- It's a pleasure to be here with Gresham as part of
lifelong learning week. And thank you very much for joining me to talk about Charles Edward Stuart. It's almost 300 years since and it will be 300
years at the end of this year since Charles Edward
Stuart was born in Rome, Bonnie Prince Charlie. But in this age of sustainability, change, environmental
and biological threats, how can we remember him? The concerns of 18th century
European royalty seem impossibly remote. Who really remembers the
deeds of Peter, the great of Russia of Frederick the
great, of Prussia of Catherine the great or of Joseph,
the second of Austria? But Charles Edward Stuart still has a life in the cultural memory of the world. Despite the fact that he never rained far
less ruled and whose claim to the British Thrones
was barely recognized, and the fact that his most
famous adventure, the rising of 1745, 46 was actually to restore his own father rather than
himself to the throne, Charles is remembered. He spent his early life
agitating and begging across Europe for military
aid and political support. And his later years in
alcoholism and domestic abuse. And yet he remains a fame
figure and fascination. One many find it hard to justice to more a myth than a man
for the caricaturists. And this includes some historians who should really know better. The friend of Montesquieu,
who is supported by Voltaire is an out
of touch representative of Catholic absolutism whose
futile attempt to disturb or Gustin Britain ended in well medicated disaster. For others, Charles is a romantic hero Who almost changed history. Who was Bonnie Prince Charlie? is one question I shall
ask in the ensuing lecture. That question is intimately involved with two others. Who were the Jacobites,
and what did they want, and what were their greatest hits? What is the core of the Jacobite story? That core that makes today Culloden the most visited battlefield
in the UK and has seen the Outlander series of Danny Gabaldon sell 30 million copies. Jacobitism was not just a single event famous as the 1745 rising is. It was a process and it was a movement. The Jacobite attempts, are not just those are 1745 or 1715 They are of 1696, 1708, 1719, 1922, 1744, 1752 and 1759. The Jacobite cause with central
to French foreign policy. And it became central to
the British Imperial army and central to the
development of romanticism and what become the national
brand of Scotland today. And this is all centered round a man of doubtful personal qualities no distinctive achievements, not like the tutors. He has no reformation or model or Shakespeare to his credit. Yet perhaps the mythology
of the man and his cause tells us more than we
think about ourselves and our past. At one spot, and we'll see it in a moment. Glenfinnan on 19th, August, 1745, Charles Edwin and his supporters
raised the Royal standard of his father from amid shouts of long live King James, the
eighth prosperity to Scotland and no union from a small
following, which grew from 400 to 1100 with the arrival of troops under Donald Cameron
Lockheed later that day. That event and the rising it made possible which ended at Coloradan
underpin a great deal of what Britain was to become as well as raising the questions,
which once and now again threaten it's coherence
as a political unit. In 2018 almost 500,000 people visited this remote spot
to the head of Loch Shield, where a monument of a Scott's Highlander stands on a tower designed
by James Gillespie Graham in 1815, as an act of
tribute and gratitude both to the men of the Jacobite rising, and the role their descendants have played in British victory in the Napoleonic Wars. The Jacobite express train
from Fort William to Mallaig runs over the viaduct opposite,
which is also the route for the Hogwarts express
in the Harry Potter films. The Jacobite Highlands are still a call of magic and romance. But before they were magic and
romance, they were politics. And Jacobitism takes its name from Jacobus James on the left there, James the seventh of Scotland
and second of England who was deposed on account not so much of his Catholicism, but of the Catholicism of his son and heir born on the 10th, June, 1688, by William of Orange on the right. When it became clear that James would be fathering a Catholic
dynasty, seven grandies, the Earls of Dundee,
Devonshire, Shresbury, Vicam Lumley, the Bishop of London Edward Russlynn had Henry Sydney,
both of whom gained titles for their action, contacted James nephew and son-in-law William of
Orange who invaded England at the beginning of November. James fled and was subsequently excluded from the English crown under
the fiction that he'd abdicated and William and Mary were
declared joint sovereigns. Although the Williamite
succession was declared a glorious, that is bloodless revolution by John Hampden in 1689 and it's still commonly
known by that Dane today, it was anything but in Scotland and Ireland where major
battles were fought at the boeing on Akron. The last part of the British
Isles held for James. The bass rock off the Lovian
coast did not surrender In England this may have
been a glorious revolution elsewhere in the British kingdoms, it was a severe military struggle. Throughout most of the rest
of the next 60 or 70 years, the Jacobites in exile sought to... perpetuate that struggle from the point of view
of their own restoration. There is William on the left there. He still doesn't look very happy, even though he's got the key, he's got the crowns of England,
Scotland and Ireland to add to his Dutched rule. And on the right is James from
a metal issued in the 1690s, not James the second and seventh but his son called by
many, the old pretender. But those titles, the old
pretender and the young pretender, which many of you will be
familiar with ultimately derive from the accusation of the illegitimacy of young James. The fact that he was only a
pretended Prince of Wales. And so actually they're terms of bias. Although they remain very popular and I won't be using them. James's title as James,
the third and eighth was widely recognized
in continental Europe but obviously not in the British Isles. His son is more properly Prince Charles because his title was barely recognized in diplomatic circles in Europe. These metals and metals of with the, bearing the heads of royalty has been since the beginning
of the 17th century, handed out as special gifts to courtiers, were on a different
scale to the medals that Charles the first might have
handout to his supporters and friends. They were manufactured
on industrial scale. Thousands of them were circulated to Jacobite supporters in the
British Isles in the 1690s and later to allow to be the expression of
Jacobites sympathies. They've could demonstrate
the Jacobite sympathy. And you'll see from the
wear on young James's hair that those metals
weren't just locked away. They were, and we don't
know much about this yet. They were actually kept in circulation. So they were exchanged. You need quite a lot of
rubbing to get to that stage of where on the highest
points of the metal they were exchanged and moved
about as tokens of sympathy among a much wider audience
than the many thousands who originally received them. Jacobite culture and Jacobite artwork, and I'll come to that Is everywhere. Scotland remained central. And that's a contemporary
map about from 1750. Scotland remained central
to the Jacobite cause. And I'll be of course,
be retiring to Scotland and to the palace at Holyrood house. That's how I looked in 1745
in which Charles held court in the autumn of 1745 later on. But one of the things I
think it is so important to get across both about Charles Edward and about the Jacobite
movement as a whole, is that we still live in the world that arose out of the conflicts which led to the
deposition of the Stewarts and the struggles between the Jacobites and the successive
governments of Great Britain. And one of the key ways in
which we do is that the concept of parliamentary sovereignty later refined to include the concept of the
crown and parliament in 1720. The concept of parliamentary sovereignty the illimitable sovereignty of parliament which is such a critical
part of the Brexit process and the last four years was articulated by the English
parliament in 1688, 89, as part of its justification
for the exclusion of the Royal family. And that's it's classic
formulation for the 19th century as an embedded part of
British constitutional law by AV Dicey. The principle of parliamentary
sovereignty means neither more, nor less than
this name of the parliament thus defined as under
the English constitution the right to make or
unmake any law, whatever and further no personal body
is recognized by the law of England as having a
right to override or set aside the legislation of parliament. It took a little while, but
by 1714, when the Royal assent was given to a parliamentary
bill, it was given automatically, it was an
automatic constitutional process. It no longer really
passed through the hands of the sovereign. But although James's daughters, first Mary with her husband, William became a queen and then
Anne succeeded him. up to 1714. The change in 1714 was much greater. The exclusion of all
Catholic heirs in England by the act of settlement in 1701 into which Scotland was
incorporated by the union acts of 1707 led to the heirs
of Sophia of Hannover succeeding to the British thrones as well as the Hanoverian electorate. And this is I think probably
one of the most forgotten parts of all of Britain's history. The fact that Hanover as it stood in 1719 and
later on, as it stood in 1789 a significant central European power was part of the British
monarchy between 1714 and 1837. And indeed it was only
because Hanover would not allow a women to succeed that when Victoria became queen in 1837, the kingdom of Hannah
where as it had become rather the electorate by this time was taken over by Ernst
or Gustus fifth son of William, the fourth. Had Hanover remained British, had it reigned part of
the British dominions, the history of the
unification of modern Germany would have been much more problematic for Bismarck would have found British as well as Austrian interests
stood in his way in terms of reuniting Germany in the
latter part of the 19th century. But we have completely forgotten the role that Hannover played in British politics. The exclusion of the Stewarts, which was clearly there with James's daughters, the exclusion of the male line, now became the exclusion of 57 people all of whom were Catholics who were closer to the throne than George the first. And for many people, it was a huge deal that so many of the Stuarts were excluded. And it was a huge deal because
the exclusion of the stewards was not simply the replacement
of one, dynasty by another. James and his son were
not only the senior heirs of the Scottish Royal line, they were recognized as Kings in Ireland where the Lia Fail identified in Ireland with the
Scottish stone of destiny. Although it wasn't habit in legend used to crown the vikings of Ireland at Tata. The Stuarts were also the
senior as the house of Tudor by the marriage of James the fourth to Henry the seventh's daughter, Margaret. The seniors at the house of Plantagenet, via the marriage of Alexander
the second of Scotland to Joan the daughter of John and through multiple other marriages throughout the Plantagenet theater. And also the senior as
the house of Wessex, by the marriage of Malcolm
the third Canmore of Scotland, to Margaret granddaughter,
of Edmund Ironside whose brother Edgar had been
elected the last Saxon King by the which anagiment as
William, the Congress forces approached London in 1066. In other words, the need
to challenge the legitimacy of the Jacobites to pretend that their leaders were the old and young pretender were central in British politics because their legitimacy
was so overwhelming. They represented the senior
heirs of every dynasty for a thousand years, as well as being accepted
as monarchs in both Scotland and Ireland. Now, Jacobitism had very
significant differences in its motivation, depending
where you came from in the British Isles. The Jacobites all wanted to restore James and his successors. James, the eighth and
Charles Edward born in 1720 who died in 1788 to
the Thrones of England, Scotland and Ireland. And their goals were dynastic
and religious on one level but it was much more
complicated than that. English and Welsh Jacobites
tended to be motivated by the following political goals. Dislike of foreigners and the
Dutch Hanoverian connection of the Royal family. Xenophobia, little England, as
in these are very high on the the list of English of
English Jacobite motivations. They had a particular view of Anglicanism which later resurfaced as high Anglicanism the Oxford
movement in the 19th century which disliked the
Lutheranism of the Georges and preferred the close
relationship between church and crown which had existed under Charles the first and Charles, the second. They favored the country
and distrusted the city. They distrusted London and
they distrusted the innovations and financial services,
particularly the bond market and the bank of England, which
had come with the new regime in the 1690s and the ability
rather topical ability I think we all agree for great Britain to run
a large national debt which came about ultimately
through the movement to trade bonds, to third parties which became a practice in the 1690s. They preferred a local
to a financial economy. They had an economy that
grew things and made things and was about relationships
rather than economy which is about money and
debt and stocks and shares. And also because the Tories were suspected of being Jacobites by the Hanoverians. They were excluded from
office between 1714 and 1760. And that was a bit of a
self-fulfilling prophecy because it meant that
naturally some of them who might otherwise not have
been Jacobites became Ja.... Some of them were
Jacobites became Jacobites because, hey things weren't
going too well for them. But Scotland and Ireland,
the motivations are really strongly different. In Scotland. all the Stuart's opposed either the prospect before 1707 or the actuality after 1707 of the union. And so a huge motivation
for Scottish Jacobitism is opposition to the union with England. In both Scotland and
Ireland, the supporters of the stewards wanted
to see a constitution arrangement much more like
the multi kingdom monarchy of the Stuart's with
subsidiary Royal capitals in Edinburgh and Dublin and England, Scotland and Ireland kept as three distinct kingdoms with a stronger representation,
including Catholic rights as was made clear in the
1689 Dublin parliament a stronger representation and
save for the Irish parliament as well as the restoration
of the Scottish parliament. They wanted to see in
Scotland, the restoration of episcopacy, which although
it was like not identical with the church of
England, the Episcopalians didn't join the Anglican
community until 1867, which was like the church of
England, but it was strongly associated with the Stewarts
and the Stuart crown. And of course in Ireland they wanted Jacobites wanted a protection extension of Catholic rights. Ultimately, these formed the largest group of active Jacobites. And both as large Scottish
and Irish diaspora soldiers, Commanders, diplomats, governors and administrators,
merchants and traders spread across the whole of Europe because they had nowhere else to go. They were politically
alienated from the society of which was now had in the ascendancy
in the British Isles. Here is the Jacobite leadership was very sensitive to this. This is a metal, a famous metal key of Quius est of James, a link to the 1708 attempt
to restore him to the crown to the crowns. On one side, the medal says, Quius est. Who's, is it? I brackets it's me. right? And on the other side says, Reddite. Give it back. What should they given back? Three kingdoms Ireland, Scotland, and the third one called Britannia Britain, not England. James is rhetorically separating
both Scotland and Ireland not just from England,
but from the concept of Britain itself. And he's very clearly making it make it obvious to his supporters that he has expects to and wants to have
rights, which are separate but conjoined in all the three kingdoms. This was not fantasy politics in the era The Stewarts, the multi kingdom monarchy, the Stuarts was not dissimilar from a lot of similar
political arrangements in early modern and indeed
into 19th century Europe including the United
Kingdom of the Netherlands which from which Belgium
split off the Polish the Polish Lithuanian Commonwealth and the United kingdoms
of Denmark and Norway, the Oldenburg's. So you can see, however
that Scottish and Irish Jacobitism and English Jacobitism that they may both want
to stew at restoration, want it for very different
reasons, and I'm not going to... one of the great vices
of his being a historian is to be present test, to
see the issues of history in terms of the issues of the present. And yet, you know, it's so
tempting for Jacobitism. So, and I'm not going to present this. I am actually going to take
the present back and say that the difference
between Scottish and Irish and English Jacobitism can al... Between a European Jacobitism
with greater stress on Scottish and Irish nationality and xenophobic Jacobitism,
which is very much introspective and distrust the metropolis is in favor of the shires has got a very tempting similarity to remain and leave, a very tempting
similarity, indeed. And perhaps in that part
of the British Isles where the revolution of 1688, 89 is closest to the surface Northern Ireland, if you
actually count the supporters or the supporters of the
DUP and the supporters of shin Fein and the intermediate parties and how they voted in the 2016 referendum you will see that I'm not
being presentist just at all. So there is something deeply contemporary about Jacobitism and what it symbolizes. And I think we ought also to recognize that it is all round us in
so many ways, all around us. This is the interior, and
it's an Anglican church hard to believe. It's the most broken
Teradyne Anglican church anywhere anyone has ever seen. And it is Michael and
all angels at Whitley in Worcestershire. And it's design is by the Catholic and crypto Jacobite
architect, James Gibbs, who of course will be
famous as having built quite a number of very prominent
18th century buildings. And it's actually based on the design of the interior of the chapel at Cannons which was commissioned by
the Jacobite Duke of Chandon. So by these statements of European expressions of European identity, even for the church of England, Jacobites are clearly signposting their Catholic and continental links. Jacobite leadership was by now very much
based on the continent displaced from France after the treaty of Utrecht in 1713. It eventually took up residence,
the long-term residence in the Palazzo del Re in Rome from 1719 onwards. And the Jacobite court was
there for more than 60 years. It became a center of espionage, conspiracy trade plotting. And it was In Rome that Charles
Edward Stewart was born on 31st December, 1720, to James and Maryanne Clementina Sobieska, who was the daughter of the eldest son of John the third Sobieski
of Poland and Lithuania still famous for his part,
crucial part in the victory over the Ottoman empire,
the Gates of Vienna in 1683. So Charles came from, was embedded in European royalty. European Catholic royalty is of course, Poland, long seen as, and
some still seeing today as some of the street protests indicate in Poland in the last
couple of weeks as a champion of Catholicism. And that is how James looked at the time of his son's
birth by Antonio Daveed. Now, Charles was brought up to be the great hope of the Jacobites. He was the elder son of his father, and he showed promise both in terms of languages,
personality, and charisma and also military promise by the 1730s There was widespread discontent in the British polity, not just because of the link to Hanover. and that's a George the third Hanover coin on the right-hand side, but also because of the longstanding
accusations of corruption round roll polls with administration and its imposition of taxes. That is a protest metal on the left. Again, you heavily circulated from the excise in the 1730s. Walpole is imposition
of taxes on Scotland, seen as a satanic attack on the country's ability to trade under the terms that it had previously enjoyed. That's why smuggling was
such a political crime in Scotland and why the
Porteous riots, which were ultimately linked to the
execution of the smuggler was such a flash point
in Edinburgh in 1736. By 1744, 10 years after
Charles would foresee military action, Lewis's the 15th
France, was embarrassed by its position in the war
of Austrian succession. Once again, Britain and
France were fighting. This is what was happening all the time from William of orange
succession to the Thrones onward. And Louie was prepared
to launch or to counter the launch of an invasion by the Jacobites to improve is own position
in war on the continent. But the b.uildup of his forces
of the channel ports was slow British intelligence were alert, was alert and unsympathetic, French diplomats, not all of whom believed
in the Jacobite cause leaked to their British counterparts some details of the invasion plan with the inevitable event,
the inevitable results. Charles, then decided to
launch a rising himself. Even though the vast majority of his supporters regarded French troops as critical to his success. What happened after
that is often described as something that he did
completely by himself but almost certainly it's a deniable special
operation of the French crown which enables Louie to
continue to support Charles but not to appear to be
committed to his cause. Charles set sail with two ships in July, 1745. The 64 gun Elizabeth in the Du Teillay Charles's (stammers) they go with 200 troops and quite a few guns. They're there to destroy these two ships setting out to destroy
the entire super structure and infrastructure of the British state and empire. So, four days after they set out the Royal Navy's Lion, which was an ancient 60 gun fourth rate damaged one of the ships so badly that she had to return
to port carrying with her all Charles's man and all his guns. So when Charles made landfall at Eriskay he had only a handful of men with him, including his Lieutenant
General, Marquess of Tullibardine And in Jacobite terms, the Duke of Atholl, Colonel John Sullivan,
his quartermaster general and a French regular,
and a cavalry officer, Sir John MacDonald, those were
his only three real soldiers. Naturally, he got rather
a chilly reception. It doesn't look chilly
at the princess strand at Eriskay there, that's... We had to wait 78 years
to take that photograph. But he ran into a lot of opposition. People didn't want to take the risk of rising with no French support. An traditionally, it was,
it was Ronald McDonald the Kenalog of Bidart
who made the first pledge of support six days after
Charles Edward landed. But almost immediately the
small force that was gathered by the Jacobites made a
significant difference. And the 14th of August they defeated the British reinforcements at Fort William. On the 16th, the first Foot
were defeated at Highbridge and Laggan. On the 19th the standard
was raised at Glenfinnan and British forces were
defeated at Inverness before the end of the month,
which included the capture of Cluny Mcfoster who
promptly joined the Jacobites. Charles. the second decided
to return from Hanover, By 4th September, the
Jacobite army were in Perth where several other Nobles joined them. Less than two weeks later, the city Gates of Edinburgh
were accidentally left open. The Lord provost, Archibald Stewart, The clues is in the name, was subsequently tried but found not proven that
elegant Scottish verdict of having aided and abetted the Jacobites. A crowd of 20,000, that's
Glenfinnan on the left. A crowd of 20,000 greeted the entry of the princess army. Matters changed rapidly. The British army in
Scotland under Sir John Cope was defeated at Prestonpans
four days later. Three days after that on Jacobite
held terribly in Scotland taxes started to be levied
on the pre-Union basis under the old Scottish pre
1707 Scottish tax system. On the 25th of September the city of Aberdeen
abandoned the government when Jacobites raised a
battalion of volunteers in the streets. On the 28th September run
began on the Bank of England and landholders began
withholding their land taxes. The government started to be
forced to borrow from the city and individual merchants
in order to be able to keep up the military spending
to participate in the war of the Austrian succession
and to bring the troops back to England who might be expected to crush the Jacobite rising Prince Charles meanwhile
was in Holodu palace. And that, although it's a
somewhat difficult to see I chose because it is a picture of Holodu done by Paul Sandby who was of course of
famous 18th century artist and military artist with
the British army in Scotland and was in Edinburgh for
some years after 1746 and that's done by him. That was how it was in Charles's day that was taken done by Sandby
three years afterwards. And that's a more modern photograph and a picture of Gladstone's land, the oldest house in that, in
the lawn market at the top of the high street, near
the castle, which was built at the beginning of the 17th century. This was the kind of
Edinburgh through which light in which large crowds gathered. The Port Edelman was the
second largest city in Britain at the time, after a
long way behind London, but still ahead of anywhere else. And this is where the crowds gathered. And in these narrow
streets, the Jacobite army thronged. But Charles also always
alert to propaganda wanted the most notable artist of the day In Edinburgh, Alan Ramsey, to take it his picture,
which became the basis of a propaganda print by the engraver, Robert Strange. And Ramsey who had actually
visited the Royal family of the Jacobite Royal
family in Rome in 1736, came down from where he
was staying, which is if anyone knows Edinburgh in
the middle of Ramsey garden which is Ramsey lodge, there's
the center Ramsey garden close by the castle, went
down to Holyrood and did or began this painting of Charles Edward. Alan Ramsey later became Court painter to George the third. So you can see that he was
canny as well as a good painter. Charles made a great play
of holding a Royal court at Holyrood. He stayed in the West wing of the Duke of Hamilton's
departments, formerly those of Charles the second's
queen, which had just been redecorated recently by William Adam. People came to the great hall
to see him dying in the manner of Royal, of European royalty. Eating in public was what Kings did at this stage, particularly
in continental Europe. The Prince held levies and balls. And these seem to be an organized rather as the Edinburgh assembly dances of the period were organized. Many many of whose precedence were were in fact themselves Jacobites. That is there was a first set
of French and Italian dancers predominantly minuets
and related measures. And then there was a
break for refreshments and then there was
Scottish country dancing. And just as an image of
Jacobite material culture the dress on the left,
is pretty good provenance as having been worn by Oliphant of... Madam Maliphant of Gask not
Oliphant to Gaston himself, but madam Maliphant of Gask at
one of the balls in Holyrood in 1745 and the right
province is a bit less good, but we think that that may have been worn by the Countess of Airlie. So these are images of that strange Autumn in 1745. But, those forces opposing him were not idle. 6,000 Dutch troops were called
in by the British government and 18 battalions and nine
calvary squadrons called back from the continent, while the independent Highland companies loyal to the British crown
raised resistance in the North which was later defeated
at the battle of Inverurie, on the 20 in Aberdeenshire
on the 23rd of December. Charles had who waited
quite some time in Holyrood but he had to move and
indeed the resolution to invade England was only carried by a single vote at his council. Many of them wanted to,
to stay in Scotland, recall the Scottish parliament
and asked for French troops. Charles was of the view strategically that unless you attack London, that was no go. So in 8th of November two
Jacobite army divisions entered England taking
Carlisle a week later. And the French troops, Scots and Irish and the French
service predominantly Scots in this first landing, landed
with Lord John Drummond at Montrose on the 22nd of November. So the Jacobites maintained
two armors, one in Scotland, one had advanced into England. The troops who are
opposing them in England, largely militia and local levers were not regarded by their
commanders as sufficient. And on the 23rd of November,
the defense of Manchester was abandoned by the government. And on the 3rd of December,
the defense of Darby was abandoned. On the 5th of December
with the Jacobite army at Darby, the only forces between them and London were between one and 2000 men at Finchley. Of whom the black watch,
who were held in the South of England, because they
were widely regarded to be unreliable after the 1743 mutiny, were almost the only regular soldiers. Cumberland had its
forces at North Hampton. I would not have got there in time. The Jacobites did not know this. Their intelligence was very poor. Charles was out voted
and he had to retreat. That's just to get the
feel of a contemporary map, both of England travelers
comparing to England and Wales, in the middle of the 18th
century and Darby and Darbyshire. Charles's furthest advance into England, the bridge at the end of the town. Very much, his commanders still thought recruitment of England had
been about a thousand men, which was not terrific by
any means, but the issue is that actually it was probably
just as many as Charles's. the second he got on the
way to Worcester in 1651. So they were probably too
optimistic in terms of the number of men who would actually join them. Charles's Scottish commanders really had the opposition to the
union dimension of Jacobitism at their heart, in terms of their opinions on one or two significant exceptions, but that's more or less it. In terms of that opinion and
the way that the political view that they wanted to put forward. So Charles himself had repealed the union a decoration of Edinburgh in
the 14th of October, 1745, and was still very conscious in the in writing to Louis the
15th in November, 1746 but the oppressions and depredations after Culloden were threatening
this kingdom of Scotland and later Chevalier de
Johnston one of his officers who became aide to Count. With both aide to Count to
Lord George Murray in 1745, to the Jacobite Lieutenant General and later Raider Kong to
the French general Montcalm in Quebec in 1759, put very strongly that patriotic view, the Scots
have preserved their Liberty and independence down to the
union of the two kingdoms in 1707. Very interestingly, when
we come to that moment at Quebec, 14 years later Chevalier of the Johnston is
fighting on the French side but whose troops are able to
reach the Plains of Abraham because another Scottish
Jacobite French officer has changed his mind about
the politics of the world and has joined the British
army captain MacDonald. And he gives the password
to the French centuries in good enough French to deceive them. And so the British troops
can progress onto the Plains of Abraham. Well, Charles, his army
was still successful even in retreat. So the British advance,
the British army was at now chasing again, the
relation bound skull was beaten off at Clifton by Lord
George Murray's charge on the 18th of December, 1745, Lord Louis Gordon beat the Scottish government troops at Inverurie
on the 23rd of December. And the British army was again,
defeated, substantial force under Henry Hall, who
was defeated at full Kirk on the 18th of January, 1746. But the Jacobite army was
still in retreat mode. There was now a lot of
division in the high command between Charles and his
officers who particularly Lord George Murray really saw
the situation as on winnable and was keen to pull back and disperse his troops in the hope that things would be the same as they'd been
after previous risings. That is that after a bit of
fuss, everything would die down. They were very wrong about that. The Jacobites that then thus
lost the East coast ports and the reinforcements
of men and material. could no longer be landed from France. The last convoy came in, by a day or two late after the Jacobites had lost to Aberdeen and Peter Head. On the 20th of March general
Bland's forces were defeated at Keith in the Northeast of
Scotland by Lord John Drummond but that was it. Perth and Drummond's division
failed to contest the spay, Drummond reteach from near
and where the Jacobite cavalry from having a fighting retreat, and we move on to Culloden. I won't dwell I've written a book on Culloden and I won't dwell on the battle in too much detail here, but just as we began with a
start of the Jacobite rising so we must see it through to its finish. And although it went on, there
were attempts after Culloden Culloden is not perhaps
understood at the time, but certainly understood
in retrospect as the end of the Jacobite cause. So this is a contemporary French map and you may be able or may
not be able to see that on one side, it's not
particularly accurate. It says LaMi echo says, and another side LaMi and glass the English and the Scottish armies. We now generally think Of Culloden as a civil war, a
battle where they were members of the same family on different sides. And that's indeed true,
but it also was a war a conflict with a strongly
national dimension. That was how it was understood by many of its participants on the day and by the French officers who
fought alongside the Jacobites. And here in a much more modern though I think will still be developed map. You can see what happened that day. And fundamentally British army is in red. The Jacobites are in blue that fundamentally the
Jacobites were out numbered. They had no second line. But we think we know so they had to put all their
troops into the first line with a hope of breaking the
British army straight away and they didn't manage to do it. But the thing we think we know about Coloradan is not what
we know about Coloradon. Because we think and this is how it's
nearly always presented That Culloden was a victory for British guns over Jacobites swords. But in fact, it was very
nearly the opposite. The Jacobites and that's what
the battlefield archeology shows laid down enormous
amount of fire on the ground at Cullodon and particularly
a firefight down down close to where the B 9,006 road runs in the latter stages of the battle. But they were successfully in cir... Almost successfully encircled. Some of them got away, the encirclement wasn't complete by cavalry. So the Dragoon and cavalry superiority of Cumberland's army that
day was absolutely critical. And they of course attacked with swords. That is the battlefield of Culloden today. And one of the interesting things is on the right, is that the right you can see just that there's as the line slopes up, this is standing on the Jacobite frontline
as the line slopes up, it actually goes out of
sight because it dips down the other side of the crest and the left and the right
wings could not see each other. They never intended to
fight on that ground. Prince Charlie did not
choose the field himself. The graveyard of Cullodon, the song goes that was the ground on which they had to
fight after their retreat following the unsuccessful night
attack, which left too late for very obvious reason that
you can see a thin strand of blue in the left photograph. And that thin stranded
blue is the Murray Farth. And on the Murray fourth
was the Royal Navy and the role Navy had telescopes and it was Scotland in
the middle of April. And it got dark rather late to set off. So, out of such conflict and accidents, history changes. There were a few of them, 1400
men on the field that cold wet April day on the edge of Europe but Cullodon is still a decisive battle in terms of the history of the world. This is to some extent, what if history, I agree. But it is at least possible,
but some, if not all of these things would have happened. Not victory at Cullodon,
it was too late by then but the victory in the
campaign would have changed or could have changed the world, not least because any restored
Stuart dynasty would have had a relationship with
France closer to that of Charles the second than
that of the Hanoverians. In that case they would
have been, shall we say, perhaps not so much not on cordial but at least a cohabitation policy, rather than a confrontational policy with French Imperial power. The war of 1756, 63, the seven years war would not then have occurred. If it had not occurred the American revolution
would have had to take place with large numbers of
French troops in Canada unable to enter the Louisiana territories which would no longer have
been so isolated as they became after the British victories
in the late 1750s. France would not have become
so impoverished in the wars of the 1750s, sixties,
seventies, and eighties which means there's a very good chance that it would not have collapsed under the pressure of agricultural failure and a poor economy into
revolutionary politics in 1789. Which means that there is no Napoleon. And the changing of the face of Europe that was the legacy of
Napoleon and the agreements after his fall at Vienna in 1815. Jacobitism changed the world because and this is one of its most famous images a David Moria painting
originally done for Cumberland, showing the classic tropes of the Jacobites soldier. Harry, there's a chapter
lying on the ground. You're wondering what's under his kilt. His thighs agreeably raised
all armed with swords. Some of them carrying that thing on a pole which is all carbarax which was not used at Culloden. Hairy primitives against strong modern, 18th century army. But that was always a propaganda piece. That's not how it was. Those are incidentally two
pits, just to give you a sense of the very similitude,
two pistol balls fired from the second line, probably from French or Spanish pistols and pistols were fired
at very close quarters By Jacobites against the advancing British
army on the day of Culloden. It was a very different battle
from the way it's remembered. And just as I started
by talking about memory I'm going to finish by
saying Jacobitism is a very different cause and a very
different set of values from the way it's remembered. It differed nationally, it differ dynastically, and it was a pan European movement. The battle of Culloden was
not just a dynastic conflict. It was not fought between a
modern army and Highland clans who were primitive by comparison. It was not fought between
Catholics and Protestants. It was not a victory
of muskets over swords. It was not fought on the site chosen in defiance of good advice by Charles Edward Steward's
his Irish officers. It was not fought to end
the British civil war. And it was not either a defeat
for Scottish nationalism. Jacobitism was bigger
than all those things. But in the aftermath of Culloden,
there was a determination for Jacobitism to never happen again. And that led and I would go there today as the lectures is drawing to its close, that led to an enormous amount of brutality both
immediately after the battle and in the longer term. Indeed general Bland who in his 1743, three ties of military
discipline had talked about having a respectful attitude by occupying military forces towards the civilian population. It was three years later writing to the Earl of Loudon, "destroy all persons you can find who have been in the rebellion or their abettors". Well, what's an abettor of rebellion? Somebody who gives
somebody a drink of milk? It often was in 1746. Cumberland was initially very positive, that with a month or six weeks, He'd have sorted things
out on the 23rd of April. 10 years later, they were
still 60 British army patrols In Scotland. The commentary by Andrew, by
the contemporary and biographer of Cumberland, Andrew Henderson, "the victory at Culloden gave birth to an inexpressible joy through the extensive
dominion of the British empire not only Europe and
Africa, but the two Indies joined in the shout and
gave joyful acclamations", was not entirely an exaggeration, but whether it's... and it was not entirely true either, but what it does signify
is the global nature of Jacobitism and the Jacobite threat. And yet it's ineradicable domestication within Scotland. When Cumberland left for
England on the 18th of July, he left troops, not in the Highlands but in the Edinburgh borders and Glasgow and Dundee and Angus and
Aberdeen, the Northeast, East Lothian, at Sterling, at Perth. 27 burgh deployments, 12,000 men, the size of the British
establishment in Ireland and a quarter, the size of the British standing army in 1756. The occupation of Scotland
after Culloden was big business. But the international
dimension of that, which led on recommendations from general Wolf to initially to Lord
Barrington's defense secretary and then to Pitt who then
claimed all the credit for himself, William Pitt the elder, to actually solve a problem of Jacobitism long time by recruiting
ex Jacobite soldiers in the British army, came to
fruition in the seven years war in Canada. The depopulation which
Cumberland had hoped to see was not in the Highlands, was not possible, politically possible, but in the aftermath of 1746, because Cumberland speedily got himself
into very hot water indeed, people disapproved of him
in London and elsewhere not just in Scotland very soon because of the exceptional brutality, which you'd suppress the rising. But he remained influential in the army, and therefore it was
British forces initi... When British forces initiated
Le Grande Derangement of 1755, which expelled 80% or more of
the French speaking settlers from Nova Scotia, they were following in
Cumberland's footsteps and in his policy for the Highlands. Cumberland said himself
in Le Grande Derangement "I wish we could have
done the same in Lochaber but we can do it here now". That's just a picture of
the acajun expulsions. So the nature of the seven
years war, the ultimate... Final war for victory
between Britain and France the nature of the British polity, the nature of its relationship with
Europe and the world all of these things are
intimately connected with the Jacobites and
Charles Edward Stewart, and whether they won or lost. And Fort George still in
use as a barracks today is a monument completed in 1756 which costs 2 million pounds at the time which could ill be afforded by a British government already deeply in the national debt and
starting a global war with France in the second
half of that decade. Fort George symbolized
in it's size and strength on a remote peninsula
out of fear in Inverness. Just how worried the
British government were about the Jacobites. Many people still think that
the Jacobite cause was futile and that it was bound to fail but that's not what was
thought at the time. Thomas Paine to Thomas Jefferson, 1776. "The descent that was made in
1745 had nearly proved fatal to the Canadian government". And Marc Antonio Barretti
to James Boswell in 1768. "If the Corsicans are successful
in fighting for Liberty, they will be no rebels and
this will likewise be the case when your Americans
set up for themselves". Not to say he expected the
Americans to revolt in 1768 Interestingly, "not to say that it had
been likewise, the case if your scotch had succeeded in their last rebellion". In the 18th century, Jacobitism was understood
as geopolitical politics. And it also went on in the writing that came
out of the Jacobite movement often produced by people who
were closely linked with it. Writers like Alasdair
MacMhaighstir Alasdair, who was an officer in the Jacobite army, writers like James McPherson
and the huge cult of Ossian who had 17 relatives in the
McPherson regiment alone and writers like Sir Walter
Scott, whose own father was recruited to join Maria Bruton Ceasars for the Jacobites in 1745. All of these created
what is still the image of romantic Scotland, the land
of the mountain and the mist. And just as French had been familiar throughout the 18th
century with Le Montagnard of Scotland, the Highland of the Scotland, they saw Scotland's
almost entirely Highland fighting to restore the Jacobites. So that fused with the
cult of Swiss Liberty and independence arising
from the populative Aloosa gave rise to the Montagnards, the Jacobins who sat on the high benches in the national assembly in the early 1790s. These are just some of the paint... finish with just some of the paintings from romantic France of McPherson's characters and images from Osteon, a warrior Scotland an ancient Scotland, a chivalric Scotland, the last echoes of Francis ancient Alliance with Scotland and a country where the mountain, the mountains and Liberty were conjoined in their struggle to restore the Jacobites and Charles Edward Stewart. That link on the last
page in front of you now will take you to the database of the officers of the Jacobite armies and it contains the
names so far of more than 3000 Scottish, English and Irish men who served at commissioned
rank in the Jacobite armies from 1688 to 1760. A huge number of people were
involved in this movement. It was a European movement. It's of global significance and its defeat and or its victory determined the nature of the Britain we live in today. Thank you. - Professor Pittock, thank you very much for a really fascinating lecture. We've had some questions
from the online audience and if you don't mind, we... I think we have enough time to take a few. (clears throat) Excuse me. Charles Edward Stuart,
versus the Duke of Cumberland which representation is
more biased according to the records and durations of the 45? - Which, is more biased? I'm not sure which between which - I think, the questioner is asking between Charles Edward Stewart versus the Duke of Cumberland. - Cumberland, despite some attempts to rehabilitate him was widely disliked. Almost as soon as you go back to London because gossip started
to circulate at a levee in early May, 1746 that there were actually
almost no Scottish prisoners almost all the prisoners he'd taken were in the French service. And then it was suggested that
he should be made a Freeman of the butchers company in the
Autumn of 1746 and a pam... A large pamphlet with
a picture of a butcher on it with an axe was
published in London in 1746. So basically if we're talking
about talking about bias Cumberland's version of events is not one that was accepted almost from the start
and almost everywhere. So I guess it would be the more biased. - Thank you. A quick one, did he leave issue in France? At least I think it's
a quick one (chuckles). - Charles had one. There've been many people who suggested they might be descended from Charles. Charles had one illegitimate
daughter whom he legitimized but legitimized from the point of view of inheritance legitimizing
her doesn't mean she can become I mean, inheritance under
personal property, not inheritance of a crown who was
Charlotte Duchess of Albany who died in the early 1790s. And she was at some time in France, but not always. - Was he raised to fight
to regain the throne or was it a response to
pressure from the Highlanders? - He was raised to fight
to regain the throne but there was strong support for him to do so. And by the late 1730s as the political situation
got more opportune there was a significant traffic between Scotland in particular and the Jacobite court to
put in place the developments which would be necessary to
launch a successful rising. - Thank you. There were some other, what
if questions, but I think your lecture ably answered most of those. So I think we will stop there with another thank you very much for, as I said, a fascinating lecture.
