Saturday, 20 March 2010

Hanoverian memorial at Culloden?

Military historian Trevor Royle wants a monument at Culloden to the redcoats who fell in the battle, as "the thousands who fought at Culloden should be remembered because the battle and regiments involved were important to the future development of the nation and the British Army". There's more at http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/highlands_and_islands/8576910.stm.

There were many Scots on the Hanoverian side, as well as many English, but no matter what the outcome may have been, the aftermath led to the most shameful period of British history, with the virtual destruction of Highland culture. If the regiments involved themselves will still not grant Culloden as a battle honour today, one questions why we should be required to do so on the site where the Hanoverian regime committed some of the greatest war crimes in British history?

Should there be a memorial to the Hanoverian side at Culloden? I suspect not. In many ways though, I suspect it's really an academic point, as I'm not sure how long it would last if there was one...!

PS: I should add, it would also be great if the image of that idiot Bonnie Prince Charlie was taken off all our shortbread tins...!


Chris

www.ScotlandsGreatestStory.co.uk
Professional genealogical problem solving and research
http://twitter.com/ChrisMPaton
Researching Scottish Family History (New book)

2 comments:

JMB said...

I copied the link to the BBC news item onto the Britishregiments group where I got a reply that battle honours did not exist at the time but many were later awarded retrospectively.

But

"one rule has always stood fairly firm: internal wars between the Sovereign's subjects do not qualify for honours"

Chris Paton said...

I suspect it would be stretching the definition of 'honour' too far.

Chris