granville 245, 252 trading centre 175 ‘Great Awakening’ 80 Holywood, John g Greenfield, John 68, 69 Home Circuit 42

Greenland 14, 15, 16 Hoorn 159 Groningen 164 hopital-général 246 Grubb, Farley 216, 217 Horn, James 45, 46, 63, 64, 70 Guadeloupe 127 Howard, Sir Michael 186

Gudbrandsdalen 82 Huguenots 74, 121, 157, 196, 208, 276

Guinea 86 Hundred Years War 77 Guyana 115, 131, 177, 178, 250 Hungary 3, 196

gypsies 29, 207, 239, 243 Hudson, Henry 178 Hudson, river 2, 174

Haarlem 165 husbandmen 68

Habsburg dynasty 272 Hutcheson, Francis 120 Hacker, Werner 197

Hainaut 155 Iberian peninsula 11, 24, 158 Halifax 96, 97, 201 Iceland 14, 15, 16

Hall, Thomas 263-4 Ile-de-France 240, 245

Hall, Thomasine, see Hall, Thomas Ile de Rhé 84, 263-4 Hamburg 230, 247, 248, 249, 252 Iles du Diabel 212 Hamilton, Sir James, First Viscount Imhof, Arthur E. 194

Clandeboye 78 Independence, American War of 52, 94,

Hanau 222, 230 Q7, 102, 103, 105, 148, 201, 209,

Hanseatic League 77 252

Hansen, Marcus Lee 40 India 2, 12, 13, 18, 112, 170-1, 186, 274

Harris, R.C. 244 Indian Ocean 11, 13, 127, 170-1, 267 Harrower, John g2, 99 Indonesia 4, 169

Harrsch, Josuah 210, 211 industrialization 112

harvest 86, 88, 106, 213, 225 ‘Industrial Revolution’ 193, 203

hawkers 89, 94 Innuit 16 Hasenclever, Peter 212 internal migration 39, 131, 155, 258, 266 Hebel, Johann Peter 228 intellectuals 97

Hebridean Islands 94, 103, 110 intestate law 217 Heerbrand, Jacob Friedrich 229 Invernesshire 79, 104, 109

322 Index Iran 18 kelp production 103, 106, 109

Ireland 49, 117; Cromwellian settlement Kerry 117, 123, 132, 135

of 60, 61—2; destination of Khan, Ghengis 11

Huguenot refugees 242; discovery Khan, Kublai 12 of Iceland by Irish monks 15; Kilkenny 177, 123, 131

emigration 112, 113, 142-4, Kinkell 80

281-2; English settlementin 2, 59, kirchenbiicher 197

61, 63-9 passim, 273; foreign Kleinfeller, Johannes 220, 221, 234 military service 3, 120-6, 128-9, Knittle, Walter 198 "131-2, 133-5, 138, 142, 272, 274; ‘Kochertal’, see Harrsch, Joshua

migration to North America 74, Kraichgau 197 113, 114, 128-9, 229, 273, 2753

Norman invasion of 23, 24, labourers 132, 137, 206, 267, 281, 283 25; pilgrimages in 22; scale of Ladabists 176, 180 migration 39, 42, 45, 47, 51, 56,58, | LaFléche 250

114-16, 119, 138-41, 146-7; landesherr 204 Scottish settlement in 76—100 — _Landnémabok 15 passim, 119-20, 142; settlement in landowners 66, 67, 80, 88, 103, 104, 106,

273 249, 250

West Indies 59, 60, 68, 87, 126-7, 107, 108, 109, 110, 119, 130, 137,

Ireland, Church of 88 Landry, Yves 257 iron smelting 66 Landsman, Ned C. 76, 86 Jroquois nation 254 land speculation 2 Islam 18, 19, 22, 23 Languedoc 2, 240

Italy 10, 12, 19, 22, 31, 188, 191, 242 L’Anse aux Meadows 16

Laois (Queen’s county) 65, 66

Jacobite cause 89, 101, 109, 123 Larne 117, 129

Jakarta, see Batavia La Rochelle 77, 243, 244, 245, 251, 252,

Jamaica 34, 44, 49, 86, 87, 136 263

James VI & I, King of Scotland and Law, John 251, 253, 258

England 78, 81 Lawless family 143

James River 74 leather workers 67 Jamestown 78 Lecky, W. E.H. 119

Japan 169, 170-7 letbeigenschafi 204 Java 12, 169, 170-1 Leicester, Robert Dudley, earl of 122 Jerusalem 18, 19, 20 Leiden 156, 159 jesters 206 Leinster, province of 177, 120, 123, 142 Jesus, Society of 254 Le Maire, Isaac 156

Jews: banishment from Spanish Indies Leon 28, 34 29; in Crusader states 18, 19; Lescaut, Manon 236, 239, 260 persecution in Russia 74; presence Lewis 80 in West Indies 87, 136; presence in Lichtenau 193 Venice 179; settlement in Dutch Lille 156

empire 175, 176, 177, 179; Limburg 165, 230 settlement in Holland 157,158,184 Limerick 123

John, Prester 13 Limerick, Treaty of 123 Johnson, Samuel 94 Limousin 241, 242

Johnston, Gabriel 101 linen 128, 130, 131

joint tenancy 110 Lippe 163, 164 Lipsius, Justus 156 Karlsruhe 227, 230 literacy 232 keelmen 88, 89 Lithglow, William 81

Keith, Revd George 74 Lithuania 23, 25, 222

ss Index 323 Liverpool 44, 133 Massachusetts 86, 212

livestock 71, 162 Massif Central 241 Lahontan, Baron de 254 Mathieu, Jacques 252 Lohrhaupten 220, 230 Mayo 137

Lombardy 19 Mediterranean Sea 9g, 10, 11, 165, 167,

London 230; fear of foreigners 112; 168, 1770-1, 184, 190, 241 importance of port 44, 57, 77; Irish Mennonites 179, 180, 208

settlement in 133, 136, 1473 Menschendiebe 247 migration from 42, 52,92,102,127, | mercenaries go, 113, 114, 121, 122, 135,

144, 248; migration to 2, 222, 263; 166, 185, 188 Polish ambassador in 80; size 182 merchant capitalism 189

London Merchant 74 merchant navy 180, 188-9

Lothian 80 merchants 12, 13, 18, 19, 22, 27, 29, 34, Louis XIV 157, 166, 244, 253, 276 35, 36, 54, 59, 68, 77, 78, 80, 81, 82, Louisiana 237; billeting of troops in 257; 93, 95, 96, 99, 100, 121, 123, 126,

and domestic French attitudes to 127, 134, 136, 143, 148, 154, 159, settlement in 238, 239; labour 198, 206, 217, 218, 226, 229, 243, supply in 130, 250, 251, 252, 253, 245, 247, 249, 254, 258, 279, 281 255; migration to 236, 242, 258; Mercier, Louis-Sebastién 242 Spanish acquisition of 34, 259; mestizo population 4

supply of information about Mexico 35

conditions 259 Middle Ages 111, 190, 205, 219 Louth, county 177, 130 Middleburg 77

Liibeck 247 Middleburgse-Commercie-Compagnie

Lucassen, Jan 195, 271 168 Lutherans 158, 179, 208 Miller, Henry 218 Lyons 241, 242 miners 206, 211

Ministére de la Marine 256, 257

McDonald, Ellen 98 missionaries 12, 18, 268 McDonald, Forest 98 Mississippi 237, 251 MacDonnell clan 77 Mittelberger, Gottlieb 247

MacNamara family 137 Mitterauer, Michael 205 Madeira 13, 17, 170-1, 268 Mocha 169, 170-1

Magalhaes Godinho, Vitorino 267-9 Moll, Albrecht Ulrich 248

Maine 223 Monaghan, county 80

Malabar 169 Moneypenny, Thomas 80 Malacca 169, 170-1 Mongols 11-12, 13, 18

Malaga 34 Monro, Robert 84 malaria 48 Montgomery, Sir Hugh 78

male emigrants 82, go, 132, 215, 232, Montreal 250, 253, 259 241, 250, 266, 269, 280, 281, 283 Mons 243

Mallow 69 Montserrat 49, 59, 126, 127 Malmé 77 Monte Corvino, John of 12 Malthus, Thomas 107, 159, 218, 222 Montevideo 34

Manhattan Island 178 Moogk, Peter 275

manufacturing 56, 68 Moors 29 marines 125, 126 Morgan, Edmund 70

Markland 16 Morocco 158, 170-1 marriage 35, 232, 240, 253, 283 Morrison, Fynes 80

Martinique 236, 253 mortality rates 47, 48, 49, 50, 53, 54,

Martin, Lazarus 74 126, 136, 177, 208, 214, 274, 279 Maryland 49, 52, 58, 73,75, 145, 180 Moucheron, Balthasar de 156

mass 246 Mountrath 68

324 Index Munster, province of 49, 7, 118, 120, migration 245, 250, 257; sexual

123, 130, 137 balance of 25,4; social structure of

Miinster, Treaty of 156 244, 255

Murragh, parish of 68 NewJersey 54, 86, 93, 179, 212

musicians 206 New Jersey, Presbyterian College of 95 ‘Newlanders’ 214, 224, 229, 231, 247 Nagasaki 169, 770-1 ‘New Paisley’ 96

nahrung 234 Newport News 74

Nantes 129, 136, 245, 252 New South Wales 239 Nantes, Edict of, revocation 208, 242 New Spain 31, 34, 266, 272, 277 Napoleonic War 103, 141, 166, 167 New York colony 174; Dutch influence

natural growth 48 in 2, 179; French population of

Navarre 23 242, 248; German migration to 201,

Navigation Acts 179 210-11, 249; scale of settlement 52, navy 125, 126, 181, 187, 189, 190, 263 54, 198; Scottish settlement in 91,

Netherlands 170, 174, 184, causes of 94, 95, 96, 99, 101, 103-4 migration 153-5; comparison with New York city 49, 93, 105, 242, 248

migration of other countries 116, New Zealand 112 187-91, 272; connection with Nieuw Amsterdam 174, 178, 179

Scotland 84, 86, 87, 89; Nieuw Holland, see Niuew Nederland development of overseas empire 2, Nieuw Nederland 175, 178, 179 14, 34, 165-80, 270-1, 274, 275, nobility 24, 30, 156, 207, 240

276; immigration into 31, 136, Norfolk County 69,71 155-61; influence of religion 208, Normandy 22, 23-4, 241, 242, 245, 246

210, 211, 242; labour market in Northumberland 78 161-5, 180-85; links with Germany NorthSea 162, 163, 164, 165, 167, 185 231, 278, 279; military activities of Norway 2,14, 15, 82 142, 185-7, 209; scale of migration Nouveau Mercure 251

181, 196, 197, 198, 201 Nouvelle France, La, see New France

Neuchatel 212 Nova Scotia 2, 104, 237 Nevis 44, 86, 126, 127 Nusteling, H. P. H. 157 New Brunswick 96

New Castille 28 Oberaémter 227 New Christians 214 obrigkeit 212

Newcastle-upon Tyne 79, 84, 85, 89,92, | O’Connell, Colonel Daniel 134

263 O’Conor, Charles 134

New England 49; German settlement in O’Conor, family 123

201, 228; historiography of officers, military 105, 106, 121, 122, 123, settlement 42, 74; Puritan character 132, 133, 134, 135, 136, 137, 138,

of settlement 41, 64, 75; scale of 142, 143

migration to 50, 54, 265, 273; Ogilvie, Captain George 84 Scottish settlement in 93; skillslevel | O’Hara, Charles 130

of population 67, 73 Old Castile 28, 35

Newfoundland 237; English settlement Oldenburg 162, 163 in 2; Irish migration and trading O’Leary, Arthur 143 links 115, 119, 128, 129, 131, 137, Orelli, Joseph 211

147; Scandanavian links 16 Orkney 80, 82 New France 237; decline in trade 258; O’Rourke, Count John 134 dispatch of engagés to 251, 252,253; | _O’Rourke family 123

domestic attitudes to settlers 238, orphans 70, 71, 245 239; French surrender to Spain Ortssippenbiicher 194

259—60; royal involvement in Osnabriick 163

Index 325 O’Sullivan, Morty Oge 133-4, 143 200, 216, 217, 224, 225, 226;

Outer Hebridies 80 Scottish presence in 91, 95, 96, 99; , Overijssel 164 sources for quantitative estimates 198, 199, 202

Pacific Ocean 170-1, 174 Philadelphia, College of 99

paganism 23, 25 Phillip II, King of Spain 155, 156, 158

Pagan, John 95 Pietists 208, 214, 215 Paisley 79, 95, 96, 97 pilgrims 19, 22 Palatinate 3, 197, 198, 208, 210, 211, Pisa 10

215, 216, 230 Plancius, Peter 156 Pale 123 plantations 70, 118, 126, 127, 137, 254,

Palestine 11, 18 273, 276 Paris 132, 241, 245, 257, 259 Plassey 273

Paris, Treaty of 94 Plymouth 264

Paris, University of g poepenbode 231 Pastorius, Francis Daniel 210, 215, 219 Poitop 245

Patagonia 34 Poitou-Charentes 245

Passenger Vessels Act (1803) 103, 105 Poland 2, 77, 78, 80, 81, 83, 84, 86, 112, ‘Paxton boys’ 80 158,196. Pearl, Richard 69 Political Arithmetic 182 peasants 19, 24, 106, 108, 220, 226, 228, Polo, Maffeo 12

234, 243 Polo, Niccolo 12

peat 162, 164 Polo, Marco 12 pedlars 77, 80 Pont, Timothy 79 Peking 12, 18, 170-1 Poole 119

Pennsylvania 49; communications with poorters 159 216, 217, 225; economic conditions populist doctrine 209 in 213, 214; English settlement in ports 32, 44, 57, 99, 128, 148, 244, 249,

44, 52, 80; German settlement in 251, 255, 279 192, 210, 211, 212, 231; Irish Portugal: contrasting migration population of 146; motivation of experience with Spain 267-72; emigrants 234; position of religious creation of single monarchy with

minorities 219, 226; scale of Spain 29, 157; involvement in Asia immigration 54, 58, 200, 201, 229; 13, 18, 175; involvement in slave Scottish presence in 93, 95; sexual trade 189, 283; presence of Irish

balance of population 232 soldiers in army 138; relations with

‘People’s Clearance’ 109 Dutch 158, 168; settlement in

Perche 240, 245 Atlantic islands 14, 17; subsistence Pernambuco, see Recife migration from 277 Persia 169, 170-1 Pott, DrJohn 73 Perthshire 79, 82 Pousseau, Jean-Pierre 241, 255

Peru 31 Prendergast, Lieutenant John 148

petits blancs 254 Presbyterians 75, 88, 99, 115, 119, 139, Petty, Sir William 61, 62, 87, 182, 183, 140

IgI Prévost, Abbé Antoine-Frangois 235 Pfalz 176 Prince Edward Island 104 Philadelphia: French migration to 248; Princeton 95, 96, 99

German-language printing 218, printers 96, 218 231; German settlement in 3, 215, Privy Council, Register of 84 252; Irish migration to 116, 128, Privy Council, Scottish 82, 87 148; literacy levels of immigrants professionals 30, 35, 73, 266, 269, 277 232; scale of immigration 51, 145, proletarians 190

326 Index proselytism 107, 178 198, 199, 200; merchant operations

protestantism: European politics 272, from 217, 226, 229, 247, 258; 274; and family migration 160; and Scottish community in 89; use of

56, 58 224, 227

proselytism 107; and role in Ireland port by German migrants 3, 216, Prussia 2, 3, 23, 25, 77, 158, 186, 196, Rouen 77, 245

208, 209, 248 royalists 242

Pulteney, Sir William 248, 249 Royen, P. C. van 168

Puritans 41, 64, 74, 75,158 Rush, Benjamin 96

Purvis, Thomas 98, 202 Russia: early trading links with Europe

Pury, Jean Pierre 212 10; location for German migrants 3,

Purysburgh 212 196, 209; and religious persecution Pynchon, John 67 74, 158, 208; recruitment of Scottish

Pyrenees 24, 241, 243 soldiers 84

Rutgers University 179

Quakers, see Friends, Society of Ruthven, Patrick 82 Quebec 236, 237, 256

Queen’s College 179 Saba 174,177 Quilon 18 sailors 29, 126, 167, 172, 173, 185, 186, 188, 209, 259 rabbis 158 St Andrews 80 race relations 3 St Brendan Island 14

Recife 174, 179 St Christopher’s 49, 59, 126

recruitment 128, 129, 130, 131, 132, Saint-Croix 136

133, 134, 135, 141, 142, 146, 246, Saint-Dominigue 34, 237, 246, 253, 254 256 St Eustatius 174, 177 Red Sea 169, 170-71 St Lawrence river 237, 244, 245, 276

redemptioners 217 St Lucia 87

Reise nach Pennsylvanien im Jahr 1750 247 St Malo 245, 252, 255

Reformation 77, 208 St Martin, 174, 177

‘Regulators’ 80 St Patrick’s Purgatory 22 religious persecution 74, 242, 276 Saintonge 244

Remarks for the information of those who wish Salle, Gadifer de la 17

to become settlers in America 248 Salzburg 158, 208

Renfrewshire 84 San Antonio 34 Renaissance 191 San Augustine 34

rent 66, 110 Sanchez Albornoz, Nicolas 265, 269 Restoration, English 42, 63, 86, 88 Sands, Isaac 68

revolts 25,141,177 San Julian 34 Reynal, Carew 61 Santander 35

Rhineland 3, 51, 192, 210, 214, 218, Santo Domingo 34

231, 242, 253, 258, 277 Sania Mana 26

Rhine, River 3, 121, 226, 230, 234, 247 Savoy 241, 242

Rice, John 69 Saxons 10, 22

Riddesdale 85 Scandinavia: early discoveries by Vikings Robert, Normand 245 Republic 160; service of Scottish Rome 18, 22 soldiers in 84, 86 Roscommon, county 137 Schelde 164

Rio de la Plata 34 10, 14, 15, 16; migration to Dutch

Rose, Nicol 84 Scheuchzer, Landvogt 221 Rotterdam: diminished migration in Schliichtern 222

nineteenth century 160; Schofield, R.S. 55, 90 documentary sources of migration scholars 206

Index 327 Scotland 79; foreign military service 3, Smout, T.C. 63, 76, 120 114, 121, 122, 135, 141, 142, 147, Socinianists 158 166, 272, 274; Highland migration soldiers 36, 77, 81, 84, 114, 161, 166,

patterns 100-11, 144; Lowland 172, 185, 186, 188, 208, 209, 239, migration patterns go—100 passim, 244, 257, 259, 264, 268 122,171; migration before 1700 15, | Souden, David 43, 44 76—9g0 passim; migration of religious Sound 82 dissidents 179; Norman invasion of, South Africa 242 23, 24; scale of migration 39, 42,45, | Southampton 3

47, 56, 58, 85, 90, 98, 104, 277; South Uist 79, 107 settlement in Ireland 61, 62, 63, Sower, Christopher 214, 215 113, 118, 119, 120, 130, 139, 283; Spain: colonial rivalry with Dutch 175;

settlement in North America 50, 51, contrasting migration experience

52, 98, 100, 273, 275, 279; with Portugal 269, 271, 272;

settlement in West Indies 60, 127 exceptional nature of migration

Scotland, Church of 92 history 3, 265—6; French migration Scotland, Company of 86 to 241, 242, 243; German migration

seasonal migration 131, 154, 243, 282 to 145, 196, 209; influence in

seceeders g2 Louisiana. 255, 259; internal

sectS 144, 210,214 religious problems 23; migration of Seelenverkaufeer 247 families 280; military forces 84,

serfdom 226 114, 121, 122, 123, 124, 125, 135, servants 30, 42, 45, 70, 118, 126, 161, 136, 147; mixture of migrants with 186, 188, 205, 206, 215, 226, 241, native populations 4; nature of

242, 245, 250, 263, 276 migration 27-32, 187, 190, 277;

servants, indentured 43, 44, 107, 129, rule in Spanish Netherlands 155, 140, 189, 239, 244, 247, 252, 254, 156, 215; settlement of Castile 24;

255, 257, 259, 275 sources for migration history 26-7;

Sete 145 trading links with Ireland 134;

Seven Years War (1755-62) 94, 96, Io1, transatlantic migration 32-6; 105, I11, 142, 147, 185-6, 257, 260 unification of throne with Portugal

Seville 26, 28, 33 157-8 sheep 108, 109, 110 Sparthan 265

Shetland Islands 80, 82, g2 Speyer 224, 230

Shipward, Lieutenant John 74 Stanley, Sir William 122

shopkeepers 159 State Papers, Colonial 126

Sicily 22, 23, 30 States general 169 Siegerland 211 Stavanger 161 silver mines 31 Steele, Margaret 84 Simm, Hugh 96 Steinau 222, 230

Skene, Sir John 80 Steward, Robert 96

skilllevels 44, 45, 63, 64, 65, 66, 73, 91, Stewart, Captain Allan 96

QQ, III, 131, 144, 242, 250, 269, stock raising 67

277 Strassburger, R. B. 199, 200

Skye 79, 109 Stuyvesant, Peter 179 slate 109 subsistence migration 277 Slav 23 sugar 17, 57, 68, 127, 268, 276

slavery 4,17, 44, 46, 53, 60, 70, 145, Sultaniyeh 18

271 Surinam 175,177 Sligo 17, 130, 137 Sussex 264 175, 176, 177, 184, 189, 254, 258, Sumatra 12, 170-1

Smith, Adam 144 Sutherland 79, 109

Smith, Abbot Emerson 42, 43, 44 Swabia 192

328 Index Sweden 2, 15,77, 82, 83, 179, 185 Tuchinge, Simon 74

Sweetman, Peter 126 Tuite, Nicholas 136

Swieranga, R.P. 178 Turkey 189

Switzerland 230; actions of military Turner, Henry 68

forces 85, 121, 166, 209, 239; Twente 163

immigration 160; migration to Tyack, Norman C. P. 41, 42 North America 192, 212, 213, 214, Tynedale 84 216, 217, 224, 231; movement of Tyneside 88 - population within Europe 3, 188, Tyrol 215 211, 215, 227; position of religious

minorities in 58, 242; scale of Ulster, province of 49, 62, 63, 66, 78, 79, migration 195, 202; social context of 80, 81, 82, 86, 88, 91, 93, 112, 113, migration 193; sources for migration 177, 118, 119, 120, 128, 130, 131,

history 196, 197, 199, 265 138, 139, 140, 147

Syria 11, 18, 1770-1 undertakers 79, 118 unemployment 283 Taafe family 123 Union, Act of (1707) 86 Tabriz 18 United Irishmen 143 tacksmen I10 United Provinces, Republic of, see Talon, Jean 256 United States 196, 201, 248, 249 Tangiers 86 universities 135 tanners 223 urban settlement 31, 32, 66, 132, 141,

Taiwan 169, 170-1 Netherlands , taxes 222 144, 186, 191, 207, 244, 245 teachers 96, 206 Uruguay 34 Temple Martin 69 Urgenj 18 tenants 79, 85, 108, 110, 118 Usselincx, Willem 156

tenants in chief 66, 67, 68 Utrecht 164 Teutonic Knights 25

Texas 34 vagrants 4, 121

textiles 67, 131, 132, 156, 163, 211 Valencia 241

The Atlantic Migration, 1607-1860 40 Valenzuela 34 The Atlantic Slave Trade: A census 46 Venezuela 34 The Population of the British Colontes in Venice 10, 12, 187, 188, 189, 190, 191

America before 1776 46 Vikings 10, 15, 16 Thirty Years War (1618-48) 84, 121, Vinland 14, 16 , 194, 196, 209, 224 Virginia 2, 40, 49, 52, 58, 68, 69, 70, 71,

Thom, William 95 72, 73> 74, 86, 92, 95, 127, 145, 211, Thorowgood, Captain Adam (snr) 71 264, 265

Thorowgood, Adam (jnr) 71, 72 Colonial Virginia, General Council and

Thorvaldsson, Eric (Eric the Red) 15 General Court of 69

Thuringa 223 Vivaldi, Ugolino 13 lichelbode 23% Vivaldi, Vadino 13

Tierra del Fuego 34 VOC see East India Company, Dutch tillage farming 67 Voyagers to the West 51,57, 92, 273

Tilly, Charles 190 Vries, Jande 190, 191

timber processing 67, 105, 109 vrylieden 175 Tipperary, county 17, 123, 131

tobacco 57, 68, 93, 105, 127, 145, 146 wages 132,214

Tower, George 83 Waldo, Samuel 224 Trinidad 35 Wales: Norman invasion of 22, 23, 24; Tripoli 18, 19 revolt against English rule 25; scale Troupes dela Marine 257 of migration 55, 62, 63

Index 329 Walise family 123 White Servitude in Colonial America 44

Wannemacher, Amimann 221 white settlers 32, 42, 46, 49, 57, 253, Warsaw 77 254, 255, 256 Wartling 264 WIC, see West Indies Company

Washington, George 149 Wigtonshire 79

Waterford, city 7, 129 wills 70, 71 Waterford, county 17, 123, 131 Wilson, Alexander 97 Watson, John 127 Windward Isles 177

weavers III, 221 wines 254

Wells, Robert 46, 47 Witherspoon, John 95, 96, 99

Weser, the 164 218 Westphalia 163 Wokeck, Marianne: German migration to

Wertenbaker, Thomas Jefferson 40 Wochtentlicher Philadelphischer Saatsbote

Wexford 17, 138, 143, 149 North America 199, 211, 215;

West Indies 49; colonization of 24; research on scale of immigration comparison with other European through Philadelphia 50, 51; scale of

colonial settlements 68, 255; Irish migration to North America

criminal element of population 58, 58, 116, 128, 147; ‘self-generating’ 86; Dutch involvement in 168, 175, momentum of transatlantic migration

177, 178, 271; English possessions 214, 225, 229 in 2,56, 57; French possessions in Wolf, Stephanie 210 245, 252, 258; health hazards of 50, | World War, Second 182

53,54) 55, 254, 272, 275; Irish Wrigley, E. A. 55, 90 movement to 59, 60, 113, 114, 126, Wiirttemberg 2, 194, 213, 225, 230 127, 136, 276; lack of research on

native population 5; religious Yangchow 18 minorities in 75; scale of settlement yeomen 68, 72, 79, 118 in 42, 273; Scottish presence in 87, Young, Arthur 130 93, 95, 97; servant population of 44, | York, county 69 - 129; Spanish settlement in 26, 28, Yorkshire 52, 99, 144, 147 31

West Indies Company 175, 178, 179 Zayton 18

whaling 89, 240 Zeeland 161, 164,175, 177, 187 wheat 145, 146 ZLiggeunerstreifen 207

whiskey 106 Zurich 208, 221, 230

*.

«