Bonnie Prince Charlie and the Jacobites
Vložit
- čas přidán 26. 05. 2024
- Charles Edward Stuart (‘Bonnie Prince Charlie’) is one of the most recognisable and romanticised figures of British history. Born in Rome as a Catholic prince on 31 December 1720, he led the Jacobite Rising of 1745, which came closer than anyone expected to changing Great Britain irrevocably.
Professor Pittock will ask what kind of man was Charles, what were his ideas and day to day life like, what might have happened if he had won in 1745, and what even in defeat his legacy changed for Britain and its Empire.
The transcript and downloadable versions of the lecture are available from the Gresham College website:
www.gresham.ac.uk/lectures-and...
Gresham College has offered free public lectures for over 400 years, thanks to the generosity of our supporters. There are currently over 2,500 lectures free to access. We believe that everyone should have the opportunity to learn from some of the greatest minds. To support Gresham's mission, please consider making a donation: gresham.ac.uk/support/
Website: www.gresham.ac.uk
Twitter: / greshamcollege
Facebook: / greshamcollege
Instagram: / greshamcollege
best, I've heard on the subject as a loyal Jacobite and descendant of Gordon of Glenbuchat and Forbes of Skellater
This man tells the truth. That's why his version fits well in our minds
This is wonderful. Brilliant and deeply engaging.
I found this lecture fascinating and enlightening. May I say that not all that is seen is absolute and true. There always two sides of the story and humanity takes it from there. Most enjoyable - thank you.
So so informative and smart thinking short and long term...
'Pretender' doesn't mean someone who 'pretends', in the ordinary sense; in this context it means a Claimant to the throne.
Yes you are correct. Claim in French means prétendre
I trust you already knew this before listening to this guy.
You omitted the full definition. Check Merriam Webster: claimant = a claimant to a throne who is held to have NO JUST title
I am learning so much. Great video. Thank you so much.
Many years ago, I went on a visit to a stately home in Scotland (don't remember which one). Among its treasures was a coin of 'King Charles III'. It took me a few minutes to figure out who that was!
there'll be quite a few more of those now.
The Leading Authority on The Risings without a doubt
An interesting subject and a knowledgable speaker. It's worth noting that Prince Ernest Augustus, King of Hanover from 1837, was the fifth son of King George III, not of King William IV, which is stated in the lecture.
This is so brilliant! Exposition of complexity.
Pretty biased though, Scottish Jacobites are fantastic but English jacobites are terrible nationalists 🤦🏻♂️😂😂
Really enjoyed this highly informative lecture. Thank You
Me too!
This was great, but it was somewhat sad (to me, at least) that there was no applause at the end. It deserved a standing ovation, and so here I stand, clapping by myself -- well done!
I think this was filmed during Covid restrictions, so there would have been no live audience.
Worth watching. Thanks for helping broaden my education, Gresham. Liked and shared.
This was really interesting Thank you.
Outstanding - thank you
My hero in history so romantic his story.
His later life was not so heroic or romanic. He became a violent drunkard, fantacist and embarrassment even to the French.
Well done. Wonderful lecture.
Quality lecture. 👍🏼
Really great lecture
Professor Murray Pittock provides here an excellent lecture. Whereas he describes events on land very well, I feel that he only provides a hint at the vital importance of the balance of power at sea and ultimately the supremacy of the Royal Navy that managed to produce a very effective blockade against the French fleet in the north sea. The Royal Navy achieved this with great efficiency over French ships were unable to deliver vital supplies to the Jacobite armies in January-February 1746 through the eastern ports. When effective support eventually came from king Louis XV, it was after the battle of Culloden. Two major sea rescue missions were funded at great expense via the west coast of Scotland to Loch Nan Uamh, with the Corsair ships from Nantes, "Le Mars" and "La Bellone" in early May 1746, and Corsair ships from Saint-Malo, "l'Heureux" and "Le Prince de Conti" in September 1746. For the initial voyage of Prince Charles Stuart to Scotland, I have yet to see some clear evidence of the initial support of king XV to the departure of the "Du Teillay" in July 1745. Professor Murray Puttock seems convinced of the support of King Louis XV, even so such a support would make complete sense. Is he giving King Louis XV too much credit or was king Louis XV that good at keeping a secret?! In contrast with the fiasco of the French invasion from Dunkirk in the winter of 1744, the initial plan for the voyage of Prince Charles Stuart from Saint-Nazaire at the beginning of July 1745 was prepared in great secrecy and if it wasn't for the sea battle between HMS Lion and L'Elisabeth, the arrival of Prince Charles Stuart on board the "Du Teillay" with the "Elisabeth" as her escort would have made a far greater initial impression on the Scottish Highlanders. The "Du Teillay", a.k.a. "La Doutelle", the ship that Prince Charles Stuart sailed on was only 78 feet long. It didn't belong to the French Navy but it was a 18 gun privateer ship commissioned in July 1744 on the account of Antoine Walsh, a wealthy merchant and shipowner of Irish descent established in Nantes, the capital of the province of Brittany on the west of France, where Jacobites of Irish descent exercised a great influence under the leadership of Luke O'Shiell. The expedition of the "Elisabeth" herself, a ship of the line of 64 guns (a double-deck), was financed by Walter Rutledge, another Jacobite of Irish descent, merchant based in Dunkirk. Perhaps the only hint that the French Navy was involved to a minor degree was the presence on board the "Elisabeth" of the cadets of the "Compagnie Maurepas" in their "pretty uniforms" (the comte Phélipeaux de Maurepas was the secretary of the French Navy at the time). If king Louis XV was made aware of the Prince's intentions from a letter written by Charles Stuart, it is more likely that King Louis XV turned a blind eye to the whole operation as long as it didn't compromise his own position and didn't involve any financial support for an expedition that had little chance of success. Although on paper Antoine Walsh was a secretary of the French king and a captain of the French Navy, it would have been very much to King Louis XV's best interest to let Lord Clare and a small group of Jacobite of Irish descent organise the voyage of Prince Charles Stuart to Scotland in a private venture, then deny any involvement. It is all very speculative and the fact is that we don't really know. Back then, the attitude of the French Navy was to provide corsair captains with a letter of marque that provided them with a lot of autonomy in organising their own ventures and plunder British ships as long as the French kingdom got its share. Under the cover of a Corsair expedition, Prince Charles Stuart was able to organise his own expedition to Scotland without raising suspicion but it would not have been possible without the ships of Irish Jacobite supporters established in Dunkirk, Saint-Malo and Nantes. In that respect, Professor Murray Pittock is right, Jacobitism was a European movement in its own right. If the motivations of Scottish, Irish and English Jacobites were very different we tend to forget the Jacobites of Irish descent who established themselves around various ports of Europe for one, two or three generations, in fact since the 1640s. In their exile, they hadn't lost their strong sense of Irish identity and therefore had their own personal reasons to support the return of the Stuart dynasty to the throne of England, Scotland and Ireland.
EXCELLENT! BRAVO!
Jacobin's to not appear to named from Jacobite " Middle English (in Jacobin (sense 2)): from Old French, from medieval Latin Jacobinus, from ecclesiastical Latin Jacobus ‘James’. The term was applied to the Dominicans in Old French on account of their church in Paris, St Jacques, near which they built their first convent; the latter eventually became the headquarters of the French revolutionary group." Montagnard " so called because as deputies they sat on the higher benches of the assembly. Collectively they were also called Le Montagne (“The Mountain”)."
Brilliant loving this
Great video...
Wonderful !
I'm reading the book of Culloden. My swedish point of view and the way we write books on history is not equal to the British way. This lecture helped me stay on course.
How would you say the two differ? I'm also unsure as to what you mean by 'the British way' of writing history. We have a wide range of approaches to history from the utterly fanciful 'historical novel' to the very rigorous and academic.
@@Alan_Mac the one academic I read was so apologetic about what everyone else had written that I read it too quickly. And the facts was so short inside the text one had to slow down the pace of reading making the ergonomy of reading very uncomfortable. The other book was written by a Canadian in the novel kind of way, easier to follow but the rows of text was too close to each other making the text float together (and I'm not very much a dyslectic).
This is a wonderfully informative and insightful lecture, and I'm glad it has been made available following the technical difficulties on the occasion of the original ticketed lecture. May I draw Prof. Murray's attention to a glitch in his images - I'm sure an inadvertent mistake? At approximately 34:30, two gowns are shown, which are said to have links to CES's occupation of Holyrood Palace in September 1745. The gown on the left has probable provenance linked to Margaret Oliphant of Gask. However, the tartan gown shown on the right in that slide is not a gown from the 1740s but rather it's the tartan dress worn by Princess Victoria c. 1835-37. Victoria's gown was on display at the NMS as part of the "Wild and Majestic: Romantic Visions of Scotland" exhibition in 2019, and the photograph appears to have been taken of it in that setting.
Maybe Victoria was into vintage?
So The Lord of the Rings was actually a Jacobite fable and, in fact, Sauron won.
I was struck by the deafening lack of applause. I am not sure what that meant so I can't take that any further. The other point that caught my attention was the what the possible effect on the history of Germany and Prussia, particularly in relation to Bismarck. However, i think that very, very far afield as I doubt that even if BPC had succeeded in taking London, the odds that he could have had anything resembling serious relations with Parliament would seem to me to be very far fetched indeed. Beyond that, I think Scotland may well have prospects today of renewing its relationship with Europe in another light, and we may get to see what that could be soon enough. All in all, however, it was a wonderful lecture.
Pretty difficult to get an applause when there's no audience lol. Corona restrictions on gatherings might have played a small part if you're not sure.
It was an on-line only lecture due to Covid restrictions. I can assure you that all lecturers at Gresham get applause at the end of their lecture and again at the end of the Q&A when there is a live audience there.
It has been repeated by many historians that there were more Scot’s fighting for the crown than for Charlie at Culloden. It is a shame that was not explored in the lecture as there is a suggestion that the 1745 rebellion was really highlander v lowlander, or feudal clan v Age of Enlightenment
I cannot imagine why this crucial issue was avoided.
This Man is Factually correct and many many others agree that he is the leading expert. A Scot who knows the Truth and proves it
Or Reformed Faith against Catholicism, or Presbyterianism against Episcopalianism. Or improver against traditionalist. It gets only more complicated and these complications exist still in Scottish (and UK) culture and politics. There is no "correct" answer to this very day.
Modern Scotland still needs to answer this question. The answer is in cooperation and reconciliation... The hardest answer of all.
Its really just Jacobites vs hanoverians
@@IOTBW no not really. It’s about the BCL woodsmen fighting against the modernity that’s evolving through the industrial and agrarian revolution
So, the entire night march to Nairn was a bit pointless if the Jacobite's were better armed and well-trained (though how they were as well-trained as the Government army that came partly from Flanders and all drilled endlessly over the winter at Aberdeen, is a matter of conjecture). They certainly had more muskets than was thought previously, but they also tended to go for a single massed volley before the final charge, less effective overall than the firing by platoon and rank of professional forces. They were so well-led they stood under artillery fire even when all theirs was out of action, and once they did make contact we have the official records of how many losses the regular troops took, although the losses to the Argyll Militia are not documented so well. This is probably where most Government losses took place as it was recorded they crossed the park walls and came into hand to hand contact, taking severe losses as the Jacobites retreated.
Fascinating and informative talk
Long live Francis of Bavaria. The rightful King !
They are now German (like everyone else lol), the hereditary dukes of Bavaria i believe
They are all battenburgs Diana was a Stuart descended from kings
29:10 I'm a Murray. Dunno if it's of Tullubardine, or Atholl! So,which tartan should I wear?😁
... Remember you're a Womble !!!
Anything you like. Modern tartans have no historical clans links. It is entirely made-up nonsense.
How strange; interesting but a political rather than an historical speech. He sounds like he'd be ready to restore the Stuarts at the drop of a tricorn hat.
Well I mean they *are* the true dynasty. Don't worry, the German's won't last forever.
@@jambammz9908
The true dynasty? The Stuart's legacy was 4 kings, three of whom were real duffers with no political sense or lightness of touch who consequently 'blew it'.
@@michaelbedford8017 whether you like it or not the English model is Devine Right Of King's ergo Stuart dynasty true dynasty. Courses m Scots Law differs, no divine right as the people can appoint their monarch. And have done previously. 🤷🏼♂️
@@michaelbedford8017 I could also list a very long line of English Monarchs who are despots. Jus sayin
@@michaelbedford8017 oh yeah btw I've just outlined the two differing legal systems and how one, the English model, ignored its own laws to appoint a different Monarch to suit it's Elites.
Outlander send me down this Bonnie Prince rabbit hole and I’m not mad at it 😂
"Who today really remembers the deeds of Peter the Great ?" the Professor asks. Everyone in Russia ? He goes on "Charles Edward Stuart still has a life in the cultural memory of the world". A bold claim. The world.
Yeah i thought the same Peter the great is a much larger and well known historical figure that BPC .. even I as a Englishman have read more on Peter let alone the Russians.
@@steve.k4735 I think the key there is "as an Englisman" - I am too - I'd contend that (beyond his name) BPC is barely known in England today but in Scotland that is obviously not the case. There was a time in the 19th century when he was well-known in Europe (France and Germany) as part of the Roamntic movement but those days are long gone. However, I can state with certainty that everyone in Russia knows about the deeds of Peter the Great (not least because Putin frequently references him) and Caterine the Great (another "forgotten" figure according to the Professor). Likewise Peter the Great is still very well-known in Germany, for example you can't go far in Berlin without encountering a reference to him. So I'd say BPC is a figure of only regional fame too with no significant profile at all in "the world".
Sorry - mistyped - Frederick the Great in Germany obviously, also listed by the Professor
@@cliveb9771 Yes agreed and in this case their international fame is proportionality correct (I would postulate).
Peter is a character that changes Russia in great depth and destroys Sweden as a military power effecting the course of world history, where as BPC effects much less, although the genocide of the highland Scots does arise from his actions.
"A bold claim."
No.
It's an accurate observation.
The Romanovs are martyrs in Russia - Peter and Catherine are regarded as a Westernizers.
Everyone knows Jacobite shanties, tartans, bagpipes ect. - none of that holds true to Cromwell, William of Orange, House Hannover or Protestant and Whig England in general (outside of Northern Ireland).
The cause of Westminster and the Bank of England are the most unpopular causes, one could think of - while Cherlie would win elections if he lived, today.
The Jacobites were black Scots weren't they?
No they weren't. 😂😂
@@IrishCinnsealach
Prove it?
Obviously you do not know what the 'black jacobins' mean!
Don't you know that back in the day that parts of Europe including Scotland was ruled by a melanated aristocracy.
Close the white washed and sanitised white supremacy version of history friend, go look for the real European history which included melanated people imaged as un-melanated in history books.
I guarantee your response will be " Oh my ......"
Yes they were!
show the originally pictures and the charters as well they hide them in museums... omitting is lying
Jacobite were e black nationalists. Many Jacobite were taken to Jamaica as slaves
No they weren't. 😂😂😂
Most were brought here to establish the 13 colonies...The Jacobites were people of color
Cuius est; reddite referees to the incident in the gospel of Matthew 22:21.
Thank you!
The accusations of bias by a few commentators on here are from people who clearly haven't studied the subject matter to any degree. Unlike professor Pittock who clearly has.
Don't leave things out tell the truth about the Stewarts and the Jacobite's.
The vast majority of so called historians condem Jacobitism and especially the 45.Having studied many books on the jacobite uprising the vast majority of the so called historians tend to focus on the go home Charlie your not wanted with or without french support, that the rising was a civil war,highlanders forced onto the battlefield for the cause ,the rising would destroy prosperity within the union. that the highlanders got what they deserved following Culloden as they were just as brutal following the battle of Prestonpans ...the demonisation of the Highland people....the list is endless......Historians make history....as Winston Churchill once said history will be very kind to me for I intend to write it. Which he did with huge volumes relating to the first and second world war and his view of the causes and events......This is one of the very few historians that strives to give a more balanced view towards Jacobitism and the 45.He should be congratulated for this endeavour as simply taking sides and demonising one side over the other is futile. I suspect that Jacobitism is suffering from an attempt to demonise the movement following a resurgence of Scottish self determination as well as from a glorification and simplification from those seeking Scottish independence. My point is it is very difficult to get a balanced view on historical events as the vast majority of historians support the status quo and tend to concentrate on controlling the past to reinforce the here and now and the future. Not every young man eagerly enlisted in the outbreak of the great war 1914_1918 as historians routinely trout out over and over again. Young men desperate to defend Britain and the Empire .How they enlisted with smiles on their faces in great pals battalions.Accoring to many historians the war for them was going to be a great adventure and over by Christmas 1914. Young men maybe did enlist for naive reasons ...but the vast majority joined up to escape the misery of their everyday existence .. unemployment,mind numbing factory worn... poverty.The peer group pressure of compulsion ....way ahead of the eventual conscription. The White feather campaign all drove the men to enlist.The stereotype still exists of all the eager young men fully behind the cause to service king county and empire .You really have to reflect on why is this always the case....what are historians trying to do?
@Rosten Boss no I haven't heard of that? I just like history and have seen too many lazy historians ...they go to a well established source or authority and take all their information from that source....I like to look at at historians whom take an alternative approach instead of the established status quo. I suppose I just feel that history is important...Someone once said he who controls the past controls the future....may have been George Orwell in the novel 1984 ,but don't quote me on that. Thanks for the kind words .
Thank you. Not a historian, but to attempt an answer. Because they are in the established way of thought. Questioning is more difficult. Nuance, subtlety and tone is just as relevant. And there is (at least! ) always two sides to any 'divorce.'
Cumberland stiff modern British Protestant quality sausage verses Papist continental garlic mini sausages and various Catholic 10%
taxed pork scratching s.
So sad that the reigning Monarch or the heir apparent cannot still be Catholic. I was pleased to see the Queen gave permission to the Royal Duchess of Kent to become Catholic. I am a British Catholic living in the U.S.
Thank you.
For 2-300 hundred year Catholics may well have been suspect French or French agents or even pawns. The gunpowder plot was a piece of Franco- Spanish Catholic terrorism
Why would you want the Supreme Governor of the Church of England to be a Catholic?
Best place for you
Interesting but I resent the equation of 'leave'with 'Little England' and that 'English Jacobitism' was somehow less pure than that of Scotland or Ireland..what a load of tosh. Try telling that to the men if Tynedale who rose in their thousands in 1716!
You state that you will not indulge in presentism then do just that!
I just read on another video, one comment came from a Scot. Not to forget about the english who fought on the jacobite side.
Thats what he wrote. Was this true and do you know where i can find out more on this. Thanx
@@tub19 there are many history books covering Jacobitism which was extremely powerful and popular in England and Wales, especially in the Catholic north. 10000 northumbrians rose in the 1715 rebellion.
By the time of the 1745 it had fallen out if fashion in much of England but the Manchester Regiment fought for BPC and was left garrisoning Carlisle Castle.
The best history of the 45 is John Prebble's 'Culloden'.
These 'rebellions' were a civil war between a deposed and rightful family who were the senior claimants in the Wessex, Dunkeld, Plantagenet, Tudor and Stewart lines and the Hanovarian usurper. Whilst I think that in the long term, the Hanovarian worked out best for ourodern democracy, this doesn't change the fact that James VIII (III) and Charles III were the legitimate monarchs of Britain by every concievable measure.
This was the great matter of late 17th and early 18th C Britain.
The propaganda job of labling these legitimate kings as 'Pretenders ' has been extremely effective.
You may well resent the equation, but it was apparent to anyone with an iota of common sense that Brexit was a tragic farce, underpinned by a misty-eyed nostalgia for empire, an overblown conception of our international importance, xenophobia and economic illiteracy. And thus it has proven to be.
I toured Culloden in Oct 1971, with a local historian. A fantastic day, that I'll remember to my last day. Perhaps some of my Hebridean relatives from the Isle of Benbecula died on the Culloden battle field.
They should have all run away and carried out Guerilla Warfare. My Irish relatives were smarter. They used Guerilla Warfare to wear down the Black & Tan Pommies thru financial losses.
"Audentes Fortuna Juvat".
Cromwell gave the current people our land and names and those names came to America after us,.... they did the same here took our names and land ..... Jacobites are a bloodline of people and now they are in America. Jacobite means sons of Jacob. He doesn't know what hes talking about
This sounds more like an anti Brexit fro European lecture
You have unwittingly hit on why this is relevant to today's UK.
Once you understand what the Jacobites were/are after, it should become clearer. 😉
"This sounds more like an anti Brexit (...)"
You sound more like a Remainer who is fond of national debt.
@@jambammz9908 it has nothing to do with it, you’re just another bitter Scott with a chip on his shoulder.
@@christophmahler Eh?
@@jackdubz4247
If You nothing to say, shut up.
Hm, interesting subject but the lecturer clearly has a bias ( Scotland, Charlie and the Jacobites) in his sympathies, I do not really like that in a proper historian, made me rather sceptic to this lecture. And he speaks like he is reciting a song or a story, ok if you are lecturing to the local history society but not in this context.
I noticed that too! He went a bit far listing Charlie's 'claims'
He is not the senior heir to Wessex by any metric; not only was that crown elective, but the Jacobites don't represent the eldest line! The Stuarts descended from Robert the Bruce, grandson of one Robert *de Brus* who competed w/ John Balliol over who had the best claim to Scotland via Malcolm III's son David.
Balliol would have held any dubious claims to Wessex via Primogeniture; Brus only boasted proximity-of-blood, which while once widely used had fallen out of favour at the time. Balliol's only son is not recorded any children, so his heir would be one of his sisters, several of whom left descendants, but history does not record which of these sisters was born first, so we don't know which line is the senior one.
You are overdoing your analysis too much, Murray Pittock researched the subject matter better than anyone has ever done, bias doesn't come into it. Or do you know better? I kindly doubt it.
My Fifth Great Grandfather was Bonnie Prince Charlie. We should discuss points of family knowledge.
Clearly a lie. You can only have 4!😁
How?
were related. pm me.
@@HRHKingJamesIXofScotland how to p.m.?
he was George Washington?
Why don't you and your organisation the Jacobite's / Stewarts were Black people.
The Real King Charles III
It is now being re-fought in Scottish independance and Scotlands relations with Europe . That is why the Scots voted against Brexit! Long Live the Auld Allaince !
"Long Live the Auld Allaince (...)"
True.
But the European Union is just another Whig 'Commonwealth' of central banks - the auld alliance requires Christian princes, not secular committees...
No thanks
The Auld Alliance died in 1560.
Bonnie Prince Donnie failed in his recent attempt at an uprising !
Tailoring the facts to fit a Scottish nationalist narrative . The absolutist French court represented only one aspect of reactionary Catholic continental Europe .One that sought domination over the Protestant north , persecution of religious minorities such as Huguenots . To quote Tom Paine in support of some suprious arguments is risible. Entertaining, but anecdotal episodes don't make for very sound historical analysis .
The most hilarious bit was when he was contrasting the fantastic and positive Scottish jacobites with the terrible narrow minded English nationalist jacobites. 😂
Their Spanish bedfellows during the events of 1719 only legalised the right to be publicly Protestant in 1980. It had been legal to be Protestant in private only since 1945.
Scotland’s Queen Mary of Scot’s, did unify the place we know as United Kingdom 🇬🇧
The Jacobites were black people.
No they weren't you deluded fool. 😂😂
Absolutely
This lecture is proof that history is written by the victors. The men he is tearing down were black nobles. Shameful is what I find this further whitewashing of the truth
What?
😂😂 Oh you poor deluded fool
Absolutely...The black nobility ran these countries all over Europe...go to these places and look at the family crests, statues and paintings..
Thank goodness Charlie never succeeded. Another popinjay Prince looking for a comfortable seat.
How is that different?
@@dwaynedarockjohnson2023 Where did I say it was different?
"Thank goodness Charlie never succeeded."
Right.
Since the barons of Westminster and the Bank of England are so caring about the population...
His opening statement is, frankly, and I regret to say ( although I’m actually a ‘ Jacobite ‘ , and more so a Ricardian, by sentiment ) wrong. False. The ‘ pretender ‘is barely known, and garners virtually no interest outside of the windswept and sodden isles. Peter the Great ? Far, far more on the bizarrely parochial British, poorer than ever, snootily refer to as ‘ the continent ‘. Do not deceive yourselves. Brexit was greeted with delight and relief by most Europeans, exhausted and bored by the annoyances of everything from unbearably barbarous British ‘ tourists ‘ to the unending whinging of characters like Thatcher.
Remember, he was a black man stop the lies.
It's not brilliant at all - most of it is historically inaccurate, if not, indeed, outright bizarre. It is history written with a deep ideological bias. And therefore not history.
INDEPENDENCE for SCOTLAND