Talk:Battle of Culloden

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.
Start	This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.
Additional information: This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-Class status: Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar: not checked Supporting materials: not checked Related task forces (nations and regions): British military history task force

An event in this article is a April 16 selected anniversary (may be in HTML comment)

---

new bayonet tactics added to Battle section, based on a BBC TV programme about Culloden by military historian Richard Holmes. "Battlefield Britain" os to cover Culloden on BBC2, 9pm 17 sept '04 - will see if this also mentions bayonets. -- dave souza 22:08, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)

The programme did indeed cover the bayonet training (using the new "socket" bayonet replacing the old "plug" bayonets which had failed earlier), also emphasised training in rate of fire of the muskets, tired and hungry Highlanders, problems with the ground etc. There were some statements which conflicted with history books, and the highlanders were shown charging with their plaids on at the Battle of Prestonpans when the evidence is they took them off first - any evidence of what happened at Culloden? When time and energy permit will try to revise this article. - dave souza 19:55, 25 Sep 2004 (UTC)

Contents 1 Neutrality 2 Scottish Government Clans 3 Mainland Britain and Britain 4 Gaelic Language 5 The 9th Lord Cathcart 6 Purpose of the Campaign 7 Featured article? 8 An alternative interpretation that may warrant inclusion 9 Sir Harry Munro

[edit] Neutrality

This article seems to have been written to demonstrate that the Duke of Cumberland's army was nothing more than a bunch of mercenaries protecting the private interests of the Hanoverian dynasty, and by inference that it had no base of support in England. This is not true. CalJW 22:34, 16 Apr 2005 (UTC)

You're right, it's not true: the article doesn't seem to suggest anything of the sort. Maury 00:03, 17 Apr 2005 (UTC)

It most certainly did when the notice was posted, but it has improved since and I have tweaked it again. Oliver Chettle 05:43, 2 May 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Scottish Government Clans

It should be noted that many Scotts clans higland and lowland supported the British Government during the Jacobite uprisings. Including MacKays, Rosses, Munros, Gunns, Campbells, Grants, Agnew and many more. Most fought at Culloden but not under their clan names. The Battalions were named after their commanders, most of the Battalions made from the Scotts clans actually had English commanders, who the battalion was named after. With the exeption of Munro and Cambell whos commanders were their clan chiefs.

[edit] Mainland Britain and Britain

If Culloden was 'the last military clash in mainland Britain' this would imply that there was another part of Britain which was not on the, em, "mainland" where such a clash took place at a later date. Where was that part?

Maybe the Nazi occupation of the Channel Islands, 1940 - 45, if not the battle of Britain (certainly military and certainly a clash). OtherDave 00:20, 26 January 2006 (UTC)

We will never forget. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 195.153.219.170 (talk • contribs) .

Im not sure if the Channel Islands really count as, while they are geographically 'British', they are not a part of the British polity and ( to my knowledge) never have been. An Siarach

Not really arguing; I thought that Culloden as "last military clash" neglected that bit of unpleasantness with the Luftwaffe. My Channel Islands comment addressed the "not on the mainland" question. (The Channel Islands may not strictly be part of the British polity, but Islanders are full British citizens.) OtherDave 18:26, 11 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Gaelic Language

The Gaelic language may have been discouraged, but it was never outlawed, hardly a pratical arrangement! Rcpaterson 23:52, 4 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] The 9th Lord Cathcart

Does anyone know which British regiment Charles Cathcart, 9th Lord Cathcart was attached to ? He was wounded in the battle.

195.137.109.177 17:46, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

He was Cumberland's ADC and not, I think, attached to any specific regiment. Rcpaterson 05:17, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Purpose of the Campaign

The statement that the campaign was intended to place Charles Edward Stuart on the throne is dubious. His father James Francis Edward Stuart was still alive in 1745 and the aim was probably to win the campaign for his cause. I believe that Charles Edward Stuart became the young pretender when his father died in 1766.

User:indigofoxbat 16.49 26 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Featured article?

I'm considering nominating this article as a featured article candidate (See WP:FAC). It seems to be reasonably comprehensive, referenced and neutral. Comments welcome. --Tony Sidaway 02:13, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

It's a nice article, but might struggle at WP:FAC without inline citations (I know they're not supposed to be compulsory - but the defacto situation is that very few are promoted these days without them). --Mcginnly | Natter 12:31, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

Has it been peer reviewed yet? --Mcginnly | Natter 12:32, 8 October 2006 (UTC)

That would be the first step. Inline citations are a cosmetic matter, a mere frippery. The first thing to do, I should say, is to overhaul the quality of writing. Without that, FA or no FA, it's not likely to be worth reading. --Tony Sidaway 16:20, 10 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] An alternative interpretation that may warrant inclusion

I've read an alternative interpretation of the battle of culloden - rather than an essentially english/scottish fight - it was much more divided along catholic/protestant religious lines and highland/lowland rivalry - with many lowland scots fighting for cumberland, and various other nations pitching in for respective sides.

"Captain Cunningham’s Company of Artillery – composed of ten short Saxon six pounders and six coehorn mortars. In total it was an army that mustered 9,000 effective fighting men. It may be worth noting that approximately one third of the 16 battalions present were made up of Lowland Scots together with over 600 highland levies."[1]

--Mcginnly | Natter 14:32, 16 November 2006 (UTC)

Far from being an "alternative interpretation", this is accepted as fact - no historian would claim it was an England v Scotland match, even if that is the popular romanticised shortbread-tin view. As far as I can see, the article makes this pretty clear: see especially the section Armies, which looks like an accurate summary of the nationalities involved. However, the article could benefit from an extra paragraph or two on the background to the battle, viz. a very brief summary of Jacobitism and its demographics (with special reference to Scotland), and a mention of the failed 1715 rising. Of course the article Jacobite rising already does this, but many misinformed readers will come to this article and not bother to read up on the wider background, so it ought to be to touched upon. --Blisco 20:28, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Sir Harry Munro

I will explain about the Munro invlovement. Heres a little history lesson.

Chief Robert Munro (1684 - 1746) led men of the Clan Munro in an independant Black Watch company against the French, in support of the British government. This included action at the Battle of Fontenoy in 1745. As a reward for his exellent service when he returned to the UK he was appointed the commander of the English 37th regiment of foot.

The English 37th regiment of foot was made from Englsih soldiers and not Scotts from the Clan Munro. He commanded the English 37th at the Battle of Falkirk (1746) where they ran off and left him. He was surrounded by Jacobites and killed.

Robert's son Harry Munro would not just be able to just assume the right to command the 37th regiment. It is well documented that Harry had a military carreer in Loudan's regiment at the time of the Jacobite rising. However he had nothing to do with the 37th. Harry was taken prisoner at the Battle of Prestonpans in 1745 as part of Loudan's regiment but was later released. He rejoined Loudan's regiment but after the Battle of Falkirk (1746), Sir Harry was listed as absent "by HRH leave" to deal with the problems at Foulis Castle which was said to have been rendered "a compleat desolation" by the Jacobites. The Munro company under Harry was disbanded in 1748.

The 37th regiment of foot at Culloden is often mistakenly referred to as "Munro's" regiment of foot. Colonel Dejean took over command but the regiment was never renamed Probably because its previous commander Robert Munro (1684 - 1746) had not long died just a few months before. Even today at the Culloden battle site a plaque calls it Munro's regiment. [2] Perhaps in honour of Robert Munro. 195.137.109.177 10:53, 10 February 2007 (UTC)