Ye Jacobites by Name

The song "Ye Jacobites by Name" is always listed as a pro Jacobite song, but listening to the lyrics this does not make any sense. I believe that the song is listed as a pro-Jacobite song by many people because it was included in James Hogg's Jacobite Relics of Scotland. I suppose before I go on you are likely wondering who the hell Jacobites are. First, they have nothing to do with the French Revolution those are Jacobins. Second, they have everything to do with the succession of the English monarchy. The current House of Windsor are actually usurpers to the throne of England descendent from the Hanoverian line. The proper house is still the House of Stuart, which was initially deposed in the Revolution of 1688 and then completely ignored in favor of the Hanovarians by the Act of Succession.

 Ye Jacobites by Name

     Ye Jacobites by name lend an ear, lend an ear

     Ye Jacobites by name lend an ear

     Ye Jacobites by name your faults I will proclaim

     Your doctrines I must blame and you shall hear, you shall hear

     Your doctrines I must blame and you shall hear

What is right and what is wrong by the law, by the law

What is right and what is wrong by the law

What is right and what is wrong, that should know all along

The weaker man must run for the grove, for the grove

The weaker man must run for the grove

     Chorus

What makes heroic strife, fame and fare; fame and fare

What makes historic strife, fame and fare

What makes historic strife to wet the assassin’s knife?

To end a parent’s life with bloody war, bloody war

To end a parent’s life with bloody war

     Chorus

Let the (So leave) schemes alone in the state, in the state

Let the (So leave) schemes alone in the state

Let the (So leave) schemes alone, ignore the rising son

And leave a man alone (undone) to his fate, to his fate

And leave a man alone (undone) to his fate

     Chorus

You Jacobites by name lend an ear, lend an ear

You Jacobites by name lend an ear

The second stanza does seem to indicate a pro-Jacobite sentiment "to end a parent's life with bloody war..." as it was Mary Stuart wife to William of Orange who helped to lead the rebellion against her father, James II during the Revolution of 1688. However, it is likely that the author was thinking more about the concept of the king as the father of the nation when the lyric was written. After all the goal of the Jacobites was to kill the current king, George I and replace him with James III. This interpretation is also supported by the third stanza, "ignore the rising son," which is clearly referring the pretender to the throne James III. Therefore this is likely an anti-Jacobite song that Hogg simply included in his collection of songs and poetry about Jacobitism not a pro-Jacobite song.

Yellow as a Racial Term in 19th Century Folk Songs

I was listening to folk music earlier today and it struck me that it is possible that the term "yellow" was used to describe persons of Mexican dissent in the early 19th century. The two songs that made me think this were "Yellow Rose of Texas," for obvious reasons and "Santiano," an old sea shanty. In both songs women are referred to as "yellow." This would make sense if you were trying to describe someone who was not white, but does suggest that brown was not thought of as the proper description either. This is a minor point but adds to the continued vagaries and arbitrariness of racial descriptions.

Santiano

When I was a young lad in my prime
Way hay Santiano
I went to sea and served my time
Along the planes of Mexico

Why do those yellow girls love me so
Way hay Santiano
because I don't tell them all I know
Along the planes of Mexico

When I was a young lad in my prime
Way hay Santiano
I knocked down them yellow girls two at a time
Along the plane of Mexico

In Mexico, in Mexico
Way hay Santiano
Them yellow girls show you all they know
Along the planes of Mexico

Yellow Rose of Texas

There's a yellow rose in Texas that I'm going to see
No other soldier know her, no soldier only me
She cried so when I left her it like to broke my heart
And if I ever find her we never more will part

She's the sweetest rose of color this soldier ever knew
Her eyes are bright as diamonds, they sparkle like the dew
You may talk of your dearest May and sing of Rosalie
But the yellow rose of Texas is the only one for me

Now I'm going to finder her for my heart is full of woe
And we'll sing the songs together that we sung so long ago
We'll play the banjo gayly and sing the songs of yore
and the yellow rose of Texas shall be mine for ever more

Now i'm going southward for my heart is full of woe
I'm going back to Georgia to find my Uncle Joe
you may talk about your Beauregard and sing of General Lee
but the gallant Hood of Texas played hell in Tennessee

 In Santiano the sailor is telling of his youth sailing along the shores of Mexico and all of his sexual exploits with women in port. The third and fourth stanza seem to describe all women that he met in Mexico as 'yellow,' which would seem to indicate that this is a description of Mexican women in general. The Yellow Rose of Texas is actually more direct as he describes his love as 'the sweetest rose of color....' Alternatively he could be describing a light skinned African American woman, but as the last stanza clearly indicates that he was a solider in John Bell Hood's army (and is now off to join Joe Johnston's army) this seems unlikely.

What all Good Books Do

I recently finished reading Professor Danielle Allen's, Our Declaration and it did what all good books do it provoked me to think about my own work and beliefs. Specifically it showed me a disjuncture in the way I read texts and believe texts should be read. It has always been my belief that documents should be read within their historical context. In fact I don't believe you can be a historian if you believe in reading documents out of context. But this is in direct conflict with my belief that laws and constitutions should be read in the present context.

The easy out is to simply say that when I read historical documents, which are not active I read them as a historian, but when I read laws or constitutions I read them as a lawyer. While this is true it does not solve the disjuncture. Many lawyers, Originalists, do read the Constitution and laws in the context in which they were written. As I read Allen's book I was simultaneously struck by the beautifully crafted argument she was making and how vehemently I disagreed with it precisely because it was ahistorical. Conversely I am a fervent opponent of Originalism because one I don't think any one document created by multiple authors can have an original meaning and because I believe to read the Constitution in this way is to kill it.

I have never liked the phrase an evolving constitution as that implies that it is becoming better and I do not subscribe to Whiggish view of history or development. I prefer to think of it as relativistic that way there is no positive judgement or expectations associated with any time period. The laws of our country are simply changing as our country changes. But I digress from the problem at hand.

The best solution I can come up with is that I see documents such as the Declaration of Independence as dead, but law and the Constitution as living. However, this is still one level removed from the real division between living and dead documents. Alas, I have only been pondering this or a few hours and will not likely come to a solution for a while.

Reading the Declaration of Independence

Allen, Danielle. Our Declaration: A Reading of the Declaration of Independence in Defense of Equality. New York: W.W. Norton & Co., 2014.

Professor Allen's book exemplifies all that is admirable and flawed with the University of Chicago's core teaching methods. Although at Princeton University it is clear that Allen's sensibilities and intellectual focus remain in Hyde Park. Directed at both academics and lay readers Allen does a spectacular job dissecting the Declaration line by line. As I read the book I could feel myself transported inside of the neo-gothic buildings of U of C. I could almost smell the chalk (Chicago steadfastly refuses to put in whiteboards) and see the undergrads parsing this seminal document word by word. Allen's voice is clear throughout the work guiding the reader like the skillful teacher she is.

Her assessment that the Declaration is a memorandum was revealing and allows a modern reader to connect with an often misremembered document. Allen at times seems to be torn by the desire to make historically based arguments and her non-contextual reading. At times she uses historical context and research to show that the Declaration had numerous authors, but then ignores context when examining the text. Although mentioned Allen fails to point out the degree to which the Declaration is modeled explicitly on the English Bill of Rights of 1689. These were Englishmen not yet American's writing this document.

Allen pushes some of her arguments too far. For example, she argues that there were numerous individuals involved in the conversation to help show that the declaration belongs to more than a few writers. She does have a point that the Declaration was the work of more than a few secluded men in Philadelphia, but to include people in the states who affirmed their desire for independence is a bit too much. That the independence would not have occurred but for the effort of thousands of men and women is beyond question. But to assert that these people had any effect on the wording of the Declaration is absurd. And it is the wording that Allen is concerned with.

These mild criticisms aside, Allen's book should be read by anyone who wants to understand either why the Declaration remains a relevant document to this day or by anyone who is considering attending the College of the University of Chicago. Allen tackles head  on the compromises needed to pass the Declaration, which made it a less than perfect document. Some will criticize her for letting Jefferson and the other founders off the hook for dodging slavery, but Allen's goal is to show the continued relevance of the Declaration not its shortcomings Historians will be frustrated at times by her lack of contextualism. But this is not a book for historians, this is a book for everyone.

And We're Back

After a two year hiatus of frantic dissertation writing and teaching I may finally have time for this silly blog again. There are many changes planned including new reading lists, updated links, and general nonsense of blogging activities.

The House of the Rising Sun

The song The House of the Rising Sun has usually been regarded as telling the story of a New Orleans brothel. The song is usually sung from the perspective of a women regardless if the singer is male or female. This reading seems to stem from the opening stanza of the song:

There is a house in New Orleans

They call the rising sun

It’s been the ruin of many a poor boy (girl/soul)

Dear god I know I was one

This stanza does seem to suggest that the song is about a house that is the ruin of an otherwise good person, but the rest of the song does not follow that its about a brothel. In fact the song has several references that seem unlikely to refer to brothel life. As with all folk songs there are numerous additional lyrics and alterations that have been made over the years. I am basing this analysis on the most commonly included stanzas.

My mother was a tailor

She sewed my new blue jeans

And my father was a gambling man (My sweetheart is a drunkard)

Way down in New Orleans (He drinks down in New Orleans)

The only thing a gambler (drunkard) needs

Are a suitcase and a trunk

And the only time he’s satisfied

Is when he’s on the drunk

Oh mother tell your children (Please tell my baby sister)

Not to do as I have done (Not to do what I have done)

Don’t spend your life in sin and misery

In the house of the rising sun

I got one foot on that platform

And another on that train

I’m going back to New Orleans

To wear that ball and chain

There is little dispute that the lyrics tell the story about a women who was led astray by either her father or lover. That seems to vary at the whim of the performer. However, it seems more likely that the song is about a prison rather than a brothel. The two most clear peaces of evidence for this are the reference to a mother sewing new blue jeans. A prostitute is not likely to ever wear jean, especially in the early 20th century when they were reserved for workers. A prisoner on the other hand would need blue jeans to wear as they were not allowed a large selection of clothing and were often employed in manual labor. No interpretation that argues for the house being a brothel seems to account for this anomaly.  The last stanza also suggests a prison with the reference "to wear that ball and chain." It could be a metaphor for being tied to the profession of prostitution, but this seems the alternative literal interpretation is more reasonable. I have heard some say that this is a metaphor for marriage, but then it seems odd that the song would recount the a persons wicked life before ending on a marital note.


A few people have argued that the entire song is a metaphor for slavery and that the house actually refereed to slave pens which were out in the open. This seems to stretch the interpretive elasticity of the lyrics beyond the breaking point. There is no direct reference to slavery and it is doubtful that the song is old enough to refer to the institution.

ash tree

As a historian studying early modern England I have become fascinated with the spelling and typeset of English pamphlets. One of the most interesting aspects it the loss of the ash tree or ash (æ). Although modern spelling, especially in America has eliminated the ash it can still heard in the way we pronounce words such as archeology, medieval, and demon. It isn't practical to use the ash on a current keyboard, but it would be nice to begin using the ash again. It is far more aesthetically pleasing to see on the printed page and emphasizes pronunciation.

I doubt this will catch on in any larger sense, but I have personally decided to begin using the ash when ever possible. The ash is dead, long live the ash! Huzzah for mediæval, dæmon, and archæology!