Cynthia wrote: re Highland march:
Rather, Mike told me it was a "swinging fast walk". Maybe he
was thinking of the kilts, but a "louping jog" could fit the description as well.I think the great kilt (full thingy, huge length of fabric in one piece for cloak and all) pretty much forces a swinging walk on the flat. For battle the Highlanders discarded their philamor and fought in their smalls, must have looked like a load of Marley's ghost actors weilding claymores instead of candles.
A lot of my info is from rather doubtful sources like 'Waverley Anecdotes' (1833 - no author identified!) which in turn quote old accounts. The early Highland clan chiefs had champions - eventually becoming a hereditary thing - and they must originally have had some purpose. There's a load of stuff out there about the courtesy of Highlanders towards their enemies, and in the Borders (different ethnic group, but many shared principles of rapine, theft etc) it's said that battles were sometimes over without any blood being spilled. The real object was to take prisoners and then ransom them, and it was so formalised that the prisoner would be taken, would agree to pay his ransom immediately, would then be released and have to sit on the sidelines agreeing not to fight any more - like a chess piece taken off the board.
The theories I've heard (and, well, developed) on the harped brosnachadh are that it would have been performed in the camp either the night before the battle or the morning of the battle. Maybe just for the "generals". The concept of a ritual stand-off that you refer to is intriguing. Can you share more? (And if everyone else is groaning right now, let us know...we can take our conversation off to a quiet corner.)
Small inter-clan battles governed by rules of ransom, blood-money and blood-feud must have been a very strange mixture of extreme violence and caution. Kill someone, and you would either have to pay a substantial amount to their clan, or suffer a state of feud for generations; take them a live prisoner, unharmed, and they would pay you instead. Not only that, they might respect you and in a future battle would endeavour to ensure they took YOU prisoner in return since being taken prisoner was a good way to ensure safety.
I bet that while all this courteous bloodshed was happening for the chiefs and their families, a load of the peasantry was getting wiped out on their behalf. I think the harpers were honoured and protected as if family members. They could well have been known to both sides in a dispute.
David
Posted to Scots-L - The Traditional Scottish Music & Culture List - To subscribe/unsubscribe, point your browser to: http://www.tullochgorm.com/lists.html
