Scottistics

[Guest]

" I don`t think the lads in the trenches gave a toss who was next to them as long as they could rely on them when push came to shove,but I am sure there was plenty of banter going on,and I`m sure the Scots lads in the Great English Regiments got the same. "

Well said Gary.

This from the Dundee Courier - Saturday 21 February 1920

Dundee Courier - Saturday 21 February 1920

There was a unique reunion in London last night of the survivors of about 250 Englishmen who were drafted into the 2/4th Battalion of the Black Watch in June 1916, during the critical period of the war. The men were originally in the Royal Fusiliers, but look back with pride to their association with the famous Highland Regiment, and recall with pleasure the many friendships they formed among their Scottish comrades. Lieutenant-Colonel D Pirie journeyed up from Scotland. Letters of regret at absence were received from Capt. Marshall and Lieut J D Stewart.

Mr H F Langmead, proposing the toast of " The Black Watch " said they all realised they were associated with a very fine Regiment, particularly the 2/4th Battalion of the Royal Highlanders. (Cheers) At the time they were transferred from the Royal Fusiliers they had very mixed feelings, and he was sure those mixed feelings were felt by the officers of the Battalion who received them at Norwich. (Laughter) They were, however, very pleased and proud that they had privilege and honour of wearing the tartan of the Black Watch. (Cheers) Though at first they had a trying time, they soon got used to the kilt and to the regiment which had such wonderful war honours. They could now thoroughly realise the fervour and zeal which Scots felt for the honour of such a Regiment. (Cheers)

Looking after Dundee

Lieutenant-Colonel Pirie, on rising to reply, was greeted with cheers and the lusty singing of " For he's a jolly good fellow. " He said that the officers who belonged to the Battalion when they were stationed at Cromer and Norwich were very far scattered. India had claimed several, and South America had received its quota. In Dundee and district there were few of the officers left. He had spoken to two or three of them that week, and they sent their best wishes. One of them, Major Ash, a near neighbour at St. Andrews, desired especially to be remembered. Captain McGrady also sent hi best wishes. (Cheers) The Captain had now retired, but he was not one of the idle rich. He employed his very extensive leisure in looking after the affairs of the town. As a member of the Town Council he was deeply interested in the water question. (Laughter)

It was a splendid idea for them to meet together in London. Though they had not fought as a unit on foreign shores, at least they had been knit together for many months by long and somewhat tedious training. It was quite correct to say that it was with somewhat mixed feelings the Battalion heard a contingent of the Royal Fusiliers was to join them. They did not know how the mixture would work. (Laughter) He remembered the telephone tinkling and the adjutant coming back with a white face and announcing that about 250 Londoners who had never seen Scotland were on the way to join the unit. The Brigadier had given very short notice, probably because he feared an insurrection. (Laughter) They all had visions of men appearing on parade with the tartan pleats in front, or worse still of modest Englishmen wanting to wear the kilt rather low, or, horror of horrors, that they might wear a combination of trews and kilt. (Laughter) He could quite imagine that it was with mixed feelings also the Londoners received the announcement they they were to join the Black Watch.

They probably thought that Scotsmen were a sort of tame breed, and that when they came south and had long association with a cultured race they had the corners knocked off. (Laughter)

The Black Watch Area

In the north they found the hard, thick skulled man who generally said a joke three weeks after it was made, and was always looking round for 'saxpences' and spoke a rough and ferocious tongue. (Laughter) Everybody knew the Black Watch. They knew its good record, and that the men fought well. He thought they must have fought well about the year 300 BC. When the Romans conquered Britain the fmous General Antonious drew a wall across Scotland. He drew it just south of the Black Watch area. (Laughter) The kilt seemed to come natural to the contingent from the Royal Fusiliers-though probably behind the scenes there were many private dress parades and attempts to get the proper swing. (Laughter)

The combination of the two nations appeared to work excellently, and if in the future Scotland should, like her sister island in the west, wish to establish a Republic, he thought around Dundee there would be few hundred men who thought it might go on very harmoniously as it was. (Cheers)

The Skirl of the Pipes.

Drafts sapped the strength of the Battalion, and gradually the hope that they would go the front as a complete unit faded till they were told it was impossible. Many of those present had gone to the front in drafts and had done well, and many others whose physical disabilities prevented them continued to do their bit at home. But one and all, he was sure, felt it an honour to belong to the Black Watch. (Loud cheers)

They had resumed their civil occupations, but sometimes of an evening when smoking their pipes the old associations-the tented filed, the well known faces and figures-would come back to them, and they would hear the skirl of the pipes and would rejoice that they had served their country in a unit of the Black Watch. (Cheers)

A collection was afterwards made on behalf of the memorial fund for the widows and orphans of the Black Watch. It was explained that a house had been acquired in the suburbs of Dundee to be utilised as a holiday home, and that £30,000 of the £35,000 required had already been secured.

" Our fallen comrades " proposed by the Chairman was received with silent honours. Mr F Davey proposing " The Chairman " said it might be they, as Londoners, had many irregularities, but they each tried to do their best in the Regiment, and it was due to the efforts of Lieutenant-Colonel Pirie that they found themselves at home in their new surroundings amongst Scottish comrades. (Cheers)

A letter was read from the secretary of the Black Watch Association inviting all the comrades to join the London branch. The invitation was greeted with cheers. The London contingent of the 2/4th Royal Highlanders, in true Scottish fashion then joined heartily in the singing of " Auld Lang Syne " and at the close appointed a committee to arrange for further reunions.

Mike

[Graham Stewart]

Dundeeown - what you say is very true and in my database I have a large draft coming to the 2/7th Bn, N.F. of around 300 of whom around 80% of them are Scots and neither I nor the lads in the 2/7th would have any problem with it, nor with the hundreds of others, which also served with the Regiment, but there are those out there who constantly tell us that it was "Scots Regiments for Scots only", and if a non-Scot served then it was a fluke or otherwise, which isn't true and never has been.

I recently looked at some pre-war records of 'Englishmen', from the West Country who had directly enlisted into "Scots Regiment", as Regular 'career' soldiers, who would probably have served during the Great War, but there's constant denial about it from certain quarters. Why deny these lads a place in history, who went out of their way to enlist into Scottish Regiments, whom they would have done so with great pride, knowing they were serving with some of the greatest regiments that ever served the British Army.

[Tom A McCluskey]

Graham,

Most of the points you've made are irrelevant to mine – which is about national identity. I am in not in an argument about English in Scottish regiments and I don’t have a dog in that fight. Many researchers use the SNWM as the gospel figure for Scottish war dead under a false notion that they are all Scottish*. You’ll have to pick that point up with them and not me, as it is not something I’m in the least bit interested in. To finish, I will emphasize yet again the point I have made is about national identity - which has more to do with background and choice. Martin G has acknowledged this as a consideration, and I am thank him for this.

*As a point of principle, I can understand why those who are not Scottish, but fought in a Scottish regiment are listed in the SNWM. To not list them with their comrades, of the same regiment, would be quite divisive.

Aye,

Tom McC

[Graham Stewart]

As a Scotsman with his brains kicked in, who is both predjudiced & angry at the fact that Englishmen join Scots units, who refers to Scots perjoratively and who speaks with irrelevance - then is it worth me answering??

Think it's about time I went out and got myself some 'National' identity - any going spare up there?

[Guest]

What is a typically Scottish name ?

,I don`t think the lads in the trenches gave a toss who was next to them as long as they could rely on them when push came to shove,but I am sure there was plenty of banter going on,and I`m sure the Scots lads in the Great English Regiments got the same.

Gary

Gary

If I might respond to some of the points you make.

1. Typically Scottish Names.I think that most would agree that names that are more common in Scotland than in any other home country would be regarded as 'typically' Scottish names and of those, probably the ones with an associated tartan might fit the bill. The point is simply that there are names that are significantly more common in Scotland than anywhere else and these names can be used to illustrate an argument. Nothing more. It doe not preclude the fact that people with other names such as Fitzpatrick consider themselves Scottish, or Smith or Jones for that matter. It simply is a way of getting sample names that everyone can agree that are 'Scottish' in order to use these names to illustrate the point on the distribution characteristics. I would argue that names in the SNWM database beginning with Mc or Mac are typically Scottish for both of these reasons. I have yet to find someone who would argue that these are not a typically Scottish names. To me if a 95% of men with a certain surname were born in a particular country, I would conclude that name is generally representative of people from that country. People can make up their own minds. The data is freely available.

2. Who Cares? The lads might not have cared, but their historians did. A number of Scottish regimental histories were quite keen to quantify exactly how many Scotsmen were in their battalions. It was for some regiments an understandably important cultural issue, particularly as battalions were being disbanded due to manning issues. The matter of nationality and regiments was also debated in the House of Commons during the war (why were English conscripts being sent to fill Irish battalions when Ireland had no conscription? etc). The official Army Returns provided annual breakdowns of the number of men recruited from each home nation, so presumably they cared too. More importantly the authors and journalists that abuse the data to make nationalistic claims care about the numbers. This thread simply attempts to demonstrate how misguided these latter groups are.

3. Scottish Extractions. Lastly, all the Scotsmen who served and died in Non-Scottish Regiments are included in the SNWM data:

Scottish Casualties Extracted from English Regiments...7,256 men

Scottish Casualties Extracted from Irish Regiments........2,435 men

Scottish Casualties Extracted from Welsh Regiments........233 men

Total................................................................................9,924 men

Any mistakes are mine.

MG

[dundeesown]

4th B/W

317 named soldiers who died from,SDGW-(3 Irish,1 South African and 9 English lads.)

Lets go for the good Scottish name Macdonald 3 men (Scots),now Mcdonald 7 men (Scots).Or Campbell 3-1Scot,1Irish & 1 English.

Mc & Mac names 50 ( all Scots)

Now the name Brown 8 men (Scots), now Smith 7 (scots )

O yes and 1 Fitzpatrick ( English )

What I would call Scottish names.

Anderson- 2

Angus-1

Bruce-1

Forbes-2

Wallace 1

In fact you will find just as many Irish and Anglicized names in the list as you will "Scottish".

after the 4ths amalgamation with the 5th a lot more English lads names start to appear.

I just think this Scottish name thing is a non starter,it would all depend on the area you were from,Dundee lots of Irish and lots of lowland names.

I have no axe to grind about this I just think it`s a daft thing to fall out about.

Gary

[Guest]

4th B/W

317 named soldiers who died from,SDGW-(3 Irish,1 South African and 9 English lads.)

Lets go for the good Scottish name Macdonald 3 men (Scots),now Mcdonald 7 men (Scots).Or Campbell 3-1Scot,1Irish & 1 English.

Mc & Mac names 50 ( all Scots). No surprise there

Now the name Brown 8 men (Scots), now Smith 7 (scots )

O yes and 1 Fitzpatrick ( English )

What I would call Scottish names.

Anderson- 2

Angus-1

Bruce-1

Forbes-2

Wallace 1

In fact you will find just as many Irish and Anglicized names in the list as you will "Scottish".

after the 4ths amalgamation with the 5th a lot more English lads names start to appear.

I just think this Scottish name thing is a non starter,it would all depend on the area you were from,Dundee lots of Irish and lots of lowland names.

I have no axe to grind about this I just think it`s a daft thing to fall out about.

Gary

I am at a complete loss here .... What is the point you are making? your random sample is so small it is what statisticians wold call 'statistically irrelevant' (their term) for the simple fact that the addition or omission of one man would swing your Mcdonald sub-sample (your biggest sample) by a massive 14.3 %.. Statistical arguments based on samples this size are not particularly robust. That aside, even if they were cranked up by a factor of 100 I am still unclear what the point is...

1. The Scottish population in 1914-18 included people with surnames that have extremely high incidence with Scottish Born, expatriate Scots and descendants of Expatriate Scots. They also has an extremely low incidence in any other country in the world; particularly names starting with Mc and Mac. [Please tell me if you disagree with this point, otherwise the rest will be irrelevant]

2. The massive Scottish expatriate diaspora should reflect 1. above.

3. If the 16,555 English-born (alleged) Scotsmen were indeed Scottish, we should expect this very large sample to show similar high frequency incidence on these surnames. The examples chosen being Mc and Mac (the largest sub-group)

4. We don't see this. In fact we see less than half of what we should expect.

5. Either 75% of these expatriate English-born Scotsmen were born of an English father and a Scottish mother or the theory that they were all of Scottish descent is nonsense.

I cant be any clearer than this. MG

[dundeesown]

Oooo.

What I am saying is that you are going for " Typically Scottish Names "

and I am saying there are more Scots with non " Typically Scottish names"

as for the Mc & Mac,there may be just as many Irish Mc or Mac Mcdonalds than Scots.

GF

[mbriscoe]

Oooo.

What I am saying is that you are going for " Typically Scottish Names "

and I am saying there are more Scots with non " Typically Scottish names"

as for the Mc & Mac,there may be just as many Irish Mc or Mac Mcdonalds than Scots.

GF

Of course the most common Scottish surname is SMITh.

Actually the three most common Scottish surnames are not particularly uniquely Scottish

Position Name Number

1 SMITH 2273

2 BROWN 1659

3 WILSON 1539

4 THOMSON 1373

5 ROBERTSON 1370S

Surnames occurring most often on the birth, death and marriage registers in Scotland in 1995 by position.

Edited 1 June , 2014 by mbriscoe

[Guest]

Oooo.

What I am saying is that you are going for " Typically Scottish Names "

and I am saying there are more Scots with non " Typically Scottish names"

as for the Mc & Mac,there may be just as many Irish Mc or Mac Mcdonalds than Scots.

GF

If you want to compare the numbers as a percent of total there were over 16 times more Macs in the Scottish Born servicemen (as a % of pop) than in the Irish born servicemen as a per cent of total. Your ideas are in a fantasy world.

I am not sure you understand some very basic concepts of statistics. I don't disagree with your second statement. The last statement is simply factually incorrect. The populations stats would simply deny that claim. If you want to simply make up stats that is your prerogative. I am happy to debate this but if you want to drag this into the realms of "Oooooooo" I will leave you to it. Believe whatever you want. Really, it is not that important.

MG

[Black Watch]

Oooooooo

I don't usually get involved in arguments about statistics, but calling someone moronic is way over the top. I don't give a toss about your agenda on this thread (it seems to be to antagonise as many Scots as possible), but such an insulting post is way beyond the limits of what this forum used to be about. Looking at the threads you have recently started the word TROLL springs to mind.

Gary, I'm sorry that you fail to understand all these "basic concepts". Keep taking the tablets......

Neil

[Chris_Baker]

I have a question about the subject of this thread. The question is: so what? What is the point of all of this?

[Guest]

Perhaps a picture will help. The chart below shows the surname frequency distribution of two sub-sets of men in the SNWM database.

Blue is men known to have been born in Scotland: 72,320 men.

Red is men known to have been born in England: 16,555 men.

The Scots-born sub-set shows the characteristic spike in names beginning with M. This reflects the high incidence of Mcs, Macs and others. M represents a massive 22.2% of the sample.

The English-born sub-set exhibits very typical characteristics of known English groups. The key characteristisc being names beginning with B, H, M, S and W have very similar frequencies. We do not see this in Scottish, Welsh or Irish control samples.

MG

[Guest]

I have a question about the subject of this thread. The question is: so what? What is the point of all of this?

To illustrate that Niall Ferguson's claim that 26.4% of Scottish servicemen died in the Great War is not only incorrect, it is a gross exaggeration - see the OP for details.

He was still promoting this view a few months ago on National TV....the BBC in fact, as part of its Centenary programming.

Edit: and has permeated into articles like this: http://www.educationscotland.gov.uk/higherscottishhistory/impactofthegreatwar/background/index.asp which I believe is a government website aimed at educating people.

MG

[dundeesown]

I have a question about the subject of this thread. The question is: so what? What is the point of all of this?

Thats basically what I am saying post 125.

Never seen the moronic comment but hay it`s water off a ducks back,but I`m on the way to the docs for more tabs neil

In the end we`re all Jock Tamson`s bairns.

Gary

[Graham Stewart]

Martin - pull the plug on this one. Let the SNWM figures stand and be perpetuated throughout history, just complete the work in private and then produce a paper on it.

No-one wants to antagonise anyone here - it was simply an exercise in trying to explain, through 'statistics', that the high percentage figures on the SNWM were flawed and that a large percentage on that memorial weren't Scots by any sense of the imagination, but whom were equally as proud to have served in Scots Regiments, alongside some of the finest soldiers in the World.

Remarks have been made towards me 'implying', that perhaps I am predujdiced against Scots, however as an ex-serviceman nothing could be further from the truth having had many Scots mates over the years. The most recent is wee Ronnie McCubbin, a Glaswegian, who is a Nationalist and one finest blokes I've ever had the pleasure of meeting and working with.

As it is, I'm solely a student of Military History and in particular the 'make-up' of the British Army, I deal in fact's and not fiction, for that I can only apologise.

[Ron Clifton]

Martin

I'm with Graham on this - I think the thread has covered all the ground it needs to, with a lot of irrelevant material besides.

Keep up your good work - your figures can be justified, to a greater degree (in my opinion) than those produced by the SNWM and taken up, apparently uncritically, by Niall Ferguson. As he himself says, in The Pity of War, he is an economic historian, not a military one, and I think it was an economist who first referred to "lies, d***ed lies, and statistics"!

Ron

[Guest]

Gent's you are probably right. I should have left it at the original post. It is probably worth repeating the first and last paragraphs of the OP.

A few authors, most notably Niall Ferguson in his “The Pity of War 1914-1918” and E Spiers in “The Scottish Soldier at War” in “Facing Armageddon” have claimed that 26.4% of Scottish recruits died in WWI. On the back of this figure some authors and newspapers have also implied that the sacrifice of the Scottish nation was proportionally far greater than any other allied nation and only less than that of Serbia. I believe this figure and the associated claims to be greatly exaggerated. It is a figure based on extremely poor analysis. The real numbers are tragic enough, without any need to exaggerate the enormous sacrifice made by the Scottish people

There is no nationalistic agenda. My aim is merely to establish a more accurate figure than the one being propagated through various publications and newspapers. I fully accept that there are assumptions in my approach, but I believe them to be very conservative. Even if one was to make very generous assumptions, it is impossible to get a figure anywhere close to the 26.4%. Others may differ in their opinions and it is not my aim to convince anyone, merely to highlight a different methodology.

My only amendment to the OP would be to say that this distorted view is now being repeated on a Govt sponsored education website.

MG

[Guest]

The SNWM.ORG site no longer state the figures of 150,000.

From its website today: "The Scottish National War Memorial commemorates nearly 150,000 Scottish casualties in the First World War 1914-1918, more than 50,000 from the Second World War 1939-1945 ....." I don't think this has changed in years and was certainly the same when this thread started. See here at the very top of the page under 'History'. It makes the common mistake of using the word 'casualties' when it means 'fatal casualties'. If the duplications are removed the number of individuals is around 132,000. What might be more accurate is if it stated there were nearly 150,000 records. A subtle difference.

Under the Rolls of Honor it defines the criteria as :

"A member of the Armed Forces of the Crown or of the Merchant Navy who was either a Scotsman (i.e. born in Scotland or who had a Scottish born father or Mother) or served in a Scottish Regiment and was killed or died (except as a result of suicide) as a result of a wound, injury or disease sustained (a) in a theatre of operations for which a medal has been or is awarded; or ( b ) whilst on duty in aid of the Civil Power."

[MikeMeech]

Hi All

It appears that this forum is ignored elsewhere as Martin Pugh (author 'Unification and Disintegration') in the July edition of 'History Today' states, on page 7:

"The mortality rate for the British Army was 12 per cent, but for the Scottish troops a horrendous 26 per cent."

I suspect that will be quoted more than any statement or statistic stated here, whether we like it or not!

Mike

[spof]

Can we leave the modern politics out of this please?

Glen

GWF Admin Team

[Guest]

You might find this interesting!

To be fair to SNWM it never claimed that the database was representative of Scotsmen who died in the Great War. Their data is simply often mis-interpreted as such. The SNWM have always acknowledged this (as I pointed out in the OP some two years ago). They have been open and constructive throughout this debate and have no agenda to position Scottish casualty ratios in any other light. I deeply sympathise with them but I think they would do themselves a favour by re-wording some of the blurb.

The SNWM is not the problem, it is the lazy authors and journalists who carelessly abuse the SNWM data to construct fallacious arguments.

This thread is about statistical accuracy and not about Scots. As soon as I can work out how to do it, I will close it because I think it has run its course and I genuinely fear it will become a magnet for nationalistic rather that statistical debate.

MG.

[phil andrade]

Posts that I made this evening have been removed because they're too political.

May I be allowed to reiterate my point that flawed statistics about the Great War are relevant, especially if they impinge on popular perceptions ?

Phil (PJA)