![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
cahnAnd in this post:
-luzula is going to tell us about the Jacobites and the '45!
-I'm going to finish reading Nancy Goldstone's book about Maria Theresia and (some of) her children Maria Christina, Maria Carolina, and Marie Antoinette, In the Shadow of the Empress, andselenak is going to tell us all the things wrong with the last four chapters (spoiler: in the first twenty chapters there have been many, MANY things wrong)!
-mildred_of_midgard is going to tell us about Charles XII of Sweden and the Great Northern War
(seriously, how did I get so lucky to have all these people Telling Me Things, this is AWESOME)
-oh, and also there will be Yuletide signups :D
-
luzula is going to tell us about the Jacobites and the '45!-I'm going to finish reading Nancy Goldstone's book about Maria Theresia and (some of) her children Maria Christina, Maria Carolina, and Marie Antoinette, In the Shadow of the Empress, and
selenak is going to tell us all the things wrong with the last four chapters (spoiler: in the first twenty chapters there have been many, MANY things wrong)!-
mildred_of_midgard is going to tell us about Charles XII of Sweden and the Great Northern War(seriously, how did I get so lucky to have all these people Telling Me Things, this is AWESOME)
-oh, and also there will be Yuletide signups :D
The '45: from Derby to Culloden and after
Date: 2021-10-05 09:08 am (UTC)Meanwhile, more recruiting had been going on in Scotland, along with French reinforcements. BPC sent Colonel Lachlan MacLachlan of MacLachlan (whose name I only include because it is such a delight) to have them come down south to meet them, but their commander Lord John Drummond (a Scotsman serving in the French army) refused. He claimed King Louis had told him to first clear out the enemy fortresses, but in fact the king had told him to put himself at BPC's disposal. So that's another road not taken.
The Manchester regiment, along with some other forces, was unfortunately put in charge of holding Carlisle, which was taken pretty quickly. As English Jacobites the wrath of the Hanoverian government would fall heavily on them--they were penned up without water, food or sanitation, and several of them died. Later more of them died in jail where they were given rotten offal to eat, and then they were all executed or transported. All officers were executed except those with French commissions, who were treated well and exchanged to France.
A pause here to discuss the very different treatment of prisoners by the Jacobite army. After Prestonpans, they made sure the wounded on the other side got medical treatment, food, etc. The officers were released on parole if they undertook not to fight for the duration of the war.
The difference is not because the Hanoverians were evil and the Jacobites good. In the 18th century, war can only be declared by (the sovereign of) a country, and in war one has to follow certain rules, such as extending parole to captured officers, and setting up cartels to exchange them. BPC made claim to be the sovereign of Britain and as such regarded himself as having every right to declare war--and really wanted to show that he could conduct himself according to the honourable rules of war: he paid for food and billets, he treated the captured well, he didn't harm civilians (which is also just common sense if you're hoping to be accepted as their king). But in the eyes of the Hanoverians, the Jacobites are NOT in a position to declare legitimate war: they are traitors and should not be treated as honourable opponents in war. Their officers shouldn't be given parole, they should be hunted down and executed! Unless they had French commissions. The Hanoverians were furious with the Hessians when, later on, they were considering setting up a cartel with the Jacobites to exchange prisoners (there were some Hessian mercenaries on the Hanoverian side).
The Hanoverian officers taken prisoner at Prestonpans had respected their paroles--until an expedition was sent to forcibly "liberate" them. They were ordered to break their paroles, on direct order from George II himself. Most did, except for a few, for example Lieutenant-Colonel Peter Halkett who said that [the king] was master of their commissions, but not of their probity and honour.
Anyway. The Jacobites meet up with their reinforcements, unsuccessfully besiege Stirling Castle for a while, and then clash with the Hanoverian forces that have been building up near Edinburgh. They are led by General Henry Hawley, or "Hangman Hawley", so called not for his treatment of Jacobites but of his own men. A contemporary source: Nobody disputed Mr Hawley's genius for […] prosecuting with vigour any mortal to the gallows.
So the two sides meet at Falkirk, a confusing battle in a January rain- and hailstorm, at the end of which the Jacobites went "We...won? I think?" They did indeed win and the Hanoverians retreated, leaving behind their artillery which was bogged down in a mire. But the Jacobites did not go on the offensive, which BPC wanted to do; instead they decided in council to retreat to the Highlands, yielding Montrose and other harbours on the north-east coast which were their hope of further French reinforcements.
The Highland clans in the Jacobite army wanted very much to smash up the three forts in the Great Glen, which they proceeded to do with Forts George and Augustus, but failed with Fort William. But meanwhile Cumberland had taken over command of the Hanoverian army and was marching up the northeast coast towards Inverness. The Jacobites besieging Fort William were hastily recalled, getting to Inverness in time for the famous battle of Culloden.
The Jacobite army by this time was hungry and tired, and so were its commanders. BPC had failed to get hold of a shipment of French gold which had landed north of Inverness among Whig clans, and had no more money to pay his troops or pay for food. Cumberland had been drilling his troops in holding the line and not yielding to the Highland charge, and they had more artillery, more men, and more food. So the Jacobites lost badly, and the army was dispersed (the ones who could get away).
Then followed the great scourging of the Highlands. The feeling among the Hanoverians was that they had been too lenient after the '15 and look what happened. There was killing of unarmed people, burning of houses, rape, driving off with their cattle, and withholding of grain imports in the hopes of a famine. Here's the opinion of the Earl of Albemarle, one of the commanders: I [...] always feared from the bad inclination of the people in most of the northern counties and from their stubborn, inveterate disposition of mind, nothing could effect it but laying the whole country waste and ashes, and removing all the inhabitants (excepting a few) out of the kingdom.
Actually some of the worst officers were not Englishmen but Lowland Scots, among them Captain Caroline Scott, named after his godmother the queen, Caroline of Ansbach. The Campbells OTOH, who were traditional rivals to the Jacobite clans, were more moderate, and some said they would surrender, but only to a Campbell.
You can read more about BPC:s escape here, courtesy of
In the aftermath of the rising, many who had fought were rounded up and brought to trial, though the terrible conditions in jails and prison-hulks killed more than were actually executed. Those who survived were transported. Eventually there was another disarming act, Highland dress was forbidden, and measures were taken to weaken the clan system. A couple of decades later, when the clan elites had been more tightly tied to the Hanoverian government, the Highlands were used as recruiting grounds for regiments that would fight in the American colonies.
Yep. There's lots more to say, just ask, or fill in what I've left out! : )
Major sources:
The Jacobite Risings in Britain 1689-1746 by Bruce Lenman (1980)
Fight for a Throne: the Jacobite '45 Reconsidered by Christopher Duffy (2015) (This one is so great! *dangles temptingly in front of
Re: The '45: from Derby to Culloden and after
Date: 2021-10-07 05:14 am (UTC)They are led by General Henry Hawley, or "Hangman Hawley", so called not for his treatment of Jacobites but of his own men. A contemporary source: Nobody disputed Mr Hawley's genius for […] prosecuting with vigour any mortal to the gallows.
UM I need more detail on this :P Stories about him sending his own men to the gallows??
So, the scourging of the Highlands is where the Butcher of Cumberland got that name? (Or was it Culloden?)
All Europe is astonished at the greatness of your enterprise, for though Alexander and other heroes have conquered kingdoms with inferior armies, you are the only one who engaged in such an enterprise without any.
Heeeee okay, that's got to be a bit tongue-in-cheek, hasn't it? (Calling
Aw man, BPC, sucks to be him (but I guess sucks even more to be a Jacobite)
Re: The '45: from Derby to Culloden and after
Date: 2021-10-07 04:02 pm (UTC)His aide-de-camp James Wolfe during the '45 said the troops dread [Hawley's] severity, hate the man and hold his military knowledge in contempt. OTOH Wolfe was apparently known for talking shit about his superiors, and Cumberland among others thought Hawley militarily competent. This is just from Wikipedia, as I can't find more about Hawley's attitude towards discipline from the books I have...
Hawley did court-martial and execute a number of his men for running away at Falkirk, where the proportion of officers to private soldiers killed was high on the Hanoverian side (because of private soldiers running away). Ironically Hawley himself wasn't court-martialed for losing, though Cope was.
This is hilarious, though (from Wikipedia): Like many of his 'historical anecdotes', Walter Scott's suggestion Hawley was an illegitimate son of George II (1683-1760) has been dismissed by historians. If true, George would have fathered him at the age of two, thirty years before his first visit to England.
So, the scourging of the Highlands is where the Butcher of Cumberland got that name? (Or was it Culloden?)
Both, but mostly the former, I would say! Defeating your enemy in battle is a standard thing to do, but killing the wounded, and all the other things he did, isn't.
Heeeee okay, that's got to be a bit tongue-in-cheek, hasn't it? (Calling mildred_of_midgard?)
Looking forward to hearing more! Sadly I can't track down the actual letter.
Re: The '45: from Derby to Culloden and after
Date: 2021-10-07 07:29 pm (UTC)Re: The '45: from Derby to Culloden and after
Date: 2021-10-07 07:31 pm (UTC)Google gave me this version, and while I'm sure Mildred knows more about the circumstances and will correct me if I'm wrong here, I'm pretty sure it's fake. It's not in his Political Correspondence, it doesn't sound like him at all IMO, and then there's the "General Keith, whom I have had the good fortune to engage in my service" line, which is just wrong, since neither James nor George Keith were in Fritz' service in 1745 or 1746. (James, who I think is meant here, was a General in the Russian Army at the time.)
Re: The '45: from Derby to Culloden and after
Date: 2021-10-07 08:59 pm (UTC)Re: The '45: from Derby to Culloden and after
Date: 2021-10-08 12:17 am (UTC)One thing nobody's commented on yet is the alleged date of that letter: 1745. That's impossible, because in 1745, BPC was in Britain and had not yet been defeated. The letter, if it's real, would have to be from 1746. (
Now, that's not definitive, first because it's in brackets and I take that to mean the editor isn't claiming it's in the original, and second because it's a typo, and third because most of these letters are dated by the editor based on their best guess. But it definitely doesn't inspire confidence.
As for whether it sounds like him...It doesn't, but as Selena said, Fritz is one of the biggest trolls to ever live.
As counterevidence, Asprey claims that G2 asked Fritz for military support against the planned French + BPC invasion in 1744:
Frederick replied that if Britain were attacked, he would at once march to her defense, but that her aggressive naval actions had brought war with France, and therefore Prussia was not bound to furnish the troops called for in a defensive treaty.
That absolutely does not prevent him from having written that letter to BPC in 1746, but like
Okay, looking through his letters in the Political Correspondence, he writes to Podewils, after he learns in February 1746 that BPC is retreating and losing men, and that therefore the Hanoverians are no longer in danger:
We are therefore in no danger at the present moment of promising to keep our contingent ready to be transported to England in case of need
So Fritz *did* (reluctantly, because of the defensive treaty he'd signed), promise that he'd keep men ready to fight BPC.
I'm not aware that the political situation had changed *that* much between February 1746 and, say, October 1746, so I'm going with "fake" until I get more evidence.
Re: The '45: from Derby to Culloden and after
Date: 2021-10-08 12:07 pm (UTC)or that Keith left Russia at the end of 1746
Fritz still wasn't sure if Keith had left Russian service in July 1747 (repeatedly writing to his Russian envoy to inquire about his status and whereabouts), and Keith only arrived in Berlin in October. Fritz to Finckenstein on October 28th: Moreover, General Keith arrived here a fortnight ago. I have just taken him into my service and appointed him Field Marshal General.
That said, it's possible that there was some secret poaching going on and that's why Fritz was so eager to know more about Keith's whereabouts. On the other hand, this seems like a very risky thing to do and it makes zero sense to me that Fritz would have told anyone, let alone BPC, before Keith was even safely out of Russia.
See also this letter George wrote to his brother early in November 1747: All the Gasettiers cannot be mistaken; he of Ausbourg sais you are made Field-Maréchal by the King of Prussia. If so, I heartily wish you joy of being in the service of a Prince of such merit, of being out of Russia, and off the sea. That you got out of Russia seems a miracle to me. As far as I know, due to the English putting pressure on the Russians, George was refused entry into the country when he wanted to visit James in the summer of 1746. Both the refusal and the English meddling seem to have been reasons for James' decision to quit Russian service, but he had to be delicate and careful about it.
(although some 50% of the things I think are fake turn out to be real and vice versa
Heee. I recently came across a very fake-sounding 1757 letter from Fritz to MT and was rather proud of myself when I investigated and was proven right.)
Re: The '45: from Derby to Culloden and after
Date: 2021-10-08 01:42 pm (UTC)Was that letter cited in Duffy,
Heee. I recently came across a very fake-sounding 1757 letter from Fritz to MT and was rather proud of myself when I investigated and was proven right.)
Hee! Good for you! I was suspicious about Eugene's memoirs from the first page, and then Selena found that they were written by the Prince de Ligne, and I was pleased. :)
If only professional historians were this skeptical!
Re: The '45: from Derby to Culloden and after
Date: 2021-10-08 09:01 pm (UTC)Duffy wrote two books about the '45; the second one is an updated and expanded version of the first, where he says he went through four times as much source material as for the first. It has an incredible amount of detail compared to other books I've found, which is valuable for writing fanfic set during the war. : )
ETA: In general I find it frustrating when historians make judgements about people's character, or competence, or motivations, and don't tell you how they got to that conclusion. See for example the Lenman quote in one of my comments. Maybe he had read lots of the guy's letters, or whatever, to come to that conclusion, but how am I to know? In that respect Duffy is no worse and considerably better than some books I've read at backing up his judgement by citing sources--though perhaps, as you say, sometimes uncritical of those sources.
Re: The '45: from Derby to Culloden and after
Date: 2021-10-07 08:01 pm (UTC)Re: The '45: from Derby to Culloden and after
Date: 2021-10-07 09:03 pm (UTC)