Wars and ConflictsÌý permalink
Culloden, 1746
This discussion has been closed.
-
Message 1.Ìý
Posted by Herewordless (U14549396) on Saturday, 19th February 2011
During the '45 rebellion, the Scottish Highlanders gained a ferocious reputation in battle, but having invaded England and reaching Derby by September(?), their war council voted to return to Scotland due to an elaborate lie (nearby Govt army) told by one of their number, a Govt agent.
But, were there any British Govt armies near Derby? Or London? Where were they, and how many were there to call upon?
And what happened to the French invasion fleet in support of Charlie- it is said that it was 'on the brink' of sailing? Did it flounder in a storm? Or RN action? -
Message 2
Posted by raundsgirl (U2992430) on Saturday, 19th February 2011
And what happened to the French invasion fleet in support of Charlie- it is said that it was 'on the brink' of sailing? Did it flounder in a storm? Or RN action?Ìý
I think the operative words there are 'it is said'. Did it exist? Was it more hope than expectation? Or did the French wait to see how successful the rebellion was before they committed themselves? -
Message 3
Posted by Herewordless (U14549396) on Saturday, 19th February 2011
Well, in summer 1746, French Duke d’Anville sailed for New England, commanding the most powerful fleet of the time – 70 ships with over 10,000 troops. He intended to recapture Louisburg, Nova Scotia, and destroy from Boston to New York, all the way to Georgia.
I wondered if there was also another French fleet, as mentioned by Peter Snow in Battlefield Britain, maybe in the Channel? -
Message 4
Posted by Anglo-Norman (U1965016) on Sunday, 20th February 2011
Or did the French wait to see how successful the rebellion was before they committed themselves?Ìý
That seems quite possible. In 1781 the French adventurer Baron de Rullecourt launched an attempt to capture Jersey. The French government promised an army, but only if de Rullecourt's mercenaries were successful in the initial invasion. The French did supply some troops which took part but the government was seemingly so keen to enforce a policy of deniability that they were officially classed as deserters!
The French did supply some troops to the Jacobite forces which saw service at Culloden, such as the Royal Eccosais, though they were Scottish or Irish exiles in French service (albeit still French Army regulars) rather than native French. -
Message 5
Posted by cloudyj (U1773646) on Monday, 21st February 2011
But, were there any British Govt armies near Derby? Or London? Where were they, and how many were there to call upon?Ìý
The closest was Cumberland's army at Lichfield. Wade's army was strung out in Yorkshire, while a third army was based in London.
And what happened to the French invasion fleet in support of Charlie- it is said that it was 'on the brink' of sailing? Did it flounder in a storm? Or RN action?Ìý
It wasn't quite ready when the news arrived that the Jacobites had retreated towards Scotland. It also managed to lose 17 ships to two privateers on 18th December and all hope of surprise was lost. Although there were few RN ships to intercept a French invasion, there were no French warships allocated to cover the crossing either -
Message 6
Posted by MB (U177470) on Monday, 28th February 2011
I would suggest reading the book on Culloden edited by Tony Pollard. His group did some work on the battlefield which resulted in the National Trust having to revise a lot of the maps etc in the visitor centre at the battlefield.
Many of the maps that appear in books were drawn many years after the battle, he went back to the handful of maps drawn soon after the battle and so more likely to be accurate.
Culloden
Edited by Tony Pollard
ISBN 9781848840201
There is a summary of their findings on the University of Glasgow Centre for Battlefield Archaeology website
MB -
Message 7
Posted by George1507 (U2607963) on Friday, 4th March 2011
I think that the '45 rebellion was a close run thing really. There's some evidence that there were lots of people getting out of London when it was reported that the Jacobites were approaching; there was a run on the Bank of England; George II was ready to flee to the continent (indeed may even have been at the channel port when news of the retreat back to Scotland arrived.
Bearing in mind that George II led his troops at Dettingen just 2 years before, I think it may well be that he was advised to keep away.
We won't know what would have happened if the Jacobites had carried on - but rather like Mallory and Irvine on Everest it's great to do those 'what ifs'. -
Message 8
Posted by MB (U177470) on Friday, 4th March 2011
I think that the '45 rebellion was a close run thing really. There's some evidence that there were lots of people getting out of London when it was reported that the Jacobites were approaching; there was a run on the Bank of England; George II was ready to flee to the continent (indeed may even have been at the channel port when news of the retreat back to Scotland arrived.
Bearing in mind that George II led his troops at Dettingen just 2 years before, I think it may well be that he was advised to keep away.
We won't know what would have happened if the Jacobites had carried on - but rather like Mallory and Irvine on Everest it's great to do those 'what ifs'.Ìý Not so sure about being a close run thing.
Just had a quick scan through a book on the invasion, they did some good outmanoeuvring at Derby but otherwise never met any serious opposition. They did not get very much support as they went South unlike what they expected.
About 10,000 people were raised as they approached Manchester on the retreat "who seemed very hearty to have a brush with the rebels" but they decided that it was not worth the loss of life and probable burning of the town so disbanded. The rebels were stoned though as they entered the town. -
Message 9
Posted by Scriptofacto99 (U3268593) on Saturday, 5th March 2011
The whigs were to blame for the harassment of the Jacobite forces as they retreated north through Manchester . However, their actions were in no way representitive of the local population. Many locals had previously joined the Manchester Regiment as the Prince marched south. Indeed Manchester has the distinction of providing the only English regiment within the Jacobite army and was commanded by one Colonel Francis Towneley of the Towneley's of Burnley.
The reason for strong local support for the Prince was historical. During the Civil War Manchester itself had supported the Parliamentary cause. The surrounding towns and villages bar Bolton, were fiercely Royalist. It is no coincidence that the Jacobite forces had chosen to march south through the northwest of England. The major towns of Lancaster and Preston not only had large loyal Catholic populations, they also had the support of the local Catholic gentry. Had all English towns and villages followed Manchester's example in supporting the Prince, the Jacobite army would have swelled to such an extent they would have swept all opposition asunder. In the words of John Byrom:
"God Bless the King! I mean our Faith's defender;
God Bless-no harm in blessing-the Pretender!
But who Pretender is, or who is King,
God bless us all, that's quite another thing!" -
Message 10
Posted by MB (U177470) on Sunday, 6th March 2011
The whigs were to blame for the harassment of the Jacobite forces as they retreated north through Manchester . However, their actions were in no way representitive of the local population. Many locals had previously joined the Manchester Regiment as the Prince marched south. Indeed Manchester has the distinction of providing the only English regiment within the Jacobite army and was commanded by one Colonel Francis Towneley of the Towneley's of Burnley.
The reason for strong local support for the Prince was historical. During the Civil War Manchester itself had supported the Parliamentary cause. The surrounding towns and villages bar Bolton, were fiercely Royalist. It is no coincidence that the Jacobite forces had chosen to march south through the northwest of England. The major towns of Lancaster and Preston not only had large loyal Catholic populations, they also had the support of the local Catholic gentry. Had all English towns and villages followed Manchester's example in supporting the Prince, the Jacobite army would have swelled to such an extent they would have swept all opposition asunder. In the words of John Byrom:
"God Bless the King! I mean our Faith's defender;
God Bless-no harm in blessing-the Pretender!
But who Pretender is, or who is King,
God bless us all, that's quite another thing!"
Ìý My book on the Jacobites in Lancashire certainly gives a different impression particular about Manchester. -
Message 11
Posted by Scriptofacto99 (U3268593) on Sunday, 6th March 2011
Hi MB,
Don't take my word for it. The following website contains an extract from the diary of Elizabeth Byrom:
The Jacobites entered Manchester unopposed. The Jacobite forces were spearheaded by a sergeant, a drummer, and a Scottish lassie. No force was needed, nor was it expected. -
Message 12
Posted by MB (U177470) on Monday, 7th March 2011
Hi MB,
Don't take my word for it. The following website contains an extract from the diary of Elizabeth Byrom:
The Jacobites entered Manchester unopposed. The Jacobite forces were spearheaded by a sergeant, a drummer, and a Scottish lassie. No force was needed, nor was it expected. Ìý Reading through again I don't see any sign of the Jacobites being welcomed into Lancashire except by a very small number.
Chevalier de Johnstone writes of a sergeant (Dickson) at Preston "he had been beating up for recruits all day without getting one". Dickson asked permission to go ahead of the army and get some recruits in Manchester. He went ahead with a drummer and his mistress. When the local population realised he was ahead of the army they attacked him but he repelled them by drawing his blunderbuss. He had to be surrounded by local Jacobite supporters to protect him from the mob
He got about 180 recruits (out of a population of about 40,000) which was the origin of the story of Manchester being taken by a sergeant, a drummer and a girl. This became the Manchester Regiment but it never exceeded 300. Johnstone writes "these were all the English who ever declared themselves openly in favour of the Prince".
They were unopposed but from another read through I don't see any signs of significant support. The JPs found it convenient to absent themselves leaving the constables to meet the Jacobite forces. They were summoned by a Jacobite officer who was asked by what authority they were asked to attend so the Jacobite officer drew his sword. The constables were ordered to have the bells rung and bonfires lit in "celebration", they were also sent around ordering householders to illuminate their windows for the same reason. Most of them seem to have managed to avoid going around reading out the enforced proclamation of King James the Third.
The local population had horses and carts requisitioned, were taxed and many required to do work for the Jacobites. -
Message 13
Posted by cloudyj (U1773646) on Monday, 7th March 2011
George II was ready to flee to the continent (indeed may even have been at the channel port when news of the retreat back to Scotland arrived.Ìý
No he wasn't.
"In spite of wishful thinking on thepart of the Jacobites afterwards, King George was preparing to position himself at Finchley and did not have his bags packed ready to flee the realm."
The '45 - Christopher Duffy (p309). -
Message 14
Posted by cloudyj (U1773646) on Monday, 7th March 2011
The major towns of Lancaster and Preston not only had large loyal Catholic populations, they also had the support of the local Catholic gentry. Had all English towns and villages followed Manchester's example in supporting the Prince, the Jacobite army would have swelled to such an extent they would have swept all opposition asunder.Ìý
Therein lay the problem. The Jacobite army marched through Lancaster and Preston yet none of the Jacobites there were willing to commit to the cause. -
Message 15
Posted by Catigern (U14419012) on Wednesday, 9th March 2011
Did the rebels really gain a ferocious reputation *during* the '45, or is the mythology of the 'highland charge' a product of later romanticism? The British Army certainly never shrank from engaging the enemy when they were able to catch them. It's often claimed that a fully equipped highlander was better armed than a redcoat, but when an attempt was made a few years after the rebellion to arm the Black Watch with broadswords, the troops objected, preferring the combination of musket and bayonet.
As for the response of the north west of England to the Jacobites, I can wholeheartedly recommend Dr Jonathan D. Oates's slim but thorough book on that particular subject, published by the Centre for North West Regional Studies at Lancaster University. Oates's work reveals that there was very little active support for the Jacobites from the local population, which actually tended to do all within its limited power to resist the Pretender (see, eg, the service of the Liverpool Blues volunteer regiment and the shooting dead of a rebel Hussar by a townsman of Kendal).
What we need now is a comparable study of *Scottish* pro-Georgian loyalism to set against the romanticised pro-Stuart-cum-ScotNat twaddle peddled by the likes of Murray Pittock (a Prof. of Engliah Lit. masquerading unconvincingly as an Historian) & Duffy. According to the latter, the Scottish Borderers did not rebel because their society had become 'effeminate and luxurious', but the truth is that they were staunch Whigs, as evidenced by the fact that the loyalist Dumfriesshire Militia captured 34 of the Jacobites' supply wagons when the rebels advanced through their area. -
Message 16
Posted by cloudyj (U1773646) on Thursday, 10th March 2011
Did the rebels really gain a ferocious reputation *during* the '45, or is the mythology of the 'highland charge' a product of later romanticism?Ìý
I think so. Why else did Cumberland train his men to counter a highland charge if they had little regard for it? Prior to the '45 it was thought that Highlanders wouldn't cope with cavalry. A myth which was ended at Prestonpans (albeit against poorly motivated dragoons rather than proper cavalry).
It's often claimed that a fully equipped highlander was better armed than a redcoat,Ìý
Possibly, but very few would be that well armed. Many had little more than knives.
As for the response of the north west of England to the Jacobites, I can wholeheartedly recommend Dr Jonathan D. Oates's slim but thorough book on that particular subject, published by the Centre for North West Regional Studies at Lancaster University. Ìý
Thanks for the recommendation. I'll try and get a copy. In the whole of Cumberland and Westmorland the Jacobites gained only a single recruit despite being claimed as Jacobite heartlands.
. According to the latter, the Scottish Borderers did not rebel because their society had become 'effeminate and luxurious', but the truth is that they were staunch Whigs,Ìý
Perhaps the lowlanders recognized the value of a "luxurious" society which is why they'd become staunch Whigs? And I certainly agree that Scottish pro-Georgian sentiment is mostly ingored in the modern narrative.
I'm convinced that Jacobites in 1745 largely thought of themselves as against things (Whigs, low church Anglicanism). I suspect that many were discovering that political opposition and power no longer required a change of monarch, but control over Parliament. That would be what delivered what they stood for, not a new monarch. -
Message 17
Posted by Catigern (U14419012) on Sunday, 13th March 2011
Why else did Cumberland train his men to counter a highland charge if they had little regard for it?Ìý
Good point, and one that's supported by the most convincing analyses of the new bayonet drill, ie that its greatest impact was to imbue the troops with confidence and mutual trust, rather than as an actual melee technique.
Prior to the '45 it was thought that Highlanders wouldn't cope with cavalry. A myth which was ended at Prestonpans (albeit against poorly motivated dragoons rather than proper cavalry).Ìý
Hawley, who had seen the rebels scattered by Argyll's Horse at Sherriffmuir, seems to have persisted in this belief, given that he flung his dragoons at formed Jacobite foot at Falkirk without support from the other arms.
Many had little more than knives.Ìý
True, but they got better armed as the rebellion progressed, both by capturing muskets at Prestonpans and because of French shipments of arms.
'Dr Jonathan D. Oates's slim but thorough book...'
'I'll try and get a copy.'Ìý
Good book-hunting! The full title is 'The Jacobite Invasion of 1745 in the North West' (2006)
In the whole of Cumberland and Westmorland the Jacobites gained only a single recruit despite being claimed as Jacobite heartlands.Ìý
I suspect the claim can be put down to subsequent romanticisation of the Jacobites - it seems to me that, for the last couple of centuries, everyone who could possibly do so with a straight face has claimed that their ancestors were Jacobites.
Perhaps the lowlanders recognized the value of a "luxurious" society which is why they'd become staunch Whigs?Ìý
I'd call mainstream British society 'specialised' rather than 'luxurious', in that its fighting power was concentrated in the regular forces, rather than being diffused amongst part-time warriors.
And I certainly agree that Scottish pro-Georgian sentiment is mostly ingored in the modern narrative.Ìý
Alas...
I'm convinced that Jacobites in 1745 largely thought of themselves as against things (Whigs, low church Anglicanism).Ìý
I'm in two minds about this. Jacobites themselves may have thought of themselves as *for* certain things (Divine Right, sacral kingship etc), but these things were, so far as most Britons were concerned, aspects of the 'Bad Old Days' that had been retreating towards the historical horizon for several generations by 1745...
I suspect that many were discovering that political opposition and power no longer required a change of monarch, but control over Parliament. That would be what delivered what they stood for, not a new monarchÌý
Aah, but surely Parliament was only the key to influence in the context of the Glorious Revolution and Hanoverian Succession... The Jacobite aim was to reduce Parliaments (both Scottish and English) to places where cowed, craven, submissive subjects met to hear diktats from an autocratic king in London...
-
Message 18
Posted by arty macclench (U14332487) on Sunday, 13th March 2011
"when an attempt was made a few years after the rebellion to arm the Black Watch with broadswords, the troops objected, preferring the combination of musket and bayonet."
A point of order: the 42nd were issued with broadswords from their formation, as the 43rd, in 1739. They never got the chance to close with the enemy in their first battle at Fontenoy in 1745.
It is said during the French Indian Wars in America (1755-64) the Highlanders found swords cumbersome for bush fighting and came to prefer a rifle and bayonet with a handy hatchet as a side arm- although there are accounts of them at Fort Carillon in 1758 furiously hacking away at the abatis with their broadswords to get at the French.
Some claim that because of this previous experience the 42nd left their broadswords in Scotland before shipping to America in 1776, but there is a description of them preparing to attack the rebels in Fort Washington in November 1776, with their broadswords in hand.
In the campaigns that followed, however, it seems the practical 'American' combination of musket, bayonet and hatchet was adopted again and the swords put in store.
At an inspection in Halifax in Nova Scotia, June 1784, the 42nd were recorded as having 442 broadswords.
Swords of course also had symbolic value particularly when in the early days when every Highland soldier considered himself a gentleman. -
Message 19
Posted by Laurie (U14855286) on Thursday, 28th April 2011
Interesting aside.... After the battle of Marston Moor when Scots fought alongside Cromwell's 'Ironsides'. A lady from Townley Hall was searching for her husband among the slain on the battlefield. An officer had people escort her safely from the field. When she asked whao the officer was, it turned out to be Oliver Cromwell!.
People go on about the old Scottish battles, but on September 3rd last year at 6.00AM. I was on Doon Hill, overlooking the site of the Battle of Dunbar. It's 360th anniversary. I was the only person there! It was one of the most terrible routs of an army ever. Up to 30,000 fresh Scottish troops, demolished by a sick and defeated English army. The battle started at 6.00AM and was finished at 9.30AM. -
Message 20
Posted by cloudyj (U1773646) on Monday, 2nd May 2011
Some claim that because of this previous experience the 42nd left their broadswords in Scotland before shipping to America in 1776, but there is a description of them preparing to attack the rebels in Fort Washington in November 1776, with their broadswords in hand.
In the campaigns that followed, however, it seems the practical 'American' combination of musket, bayonet and hatchet was adopted again and the swords put in store. Ìý
At Moore's Creek Bridge, highland scots loyalists attempted a "highland charge" with broadswords and were thoroughly routed by that practical combination. -
Message 21
Posted by ShaneONeal (U14303502) on Monday, 16th May 2011
Interesting aside.... After the battle of Marston Moor when Scots fought alongside Cromwell's 'Ironsides'. A lady from Townley Hall was searching for her husband among the slain on the battlefield. An officer had people escort her safely from the field. When she asked whao the officer was, it turned out to be Oliver Cromwell!.
People go on about the old Scottish battles, but on September 3rd last year at 6.00AM. I was on Doon Hill, overlooking the site of the Battle of Dunbar. It's 360th anniversary. I was the only person there! It was one of the most terrible routs of an army ever. Up to 30,000 fresh Scottish troops, demolished by a sick and defeated English army. The battle started at 6.00AM and was finished at 9.30AM.Ìý I think you got some of your facts wrong there Laurie:
"As Cromwell led his army over the border at Berwick-upon-Tweed in July 1650, the Scottish general, Sir David Leslie, decided that his best strategy was to avoid a direct conflict with the enemy. His army were not the battle hardend veterans of The Thirty Years War who had taken the field for the Scots at Newburn and Marston Moor. Many of them had perished during the Civil War and the ill fated 1648 invasion of England. Far more had left active service after the former event. This meant that a new army had to be raised and trained by the remaining veteran soldiers. Eventually the army comprised some 12,000[1] soldiers outnumbering the English army of 11,000[2] men. Though the Scots soldiers were well armed, the lack of time meant they were poorly trained compared to their English counterparts all of whom had served with Oliver Cromwell for years."
-
Message 22
Posted by Vizzer aka U_numbers (U2011621) on Wednesday, 21st December 2011
The French did supply some troops to the Jacobite forces which saw service at Culloden, such as the Royal Eccosais, though they were Scottish or Irish exiles in French service (albeit still French Army regulars) rather than native French.Ìý
It should also be appreciated that the Jacobites did everything in their power not to be seen as a 'French' invasion. This would have been a disaster for their image and particularly in England.
Although there were many English Jacobites they in no way would have wished to have their king as a mere French puppet. Similarly there were even more 'undecided-wait -and-sees' in England who couldn't care less whether they were ruled by Stuarts or by Hanoverians. They also, however, would have rejected any candidate seen as a puppet of a foreign power.
Viewed this way it could be said that it was in the interests of the Hanoverian establishment to present the Jacobites as being French stooges. The undecideds in England, of course, were ultimately the ones who the Hanoverian establishment feared the most.
About this Board
The History message boards are now closed. They remain visible as a matter of record but the opportunity to add new comments or open new threads is no longer available. Thank you all for your valued contributions over many years.
or Ìýto take part in a discussion.
The message board is currently closed for posting.
The message board is closed for posting.
This messageboard is .
Find out more about this board's
Search this Board
Â鶹ԼÅÄ iD
Â鶹ԼÅÄ navigation
Â鶹ԼÅÄ links
Â鶹ԼÅÄ Â© 2014 The Â鶹ԼÅÄ is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.
This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.