Culloden

[ANDY-J3]

It's interesting that you should mention his brother Henry because the national gallery admitted a couple of months ago that the iconic image we have of Charles Stewart wearing the suit of armour isn't him at all but his brother the Cardinal.

Gallery admits portrait isn't Bonnie Prince Charlie - Scotsman.com News



The problem was however that an "authority" on Jacobite imagery had identified the portrait previously as definitely being the Prince so even university academics with years of experience sometimes get it wrong. That's why I think it's best to avoid talking about some of the events in the '45 rebellion, especially the religious and political ideals of those who took part, as if they were proven facts. There are too many grey areas where we don't have any textual evidence to say we are dealing with certainties - a lot of the time we are only dealing with conjecture and probabilities.

[wullie m]

We're talking facts here, not Jacobite Waffle, Old Clanranald, a good Catholic, sent word to BPC to go back to France, Lochboisdale ditto, the Catholic Macneils of Barra, stayed at home, their chief jailed for a while, then let go. I think your problem Andy, is that you're history is straight out of "Red Rory of the Eagles", there is nobody now living who was at Culloden, we have to rely on written evidence, unfortunately many of the books are of the tartan shortbread tin genre. There's nothing we should avoid talking about, you could start with Prebble's "Culloden" and I recommend "Culloden & the '45" by Jeremy Black. The portrait mix up is an irrelevance, so what? so two siblings are mixed up-happens with family pic's all the time.

[ANDY-J3]

Well my degree is an honours BA in history and humanities - what's your degree in? I've never even heard of red Rory thingummybob. You seem so certain of your facts that I would assume you're a Professor in history? Your approach to history is all wrong but I like it all the same - it makes for interesting reading.

[wullie m]

History & Humanities Andy! so nothing useful then? another burden on the hard pressed taxpayer, and never heard of Red Rory, so I'm corresponding with a callow youth who doesn't know his Jacobins from his Jacobites!
wullie m

[ANDY-J3]

Wullie,
History and humanities is fun - who says it needs to be useful, and as regards the tax payer well I've paid enough tax and national insurance over the years to be entitled to some free education. The point I was making about your approach to this topic is your use of sweeping generalisations. A highland clan wasn't a homogenous group of people who all shared the same surname, religious beliefs and political ideals. It was a group of people living in a geographical area that happened to be the feudal domain of a highland chieftan. Just because a clan chief happened to be Episcopalian it doesn't follow that all those who nominally owed him allegiance had the same ideals so I don't necessarily agree with you when you make statements that a certain clan was Catholic while another was Episcopalian although that might have been true in some cases. You also find members of the same clan fighting on both sides so you're often dealing with people who are motivated by expediency rather than ideology. I do agree with your judgement of Charles Stewart though - he had Scots killing their fellow Scots in order to purse his own dynastic ambitions and it's a pity he ever set foot in this country.

[wullie m]

Andy, generally speaking your post is OK, but in the few Catholic clans that there were, the people were of that religion, just as Catholicism in the Highlands today is still confined to certain areas, Barra, S.Uist, Morar, Strathglass, Roybridge etc' there have been great population changes since the '45 but the folk who survived the clearances and emigration from these districts are still there. The towns of course have a mixed population. Re' "feudal domain" you have to remember that many of these chiefs had no charter to the lands they occupied and were tenants of say the Duke's of Argyll or Gordon ,for example, this was the cause of much of the unrest. The Macintosh was feudal superior of much of Lochaber but the Macdonell's & Cameron's who occupied this land, would pay no rent.(the cause of the last clan battle). The Macintosh clan themself occupied land owned by the Duke of Gordon who certainly claimed his rents. Clans after the '45 who were in this position couldn't be forfeit as the lands weren't theirs. Keppoch & Macpherson for example, and the Macintosh himself was a government officer and not involved in rebellion (his clan was) so no forfeiture there. It's a complex subject but the clan system was already dying before the '45, the rebellion hastened its end.