Whig propaganda, part 1

 Here is the first in a series of articles on Whig propoganda, by guest writer Christopher Whitelaw:

 Propaganda is defined in the oxford dictionary as, “information, ideas, opinions or images, often only giving one part of an argument, which are broadcast, published or in some other way spread with the intention of influencing people's opinions.” In the case of Whig propaganda the information, ideas and opinions were propagated through, pamphlets, plays, show trials, speeches, political literature and other methods. They gave one side of an argument - the other side was Jacobitism.

 The philosopher Jacques Ellul describes two types of propaganda, of which Whigs utilised before, during and after the Glorious Revolution of 1688-89.

 The first was of agitation, used to incite revolution or undermine an existing regime; secondly - propaganda of integration, used to promote acceptance and support amongst its citizens for that system. To justify the changes of 1688, the Whigs propagated the image that is known traditionally as the Glorious Revolution and became the main exponent against Jacobitism.

 The Whig ideology or perhaps, to an extent - the Whig illusion - did not occur immediately and has received several interpretations. Steve Pincus, in a non-Whig perspective, renamed the Revolution of 1688, the First Modern Revolution and argued that it was violent, divisive and popular. 

 In 1848 Thomas Babington Macaulay, with his History of England, laid out the classic Whig statement, that unlike other revolutions, the events of 1688-89 were bloodless, consensual, aristocratic and sensible; and identified the Stuarts with the evils of absolutism and Roman Catholicism - the antithesis of the Whig mantra of Protestantism, progress and property. It is also worth noting the context of his work, which was written during the peak of the Chartist movement during a period when revolution was breaking across Europe and the danger of revolution occurring in Britain very real. Macaulay was suggesting England already had its revolution, playing down the need for revolution, and was unlike the bloody revolutions experienced in Europe (for example in France in 1789) implying the bloodless and sensible English revolution was original to England and that revolution, which was a natural occurrence and inevitable for all other countries, had already happened - a theory the Whigs of the Jacobite period would have certainly subscribed to.

 The Glorious revolution was far from bloodless; in England there was the threat of, and actual violence

against property and people. In Scotland, John Graham of Claverhouse raised the Stuart standard in April 1689 and began the first Jacobite rebellion leading a small band of professional cavalry from the Scottish army and died in battle at Killiecrankie. In March 1690, James invaded Ireland to reclaim his crown - his plan was to use Ireland as an entry point to attack England and Scotland. On the July 1 1690 at the river Boyne, James’s army was defeated by English forces. Contrary to the so called bloodless revolution, blood was shed; however, the Glorious Revolution was used again to highlight the cultural and social changes that had been occurring in England prior to the revolution. The rapid improvements of arts and manufactures, and the correspondent extension of commerce, followed the clear and accurate limitation of the

prerogative. These produced a degree of wealth and affluence which diffused a feeling of independence and a high spirit of liberty through the great body of people.