Eighteenth-century whig historians of the Union (1707) reacted to Lockhart’s tory-jacobite Memoirs in different ways. While John Oldmixon (1672-1742) incorporated passages from them into his account of the Union for the sake of confuting them, Abel Boyer (1667-1729) and Nicholas Tindal (1687-1774) endorsed them to a large degree, borrowing from them extensively. Then, several historians writing in the mid- to late eighteenth century such as Thomas Somerville (1740-1830) or Malcolm Laing (1762-1818) approached them with an open mind, but also some critical distance, revealing an evolution in British historiography towards a more scholarly approach to historical sources. Except for Oldmixon’s accounts, all those historians’s expositions of the Union were to some extent impacted by Lockhart’s Memoirs. Far from using the latter only as a storehouse of information on the Union, they were all in some mesure influenced by Lockhart’s vision of that event and, as a result, ideologically hybrid.

中文翻译：

---

洛克哈特回忆录 (1714) 在十八世纪英苏联盟辉格历史学家 (1707) 著作中的应用

18 世纪的联邦辉格党历史学家（1707 年）以不同的方式对洛克哈特的托利-雅各比特回忆录作出反应。约翰·奥德米森（John Oldmixon，1672-1742）为了混淆它们而将它们的段落纳入他对联邦的描述中，而阿贝尔·博耶（Abel Boyer，1667-1729）和尼古拉斯·廷达尔（Nicholas Tindal，1687-1774）则在很大程度上认可了它们，并从它们那里借用广泛。然后，一些在 18 世纪中后期写作的历史学家，如 Thomas Somerville (1740-1830) 或 Malcolm Laing (1762-1818) 以开放的心态接近他们，但也有一些批判的距离，揭示了英国史学的演变对历史资料的更学术的方法。除了奥尔德米森的记载外，所有这些历史学家对联邦的论述都在某种程度上受到了洛克哈特回忆录的影响。