The “inclinations of the people”: a seemingly benign yet profound phrase that acknowledges an informed community contributing to a complex public discourse. In Public Opinion in Early Modern Scotland, c. 1560–1707, Karin Bowie emphasizes such language found in print and manuscript sources to argue that public opinion shaped, and was shaped by, both official and unofficial means of communication during key political and religious events. Bowie justifies the need to incorporate unpublished and oral communications into a study of public opinion, as participation and representation was narrow for non-elites in Parliament and the General Assembly. Her work transcends both the Habermasian model of the public sphere and studies that isolate activities of the middling and poorer sort from the elite to create a more nuanced understanding of public opinion in Scotland.
To discern the public's level of understanding and engagement in political and religious events, Bowie explores channels for articulating opinions within, and beyond, the official, printed narrative espoused by the Scottish government and kirk. She identifies four primary means of participation: protestations, petitions, oaths, and other public communications; she explores each independently in the first four chapters. While none of these methods of expression was new to Scotland, Bowie notes that each was adapted to the changing political climate by official institutions and extra-institutional groups.
Within each chapter, Bowie emphasizes the shifting usages of each of these traditional modes of participation from the Reformation of 1560 to the Revolution of 1688–1690. She argues that the rise of print culture, literacy among men and women, and the Reformation encouraged individuals to share opinions in ways they had been unable to prior to 1560. The subsections of each chapter reveal Bowie's deep historiographical knowledge of public opinion and the public sphere.
Chapter 1 focuses on protestations, a method of expressing opinions through Scotland's legal system. Bowie argues that clerics embraced protestations after the Reformation as a means to assert greater rights for the kirk and its followers. This form of resistance expanded to include public testimonies and declarations, and incorporated a broader range of individuals, in particular as a response to Charles I's controversial ecclesiastical changes. Efforts by later Stuart monarchs to stifle opinions only encouraged greater defiance.
In chapter 2, Bowie traces petitioning as a means to convey extra-institutional opinion. Bowie argues that the language used in petitions adapted as crises arose; individuals presenting humble requests and expecting fair judgement changed into groups submitting assertive lists of grievances. Bowie notes that the Reformation and regnal union motivated this shift, and petitioners positioned themselves as representatives of the greater public. She includes a study of the period of “aggressive petitioning” in 1596 spurned by clerics pressuring James VI to support kirk liberties (60). As demands grew, the king restricted the power of the kirk. Petitioning continued throughout the period, though Bowie demonstrates that its acceptance by governing officials, as well as its impact, depended upon the person or group in control of Scotland. Additionally, when petitioning was restrained, the public often erupted into violent protest.
In chapter 3, Bowie argues that oaths and bands produced increased public engagement and collective resistance, but also created ways to control opinions. As she does in chapters 1 and 2, Bowie notes periods of change that coincided with major religious and political instability: the Negative or King's Confession (1581), National Covenant (1638), Solemn League and Covenant (1643), and oaths required after the Restoration. These also produced counter-oaths by government, kirk, and extra-institutional leaders. Each varied in levels of participation and enthusiasm but signaled greater levels of political awareness and willingness to contribute to public debates.
Chapter 4 expands the scope of informal, public communications to uncover the full depth of public engagement. Bowie examines proclamations, kirk circulation letters and sermons, manuscript tracts, Gaelic poetry, and pamphlets to identify grassroots methods of organizing and persuading public opinion. Bowie concludes that the person or group controlling the official narrative held a monopoly over Scotland's printing presses, while the opposition organized resistance through foreign presses, manuscripts, and oral communications to avoid censorship.
The first four chapters provide an in-depth study of each method of engagement. Consequently, some national events are necessarily repeated. This approach also restricts understanding of the ways in which these traditional devices worked in tandem and opposition to one another. Chapters 5 and 6 take a different approach; both span the period from the Revolution of 1688–1690 to the Union of 1707 and incorporate all modes of communication detailed in the previous chapters. Of particular interest is the inclinations clause of the Claim of Right in 1689, which is the focus of chapter 5. Bowie argues that the language used in this clause demonstrates a transformation in the political significance of public opinion over the previous century. The political culture in Scotland now accepted and incorporated all forms of communication to demonstrate collective opinions. Chapter 6 further emphasizes the active and inclusive citizenry, reinforced by increased literacy rates, military service, taxation, international trade, and covenants.
Throughout Public Opinion in Early Modern Scotland, Bowie endeavors to uncover sources that shed light on the perspectives of individuals beyond the urban male elites living in southern or northeastern Scotland. She successfully incorporates the documents and activities of women, the Highlands, and the middling and poorer sort. These individuals were often called upon to participate in extra-institutional actions. Bowie's efforts are commendable and contribute a wealth of information not fully realized in previous scholarship, though she readily recognizes the need for additional work on the topic, especially for the Gaelic-speaking Highlands.
Bowie achieves her goal of providing the groundwork for other scholars interested in studying public opinion, including regions beyond Scotland. Bowie also does not presume any conventional vision of a public sphere or assumed trajectory for shaping early modern public opinion in Scotland. This book is best suited for graduate students and scholars, as Bowie assumes the reader's knowledge of Scottish national affairs between 1560 and 1707.
