The seventeenth century in the British Isles, specifically the late seventeenth century, could only be described as chaotic. People witnessed and lived through the accession of a Scottish king, a series of civil wars, the attempt to create a British republic, the restoration of the Catholic monarchy, and less than three decades later in 1688 the monarchy came crashing down again to close out the seventeenth century with the ascendancy of representative parliament. Jenny Wormwald described the events of the seventeenth century as traumatic, disturbing, and oftentimes violent.1 What the events were not, was boring.
The seventeenth century was also renegade for the establishment and spread of the first modern postal service, so while these events were happening, people could talk about it. Periodicals and newsletters also informed the general public of happenings around the country, the most prominent in Scotland was the The Accounts of the Proceedings of the Estates. The main vessel for communication during warfare was letters. Letters throw considerable light onto the character and motives of the chief actors in the struggle and their difficulties. Letters are important for more than just their contents. They also have the power to tell us more than just who was writing to who. More importantly, they can tell us who was connected to who, how often letters went missing, the frequency of communication between parties, where networks existed over time and space, and how these evolved over the course of wartime. By using network analysis, we can uncover the world of the information trade, diplomatic correspondence patterns, and the anomalies. It also helps in prosopographical analysis of the period, why certain people group together, and understand the dynamics of group identities. This repository allows further access to critical information about seventeenth century British history and this pivotal period which shaped much of the modern British state.
On November 5, 1688, William of Orange landed on the shores of Torbay, England with 15,000 men. William’s arrival met with mixed responses. Desertions from James’ standing army, including some of his most trusted generals—John Churchill—to William’s cause prompted the late king’s flight to France. Between November 1688 and 1691, the administrative government of the British archipelago underwent a dramatic transformation during the Revolution (1688-90). While the Williamite triumph is well known today, at the time it did not look so certain. Doubt about the viability of the newly instated regime circulated among Jacobite sympathizers. The exact numbers of who supported the deposed king and who did not remain a hotly contested subject in the historiography. Although James was never able to fulfill his promises to lead the Jacobite cause in Scotland, Ireland hosted the most violent confrontations from the sieges in Derry to the Battle of the Boyne. Louis XIV’s enthusiasm and considerable contributions to the war effort only solidified the growing realization that Ireland and the seas surrounding the British Isles could make or break the Revolution.
Networks varied across space and time, as political authorities sought to establish some kind of control over the chaos and attempt to understand the extent of the rebellion against the newly formed Williamite government. These responses included the creation of networks of information, spy rings, and "safe" communication routes. In Scotland, communication networks tended to form under those who served in the privy council and under William's closest advisors. The networks are largely constituted from personal papers, the privy council's registrar, committee papers, and the government's contingent expenses. These historical sources are both qualitative and quantitative because they have statistical, geographic, and contextual data.
The Leven and Melville Papers capture the difficulties in the reconstruction and administration of Scottish governance. One of the fundamental questions facing the new administration was: should the government include or exclude those with an unpredictable past or suspect loyalty? The corpus contains roughly 600 letters addressed chiefly to Melville, who was the centerpiece of William's regime in Scotland as the Secretary of State. Appointment to William's revolutionary administration was determined by part played in the Revolution. Despite the fact that William never set foot in Scotland, the considerable two-way flow of correspondence between Edinburgh and London, combined with the numerous journeys made by officers of state, meant that he had a great deal of information about the situation in Scotland and was able to relay instructions to his Scottish counterparts. His Scottish affairs were designated to his Dutch favorite, Hans Willem Bentinck, the Earl of Portland. Portland then delegated this to the Secretary of State Melville, and his support for Melville to become William’s first secretary of state in Scotland sealed his influence over the mechanics of the Scottish government.2
David Leven, third Earl of Leven (1660-1728), Lord George Melville’s second eldest son, presented William’s letter to the Scottish Convention and was later given deliberative powers to secure the Convention. As a trusted member of William’s entourage, Leven was nominated to multiple committees on the Privy Council, a large majority of which were related to the military and protection of the kingdom. He also served as the governor of Edinburgh Castle from 1689 to 1702. After William and Mary’s coronation, disgruntled members of Parliament had split interests. Increased discontent with William’s more muted policies led to factionalism in Parliament, stalling the process of policy even further. Sir John Dalrymple of Stair highlighted this problem in a letter to Melville on 30 July 1689, “the Athol men have bein fals subdolus dealers...the enemies confidence is much in the differences of Parliament.”3 Parliament’s forced prorogation on 2 August 1689 after the defeat at the Battle of Killiecrankie (27 July 1689) had left policy in tatters and the Revolution at risk because it was without supplies for the army, a church settlement, or a decision on the Lords of the Articles. Concerned with the mounting tensions, including the ruckus in Parliament caused by the Club, Melville offered his condolences over the “heats in the Scottish parliament,” and that there was so little done for the security for the country.4 A long-term result—and arguably more important—was parliament’s delegation of all Scottish security measures to the Privy Council.
Opening the second session of the Scottish Parliament (15 April 1690 – 22 July 1690), Melville lamented the unresolved issue of the Lords of the Articles and the other unresolved settlement issues.5 Parliament’s main element of constitutional and procedural revolution took place in May 1690 when Melville conceded the demise of the Articles, using the concession and the news of the Jacobite defeat at the battle of Cromdale (1 May) to encourage moderates to vote with the government. The Lords of the Articles had been customarily seen as the mechanism that subverted the government to royal authority; its abolishment represented arguably the greatest constitutional success of the Revolution. 6 By summer 1690, the administration had undergone some managerial reshuffles. Following the depositions and dismantling of the Jacobite-infused scheme to overthrow William, several members were removed from the council. The lord Ross, Skelmorlie, and the earl of Annandale were at the forefront of the conspiracy. Consequently, under Sir William Lockhart’s recommendation they were removed from the Privy Council and any state office. Moreover, the plot thoroughly disintegrated trust in the secretary of state Melville, leaving him under scrutiny for much of the rest of William’s reign.7 In 1691, John Damrymple of Stair was elected as co-Secretary of State thus ensuring Melville's demise in Scottish Williamite politics.
In summary, the Melville family were of siginificant influence during the Scottish Revolution. Melville's sons - David, third earl of Leven, James Melville of Halhill, and Lord Raith, treasurer-depute, all regularly sat in Parliament. What emerges from an analysis of the committees is that the most important committees for the defense of the kingdom and the legislative agenda of the administration were staffed by emigres and those from the coastal regions. For example, the Earl of Leven was nominated ten of the fifteen most important committees for the defense of the kingdom as well as serving as the governor of Edinburgh Castle. Melville's place, and indeed his family's place, in Scottish politics was cemented by support from William III's other integral advisors including the Earl of Portland and William Carstares.