The Battle of Culloden
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 26 มิ.ย. 2024
- The last battle to be fought on British soil would be a bloody affair, with men from all over Europe clashing on a cold and dreary day April 1746. Culloden is remembered as a hallmark in Scottish history with Bonnie Prince Charlie emerging as a tragic protagonist, forever romanticised in his doomed attempt to wrestle the throne from the Hanoverian dynasty. In this episode Peter explores the facts and myths behind the battle that would bring the Jacobite uprisings to an end.
Excellent historical analysis: even-handed, a wide-range of sources, concise, and told with enthusiasm. Well done, and thanks.
it's wonderful what you are doing here and sharing with us!! thank you so much!
I thoroughly enjoyed that, thank you.
Brilliant, thank you.
Thanks for the great historic video!
Good summary of events
A thumbs up.from a fellow historian.👍👍
Thank-you so much I found this so interesting and I learnt so much in 25 wonderful minutes
Brilliant thank you :)
Great video!
Very good thank you
Thank you. This helped with my Battle Brief for JROTC.
Your website didn't work.
Thanking you
Such small numbers involved but with a huge impact on history.
During this period it was difficult to assemble a large army, even more so in the extensive British Empire.
Great stuff
I am so glad I listened to your podcast. I am reading the "Outlander" books. Although fiction, the author uses some of the facts from history. Thanks so much!
Very few facts. Her depiction of Charles Edward Stuart, the clan MacKenzie and Highland culture in general is totally inaccurate. Again, CES did not choose the field at Culloden - she gets that wrong too.
Heartline Films those books and that show HAS brought attention to it and to Scotland as a whole in positive ways. The Highland culture is alive through Jamie Fraser. Thousands are now delving into Scotland's history. That's not bad for a couple books and one beloved show.
Great video. Never heard of the battle of culloden until after I read the Outlander books.
th-cam.com/video/TW8bhB5oxQI/w-d-xo.html
Deciding to meet on unfavorable terrain against better advice... the story of so many battles.
Not saying it would have gone otherwise, but terrain is an awful handicap to overcome.
That's a myth - long disproved by important historians who are experts on the subject. Two alternative battle sites were considered by Murray which were bad choices for obvious reasons. Culloden was chosen by no one - it's where the exhausted Jacobite Army was when Cumberland showed up. Check Pittock's Culloden and Duffy's The '45 (he is the greatest living expert on the battles of the '45)
nice damn job man
nice work brah, can you link me the primary source quotes you used for this please?
70th like, good work!!!
I visited the battle site last week. Sad place.
Give us more the personal letters are so revealing thanking you
I would love to read the full letter of the Culloden volunteer...does anyone know the spelling of the name he mentions at 4:52?
Lost at Derby, Nobody is afraid of a rebellion that runs away. If they had just pressed on, the french may have got involved,Alas.
Give us the weather conditions at the time of the battle before during and after the battle
For a more accurate map, drawn soon after the actual battle see here - maps.nls.uk/view/74400862, and for the definitive and unbiased history of the battle and it's background, read Murray Pittock's excellent book - www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/0199664072/ref=ppx_yo_dt_b_asin_image_o05_s00?ie=UTF8&psc=1
Great video. My ggggggggg grandfather died in this battle. He fought for the McLaren Clan from the highlands. For Prince Charles.
My clan was also McLaren, inbox me if you want to talk.
@@saritastaten fuck you
Thanks for a great video. So glad you got the cause right - so many think this was Scots-v-English instead of a battle for succession of the British crown, based on religious differences.
Jolly glad Cumberland won - otherwise the UK might have ended up in another civil war - over religion!
Thank God SOMEBODY gets it!
So just a few things with this. My last name is Burns and I’m apart of Clan Burns. Now Clan Burns is apart of Clan Campbell. Last part is Robbie burns poet of Scotland is my 7th great grandfather.
Are you American?
@@callum1131 haha!
Makes a refreshing change from them being related to a King.
Cannister shot could only be used in the final stages of the charge.
Just one thing. There was a policy of rapine employed. Rapine is the siezing of property by force not what you seem to think it means. Now, i wouldnt suggest for a minute that there were no incidents but there certainly was no policy of r*pe upon Scottish women.
Best new Jacobite book King over the water, by Desmomd Seaward the best book so far accurate xxxxxxxxxxx
Love the simple map. A good simple map is essential for commanders to plan the battle. I can see a way out for Bonnie Prince Charlie. It involves marching 3/4 of his army behind the walls running perpendicularly between both fronts, to go right flanking. Bonnie Prince Charlie would then attack full on at the government left, rolling up the government left flank. Most of the artillery would be poorly positioned to engage the Jacobites, who who continue with their relentless attack on the government left. One quarter of the Jacobite main force would remain in their original positions, eye-balling the government troops, except for one important detail. Remaining Jacobites would form up behind a shallow hill as protection from enemy cannon. These men would not be part of the attacking force but act as a feint, forming a reserve. Had Bonnie Prince Charlie adopted these tactics, the course of history could easily have been very different. Half of the cavalry would be deployed in a forward position to arrive on the government left at the same time as the attacking infantry.
🤣🤣🤣🤣
@@JayKay7737 Jay -- A sad day for the Jacobites, for their families and for Scotland.
Hmm...and what would the Hanoverians have been doing which 3/4 of the Jacobites went on this flanking march? Sleeping?
@@paulkirk7120 Paul -- I'm attempting to rescue some advantage from a battle suited to horse and cannon, both of which were sadly lacking in the Jacobite forces. A frontal attack involved being shredded by artillery before even making contact with Cumberland'd forces. My preference would be to roll the SW flank of Cumberland's position by a concentrated attack in echelons before Cumberland can reorganise. A superior option would be to retire to a more defendable position to give time for food, ammunition and powder to be supplied. The Jacobites might actually have been better off retiring to Inverness and holding that city, where they could get some respite from fatigue, lack of food, and inclement weather. What do you think Paul?
@LaHayeSaint honestly? I think they were on a hiding to nothing from the start. As soon as they faced slightly superior numbers of troops that had some experience they discovered that they had no Plan B. What you propose is grand in theory but the walking anachronism that was the Highland element of the army only had one tactic. The Lowland and Foreign units might have been able to carry out your flanking manoeuvre but the Campbell Militia would have alerted the Hanoverians in plenty of time to redeploy Battalions from the reserve rank. In the mean time the Highlanders would not have just stayed in place getting pounded by cannon balls. The MacDonalds would still have been in a huff on the left. The other Clans would have charged and the ground would have slowed them down and they'd have been chewed up. The Lowlanders and Foreigners would already have been committed on your flanking manoeuvre. The rout would have been worse and Charlie might well have been captured without the stand of the Ecossais and Piquets.
just one diagram? That is a bit lacklustre
Brilliant I still think Prince Charles was a very brave man and a hero /
Tha mi cho brònach 😢 na madaidhean-allaidh bochd
Charnel House...for the Scottish.
Did the declaration of America’s independence come over the despair of the Jacobite rebellion which intended to crown Bonnie Prince Charlie as the succeeding Stewart as king over Great Britain?
Is Jacobinism related to the Scottish Jacobites?
Aye
Gilgal Biblewheel interesting question...so long ago, i dont think we will ever know it all fromthat time. Good supposition, does fit in with the other reasons and causes.
No. American founding fathers were staunchly protestant. They wouldn't have been violently opposed to a catholic King. The American Revolution is seen by many historians as a continuation of the English Civil wars/Revolution, but the Jacobite uprising specifically is not likely to have any direct influence.
A very weird fact about Culloden. There were more Presbyterins than Catholics at the Battle
I was rather surprised to find that there was an actual Irish contingent fighting with the government troops. Probably Protestants.
A fine overview but ...
... if you are going to do a history podcast please try and get the facts correct. James II/Vii was deposed by the English >>Parliament
Not so much Hanoverian troops, more like “British Army” troops....not actually many German forces, good vid though. I grew up a few miles from the battlefield, must visit soon.
They are called Hanoverian troops because they represented the Hanoverian King and dynasty, not because they were from Hanover.
There was a Hanoverian army …in Hanover . It was the British Army , Cumberland had a small bodyguard of German Hessians.
I also dont think that Charles had a Jacobite army as there were many reasons why British people joined the Rebellion , supporting a return of the Stuarts was one of them.
He and his followers not him.
Your map above is not accurate. What is you established expertise that you think you can make this commentary contradicting the most respected historians on the subject? Just because something's on TH-cam, don't take it as fact unless the poster had impressive credentials.
I’d question your figures on British Army losses ……that has been questioned by scholars, I’d say that is more likely British govt propaganda ……..even British Army officers allude to more losses ……
Again id question your statement on Dynastic and religious ….that is a tad over simplistic and to me would give the wrong impression, it a good deal more nuanced and complicated than that.
I’d also ask where you are sourcing your statement on Clan Donald ? They didn’t refuse to charge, the statement you make on the position in the order of battle is I’d suggest a myth (if you have direct source for that please present it), you make it sound like Clan Donald were on the verge of mutiny …..they were not ….. I would suggest that you may want to read the actual battle movements and from sources that are very knowledgeable on said. I am not being nasty but it sounded like a look at wiki and off you went. Also I would point out that Ruthven was not the last rally point (you didn’t say that directly) as Clan Donald and Lochiel did not disband until around 15th May and that was no where near Culloden.
You present well but imho still there lingers many not entirely accurate statements. That doesn’t help history.
18 september 2014, dead Jacobite soldiers where rolling in their graves.
M S yes I know there where Scottish in the British ranks.
M S yea you’re right that the Scotts probably gave up on independence long before the Jacobite Rising.
But many of those who fought for James II, would probably have liked independence.
@@jasip1000, Scots. Unless you are actually talking about a family called the Scotts.
If only we'd won 🏴 😔💔
Am I actually watching the same map showing the disposition and movement of the armies for close to 26 minutes? Couldn't there have been a little more effort invested in this "video"?
I’ll have to disagree with you at 12:40 the tactic drilled into Cumberlands men wasn’t ever proven to work. The Jacobites only ever broke through English lines in one spot, and the English were utterly destroyed in that area, despite having been trained in the new tactic. Nowhere else on the line did English soldiers even get to use the tactic so I don’t think it was all that helpful. Looks good on paper but not in practice. Love this video however thanks for posting
%
A lot of the Highlands probably only fought with the Jacobites because they wanted to get rid of the English and they were opposed to the idea of a United Kingdom.
Highlander's were on both sides. They were common men but their leaders were aristocrats, and they weren't Scottish patriots fighting for independence(that's only in Hollywood's version of history). No, getting a Stuart on the throne would see them getting English titles and land. That was their true patriotism - money and power.
Can you really say that the battle of Culloden was that last battle to be fought on brittish soil? It did take part in Scotland. Not in Britain, actually the Battle of Britain was the last battle fought on British soil. Yes the fighting was in the air but it was won on the ground.
Culloden was the last pitched battle in Britain.
Scotland is British.
Scotland is and was part of Britain and was part of the United Kingdom since 1707. It amazes me how ignorant some people are of basic historical facts and then how they think they are qualified to post rubbish on the internet. As for the Battle of Britain it wasn’t fought on British soil - hence the distinction, it was fought over the southern air space and English Channel.
This was a battle fought on common ground by two common enemies, not aircraft fought across the channel flying from bases all on the continent of Northern Europe? So yes, you can say it was the last battle fought on British soil, you’re talking semantics, when it comes to the BofB?
This is one of the dumbest comments I’ve ever seen on TH-cam.
It was definitely a Scotland vs. England battle. The conservatives Scots fought for Scotland, the liberal Scots fought for Britain. The Protestant influence was a bait used to campaign for uniting with England. The highlanders were a mix of different denominations, and would be similar to the confederate soldiers - they saw through the BS British propaganda. Bonnie Prince Charlie would have maintained Scotland's independence and maintained the clan system - this was also more in alignment with the values our forefathers fought for in the Declaration of Arbroath. The liberals were fooled back then, just as they are being fooled today to vote liberal - although, instead of the truth being "refined" into Presbyterian values (though sometimes unnecessarily bloody), it is being twisted into Talmudic "enlightenment-era" values (New Age Philosophy of Self-Divinity), which is to soon birth a system that is going to push Christianity into a corner (maybe the corner of Texas, as the "Bible Belt" was mentioned here - just saying). And once we are in that corner, will we fight and split, or bend over and succumb?
History always repeats itself.
TheoryMap DotCom it’s conservatives in Scotland who are against independence though
This was not Scotland vs England, it was a civil war between the House of Hanover and the House of Stuart.
The Government Army was full of loyalist Scots.
The confederate rebels were fortunate to not have received the same treatment as the Jacobite rebels.
A Reconstruction instead of a "Pacification."