I think you mean "Highlanders" here instead of "Jacobites"?
Yeah, I actually typed "Highlanders" first, then figured that might confuse cahn and decided to put "Jacobites" instead so she had a vague idea what period I was talking about, then I thought about adding a note for clarity, pretty much exactly on the lines of what you said here, but I got sucked back into Pugachev and forgot to come back to it. I should have known our resident Jacobite expert would call me on any sloppiness! :D
Many Highlanders also had experience from modern military units abroad and in other parts of Britain and were not some sort of primitive warriors.
Indeed, indeed.
But there are also ways in which they were great at working together as a unit. The clan was a ready-made regiment with an officer structure already in place, which had great cohesion and great loyalty to the officers.
Oh, yeah, *within* a clan was great! I was thinking more of the "My clan will fight on the right!" "No, mine!" type thing. But like I said, that can happen in more impersonal armies too.
There are always trade-offs when you compare organizations where more of the relevant bonds are between individuals and where they're more between abstractions like "the employee" and "the state". The early modern period is very much a transitional time along that continuum. But in pretty much any time, you'll see some elements of both, which is why I say "continuum".
Thank you for elaborating on the nuance that it was irresponsible of me not to elaborate on!
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Re: The Pugachev Rebellion
Date: 2024-01-22 05:19 pm (UTC)Yeah, I actually typed "Highlanders" first, then figured that might confuse
Many Highlanders also had experience from modern military units abroad and in other parts of Britain and were not some sort of primitive warriors.
Indeed, indeed.
But there are also ways in which they were great at working together as a unit. The clan was a ready-made regiment with an officer structure already in place, which had great cohesion and great loyalty to the officers.
Oh, yeah, *within* a clan was great! I was thinking more of the "My clan will fight on the right!" "No, mine!" type thing. But like I said, that can happen in more impersonal armies too.
There are always trade-offs when you compare organizations where more of the relevant bonds are between individuals and where they're more between abstractions like "the employee" and "the state". The early modern period is very much a transitional time along that continuum. But in pretty much any time, you'll see some elements of both, which is why I say "continuum".
Thank you for elaborating on the nuance that it was irresponsible of me not to elaborate on!