Support the channel with Patreon www.patreon.com/scotlandhistorytours if the Jacobites didn't leave Scotland th-cam.com/video/vgIfCxlHMlQ/w-d-xo.html Tour Scotland with Bruce www.scotlandhistorytours.co.uk/tours/info/group
Im just enjoying adults having a civil discussion...bringing the facts and able to correct one another in a respectful way. Love that tartan looking rug!
My brother visited relatives in Scotland in 1995, the 250 th anniversary of the 45 Uprising. He then went south to London to visit his cousin. He said that as he was passing through the north of England, he found them celebrating in support of the Jacobites!!!
Cheers from Seaforth Ont.Canada Bruce,we r moving tae Scotland in the spring to explore the history and drink the whisky...ohh yeah, n find somewhere to work.
I am Derby, a spit away from Swarkestone Bridge. My children and grandchildren speak awfy strange too😂 It's not unknown for me to go to the Crewe and Harpur with one for an hour of an evening with one son. I'll buy you a drink if our paths cross there.
Wonderful discussion! Incredibly informative and interesting. You should have them on again. The video was like watching a discussion between friends. I can't wait for the next video.
Good afternoon Bruce, I'm late to watching today because I spent my day at the Highland games in "Scotland county" North Carolina. Now I'm gonna top it off with some SHT... What a great day!!! 💙🏴🇺🇲
Right Bruce! We Derbyshire folk are coming up to Perth to sort you out!!! Get ready! Actually, we live in north Derbyshire and can understand anyone giving up when they get to Derby! Actually, having said that, the Jacobite/Stuart room in the Derby Museum and Gallery is worth a ten minute visit. My understanding of this point in British/Scottish/English/Irish/French/European history has been that the decision to turn back was made on simply incorrect information and sneaky 😊misinformation and if they had pressed on they had a good chance of victory? Am I wrong then?
If you want some ideas for more stories about Jacobites. Interestingly quite a number of pirates in the latter end of the Golden Age of Piracy were Jacobites such as Charles Vane and (possibly) Blackbeard. Although this is more about the jacobite movement rather than Scotland as most of the pirates weren't Scottish, just pro the Catholic house of Stewart.
@@ffotograffydd your higher ranking English Jacobites, tho not all. There were still many in Carlisle. But that's not what I'm referencing. I'm talking about your average Englishmen Jacobites joined the princes army after he crossed the border. Don't forget tho, there were still English Jacobites in London as late as 1750. When Charles snuck into London an converted to the church of England, the church he did it in, The church of St Mary Le-Strand, had much Jacobite activity still.
Bruce, I really enjoy the "What If" videos you put together. Back when I was really involved with an American Scottish Society, this is a subject we'd often sit around and discuss over a dram or three, whenever two or more of us gathered. Of course, most of us were amateur historians, not titled authors and academics who devoted and studied the topics their whole careers. I've always held to the view, that Charlie screwed up invading England. He would have been far better off consolidating his family's hold on Scotland, than invading England. When only half the population supports you, you put your cause at serious risk of failure.
Apparently Charlie's War Council were really undecided as to what to do. A major tipping point was this guy turned, passed himself as pro-Jacobite but was in fact a Hanoverian spy & told them that London was very heavily defended. This info made Charlie & Co's mind to withdraw.
Aye Bruce. As a New Zealander, I am familiar with those Derby moments. Day 4, second innings, 300 in arrears, eight down on a crumbling Lords wicket...do we try to negotiate? Cheers, mate, you are a legend.
Very interesting. The gentlemen touched upon a very important point on the Jacobite military intelligence and lack of communications with the French Court. I think more important was the more advanced Hanoverian military intelligence network and communications on French movements and the successful Hanoverian use of agents and spies within the Jacobite camp to further thicken the fog of war in this regard. Many historians look at the American Revolutionary War as a good first example of military intelligence at work in the modern era but this Jacobite campaign was actually won and lost on the successful use and failure to use military intelligence as a crucial facet of warfare strategy and can be cited as a blueprint for subsequent campaigns conducted by George Washington 30 years later.
Since school, I have argued that it was a mistake to turn back. For me I'd made no sense whatsoever and the Culloden and the infamous night march, proves, for me, without a doubt they had te wrong General.
@@Sheltie01the night march may have worked as well. They say Lord George Murray turned back premature. Just as the princes party got within ear shot of Cumberland camp celebrating Cumberland b day the night before. Murray Pittock is a great source on all of this.
@@Sonny-m1f true. I think Murray was overly cautious. Whilst it can be good for some, I think in these cases it wasn't. I recall there was a chance to end the American rebellion after York Town. The rebels hiding in a valley. The General (can't remember his name offhand) decided not to press them as he was worried about his own casualties. But yes totally agree with you. It had to be tried, but Murray was the problem.
@@Sheltie01I have to put some blame on the other clan chiefs as well. They didn't believe in themselves. They were weary at Moidart. Alot abandoned the army before crossing the border. An at derby, they voted against continuing. Charles wanted to press on, an they'd have made London if they had. Unless the 1000/2000 militia on Finchley green put up some miraculous fight. Doubtful. As the black watch had been sent down south for mutining a few years or months previously. I'm not saying the Jacobites would have taken London. But they'd have made definitive world history. The American revolution an all those wars with France may not have happened had Charles succeeded. What world we would live in today. I am truly grateful I found Murray Pittocks work as well as the Lyon in mourning.
love channel sunday morning . my go to channel , i have always wondered why he turned back ,not watched this yet but when younger was thinking they should a kept gone
Went to college in Derby. He's right about them talking funny. "Alright my duck". Top people though and I thought the city was great too. All very walkable. Which meant I could put the bus fare towards something more useful.
My ancestor was a Jacobite under the Duke of Perth. Captured at Culloden. Transported. This story is special to me. Mixed feelings b/c I wouldn't be here if they didn't turn back 😅
I don't know what's in the history curriculum at schools these days, but I do wish we'd covered more British history when I was at secondary school, decades ago. To be honest, learning about American history, Russian history, the French Revolution and so on, whilst neglecting vast swathes of our own past, seems shameful. OK, so global history shouldn't be ignored, but neither should our own, especially as it ties in with so many others. Perhaps Bonnie Prince Charlie and his story was covered in the O'level Tudors and Stuarts curriculum when I was at school, but I was forced to take 'Modern World' history instead and that, I absolutely loathed. I know almost nothing about Bonnie Prince Charlie, other than that he was nick-named the Young Pretender, and an old song about him taking a boat to Skye. To hear he actually invaded England, with intentions of taking the English throne, only to chicken out at Derby and turn back, is a revelation, something that, until today ( 05.10.2024) I hadn't even heard the slightest rumour of! No, if the bias is an English thing, then it needs to change, and soon, because ignoring so many aspects of British history in favour of that of other nations is just wrong!
Fear not, I am your American counterpart in that. An being of British stock I am deeply invested into British history. Brom Britons an Picts up to the Victorian area. After my ppl left I seem to lose interest. Not a fan of the "glorious revolution" nor the Hanoverian regimes. But I am enthralled with all the rest.. especially the folk music. My ppl come from Hertfordshire, Galloway an Lochaber. An many more places in the isles I'm sure.
You should check out everything TH-cam has of Murray Pittock. Truly bittersweet. Just TH-cam Murray Pittock Jacobite an hit lectures come up an they are jam packed. An also check out the "Lyon in mourning". TH-cam has lectures on it as well. The modern narrative on Charles an the 45 is post conflict Hanoverian propaganda. Ppl need to understand this as a civil war. An the victors write the history books. Thankfully reverend Forbes saw this happening an compiled the volumes of the Lyon in mourning. Hope all this helps to educate us on the Jacobite side of the story. Often dismissed.
You heard sack all about it, mostly due to the same communists Jacobean Fanny’s becoming very famous a couple year later. 🇫🇷 guilotines n awww that 🤭 bit of an extreme way to cut yer big toe nails I reckon lmao xx
Another great video, surprised at no mention of John Dudley and his over estimation of English forces thou, I'm led to believe that made a difference!!
@@ffotograffydd well let's look at the facts, Charles Edward Stewart was the son of the rightful king of Britain, George the second was the descendant of the upsure William of orange, so if any troops were British it was the ones with Charles.
@@ppavery The Act of Settlement, passed by a lawfully assembled Parliament, meant that Charles Edward Stuart was no longer the rightful heir -- that is the pertinent fact here, and he resorted to violence, not legal argument, in his attempt to gain the throne. George II was a descendant of Charles I, not of William III.
Personally I reckon the scottish jacobites just went hame when they realised England just doesnae have the same feeling aboot it like hame does. Especially the Highlands.
My Gaelic’s a wee bit rusty, Jen! Though it means “I’m hoping the weathers nice” or something along those lines. Like only in Scotland can it be -2*c, raining and at the same time you’re getting a sun tan in the full sun. Only in Scotland can it rain with nae clouds in the sky in a warm summers day. If you turn on the weather channel here you get a message that says “fukk off you joking?!!!!” 😂❤
Were not the English govt' on the verge of leaving the country? Perhaps the fear of the Scottish could have moved them out - a bit like Singapore in 1942 when the Japanese force was half the size of the British defenders?
I read somewhere years ago that George and his Hanoverian court were in the process of packing their bags in order to flee. It almost comes down to which bunch of "foreigners" do you like least. But if they'd reached London and taken the Crown, would it have lasted? And if so (or even if not), how would that have affected history? And if had then gone wrong, would we be talking or singing about bonny boats speeding over the seas to the Isle-of-Wight? Personally, I think Prince Charlie was too young and inexperienced in everything. That was always going to be against him even if he had succeeded. But there is always the what if...
The prince wanted to keep going. The clan chiefs voted against it. At the time there were only 1000 to 2000 militia on Finchley green. That's all that was left between the Jacobites an London. Cumberland was stuck at South Hampton an wouldn't make it in time. I see Murray Pittock is on the video. That's who I got my info from. The prince could have won. The chiefs voted against him. Just like at Moidart. An just like before they crossed the border. The chiefs were who held the Jacobites back, not Charles. 🦄⚔️🏴⚔️🦄
Bruce, I noticed that in many of the videos that you do similar to this, your guests are enjoying some brew or other relaxing drinks while you favor nonalcoholic beverages. Is this a pattern? And, oh has Pepsi started paying you advertising yet? If not, they could at least join you in Patreon.
What seems to be missed in this discussion is the populace were not with the Jacobite's, so no matter where they got to they would have never been accepted as rulers. They had not been invited to take the crown in the first place, so why would anyone accept them by force? A standing army to keep the peace maybe, but for how long? There were plenty more protestant options in northern Europe to choose from.
This war started as a family feud between Athol brothers over their Estate inheritance. It was decided by logistics. Jacobites advanced North and West along the shores of Scotland chasing the Royalists, who were losing one battle after another and kept on retreating. However, they were supplied by the Royal Navy via the ports all along the way. Jacobites arrived at Culloden after a long night march in the rain, slept in the field, did not rest and recover in town. In the morning they charged headlong up the hill across the rough bog, contrary to their normal tactics. They were blown away en masse by the Royalist musket fire.
@@ianmacpheat9064 Apparently clan chieftain Murray did not agree with the choice of the battlefield. Prince Charles was authoritarian, and god-like, and ordered the charge into the grapeshot fire. He did not have adequate counter-battery fire.
Correct. Rout is not my statement. Someone else is using my name and image. Cumberland was retreating into the hinterlands, all the way being supplied by the Royal Navy along the coast. Like it was done at Acra during the crusades. Green young Prince Charles ordered a headlong charge up the hill across the bog at Culloden, into the cannon grapeshot and muskets volley fire, without adequate counter-battery fire, against the advice of Chieftain Murray. It was Cumberland's birthday the day before. His troops were well-fed and rested. Jacobites were worn out by the overnight march in the rain, and starving. People need to walk the battlefield, in order to understand the topography. Both Murray and Charles had survived the battle. Murray was willing to fight on, but Charles ran away, like James II at the Battle of the Boyne previously.
Right . Bit of background which you may cover here you may not. The south coast smuggling gangs, notably the Hawkhurst and Chichester gangs, were highly organised armed gangs with massive Ties to the French jacobins , which were the jacobite,s main funding . Ignore for a second the French using the jacobite rebellion to distract England from the fight in the then Spanish Netherlands, you had an armed and organised outwardly jacobite supporting force in the southeast of England who ...enjoyed their wealth and power over tge area and ignored the rebellion . That has been suggested as a contribution to the turning round at derby .
London bands would have turned out , Essex and East Anglian Puritans and the South, the Catholics would have been annihilated, Scots armies had made themselves unpopular in the 17th century so were highly unlikely to find any resources except by plunder making them more unpopular.
My understanding is that a major cause of Charles' defeat was the failure of the French to land a large field army on British soil. If Charles had won and the UK and France became allies, the history of the world would have been turned inside out.
Honestly, I'm not really a fan of counterfactual history. The insights of the historians into the decision making and the personalities and background that influenced those decisions are always welcome. The problem is that questions about what *might* have happened if the decisions had been different just lead us into a fantasy world where almost any outcome is possible, depending on the assumptions you want to make.
Well yes, that's how it goes. Had they not turned back anything could have happened. The hanoverian govt may have fled. But when we turn our phone off or close the book, we are still faced with the reality. So truly heartbreaking. So close. Idk, maybe I'm just a romantic at heart. To think they turned around with only 2000 militia between them an London. Cumberland stuck at South Hampton. He wouldn't have beat them to London but I'm sure it wouldn't have been pretty once he got there, but who knows. Maybe they could have irrevocably changed world history. Maybe with this, the ties with France are more positive, the French wars don't happen, the American revolution an French revolution don't happen. It's interesting to think about. But again, we can't change reality.
@@Sonny-m1f Or maybe in the next town they print and post notices showing the English opinion of the Scots? Could they also hide food and supplies, knowing that the Jacobite army is approaching? Perhaps the Jacobite army starts to realise how much they're not wanted, and morale starts to fall. Perhaps those militia start attacking the Jacobite foraging parties, forcing the army to slow its advance to deal with the problem? If the Jacobite army took a different route in this alternative history, could disease be a factor? A cholera outbreak in a small town might barely make the historic record in the 18th century. Unless a large army turns up and starts spreading it. Like I said, it's all fantasy. We simply can never know what *might* have happened in some alternate version of the past. Just as no battle plan ever survives contact with the enemy, no counterfactual history ever survives contact with reality.
The Scotland of the time, like Britain, was overwhelmingly Protestant. The not so Bonnie Prince widnae have had a chance to rule. At Culloden, the Duke of Cumberland’s army was full of proud Scots.
@@ScotlandHistoryTours ye know EXACTLY what my point was. Jacobitism was the creed advocating the restoration of the house of Stuart, a staunchly Catholic house. Yer response was dishonest.
@@rossg9361 Tsk tsk Ross. Let's not start throwing around unjustified slights on character. It seems like this is an emotional trigger. If I know exactly what your point was, then it was that it was wrong... or let's be fair and say it missed the point. You said that Britain was overwhelmingly Protestant. Well so were the Jacobites. You say that Cumberland's army was full of proud Scots. Let's let the 'full of' exaggeration slip, but so was the Jacobite army. I'm not emotionally involved, I'm just stating facts. I don't think we need to decend into personal insults
As a musician. And comedian.the biggest mistake charlie made was derby .as a family man. My ancestry ,is sir john drummond of kelty castle.perth he fought along with bonnie prince charlie,.he should have stayed in Scotland and not invaded England
If that Charlie had won, the Jacobites in history books would all now be English, and the King Charles would find he needed to supress those independent and armed Highlanders and so the clans may even had to look to Germany for help and got a German king. And probably the chartists might have been able to create a republic because of the drunken jacobite Royalty would have few friends. And maybe a catholic Ireland may have got its independence for its King Charles Godefroi Sophie Jules Marie de Rohan.
It would have meant a Stewart king who would have probably been deposed like his Grandfather and Great Grandfather because England and Scotland at the time were strictly anti Catholic. He was also Italian so that wouldn't have helped although there was a German on the throne at the time
You're dead right. Turning back like that sucked all the momentum out of the cause, which would be a hard thing to build up again. And they might have done all right if they'd got to London. A big swathe of the city's population would happily have welcomed them - not from Jacobite sympathies, but very open anti-Hannoverian ones. While the rich and powerful were panicking and leaving the city in droves (or maybe in carriages), a lot of the poor and dispossessed got busy with plenty of cheerful rioting and breaking into rich peoples' houses. I'll leave you to decide if the motivation was political statement or theft and looting, but I'd guess Londoners were pretty good at both back then
Do you honestly think that Charlie would have broke up the union of the crowns no chance he like all of them would want to be king of all he surveyed power is everything
@@ScotlandHistoryTours sorry l think most people today think that he was just looking to regain the Scottish crown to save them from the English sorry for the confusion 👍
The Jacobites should have made better military decisions (Bonnie Prince Charlie made some mistakes) and pressed on forwards to take London. Bonnie Prince Charlie should never have secretly become an Anglican temporarily for the sake of the Egnlish crown, if that is indeed true.
So an Italian bloke called Charles Stewart would have been king instead of a German bloke called George? Why do we all still fall out over this rubbish?
@@ScotlandHistoryTours Obviously the cucks need to be educated. A bastard shall not enter into the congregation of the LORD; even to his tenth generation shall he not enter into the congregation of the LORD.
Support the channel with Patreon www.patreon.com/scotlandhistorytours
if the Jacobites didn't leave Scotland th-cam.com/video/vgIfCxlHMlQ/w-d-xo.html
Tour Scotland with Bruce www.scotlandhistorytours.co.uk/tours/info/group
Im just enjoying adults having a civil discussion...bringing the facts and able to correct one another in a respectful way. Love that tartan looking rug!
I live in Derby, a couple of minutes walk from Charlie's statue, always give him a nod when I walk past. 😄
Me too mate, except it’s where I let my 3 dogs take a massive morning jobby 💩
Big man don’t bother with no poop bags.
😉✅
Brilliant as always Bruce.
Thanks
@@ScotlandHistoryTours Mind if we call you Bruce to keep it simple? /Monty Python's Flying Circus (also almost known as "Gwen Dibley's Flying Circus).
My brother visited relatives in Scotland in 1995, the 250 th anniversary of the 45 Uprising.
He then went south to London to visit his cousin.
He said that as he was passing through the north of England, he found them celebrating in support of the Jacobites!!!
Cheers from Seaforth Ont.Canada Bruce,we r moving tae Scotland in the spring to explore the history and drink the whisky...ohh yeah, n find somewhere to work.
What make u leave Canada?
Best of good wishes.
Welcome!
Another great conversation Bruce!
Glad you enjoyed it
I am Derby, a spit away from Swarkestone Bridge. My children and grandchildren speak awfy strange too😂
It's not unknown for me to go to the Crewe and Harpur with one for an hour of an evening with one son. I'll buy you a drink if our paths cross there.
Love these discussions almost as much as your tours ❤
I'm glad!
Thanks!
Ane once again I thank you
Wonderful discussion! Incredibly informative and interesting. You should have them on again. The video was like watching a discussion between friends. I can't wait for the next video.
4am..how did you know I needed this? Thanks.
10.40 here, just having brunch.
Thank you so much.
You're welcome!
Good afternoon Bruce, I'm late to watching today because I spent my day at the Highland games in "Scotland county" North Carolina. Now I'm gonna top it off with some SHT... What a great day!!! 💙🏴🇺🇲
Right Bruce! We Derbyshire folk are coming up to Perth to sort you out!!! Get ready! Actually, we live in north Derbyshire and can understand anyone giving up when they get to Derby! Actually, having said that, the Jacobite/Stuart room in the Derby Museum and Gallery is worth a ten minute visit. My understanding of this point in British/Scottish/English/Irish/French/European history has been that the decision to turn back was made on simply incorrect information and sneaky 😊misinformation and if they had pressed on they had a good chance of victory? Am I wrong then?
If you want some ideas for more stories about Jacobites. Interestingly quite a number of pirates in the latter end of the Golden Age of Piracy were Jacobites such as Charles Vane and (possibly) Blackbeard. Although this is more about the jacobite movement rather than Scotland as most of the pirates weren't Scottish, just pro the Catholic house of Stewart.
An anti Hanoverian. They hated the British govt.
Not all Jacobites were Scottish.
@@ffotograffydd Yes, true. Irish Picquets an Englishmen. They'd hoped more Englishmen would join the army on their way thru an around 1000 did.
@@Sonny-m1f By that point most of the prominent English Jacobites were in exile, they’d already lost their land and titles.
@@ffotograffydd your higher ranking English Jacobites, tho not all. There were still many in Carlisle.
But that's not what I'm referencing. I'm talking about your average Englishmen Jacobites joined the princes army after he crossed the border.
Don't forget tho, there were still English Jacobites in London as late as 1750. When Charles snuck into London an converted to the church of England, the church he did it in, The church of St Mary Le-Strand, had much Jacobite activity still.
Bruce, I really enjoy the "What If" videos you put together. Back when I was really involved with an American Scottish Society, this is a subject we'd often sit around and discuss over a dram or three, whenever two or more of us gathered.
Of course, most of us were amateur historians, not titled authors and academics who devoted and studied the topics their whole careers.
I've always held to the view, that Charlie screwed up invading England. He would have been far better off consolidating his family's hold on Scotland, than invading England.
When only half the population supports you, you put your cause at serious risk of failure.
Wahey it’s the brucey fumey show -quality as ever nicely done coyp
I only know about the jacobites because of Diana Gabaldon's Outlander series, nice to hear a little more
Apparently Charlie's War Council were really undecided as to what to do. A major tipping point was this guy turned, passed himself as pro-Jacobite but was in fact a Hanoverian spy & told them that London was very heavily defended. This info made Charlie & Co's mind to withdraw.
I remember Bruce saying Derbyshire was "Bonnie" we we drove over to Castleton two years ago!
True
I love the insights these experts give us novices. We'll said.
Aye Bruce. As a New Zealander, I am familiar with those Derby moments. Day 4, second innings, 300 in arrears, eight down on a crumbling Lords wicket...do we try to negotiate?
Cheers, mate, you are a legend.
A'reyt Bruce. I reckon the Scots heard northern English saying they would not go further south than Derby if they were them.
thanks for the education!
Murray Pittock is the man!
Cheers from Oil City, Pennsylvania! My family the McKean's hail from Ardnamurchan and Islay and other near islands of the Hebrides
Love the what if videos. God bless you and your family.
thats interesting. I like them less than the regualr histories.
Montgomery said it’s 90% logistics. If their supply lines weren’t open for food and supplies they wouldn’t have been able to get much further.
At swarkestone bridge they turn back trembling at the risk of facing the swadlincote horse and foot
Or having a first date in the Crewe and Harper
Strong of arm and weak of head
Very interesting.
The gentlemen touched upon a very important point on the Jacobite military intelligence and lack of communications with the French Court. I think more important was the more advanced Hanoverian military intelligence network and communications on French movements and the successful Hanoverian use of agents and spies within the Jacobite camp to further thicken the fog of war in this regard.
Many historians look at the American Revolutionary War as a good first example of military intelligence at work in the modern era but this Jacobite campaign was actually won and lost on the successful use and failure to use military intelligence as a crucial facet of warfare strategy and can be cited as a blueprint for subsequent campaigns conducted by George Washington 30 years later.
As a former Jacobite reenactor, I always felt he made a mistake turning back.
Since school, I have argued that it was a mistake to turn back. For me I'd made no sense whatsoever and the Culloden and the infamous night march, proves, for me, without a doubt they had te wrong General.
@@Sheltie01the night march may have worked as well. They say Lord George Murray turned back premature. Just as the princes party got within ear shot of Cumberland camp celebrating Cumberland b day the night before. Murray Pittock is a great source on all of this.
@@Sonny-m1f true. I think Murray was overly cautious. Whilst it can be good for some, I think in these cases it wasn't.
I recall there was a chance to end the American rebellion after York Town. The rebels hiding in a valley. The General (can't remember his name offhand) decided not to press them as he was worried about his own casualties.
But yes totally agree with you. It had to be tried, but Murray was the problem.
@@Sheltie01I have to put some blame on the other clan chiefs as well. They didn't believe in themselves. They were weary at Moidart. Alot abandoned the army before crossing the border. An at derby, they voted against continuing. Charles wanted to press on, an they'd have made London if they had. Unless the 1000/2000 militia on Finchley green put up some miraculous fight. Doubtful. As the black watch had been sent down south for mutining a few years or months previously. I'm not saying the Jacobites would have taken London. But they'd have made definitive world history. The American revolution an all those wars with France may not have happened had Charles succeeded. What world we would live in today. I am truly grateful I found Murray Pittocks work as well as the Lyon in mourning.
Ken like! He should have kept pumping his sister and marched into London, so he could pump his other sister xx
Funny that you should ask , I've often wondered the same thing myself
love channel sunday morning . my go to channel , i have always wondered why he turned back ,not watched this yet but when younger was thinking they should a kept gone
Went to college in Derby. He's right about them talking funny. "Alright my duck". Top people though and I thought the city was great too. All very walkable. Which meant I could put the bus fare towards something more useful.
Beer.
@@RichWoods23 👍
As an aside you should cover the ulster plantation by “ the Bruce” et al live your show fella
Rab Bruce? Try Rab C Nesbit 😂❤ king a Govan maybe! x
My ancestor was a Jacobite under the Duke of Perth. Captured at Culloden. Transported. This story is special to me. Mixed feelings b/c I wouldn't be here if they didn't turn back 😅
My ancestors pumped your ancestors ❤🇬🇧😉
Just playing man lol, maybe! 💪
A good video discussion.
I reckon that it was an all or nothing enterprise.
Well if they had hit the Peak District, they would have felt ok - it is like a mini Scotland.
You should be on TV☘️
I don't know what's in the history curriculum at schools these days, but I do wish we'd covered more British history when I was at secondary school, decades ago. To be honest, learning about American history, Russian history, the French Revolution and so on, whilst neglecting vast swathes of our own past, seems shameful.
OK, so global history shouldn't be ignored, but neither should our own, especially as it ties in with so many others. Perhaps Bonnie Prince Charlie and his story was covered in the O'level Tudors and Stuarts curriculum when I was at school, but I was forced to take 'Modern World' history instead and that, I absolutely loathed. I know almost nothing about Bonnie Prince Charlie, other than that he was nick-named the Young Pretender, and an old song about him taking a boat to Skye. To hear he actually invaded England, with intentions of taking the English throne, only to chicken out at Derby and turn back, is a revelation, something that, until today ( 05.10.2024) I hadn't even heard the slightest rumour of! No, if the bias is an English thing, then it needs to change, and soon, because ignoring so many aspects of British history in favour of that of other nations is just wrong!
Fear not, I am your American counterpart in that. An being of British stock I am deeply invested into British history. Brom Britons an Picts up to the Victorian area. After my ppl left I seem to lose interest. Not a fan of the "glorious revolution" nor the Hanoverian regimes. But I am enthralled with all the rest.. especially the folk music. My ppl come from Hertfordshire, Galloway an Lochaber. An many more places in the isles I'm sure.
You should check out everything TH-cam has of Murray Pittock. Truly bittersweet. Just TH-cam Murray Pittock Jacobite an hit lectures come up an they are jam packed. An also check out the "Lyon in mourning". TH-cam has lectures on it as well. The modern narrative on Charles an the 45 is post conflict Hanoverian propaganda. Ppl need to understand this as a civil war. An the victors write the history books. Thankfully reverend Forbes saw this happening an compiled the volumes of the Lyon in mourning. Hope all this helps to educate us on the Jacobite side of the story. Often dismissed.
Fyi, the term "pretender" at this time meant 'claimant' and had not the present insulting meaning.
You heard sack all about it, mostly due to the same communists Jacobean Fanny’s becoming very famous a couple year later.
🇫🇷 guilotines n awww that 🤭 bit of an extreme way to cut yer big toe nails I reckon lmao xx
@@janetmackinnon3411in your opinion 😉🇬🇧
Another great video, surprised at no mention of John Dudley and his over estimation of English forces thou, I'm led to believe that made a difference!!
British forces.
@@ffotograffydd I'll stick with English.
@@ppavery Well if you’re insisting on being wrong… 😂
@@ffotograffydd well let's look at the facts, Charles Edward Stewart was the son of the rightful king of Britain, George the second was the descendant of the upsure William of orange, so if any troops were British it was the ones with Charles.
@@ppavery The Act of Settlement, passed by a lawfully assembled Parliament, meant that Charles Edward Stuart was no longer the rightful heir -- that is the pertinent fact here, and he resorted to violence, not legal argument, in his attempt to gain the throne. George II was a descendant of Charles I, not of William III.
Personally I reckon the scottish jacobites just went hame when they realised England just doesnae have the same feeling aboot it like hame does. Especially the Highlands.
😂😂😂😂😂
Exactly mate. That’s why he was marching towards France fae Scotland.
Raging eh? 😉
What does your sweatshirt say in English? If I go to your website could I order one and get it mailed to the states?
Here you go scotland-history-tours.creator-spring.com/listing/larger-gaelic-language-hoodie?product=377
My Gaelic’s a wee bit rusty, Jen! Though it means “I’m hoping the weathers nice” or something along those lines.
Like only in Scotland can it be -2*c, raining and at the same time you’re getting a sun tan in the full sun. Only in Scotland can it rain with nae clouds in the sky in a warm summers day.
If you turn on the weather channel here you get a message that says “fukk off you joking?!!!!” 😂❤
Were not the English govt' on the verge of leaving the country? Perhaps the fear of the Scottish could have moved them out - a bit like Singapore in 1942 when the Japanese force was half the size of the British defenders?
British Government.
"Bonnie" Prince Charlie had better watched Game of Thrones. You play the game, you go all in or you lose.
England must have seemed a foreign land. It would only have got worse as they went South. It still does! Imagine the HEAT!
They didn't have box sets then 😂 am I anal enough ? 😂😂😂
Wasn't the real problem that Charlie and his commander George Murray COULDN'T STAND EACH OTHER!
Doubt it! Cause they were lovers 🏳️🌈
I do enjoy historians talking on events that may have been. But what is it with Bruce and historians always meeting in Hotels? Hmmm!
I read somewhere years ago that George and his Hanoverian court were in the process of packing their bags in order to flee. It almost comes down to which bunch of "foreigners" do you like least. But if they'd reached London and taken the Crown, would it have lasted? And if so (or even if not), how would that have affected history? And if had then gone wrong, would we be talking or singing about bonny boats speeding over the seas to the Isle-of-Wight?
Personally, I think Prince Charlie was too young and inexperienced in everything. That was always going to be against him even if he had succeeded. But there is always the what if...
Charles was a prince, not a soldier.
He would have been reclaiming the crown from the Germans not taking it.
The prince wanted to keep going. The clan chiefs voted against it.
At the time there were only 1000 to 2000 militia on Finchley green. That's all that was left between the Jacobites an London. Cumberland was stuck at South Hampton an wouldn't make it in time.
I see Murray Pittock is on the video. That's who I got my info from.
The prince could have won. The chiefs voted against him. Just like at Moidart. An just like before they crossed the border. The chiefs were who held the Jacobites back, not Charles.
🦄⚔️🏴⚔️🦄
Presumably because the chiefs had the most to lose, facing at best exile and loss of their lands if they failed to take and to hold London.
Charlie the illegal immigrant, arriving on a boat and committing crimes.
His story is certainly familiar.
Intit!? 😉🇬🇧
PS How did you get these historians to discuss this with you? By their company shall ye know them
Y'ever been to Derby? I'd turn back too tbh
I should have watched more than 3 mins of the video before making this comment 😂
🤣True
Bruce, I noticed that in many of the videos that you do similar to this, your guests are enjoying some brew or other relaxing drinks while you favor nonalcoholic beverages. Is this a pattern? And, oh has Pepsi started paying you advertising yet? If not, they could at least join you in Patreon.
😂 On this occasion I was driving, but others were taking the train. Trust me, I'm familiar with alcoholic beverages
Is it Pepsi? I was trying to figure it out. Pepsi at lease are not implicated in Naziism as Coke and Fanta are.
Bruce doesn’t drink and drive.
Brucey smokes and flys ✅💨😔🤭😅😂😂😂😂❤️
What seems to be missed in this discussion is the populace were not with the Jacobite's, so no matter where they got to they would have never been accepted as rulers.
They had not been invited to take the crown in the first place, so why would anyone accept them by force?
A standing army to keep the peace maybe, but for how long? There were plenty more protestant options in northern Europe to choose from.
5 thousand , and the rest 😂
Were the Jacobite odds of success any less likely than the Normans in 1066? At least Charlie had some support from the land he was invading.
But Charles wasn't a commander or leader at the same level of William
Or was it foot and mouth?
Ah HEV me lad. 😉👍
This war started as a family feud between Athol brothers over their Estate inheritance. It was decided by logistics. Jacobites advanced North and West along the shores of Scotland chasing the Royalists, who were losing one battle after another and kept on retreating. However, they were supplied by the Royal Navy via the ports all along the way. Jacobites arrived at Culloden after a long night march in the rain, slept in the field, did not rest and recover in town. In the morning they charged headlong up the hill across the rough bog, contrary to their normal tactics. They were blown away en masse by the Royalist musket fire.
What???
@@ianmacpheat9064 Apparently clan chieftain Murray did not agree with the choice of the battlefield. Prince Charles was authoritarian, and god-like, and ordered the charge into the grapeshot fire. He did not have adequate counter-battery fire.
@@ianmacpheat9064 I did walk the campaign rout in Scotland.
@@johnadan6069 I don’t think even the most fervent Hanoverian would ever describe the Jacobite Army’s retreat into the Highlands as a “Rout.” 😉
Correct. Rout is not my statement. Someone else is using my name and image. Cumberland was retreating into the hinterlands, all the way being supplied by the Royal Navy along the coast. Like it was done at Acra during the crusades. Green young Prince Charles ordered a headlong charge up the hill across the bog at Culloden, into the cannon grapeshot and muskets volley fire, without adequate counter-battery fire, against the advice of Chieftain Murray. It was Cumberland's birthday the day before. His troops were well-fed and rested. Jacobites were worn out by the overnight march in the rain, and starving. People need to walk the battlefield, in order to understand the topography. Both Murray and Charles had survived the battle. Murray was willing to fight on, but Charles ran away, like James II at the Battle of the Boyne previously.
It wasn't the Scottish army though, it was a mostly Highland army with Irish, French and English supporters. But still not many men.
Right . Bit of background which you may cover here you may not.
The south coast smuggling gangs, notably the Hawkhurst and Chichester gangs, were highly organised armed gangs with massive Ties to the French jacobins , which were the jacobite,s main funding . Ignore for a second the French using the jacobite rebellion to distract England from the fight in the then Spanish Netherlands, you had an armed and organised outwardly jacobite supporting force in the southeast of England who ...enjoyed their wealth and power over tge area and ignored the rebellion . That has been suggested as a contribution to the turning round at derby .
And if the Stuart dynasty returned would we have had our own version of the French revolution a few decades later?
London bands would have turned out , Essex and East Anglian Puritans and the South, the Catholics would have been annihilated, Scots armies had made themselves unpopular in the 17th century so were highly unlikely to find any resources except by plunder making them more unpopular.
My understanding is that a major cause of Charles' defeat was the failure of the French to land a large field army on British soil.
If Charles had won and the UK and France became allies, the history of the world would have been turned inside out.
Indeed
Honestly, I'm not really a fan of counterfactual history. The insights of the historians into the decision making and the personalities and background that influenced those decisions are always welcome. The problem is that questions about what *might* have happened if the decisions had been different just lead us into a fantasy world where almost any outcome is possible, depending on the assumptions you want to make.
Well yes, that's how it goes. Had they not turned back anything could have happened. The hanoverian govt may have fled. But when we turn our phone off or close the book, we are still faced with the reality. So truly heartbreaking. So close. Idk, maybe I'm just a romantic at heart. To think they turned around with only 2000 militia between them an London. Cumberland stuck at South Hampton. He wouldn't have beat them to London but I'm sure it wouldn't have been pretty once he got there, but who knows. Maybe they could have irrevocably changed world history. Maybe with this, the ties with France are more positive, the French wars don't happen, the American revolution an French revolution don't happen. It's interesting to think about. But again, we can't change reality.
@@Sonny-m1f Or maybe in the next town they print and post notices showing the English opinion of the Scots? Could they also hide food and supplies, knowing that the Jacobite army is approaching? Perhaps the Jacobite army starts to realise how much they're not wanted, and morale starts to fall. Perhaps those militia start attacking the Jacobite foraging parties, forcing the army to slow its advance to deal with the problem? If the Jacobite army took a different route in this alternative history, could disease be a factor? A cholera outbreak in a small town might barely make the historic record in the 18th century. Unless a large army turns up and starts spreading it. Like I said, it's all fantasy. We simply can never know what *might* have happened in some alternate version of the past. Just as no battle plan ever survives contact with the enemy, no counterfactual history ever survives contact with reality.
Supply lines?
Supplied by the RN
The Scotland of the time, like Britain, was overwhelmingly Protestant. The not so Bonnie Prince widnae have had a chance to rule. At Culloden, the Duke of Cumberland’s army was full of proud Scots.
Most Jacobites were Protestant. I'm pretty sure they were proud Scots as well, so I'm not entirely sure of your point, but thanks for playing
@@ScotlandHistoryTours ye know EXACTLY what my point was. Jacobitism was the creed advocating the restoration of the house of Stuart, a staunchly Catholic house. Yer response was dishonest.
@@rossg9361 Tsk tsk Ross. Let's not start throwing around unjustified slights on character. It seems like this is an emotional trigger. If I know exactly what your point was, then it was that it was wrong... or let's be fair and say it missed the point. You said that Britain was overwhelmingly Protestant. Well so were the Jacobites. You say that Cumberland's army was full of proud Scots. Let's let the 'full of' exaggeration slip, but so was the Jacobite army. I'm not emotionally involved, I'm just stating facts. I don't think we need to decend into personal insults
@@ScotlandHistoryTours well, I’m a wee big sorry. Perhaps my point was too pointed. I support Celtic, I imagine ye know what that means. 😀🏴
As a musician. And comedian.the biggest mistake charlie made was derby .as a family man. My ancestry ,is sir john drummond of kelty castle.perth he fought along with bonnie prince charlie,.he should have stayed in Scotland and not invaded England
He did and thats history all gone into the past now Brucie
Aye, I don't know if you noticed, but that's what this channel is abotu😁
We would be richer than Norway.
If that Charlie had won, the Jacobites in history books would all now be English, and the King Charles would find he needed to supress those independent and armed Highlanders and so the clans may even had to look to Germany for help and got a German king. And probably the chartists might have been able to create a republic because of the drunken jacobite Royalty would have few friends. And maybe a catholic Ireland may have got its independence for its King Charles Godefroi Sophie Jules Marie de Rohan.
Wouldn't a Jacobite victory have meant a return to the Killing Time?
It would have meant a Stewart king who would have probably been deposed like his Grandfather and Great Grandfather because England and Scotland at the time were strictly anti Catholic. He was also Italian so that wouldn't have helped although there was a German on the throne at the time
Half polish bonnie P
You're dead right. Turning back like that sucked all the momentum out of the cause, which would be a hard thing to build up again.
And they might have done all right if they'd got to London. A big swathe of the city's population would happily have welcomed them - not from Jacobite sympathies, but very open anti-Hannoverian ones. While the rich and powerful were panicking and leaving the city in droves (or maybe in carriages), a lot of the poor and dispossessed got busy with plenty of cheerful rioting and breaking into rich peoples' houses. I'll leave you to decide if the motivation was political statement or theft and looting, but I'd guess Londoners were pretty good at both back then
Brain the size of a planet? 🤣
Do you honestly think that Charlie would have broke up the union of the crowns no chance he like all of them would want to be king of all he surveyed power is everything
I'm not sure where the Union of the Crowns came in, but thanks for chipping in
@@ScotlandHistoryTours think it was the stuarts in 1605 that brought about the union of the crowns
@@RPMcMurphy-k9l 1603, it's just that I wasn't aware of any intention of giving up crowns, so I couldn't make sense of your comment. Keep on trucking
@@ScotlandHistoryTours sorry l think most people today think that he was just looking to regain the Scottish crown to save them from the English sorry for the confusion 👍
The Jacobites should have made better military decisions (Bonnie Prince Charlie made some mistakes) and pressed on forwards to take London.
Bonnie Prince Charlie should never have secretly become an Anglican temporarily for the sake of the Egnlish crown, if that is indeed true.
So an Italian bloke called Charles Stewart would have been king instead of a German bloke called George? Why do we all still fall out over this rubbish?
You aint a Scotsman
😂😂Thankfully my fellow Scots take a different view from a foreigner, like yourself, who has no knowledge or influence on the matter. Toodle pip😜😜
@@ScotlandHistoryTours
Obviously the cucks need to be educated.
A bastard shall not enter into the congregation of the LORD; even to his tenth generation shall he not enter into the congregation of the LORD.
@@seekandcrush have you got any actual friends?
@@tallshort1849
All my friends are fair and ruddy, none of my friends are mamzers or muddy.
@@seekandcrush racist morons like you don't tend to have many friends. Something to do with being angry and bitter.
Thanks!