longer possessed authority, wonderfully increased their loyalty towards him. The Highlanders flourished by rapine, and traded in anarchy.82 They, therefore, hated any government which was strong enough to punish crime; and the Stuarts being now far away, this nation of thieves loved them with an ardour which nothing but their absence could have caused. From William III., they feared restraint; but the exiled prince could do them no hurt, and would look on their excesses as the natural result of their zeal. Not that they cared about the principle of monarchical succession, or speculated on the doctrine of divine right.83 The only succession that interested them, was that of their chiefs. Their only notion of right, was to do what those chiefs commanded. Being miserably poor, they, in raising a rebellion,

84

part of war. In this, they were very apt. Burnet (History of his own Time, vol. i. p. 67) pithily describes them as "good at robbing ;" and Burton (Lives of Lovat and Forbes, p. 47) says, "To steal even vestments was considerably more creditable than to make them." Otherwise, they were completely absorbed by their passion for war. See Thomson's Memoirs of the Jacobites, vol. ii. pp. 175, 176, London, 1845.

82 66 Revenge was accounted a duty, the destruction of a neighbour a meritorious exploit, and rapine an honourable employment." Browne's History of the Highlands, vol. iv. p. 395. "The spirit of rivalry between the clans kept up a taste for hostility, and converted rapine into a service of honour." Thomson's Memoirs of the Jacobites, vol. ii. p. 229.

83 Hence, looking, as they did, merely at the physical qualities of individuals, the appearance of the Pretender in 1715 disgusted them, notwithstanding his splendid lineage. See some excellent remarks in Burton's History of Scotland from 1689 to 1748, London, 1853, vol. ii. pp. 198, 199. At p. 383, Mr. Burton justly observes, that "those who really knew the Highlanders were aware that the followers were no more innate supporters of King James's claim to the throne of Britain, than of Maria Theresa's to the throne of Hungary. They went with the policy of the head of the clan, whatever that might be; and though upwards of half a century's advocacy of the exiled house" (this refers to the last rebellion in 1745)."had made Jacobitism appear a political creed in some clans, it was among the followers, high and low, little better than a nomenclature, which might be changed with circumstances." Since Robertson, Mr. Burton and Mr. Chambers are, I will venture to say, the two writers who have taken the most accurate and comprehensive views of the history of Scotland. Robertson's History stops short where the most important period begins; and his materials were scanty. But what he effected with those materials was wonderful. To my mind, his History of Scotland is much the greatest of his works.

84 A curious description of their appearance, given by the Derby Mercury in 1746 (in Thomson's Memoirs of the Jacobites, vol. iii. p. 115), may be compared with the more general statement in Anderson's Prize Essay on the

risked nothing except their lives, of which, in that state of society, men are always reckless. If they failed, they encountered a speedy, and, as they deemed it, an honourable death. If they succeeded, they gained fame and wealth. In either case, they were sure of many enjoyments. They were sure of being able, for a time at least, to indulge in pillage and murder, and to practise, without restraint, those excesses which they regarded as the choicest guerdon of a soldier's career.

So far, therefore, from wondering at the rebellions of 1715 and 1745,85 the only wonder is, that they did not break out sooner, and that they were not better supported. In 1745, when the sudden appearance of the rebels struck England with terror, and when they penetrated even to the heart of the kingdom, their numbers, even at their height, including Lowland and English recruits, never reached six thousand men. The ordinary amount was five thousand;86 and they cared so little about the cause for which they professed to fight, that, in 1715, when they numbered much stronger than in 1745, they refused to enter England, and make head

Highlands, Edinburgh, 1827, p. 128. "Cattle were the main resources of the tribe the acquisition of these the great object of their hostile forrays. The precarious crops gave them wherewithal to bake their oaten cakes, or distil their ale or whisky. When these failed, the crowded population suffered every extreme of misery and want. At one time in particular, in Sutherland, they were compelled to subsist on broth made of nettles, thickened with a little oatmeal. At another, those who had cattle, to have recourse to the expedient of bleeding them, and mixing the blood with oatmeal, which they afterwards cut into slices and fried."

85 Several writers erroneously term them "unnatural." See, for instance, Rae's History of the Rebellion, London, 1746, pp. 158, 169; and Home's History of the Rebellion, London, 1802, 4to, p. 347.

86

"When the rebels began their march to the southward, they were not 6000 men complete." Home's History of the Rebellion in the Year 1745, 4to, p. 137. At Stirling, the army, "after the junction was made, amounted to somewhat more than 9000 men, the greatest number that Charles ever had under his command." p. 164. But the actual invaders of England were much fewer. "The number of the rebels when they began their march into England was a few above 5000 foot, with about 500 on horseback." Home, p. 331. Browne (History of the Highlands, vol. iii. p. 140) says: "When mustered at Carlisle, the prince's army amounted only to about 4500 men; and Lord George Murray states that, at Derby, we were not above five thousand fighting men, if so many. Jacobite Memoirs of the Rebellion of 1745, edited by Robert Chambers, Edinburgh, 1834, p. 54.

against the government, until they were bribed by the promise of additional pay.87 So, too, in 1745, after they had won the battle of Preston-pans, the only result of that great victory was, that the Highlanders, instead of striking a fresh blow, deserted in large bodies, that they might secure the booty they had obtained, and which alone they valued. They heeded not whether Stuart or Hanoverian gained the day; and at this critical moment, they were unable, says the historian, to resist their desire to return to their glens, and decorate their huts with the spoil.88

There are, indeed, few things more absurd than that

Another writer, relying mainly on traditional evidence, says, "Charles, at the head of 4000 Highlanders, marched as far as Derby." Brown's History of Glasgow, vol. ii. p. 41, Edinburgh, 1797. Compare Johnstone's Memoirs of the Rebellion, 3d edit., London, 1822, pp. xxxvii. xxxviii. 30-32, 52. Johnstone says, p. 60, "M. Patullo, our muster-master, reviewed our army at Carlisle, when it did not exceed four thousand five hundred men." terwards, returning to Scotland, our army was suddenly increased to eight thousand men, the double of what it was when we were in England.” p. 111.

66

Af

87 "Orders were given to proceed in the direction of Carlisle, and recall the detachment sent forward to Dumfries. The Highlanders, still true to their stagnant principles, refused obedience." Pecuniary negotiations were now commenced, and they were offered sixpence a day of regular pay-reasonable remuneration at that period to ordinary troops, but to the wild children of the mountain a glittering bribe, which the most steady obstinacy would alone resist. It was partly effective." Burton's History of Scotland, vol. ii. p. 168. "And from this day, the Highlanders had sixpence a head per day payed them to keep them in good order and under command." Patten's History of the late Rebellion, London, 1717, p. 73. See also, on the unwillingness of the Highlanders to enter England, Rae's History of the Rebellion, London, 1746, 2d edit. pp. 270, 271. Browne says (History of the Highlands, vol. ii. pp. 300, 304): "The aversion of the Highlanders, from different considerations, to a campaign in England, was alinost insuperable;" but "by the aid of great promises and money, the greater part of the Highlanders were prevailed upon to follow the fortunes of their commander."

88 Few victories have been more entire. It is said that scarcely two hundred of the infantry escaped.". . . . "The Highlanders obtained a glorious booty in arms and clothes, besides self moving watches, and other products of civilisation, which surprised and puzzled them. Excited by such acquisitions, a considerable number could not resist the old practice of their people to return to their glens, and decorate their huts with their spoil." Burton's History of Scotland, vol. ii. p. 465. Compare Home's History of the Rebellion, p. 123. This was an old practice of theirs, as Montrose found out, a century earlier, "when many of the Highlanders, being loaded with spoil, deserted privately, and soon after returned to their own country." Wishart's Memoirs of the Marquis of Montrose, Edinburgh, 1819,

lying spirit of romance, which represents the rising of the Highlanders as the outburst of a devoted loyalty. Nothing was further from their minds than this. The Highlanders have crimes enough to account for, without being burdened by needless reproach. They were thieves and murderers; but that was in their way of life, and they felt not the stigma. Though they were ignorant and ferocious, they were not so foolish as to be personally attached to that degraded family, which, before the accession of William III., occupied the throne of Scotland. To love such men as Charles II. and James II., may, perhaps, be excused as one of those peculiarities of taste of which one sometimes hears. But to love all their descendants; to feel an affection so comprehensive as to take in the whole dynasty, and, for the sake of gratifying that eccentric passion, not only to undergo great hardships, but to inflict enormous evil upon two kingdoms, would have been a folly as well as a wickedness, and would convict the Highlanders of a species of insanity alien to their nature. They burst into insurrection, because insurrection suited their habits, and because they hated all government and all order.89 But, so far from caring for a monarch, the very institution of monarchy was repulsive to them. It was contrary to that spirit of clanship to which they were devoted; and,

p. 189. So, too, Burnet (Memoirs of the Dukes of Hamilton, p. 272): "Besides, any companies could be brought down from the Highlands might do well enough for a while, but no order could be expected from them, for as soon as they were loaded with plunder and spoil, they would run away home to their lurking holes, and desert those who had trusted them. See also p. 354. A more recent writer, drawing a veil over this little infirmity, remarks, with much delicacy, that "the Highlanders, brave as they were, had a custom of returning home after a battle." Thomson's Memoirs of the Jacobites, London, 1845, vol. i. p. 122. Not unfrequently they first robbed their fellow-soldiers. In 1746, Bisset writes: "The Highlanders, who went off after the battel, carried off horses and baggage from their own men, the Lowlanders." Diary of the Reverend John Bisset, in Miscellany of the Spalding Club, vol. i. p. 377, Aberdeen, 1841, 4to.

89"Whoever desired, with the sword, to disturb or overturn a fixed government, was sure of the aid of the chiefs, because a settled government was ruinous to their power, and almost inimical to their existence. The more it cultivated the arts of peace, and throve on industrially created well-being, the more did it drive into an antagonist position a people who

from their earliest childhood, they were accustomed to respect none but their chiefs, to whom they paid a willing obedience, and whom they considered far superior to all the potentates of the earth.90 No one, indeed, who is really acquainted with their history, will think them capable of having spilt their blood on behalf of any sovereign, be he whom he might; still less can we believe that they would quit their native land, and undertake long and hazardous marches, with the object of

66

did not change their nature, who made no industrial progress, and who lived by the swords which acquired for them the fruits of other men's industry. With their interests, a peaceful, strong government was as inconsistent as a well-guarded sheepfold with the interest of wolves." Burton's History of Scotland, vol. i. pp. 105, 106. 'The Highlanders, in all reigns, have been remarkable for disturbing the established government of Scotland by taking up arms on every invasion for the invaders." Marchant's History of the present Rebellion, London, 1746, p. 18. See also Macky's Journey through Scotland, London, 1732, p. 129; and a short, but very curious, account of the Highlanders, in 1744, in The Miscellany of the Spalding Club, vol. ii. pp. 87-89.

90 An observer, who had excellent opportunities of studying their character between the rebellion of 1715 and that of 1745, writes, “The ordinary Highlanders esteem it the most sublime degree of virtue to love their chief, and pay him a blind obedience, although it be in opposition to the government, the laws of the kindgom, or even to the law of God. He is their idol; and as they profess to know no king but him (I was going farther), so will they say, they ought to do whatever he commands, without inquiry." Letters from a Gentleman in the North of Scotland, edit. London, 1815, vol. ii. pp. 83, 84. "The Highlanders in Scotland are, of all men in the world, the soonest wrought upon to follow their leaders or chiefs into the field, having a wonderful veneration for their Lords and Chieftains, as they are called there: Nor do these people ever consider the validity of the engaging cause, but blindly follow their chiefs into what mischief they please, and that with the greatest precipitation imaginable." Patten's History of the Rebellion, London, 1717, p. 151. "The power of the chiefs over their claus was the true source of the two rebellions. The clansmen cared no more about the legitimate race of the Stuarts, than they did about the war of the Spanish succession." "The Jacobite Highland chiefs ranged their followers on the Jacobite side-the Hanoverians ranged theirs on the side of government. Lovat's conduct was a sort of experimentum crucis; he made his clan Hanoverian in one rebellion, and Jacobite in another." Burton's Lives of Lovat and Forbes, p. 150. Compare the change of side of the Mackintoshes, in Browne's History of the Highlands, vol. ii. p. 285. Even so late as the American war, the sovereign was deemed subordinate to the chief. "One Captain Frazer from the northern district, brought down a hundred of his clan, all of the name of Frazer. Few of them could understand a word of English; and the only distinct idea they had of all the mustering of forces which they saw around them, was that they were going to fight for King Frazer and George ta Three." Penny's Traditions of Perth, pp. 49, 50, Perth, 1836.