BONNIE PRINCE CHARLIE AND THE VICTORY AT CULLODEN
By Ian HamiltonÂ
The last few years of the Stewart Dynasty were so disastrous for Scotland that they were known as ‘the killing times’. It was under the Stewarts, and particularly under Charles 11 that London domination began. It has continued ever since. Why then do we have this silly romanticism about BPC?
BPC was an Italian on the make. Every Italian immigrant since has given us more. Ice cream comes to mind. BPC brought only destruction. A few thousand Gaels, conscripted by their lairds on pain of eviction, attempted a coup which mercifully failed. The thought of a return to monarchical government from London is an absurdity. So also is the BPC cult. A few old Edinburgh ladies now rise for him in romantic rebellion, and fight for him in the safety of their little meetings. None takes them seriously. The ’45 was never a threat to the United Kingdom. What was sought by BPC was direct London authoritarian rule. The end of the Union was not his aim. Culloden was a Scottish victory.
The tragic history of the Gael does not begin with the victory at Culloden at which as many Gaels fought for common sense as fought for BPC. It begins with the conscription of Highlanders to fight in England’s wars. Indeed positive advantages for the Gaels followed Culloden. Gaelic society had never evolved beyond tribalism. Such a system of local government is open to abuse and abused it was. A system of hereditary judges is clearly not the best way of administering justice when it includes capital punishment. The abolition of the power of the lairds by The Hereditary Jurisdiction Act of 1747 was long overdue and Westminster is to be commended for its passing.
Had matters rested there the Highlander might have had a chance of changing his habits. His methods of agriculture had made no progress for a thousand years. That does not mean they would not have improved now that the evils of tribalism had been greatly reduced. Modern farming methods only found their way into Lowland Scotland well into the nineteenth century. A glance at the life of Robert Burns illustrates my point. It was not just that he was a rotten farmer. Of course he was a rotten farmer. No efficient farmer stops his plough to lament a daisy or talk to a mouse. It is clear that the very methods of Ayrshire farming were ready for improvement. These improvements would have come in the Highlands also but for one thing. That thing is usually and usefully blamed on sheep-farming. I suggest that the Napoleonic Wars were an even greater curse.
The English ruling class and their Scotch cousins were really frightened by Napoleon. They could see their power and wealth in danger. In the Highlands conscription was rigorously enforced. The reputation of the Highland Scot as a fighter was his own undoing. You sent your sons to fight or you were evicted. General Wolfe’s well known aphorism needs only passing reference here. ‘And no great mischief if they fall.’ The Scottish fighting man was as expendable then as he is today in Iraq. It was while he was away fighting that the Clearances began. Furthermore the defeat of Napoleon did for the Highlander completely. It confirmed the hegemony of the aristocracy. They could do what they liked and they did. A typical example is the Leveson-Gower House of the Dukes of Sutherland. Strathnaver is the example usually taken but it is only an example. It happened elsewhere. To use a common phrase it happened all over the place.
It is against this background that I have been asked to write a fifteen minute play to entertain members of the Clan MacIntyre Society who are shortly to visit the parts of the Highlands where I live. Taynuilt, the centre of their territory, has a direct association with the Napoleonic Wars, and particularly with Lord Nelson. I have long condemned the uncritical worship of English heroes by us Scots. One country’s hero is often its neighbour’s villain. So is it with Lord Nelson. The first memorial to him was put up in Taynuilt by incoming English foundrymen. In a letter to the Herald on the two-hundredth anniversary of his famous victory I said that I would celebrate Trafalgar Day by pissing on the memorial. It is the most memorable thing I have ever written. People still stop me in West Highland Streets and ask if they can join me.
Plays should speak for themselves. If they are good plays they speak for us all. Soon I‘ll publish the play here, beneath this prologue. It is either a good play or it is nothing.
May 29th, 2008 at 9:56 pm
Ian, I agree with much of what you say, but in the context of Scotland today, what is your point?
You do of course meant to say the Stuart dynasty. And when referring to the English ruling class and their Scotch cousins you meant Scottish cousins. Interesting that you would refer to the English as cousins of the Scots!
You say: “A few thousand Gaels, conscripted by their lairds on pain of eviction, attempted a coup which mercifully failed.â€
But those same lairds were enthusiastic supporters of Charles lll as I’m sure most of the conscripts were.
That the attempted coup “mercifully†failed is a point of view that can never be validated. We shall never know how Scotland would have turned out if Charles lll had prevailed, to suggest otherwise would be pure speculation.
It is hard to imagine it could be any worse than the sorry state Scotland finds itself in today.
In my view, since the usurper the Elector of Hanover ascended the throne of England; Scotland has been subjected to a sophisticated form of tribalism worse than anything the Gaels could have imposed. A tribalism based on privilege, corruption and hypocrisy.
You say: “The thought of a return to monarchical government from London is an absurdity. So also is the BPC cult.â€
The cult that rules Scotland today is something else. For centuries an English elite and their Scottish surrogates have dominated every aspect of Scottish life. They have systematically altered Scotland to a point of no return.
They have merged and integrated the institutions of power, the institutions of government, the economy and culture, with England, to the extent that a nation state of Scotland is no longer a viable option.
Don’t get me wrong. I am very much in favor of the notion of an independent nation state of Scotland. But I see it only as a good topic of conversation over a dram with friends or brooding alone about the injustice, and unfairness that the Scottish identity is disappearing.
You rightly cite the Dukes of Sutherland as an example of the hegemony of the aristocracy. The English aristocracy grafted on to the Scottish peerage is part and parcel of what I’m talking about.
I like your idea of pissing on Lord Nelson’s monument on Trafalgar Day.
On the other hand it shows how much Scots have been rendered impotent when they have to piss on English monuments to make a point!
May 30th, 2008 at 5:08 pm
Here’s a good example of the impotence of the Scots, the sham Scottish government and the politicians who populate it.
http://thescotsman.scotsman.com/latestnews/Holyrood-and-Westminster-at-war.4135513.jp
It is an example of how Scotland is railroaded into submission and humiliation by the surrogates of the ruling elite.
In this case we have the Scots Darling and Salmond doing it to each other.
The headline “Holyrood and Westminster at war over oil and taxes†is a joke.
Salmond can get on his feet at Holyrood till the cows come home; his protests are hot air and fury signifying nothing, because there is no real mechanism to take on the issues of oil and tax. The Holyrood debating society just doesn’t cut it.
The net effect is, the nationalists sound like a bunch of rabble-rousers rocking the boat of DEPENDENCE.
“ALISTAIR Darling yesterday warned the SNP’s plans for a local income tax (LIT) would be “a disaster” for Scotland’s vital financial services industry.
The Chancellor argued that the Nationalists’ tax plans would act as a deterrent for Scottish firms trying to attract high-flying business executives north of the Border.â€
Darling’s argument is tried and tested- it works.
The bloated Alex Salmond leading the charge for independence merely fuels the stereotypical image of Scotland as a lost cause.
The noise you hear is William Wallace spinning in his grave!
June 1st, 2008 at 12:05 am
That’s strange Ian.
I see a Scottish Government who know how to be politicians with a strong leader in Alex Salmond.
You appear to hang on the words of Alisdair Darling!
Therefore you ignore the chaotic mess that has been Labour for the last year and a bit.
Read a newspaper, look at the amateur antics in Westminster and the general amateurism of the unionist parties within these Isles and then ask yourself if you have even the slightest clue what on earth you are babbling on about.
Impotent? lol The Scottish Government could have gotten away with merely shaving and turning up, but fortunately for Scotland they have demonstrated good governance and that they can raise the political game of Westminster no problem.
It is Westminster who will fail to live up to the challenge.
Thanks.
June 2nd, 2008 at 5:52 am
Kinghob.
Sometimes personal attacks are a sign of discomfort with the unvarnished truth. I try to avoid them!
You say I ignore the mess that has been Labour for the past year and a bit. I assume you mean Westminster.
I would not characterize the antics of Brown (and before him Blair) and their cohorts as amateurism.
On the contrary, they systematically manipulated Labour in Holyrood to maintain the status quo. They paid lip service to the notion of devolving real power to Hollyrood. On the question of independence, and this is the core issue; they have used every possible means of deception at their disposal to delay and delay. They are traitors to their heritage.
And they continue to play the same game with the SNP. Darling knows exactly which buttons to press to scare the Scots back into their vacuum of insecurity and condition of dependence.
Westminster has Holyrood wrapped around its little finger and it would be no different if Cameron were in charge.
Today the Scotsman (the voice of unionism) reported:
ALEX Salmond has taken the first formal move to try to wrest control of at least some of the UK’s oil revenues from the UK Treasury.
But Alistair Darling, the Chancellor, made it clear yesterday he has no intention of dividing the extra oil tax revenue from the rest of government income…
(What arrogance)
In his letter, Mr Salmond said: “The UK government needs to concede the principle and the justice of Scotland having direct access to a share of the tax receipts from our own oil and gas…
Salmond is of course right, but his words carry no weight, he is a voice in the wilderness that shall continue to be ignored by Westminster absent a different strategy.
Since the NATS took over at Holyrood how much closer has Scotland moved towards the prize of nation state status? Not much I say.
I don’t question Salmond’s sincerity. He just doesn’t have the leadership qualities that are needed to bring Scotland to the Promised Land.
I freely acknowledge the difficulties. The challenge of taking on the special interests, the entrenched establishment and most important, educating the uneducated majority of Scots is a daunting task.
To date the SNP has totally failed to mobilize the Scottish people. They have failed to set out their vision for the future and inspire the people to action. They are squandered an opportunity.
If the SNP and been successful in spelling out the benefits of independence the people would have already been on the streets demanding freedom and justice and control over their oil and gas.
For the past 30 odd years, Scots have been gnashing their teeth about oil and gas. Scotland is in Westminster straight jacket and until they figure out a way to break out of it, nothing will change.
The noise you hear is William Wallace spinning in his grave!
June 8th, 2008 at 6:17 pm
“Sometimes personal attacks are a sign of discomfort with the unvarnished truth. I try to avoid them!”
You can say that easily, but perhaps you don’t quite live by your own standards?
“You say I ignore the mess that has been Labour for the past year and a bit. I assume you mean Westminster.”
Nope. I mean the British unionist political party called Labour-Holyrood or Westminster branch.
“I would not characterize the antics of Brown (and before him Blair) and their cohorts as amateurism.
On the contrary, they systematically manipulated Labour in Holyrood to maintain the status quo. They paid lip service to the notion of devolving real power to Hollyrood. On the question of independence, and this is the core issue; they have used every possible means of deception at their disposal to delay and delay. They are traitors to their heritage.”
And their performance has left the union in the most precarious state in 300 years.
“And they continue to play the same game with the SNP. Darling knows exactly which buttons to press to scare the Scots back into their vacuum of insecurity and condition of dependence.”
You are heavily dependent on people in Scotland actually trusting as well listening to Alistair Darling and indeed Gordon Brown. or even the media!
Do you believe that this is the case?
“Westminster has Holyrood wrapped around its little finger and it would be no different if Cameron were in charge.”
Nonsense. That would perhaps have been the case had the SNP not won the Scottish elections, but you appear to believe that there has been absolutely no geo-political change, no demonstration of what a pro Scottish government can do, and also appear to deny that Gordon Brown and Labour and David Cameron and Conservative are actually just the choice between a red and blue bucket of manure from the same cow.
To actually believe that having the Tories in charge of Westminster will not lead to further division and complications within the fragile British “constitution’ (not that there is one!) takes quite a degree of denial to even begin to justify.
Barnet Formula. English votes for English Laws. Deliberately low block grants. It is endless. It is polishing a turd.
The continuance of the bickering and the subsequent sour grapes with our taxes that Labour in Westminster have set as a precedent (because Scotland dared to vote for the SNP) will be one the tories will delight in continuing because their bread is buttered by England vote-wise.
Remember that the SNP will take a good few Labour seats at Westminster (they are going for twenty) and they will landslide at the next Holyrood elections. There has been no reinvention of unionism or unionist parties in the last year, and that was urgently needed since last May.
“Today the Scotsman (the voice of unionism) reported:
ALEX Salmond has taken the first formal move to try to wrest control of at least some of the UK’s oil revenues from the UK Treasury.
But Alistair Darling, the Chancellor, made it clear yesterday he has no intention of dividing the extra oil tax revenue from the rest of government income…
(What arrogance)
In his letter, Mr Salmond said: “The UK government needs to concede the principle and the justice of Scotland having direct access to a share of the tax receipts from our own oil and gas…”
You see the beginning of something that would never have happened if the May result had been one seat the other way.
“Salmond is of course right, but his words carry no weight, he is a voice in the wilderness that shall continue to be ignored by Westminster absent a different strategy.”
Alex Salmond isn’t a voice in the wilderness within Scotland though. He is an exceptionally popular political leader, miles in front of his adversaries in both talent and the team of ministers and researchers that support him.
“Since the NATS took over at Holyrood how much closer has Scotland moved towards the prize of nation state status? Not much I say.”
One year on they have proved to be a competent and popular government. They have another few years.
What state are their political rivals in?
What state is support for the union in Scotland when big players like Blair and Brown were up here before the last Scottish elections to “save the union” and failed so miserably.
Has Gordon brown actually put one foot right in the year he has been the Westminster leader?
“I don’t question Salmond’s sincerity. He just doesn’t have the leadership qualities that are needed to bring Scotland to the Promised Land.”
Now I know that you are just making up your argument as you go along-you almost had me fooled.
“I freely acknowledge the difficulties. The challenge of taking on the special interests, the entrenched establishment and most important, educating the uneducated majority of Scots is a daunting task.”
Uneducated? Like myself no doubt?
The political sophistication of the Scottish electorate and potential voters is completely different to that of say, England, because there is a bona-fide choice for political leadership and government without unionist affiliation that England simply does not have!
“To date the SNP has totally failed to mobilize the Scottish people. They have failed to set out their vision for the future and inspire the people to action. They are squandered an opportunity.”
The Scottish Government could have done nothing more than shaved and turned up for the last year, such has been the crisis and political incompetence of the unionist politicians.
“If the SNP and been successful in spelling out the benefits of independence the people would have already been on the streets demanding freedom and justice and control over their oil and gas”
Patience mate! No need to demand. Just vote! very simple, particularly if you see the chance to not have to vote for the political parties of yesteryear, and that is exactly what the unionist parties look like from a Scottish perspective.
“For the past 30 odd years, Scots have been gnashing their teeth about oil and gas. Scotland is in Westminster straight jacket and until they figure out a way to break out of it, nothing will change.”
England can keep a fair proportion of the mineral wealth thus far squandered by short sighted successive British Governments-their economy needs it.
Independence, sovereignty and autonomy in decision making for Scotland’s future is about a whole lot more than mere wealth.
“The noise you hear is William Wallace spinning in his grave!”
William Wallace did his part as a leader of the people, but it was very very brief and not able to sustain any kind of long term solution. This was not the fault of William Wallace rather than a reflection of the political landscape in Europe at the time where people of lower (though not peasant) birth were not allowed to take advantage of their victories and leadership abilities.
Robert the Bruce, as duplicitous and prone to survive as any noble in the British Isles had a longer term plan, one that ensured the continuity of Scotland as a nation, and he suffered for a far longer period of time to achieve this that perhaps William Wallace did.
I am studying history to degree level, and must say that your mere mentioning of William Wallace is not only out of context to this modern argument, but extremely corny.
So cheers big ears, and I look forward to your apathetic attitude and lack of realistic political observation to be to my complete advantage as I take annual leave from my work and knock my Scottish socks off campaigning for the SNP at Holyrood and Westminster elections due in the next few years.
That’s what i did in the weeks leading to that historic (yep!) 2007 election victory in Scotland, and i charmed and persuaded anybody i could that voting for a unionist party was a waste of time in Scotland.
I even put on my best suit!
During the next run of elections I won’t need to state quite so often about the waste of a vote it is if you vote for a unionist party-many people will already be aware of the fact!
The continuity of the status quo you mentioned has actually manifested in panicking unionist parties looking at devolution plus-and with Wendy Alexander (remember her?) cocking up her attempt to take the SNP to task over the Referendum Question on Independence, we will see the Tories and Liberals fall out with Labour.
These people are self serving political bedfellows in the extreme-their interests are never pro Scottish.
Ever.
We’ll see who needs educated.
October 15th, 2008 at 2:28 pm
I would be truly interested to know why pissing on a statue of Lord Nelson on the 21st October would in anyway be a blow for either Scottish nationalism / pride / independance /general improved scottich standing in the world.
Attending Itlay to do similar to the grave of BPC would quite possibly be of more use and significance.