By Peter Lawrie, ©1997

Want to chat about Scottish History? - Thinking of a holiday in Scotland? Stay Bed & Breakfast or self-catering at my home on the beautiful Firth of Tay.

Aches & pains, Migraine? - Try a Bioflow.

Introduction.
Do Ravenstein’s laws of migration (Pryce, p11, schema C) apply to migration into two mainly rural Highland parishes? Although at a considerable distance from the main centres of nineteenth century urbanisation, the ‘laws of migration’ might be expected to act more strongly in drawing population away. The principal primary sources are the 1851 CEBs for the parishes of Kildonan and Loth in Sutherland. The two parishes are treated as one (LK), since the Sutherland Clearances physically moved most of the population of Kildonan into Loth, and a boundary change in 1845 apparently moved the bulk of Loth’s population back into Kildonan. (Groome, Vol IV, p361, 559).
There was a particular problem with 26 CEB fisher households (127 people or almost 5% of the population of LK) which were excluded initially as temporary migrants. Subsequent research in the Statutary records demonstrated that they were very recent but permanent in-migrants. This group has a significant effect on my conclusions. They appear to have been recruited and brought in as a group to develop the White Fishery, (in place of the un-dependable Herring Fishery) rather than as individuals. For that reason I considered it to be valid to develop a discussion of Ravenstein both with and without them.

Law 9: Migration increases as industries develop and communications improve.
In 1801 the bulk of the population of Sutherland lived on pastoral farms in the inland straths from where they were removed by the Marquis of Stafford’s agents between 1809 and 1825. ‘Memories’ of the injustices (though quite in accordance with the law of Scotland) and brutalities of these clearances, (see Grimble, MacLeod, MacKenzie, Cobbett - p128, also Devine in Scottish Past, p133-141) linger to this day among the descendants of the cleared. The cleared lands were let to capitalist sheep-farmers from southern Scotland and northern England who brought in their own shepherds. The native population was settled on tiny crofts in townships on poor land near the coast to provide labour for the herring fishery, larger farmers (Gray, p224-226), road projects, and the coal mine and salt pans at Brora (Adam, i, p180-182). (Refer also to Loch, Richards and Sage). The sine qua non of development and subsequent in-migration of shepherds, fishermen and merchants was the new road from Inverness to Wick, built under the auspices of the Commission for Highland Roads and Bridges between 1805 and 1816. (Haldane, p135,189 and Adam i, lxxiii- lxxiv) The William Daniell print of 1821 shows an impression of Helmsdale two years after the harbour had been completed, illustrating the newly introduced industries of commercial fishing for herring and large-scale sheep farming as well as the bridge (completed in 1812).

<Law 1: The majority of Migrants go only a short distance.
The in-migrant heads of household were tabulated by county and parish of birth and their approximate distance by road from Helmsdale. (Note, however, Rathven is 135 miles from Helmsdale via Inverness but only 40 miles by boat, with a favourable wind). The 1st law (Drake, chapter 7 by Grigg and Pryce, Ch 1-3) may well apply in more populous areas, (and see also Devine - Scottish Past - p124 to p128) but in this study, the mean distance from the place of birth of the 129 non-Sutherland in-migrant heads of household was 126 miles and the median 80 miles. Excluding the Rathven fishers and three sporting Englishmen, this dropped to a mean of 103 and median 50 miles, with a standard deviation of 128 indicating the high extreme values. (Drake & Finnegan, ch.8). Hildebrandt’s 5% sample (actually 8% of LK in-migrant heads) picked up ten individuals, including two from England and one from Berwick, resulting in a mean of 209 miles, median 150 miles and standard deviation of 183. (This shows the danger of using sampled results at the level of individual parishes. On a larger scale such discrepancies would probably be smoothed out.) The seven non-LK, but Sutherland-born heads selected by Hildebrandt show a mean distance of 25 miles, median 25 miles and standard deviation of 14 miles, which is almost identical to the calculated figures for the 85 Sutherland in-migrants in the parish. Half (65 of 129) of the non-Sutherland in-migrants heads originated outwith the three mainland northern counties and therefore it appears that most in-migrants have travelled larger distances than would be found in areas with large urban centres.

Law 3: Migrants going longer distances generally go to one of the great centres of Commerce.
Despite the long distances some of the migrants travelled, Helmsdale is hardly a major centre of Commerce, but the majority of in-migrants came from rural parishes with village centres comparable to or not much larger than Helmsdale. The exceptions were two from Aberdeen, one from Dundee and one from Edinburgh. There is too little evidence to debate the 5th Law (natives of towns less migratory) except to repeat that only four out of 126 non-Sutherland in-migrants came from the cities of Scotland.

Law 2: Migration proceeds step by step.
The 121 in-migrant male heads of households with co-residing children (excluding Rathven) in the CEBs were analysed, with a percentage analysis (after Pryce, table 4-1 of Anderson’s study of Preston, p107). Due to the size of the parishes, larger distance bands have been used and Anderson’s table was adjusted to match. (Showing very little real difference except that in LK there are only three parish centres within 20 miles therefore it is to be expected that intermediates are lower - one Golspie and three Latheron fathers and a fourth from Latheron with a child born in Clyne). In-migrants comprise 45% of 113 households in Helmsdale, 36% of 39 in the Strath, 25% of 132 in Loth and only 9% of 252 in the townships. Over all distances, but excluding Rathven, the total percentage split is close to Anderson’s (figures in brackets), although there are fewer intermediates and more LK births. There are 21% intermediate (28%), 67% LK (60%) and 12% at the father’s birthplace (12%). Loth (though entirely rural) comes closest to Preston with the highest percentage of intermediates out of 33 heads. Helmsdale with the greatest proportion of in-migrant families has just 20% intermediate. The Strath should probably be discounted as there are only fourteen cases in all and of the seven who came from Northumberland and Roxburgh only one had a child (elsewhere in Sutherland) before coming to Kildonan, although three of these brought wives from near their birthplace and four married in Sutherland. The 31 in-migrants travelling more than 60 miles were much more likely to have a child born at an intermediate location (45%). The townships with 23 examples (only 2 from more than 60 miles) show the lowest % of children born at an intermediate location, and some of these heads are probably the children of an earlier generation of native out-migrants returning home. To summarise, migrants did move step-wise, but necessarily by larger distances, and to less of an extent than in Preston. The figures are distorted by a few instances of very large single steps, in particular the shepherds brought to the parish by their employer, rather than finding their own way. When I included the 21 Rathven male heads with co-residing children, the ‘father’s birthplace’ for Helmsdale became 32% and, in total for LK, 24%, which is quite significantly different. As the migration of this group was probably direct from Buckie it could be argued that it contradicts the 2nd Law, but equally demonstrates the problem of special circumstances causing undue distortions in small studies.

Law 7: Most migrants are adults, Families rarely migrate.
In the analysis (excluding Rathven) it appears considerably more likely that a first child of a migrant male would be born in LK (67%) than at the father’s place of birth (12%) or at an intermediate location (21%) which supports the 7th law. In thirteen of the fourteen cases of eldest co-residing children born at the father’s place of birth the father had migrated less than 60 miles, and most of these originated within Sutherland or Caithness. However, the inclusion of 21 Rathven fisher families among migrants travelling more than 60 miles changes this to 40% father’s birthplace, 29% intermediate and 31% LK, thus, apparently contradicting the 7th law.
The 368 conjugal units (some of which may be sub-ordinate units in extended families) were analysed by the birth-place of the husband and wife. The entries for the 79 ‘no children born in the parish’ include older couples whose children may have left, younger couples without children and seven couples with children, but not born in the LK parishes, who may be recent migrants. Ignoring these and concentrating on the 289 families with children born in the parishes just 21% of 67 Helmsdale families had both spouses locally born, and 46% were both Sutherland born. Outside Helmsdale (222) 59% were locally born and 80% both Sutherland born. Just 9% of couples with local children where both parents were in-migrants came from outside Sutherland. Although 9% of females and 8% of males with locally born children originated outwith the Northern counties area, in just 3% of cases were both spouses from outwith the counties, suggesting that it was more common for migrants to be single on arrival. As there were only 7 instances of non-LK born children among the 79 ‘no children born in parish’, it seems justified in taking this approach. This, however, become 28 out 98 when Rathven was included, and the migration of these families is clearly contradictory to conclusions based on the rest of the evidence.

Law 6: Females are more migratory than males within the county of their birth, but males more frequently venture beyond.
It also appears that in almost every instance more husbands were born in the parish (vertical column) than wives (horizontal) but more wives than husbands were born elsewhere in Sutherland. However more wives than husbands also came from outwith the Northern counties. This appears to show that, in this case, females have been more migratory within the county than males but females have also migrated more from outwith the area (45 males to 50 females) contradicting the 6th law in this community. (This may be distorted by temporary out-migration of males causing CEB entries for female heads designated as married and with no sign of a husband). The inclusion of 21 additional couples, all born and married in Rathven, has no effect on these conclusions.

Law 4: Every migratory current has a counter-current.
Law 4 could be said to be demonstrated by Hildebrandt’s 5% sample finding 8 individuals who were born in LK elsewhere in Sutherland and a further 6 in other Northern Counties. A further unknown number could probably be found throughout Britain and overseas by 1851. Out-migration and emigration particularly of the native born had been on-going since the start of the century. (For instance the “Prince of Wales” took 178 Kildonan people in 1813 and 1815 to Lord Selkirk’s Red River Settlement. (Bumstead 282-287). A number of Kildonan emigrants were identified in Nova Scotia records). The natives formed the bulk of the out-migrants through-out the century (Campbell, p108, see above.) and it is clear from the population decline after 1851 that this counter-current exceeded the current of in-migrants. Or rather, migration into LK represented the counter-current to the main current of migration from Sutherland. There is insufficient data to discuss Law 10: The major direction is from rural areas to towns, except in terms of this counter-current.

Law 11: the major causes of migration are economic.
The Clearances occurred for economic reasons and were conceived and controlled from outwith the county. The ‘pull factors’ (Pryce, schema D, p13) causing in-migrations derived from the economic opportunities for non Gaelic-speaking outsiders with industrial and agricultural skills, created by the Sutherland estate (Adam). Conversely the ‘push factors’ that caused the native people to leave were the poverty, oppressive treatment and lack of opportunity they were subjected to, under the management of the estate factors (MacLeod). This out-migration was actively encouraged by the factors after the famine of the late 1840s and the introduction of the statutory poor-rate in 1845. (Devine, (Famine) p201 onwards)