Talk:History of agriculture in Scotland

"forced displacement"
The following is copied from User talk:Richard Nevell

I reverted the edit on History of agriculture in Scotland. There are 3 main reasons for this.

Firstly the historians who work in this field do not apply the term "forced displacement" to the Highland clearances. You can find people who are not academic historians doing so if you look hard enough, but in an article that has "history" in its title, I don't think you need me to spell out any arguments on the sort of references to expect.

Secondly, I don't know how familiar you are with the reference you cited. It is a paper written by human rights lawyers. Looking at where they presented it, it appears to be a marketing piece - trying to raise their profile and therefore gain more work. (Nothing wrong with that - we all have to make a living.) It does not seem to have any claim to have serious academic credentials.

Thirdly, if you look at the mention of the Highland clearances in their paper, it is a very minor part of the paper - to the extent that it is reasonable to conclude that it is a reference in passing (as per WP:CONTEXTMATTERS: "Information provided in passing by an otherwise reliable source that is not related to the principal topics of the publication may not be reliable").

Sorry to come back so forcefully on this, but much of the editing around the Highland clearances has been done in the context of trying to get the accepted views of the historians working in the field into Wikipedia - rather than some of the stuff written by others. ThoughtIdRetired (talk) 18:34, 8 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Hello ThoughtIdRetired, nice to have you here! To your above points, I will say that lawyers may indeed have something to contribute (not least because the publisher is an academic publisher) and interdisciplinarity tends to build a stronger article. I have, however, added another source using the term to allay your concerns. Richard Nevell (talk) 18:40, 8 August 2019 (UTC)


 * Unfortunately the extra reference is written by a junior academic who specialises in English literature rather than Scottish history. Reading the mention of the Highland clearances, I think it also meets the criteria for a reference in passing. I am a little puzzled as to exactly what you are trying to achieve - the facts of the Highland clearances speak for themselves - there is no need to use the language you want to insert. Much better to try and understand the out-of-phase abandonment of dùthchas - this is one of the 2 main reasons for discontent over the clearances - and it is something that particularly hit those less able to look after themselves.ThoughtIdRetired (talk) 18:55, 8 August 2019 (UTC)


 * User:Richard Nevell, I think you need to have some regard for WP:HISTRS.ThoughtIdRetired (talk) 19:05, 8 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Please do comment on the content, not the contributor. Dr Richard Nevell (talk) 19:12, 8 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Asking you to look at a Wikipedia essay about reliable sources for a history article is a comment on content. The purpose of using your username was to alert you to the comment on this page, as opposed to your user page. I am making a serious point about source selection. I suggest that the sources that you put forward do not meet the requirements for this article - for reasons already explained. ThoughtIdRetired (talk) 21:08, 8 August 2019 (UTC)
 * If you had said you do not consider the sources reliable, that would have been one thing but instead you made it personal. Telling an archaeologist and historian they need to "have some regard for WP:HISTRS" is a tad condescending. Dr Richard Nevell (talk) 21:24, 8 August 2019 (UTC)
 * Let's take this step by step. There are 2 mentions above to "references in passing". If you look at WP:CONTEXTMATTERS (also above) you will see that this is all about reliable sources. I am sorry that I did not make it clearer that these 2 sources are not reliable sources according to the content guideline to which I gave you a link. I have done my utmost to avoid making this personal - in fact I am at a loss as to exactly what has triggered that thinking in you. Clearly I have missed something - so again I apologise. "Archaelogist and historian" - well I am sure that is what you are - but how would any other editor know that? It is rare for an editor to claim any particular credentials and, from my observation, this can cause discord in the Wikipedia community. I am sure there is a sociology thesis or two in the interactions within the Wikipedia community - so I will not comment more on that. I have further remarks on the usage of "forced displacement" appended below.ThoughtIdRetired (talk) 21:51, 8 August 2019 (UTC)

Looking at the suggested use of "forced displacement" in the article, here is the definition of Forced displacement from the article of the same name: "The concept of forced displacement envelopes demographic movements like flight, evacuation, displacement, and resettlement. The International Organization for Migration defines a forced migrant as any person who migrates to "escape persecution, conflict, repression, natural and human-made disasters, ecological degradation, or other situations that endanger their lives, freedom or livelihood"." I think it is reasonably obvious that clearances in the first phase - especially when alternative accommodation was offered on the same estate, does not match any of these parameters. With second-phase clearances, one could possibly consider that there was flight from a natural disaster (potato blight), but the extensive relief program (largely run and paid for by landowners) does not match with the overall concept of forced displacement - nor do the assisted passages. Additionally, not all second phase clearance was directly associated with blight. Then you need to consider that this article makes a very brief mention of the Highland clearances. Introducing a technical term that is only, with the greatest stretch of interpretation, applicable to part of the process is highly misleading to the reader. It also goes against the usage of all the historians who write on this subject - as I have already made clear.ThoughtIdRetired (talk) 21:51, 8 August 2019 (UTC)
 * It may be worth mentioning that the paper by Eric Richards in International Migrations in the Victorian Era (Leiden: Brill, 2018) ISBN 978-90-04-27674-1 ( and then choose page 83) gives an account of the expatriation of Highlanders in the 19th century, with focus on Australia and New Zealand. Eric Richards was one of the major experts on the Highland clearances, carrying out an extensive amount of research and writing several key books within the subject. Lately he was an emeritus Professor with the Centre for Global Migrations at the University of Otago until his death last year. I think his chapter (#3) gives a good representation of the whole range of situations in which Highlanders left - with, at one end of the spectrum, various shades of strong persuasion and compulsion (Richards is slightly less absolute in depicting that outermost fringe of the spectrum, compared to some historians). However, the whole picture given by this widely acknowledged expert does come down firmly, in my opinion, against this article using the term "forced displacement" in the brief mention of the Highland clearances. I would welcome the comments of others.ThoughtIdRetired (talk) 14:12, 9 August 2019 (UTC)