He is one of the most recognisable faces from Scotland’s past, but is a man chiefly remembered for leading his army of Highlanders to a crushing defeat in the last pitched battle ever fought on British soil.
Bonnie Prince Charlie’s downfall at Culloden is seen by some as the moment Scotland’s independent martial spirit was extinguished, while his conduct during and after the campaign has cast him in the role of an effete interloper whose cause was romantic, but doomed from the start.
But now a new book is re-writing the myth of the Prince through an examination of the words of those who marched and fought alongside him. And the research has revealed a man far more capable on the battlefield and the arena of 18th century politics than history has given him credit for.
The Battles of Bonnie Prince Charlie: The Young Chevalier At War, is the work of Arran Johnston, consultant curator of the Battle of Prestonpans Jacobite Museum and the founding director of the Scottish Battlefields Trust.
Through his research of the Prince’s rebellion in 1745, the battles he fought and victories he won, the author uncovered a profile of a man which does not chime with the way the Prince has been portrayed down through the centuries.
Mr Johnston said that his first encounter with the Prince was seeing the equestrian statue which stands in his memory in the author’s home town of Derby.
READ MORE: Bonnie Prince Charlie's sword to be displayed in Perth
He said: “I wanted to know who this man really was, and what drove him to undertake such an extraordinary campaign. I've carried that fascination with me ever since, spending many years researching the prince and his campaigns.
“I wanted to write this book to bring together the perceptions I've gathered by studying contemporary accounts.
“There have been lots of books about the rising, and plenty of biographies about Charles Edward. But rarely is he taken seriously as a military commander, and too often we are influenced by the fact that we know he ultimately lost.”
He added: “How can somehow who fails completely in his mission be considered competent or capable? That's what I try to do with the book.
“I think many readers will come away with a different view of Charles Edward than they had before, or at least with more understanding of him as a real three-dimensional person.
“As I've rooted the narrative in the words of those who were there at the time, it should be clear that the person they reveal is not my own invention but a re-discovery of a verified reality.”
The exiled scion of the Stewart Dynasty, Prince Charles launched the Jacobite rebellion in the Highlands in August 1745 with the aim of usurping the British throne.
The campaign began with startling success, with a government army defeated at Prestonpans and Edinburgh captured by the rebels.
But an invasion of England failed to draw the expected support from Jacobite sympathisers, and the weary army retreated north, pursued by fresh forces.
In April, 1746, at Culloden Moor, Charles’ army was cut down by the forces of the Duke of Cumberland and he was forced to flee to Europe.
READ MORE: Bonnie Prince Charlie's face recreated using death masks
Author Arran Johnstone said that far from being out of his depth, Prince Charles knew the size of the task he was undertaking, and that his achievements astonished contemporaries.
He said: “When he chose to begin the rising in 1745 - and its commencement was entirely down to his own determination to make something happen whilst he sensed an opportunity - the prince understood that it was an enormous task.
"I'd say the events of 1745-6 pushed him to the limits of his physical and mental abilities, but that is a reflection of the scale of the task and the odds against him, rather than implying he was himself somehow deficient.
“We also have to give some credit to the men who followed Charles Edward for so long. Few would have stayed with the prince and risked so much to do so if they did not see in him something worthy of their support.
“Famous stories of how the prince persuaded men like Cameron of Lochiel to support him, hard-headed men of responsibility, tell us a great deal.”
The historian said that Prince Charles has been “underestimated” as a military leader, especially when it came to dealing with his often unruly subordinates.
Mr Johnstone said: "We must remember that the prince had no experience of running or leading an army, yet he created and led one for eight months, often under extremely difficult circumstances, achieving a number of military victories and repeatedly wrong-footing his better resourced opponents.
“Military leadership is not just about winning battles of course; it is also about motivating those under your command, seeing the bigger picture, and understanding the psychology and politics of the conflict as well.
“The prince shows ability in all these areas, which had they been able to flourish in different circumstances could have developed into significant strengths.”
The author believes the Prince’s reputation has been warped by history, beginning with anti-Stewart propaganda before and after the rebellion, and continuing g with the mythologising of his “romantic” rebellion through to his appearance in ‘Outlander’ in the present day.
He said: “The prince's image and reputation have been warped both by opponents and supporters, with 19th century romantics blurring the reality just as much as 18th century propagandists.
“This means that popular perceptions of the prince are often heavily influenced by unreliable interpretations, or coloured by prejudice or political ideology. That's true for today's audiences as much as it was in the past.
“If you've only really met "Bonnie Prince Charlie" through the unflattering portrayal in Outlander, for example, then you'll find a very different person in the pages of my book.
“Since the prince was a real person, he deserves the truth to be at least as accessible as the fiction.”
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel