Lt. Colonel George Stanhope describes the Battle of Culloden

British reenactors represent troops from the '45.

The following is an account of the Battle of Culloden from British Lt. Colonel George Stanhope, as written in a letter to his brother shortly following the battle. This comes from my research this week in Kent.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dear Brother                                                    Camp Near Inverness, April 21st, 1746

I return many thanks for the favour of yours of the 10th instant which I received last night, as well as of the 1st instant that I received at Aberdeen the 8th of this month, and should have answered sooner but have been upon the march ever since. At present writing my fingers are almost froze being as cold in camp as in winter. I shall not trouble you with our particular marches, but ours and the Rebel army about 9,000 strong, and they fired the first cannon shot at us about two in the afternoon, which we answered with great success.[1] The army was drawn up in two lines and a reserve, with horse and dragoons on the flanks. The small arms began about a quarter of an hour after the first cannon shot, and for the time it lasted it was the hottest I ever saw. The rebels after having flung away their fire attacked with sword in hand most furiously, and bent their chief effort after Barrel's [Regiment] that was on the left of the front line, who received them warmly and stood as well as men could do till overpowered and were obliged to give ground...[.] The Rebels pursuing them intermixed with sword in hand upon which our being Regiment next to Wolfe's on the left of the second line and both Regiments outflanking Barrel's of the front line had the finest opportunity imaginable which we did not let slip off.

[Our troops] giving the column of Rebels that was about twenty deep and not forty yards distant from our regiment's right the most infernal flanking fire and saved Barrel's by it, and contributed a great deal to the turn of the whole for the rebels were soon after put to flight. When we marched on to pursue them I never saw such dreadful slaughter we had made. [The Jacobites] lying thick as they had grounded their arms and our men gave no quarter to them. I reckon two thousand of them killed in the field [and by] besides in the pursuit by the horse and dragoons with a great many of their chiefs and upward of a thousand prisoners...

It was a glorious victory and I believe the cheapest that was ever gained our whole loss being under three hundred, chiefly Barrel's with upwards of a hundred killed or wounded, with Robert Kerr, a Captain killed, and their Lt. Colonel Rich much cut in the head, his left hand cut off with one stroke, and his other arm so cut that it is doubtful they can save it, some other [junior] officers killed or wounded. The whole army behaved with the utmost resolution, and our regiment with little loss as well as any.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

If you enjoyed this post, or any of our other posts, please consider liking us on facebook,  or following us on twitter. Finally, we are dedicated to keeping Kabinettskriege ad-free. In order to assist with this, please consider supporting us via the donate button in the upper right-hand corner of the page. As always:

Thanks for Reading,



Alex Burns





[1] Modern estimates place the Jacobites closer to between 7,000 and 8,000 men, and indicate that the battle began around 12:30 to 12:45pm. It is possible that Stanhope's pocket watch was running behind.

Fight for a Throne: The Jacobite '45 Reconsidered

Front Cover

Dear Reader,

I know it has been some time since I published a post, and I hope to return to work on Kabinettskriege more in the summer months. My first year of doctoral work is going quite well, and I am settling in to my new home at West Virginia University. So, without further ado, let's jump into the matter at hand, the latest book from Dr. Christopher Duffy.

For many students of eighteenth century warfare, the Jacobite rising of 1745-46 (the '45) is old hat. Many books have been published on the subject, including a previous volume from the same author. Dr. Duffy's return to the '45 is a matter of some import, as he is without question the leading scholar of this rebellion, and of mid-eighteenth century warfare as a whole.

Those who have read Duffy's previous volume on the last great Jacobite rebellion, (The '45) will recall the major facets of the rebellion- the initial Jacobite rising, let by Charles Edward Stuart, the "Bonnie Prince Charlie" of 19th century romanticism, and the Scottish Jacobite victory over Hanoverian British forces at Prestonpans. This first success was followed  a Jacobite surge southward into England, eventual retreat to Scotland, and destruction by the Hanoverian forces at Culloden Moor on April 16th, 1746.

Duffy's new study offers something for everyone. Filled with an impressive amount of social and cultural information, Duffy examines the conflict in never before seen detail. Though the book will disappoint readers hoping for a comprehensive examination of Hanoverian fighting forces, Jacobite forces are discussed at extreme length. New appendices provide detailed information about sea conditions, meteorological observations, detailed geography, and a unit by unit evaluation of the highland army.

Duffy spends a great deal of time discussing the Jacobite rising as a modernizing force- as opposed to the traditional historical view of Jacobitism: a backwards movement supporting a bygone dynasty (the Stuarts) and bygone religious movement in England (Catholicism). Rather, Duffy crafts a persuasive argument that the Jacobites were a forward-looking movement, based (via necessity) on Enlightenment ideas of religious toleration, and military innovation. Duffy makes a convincing argument that the Jacobites pioneered a divisional system which gave them an extreme advantage in strategic operations.
The monograph also makes a parallel argument that the Hanoverian system of government was bogged down in pervasive corruption, and that the politicians of the 1740s Britain made poor strategic thinkers in comparison with the Stuart prince and his advisers. In this way, Fight for a Throne turns the traditional interpretation of the '45 on its head.

The book also contains a wealth of new information on the military history of the Jacobite Rising. In Duffy's description of Culloden alone, he provides persuasive evidence that the Highlanders discarded (or perhaps neglected to pick up)  their shields in the hectic assembly to confront rapidly advancing Hanoverian forces. In addition, Fight for a Throne makes it clear that Cumberland's soldiers did NOT adapt a new style of bayonet drill, in which each soldier stabbed the highlander attacking the man next to him.

Rather, according to a eyewitness, the Hanoverian infantry

"...first gave one fire, the fore rank kept [the Jacobites] off with their bayonets till the second rank charged [loaded] again and gave them so close a fire that our fore rank was bespattered with their blood and brains..." (Quoted in Duffy, Fight for a Throne, 466.)

Undeterred by this mauling, the Highlanders pushed into close combat with Barrel's regiment, but were unable to break the British line. The chapter on Culloden alone makes this volume worth the price, but be careful- Duffy will entrance you with his wider social and cultural narrative of this vital event in British history.

Thanks for Reading!

Alex Burns