I was, however, puzzled by your figures.

The number of regular troops slain at Culloden was 50, plus another 259 wounded, of which many probably died. I was uncertain how the number 52 was reached.

Jacobite prisoners. 222 French troops and 336 others are the figures quoted in contemporary sources, but of the latter, 164 had been taken on the previous day by loyalist Scots.

Of Jacobite deaths, sources give between 1,000-4,000, and the latter is certainly far too high. I do not know of anyone who made an exact count.

Best Wishes
Dr Oates

Your best hope of keeping us all together against the EU is to support the wee bairn David William Donald, son of Ian Cameron.

http://eutruth.org.uk/subversion.htm

The French tried this with Louis Philippe in place of Charles X , Louis XIX & Henri V in 1830 and France is now a republic so tampering with time honoured principles is not always so wise .
If you are going to have an hereditary monarchy then it should be just that – denying someone their rights on the grounds of faith is just discrimination. What happened after Culledon in 1746 was just a terrible tradegy that could have been avoided if the Prince of Wales had led his forces to London . Like the failure of the French Royalists to restore Henri V in 1849 & 1871-73 – not taking your chances to change things for the better can produce very bad results indeed.

“Of all the members of the royal family, with the exception of Queen Caroline, he [the Duke of Cumberland] was the only one who possessed any remarkable ability.” Mr Lecky. How fashions change in the teaching of history.

At Culloden James Wolfe refused to carry out an order of the Duke of Cumberland to shoot a wounded Highlander by stating that his honour was worth more than his commission. This act may have been a cause for his later popularity among the Royal Highland Fusiliers, whom he would later command.

He had distinguished himself and later went on to storm Abraham Heights, crossing to the base of the cliffs in a boat whilst reading Gray’s Elegy.

What a Brit!

Parliamentary democracy as practiced in Europe today has flaws that are increasingly exposed leading to a gradual loss of legitimacy. Immediately after a national election an executive (cabinet) is formed which now controls the supposedly representative legislature through party discipline and the whips rather than being held accountable by it. And the EU system gives the cabinet mechanisms to bind their successors in a way that used to be impossible. Which of Thomas Paine’s two forms of government is the EU when there is no European people from which it may draw legitimacy and when political elites acting in their own self-interest (President Blair?) defy their own manifesto commitments to usurp the sovereignty of parliament and transfer it to EU Councils on which they sit (Council of Ministers) from where they can decree law that cannot be opposed by democratic checks (votes in a bicameral parliament) on their executive power at home and which their successors cannot easily reverse? The overturning of the 2005 referendum result in France shows that this is as much a problem on the other side of the Channel as here.

Reply: Yes, there is a growing lack of legitimacy through the transfer of powers to unelected bodies.

Reply: What form does the anti Catholicism take in modern Scotland that you claim? Is there evidence of a serious problem?

His Grace is utterly depressed that notions of sovereignty and patriotism are being expunged, such that the Scots, Welsh and Irish are exhorted to nationalism, but God forbid that the English should ever assert theirs.

And as for the claim of the Stuarts to the throne, one can but wonder at the consequences of the repeal of the Act of Settlement 1701.

if Brown is Macbeth, can we expect to see Ed Balls prowling Westminster late at night muttering “out damn spot?” (along with “so what?”) Now the question must surely be, was Cameron born of woman? Are the polls Birnam Wood moving to Dunsinane Hill?

(An inaccurate comment from Donitz? I am bewilderwed, this is unknown in my experience?)

We certainly knew a thing or two about dealing with Johny Foreigner back then.

Reply: This may be tongue in cheek but scarcely accurate. The Scottish establishment was split, with many Scots backing the British army and the Hanoverian succession. Remember in 1707 the Scottish establishment had willingly entered the Union of Parliaments. This conflict was about who should be King of the combined kingdoms. It was not a forerunner of the Scottish independence movement in the way some now imagine.