Historical trivia

[regshoe]

So, something that's puzzled me for a while about the opening of Flight of the Heron: there were, historically, two companies of the Royal Scots ambushed at High Bridge and taken captive by the MacDonells, and (if my knowledge of army structure is correct) each company ought to have had a captain, but the history books I've read so far only ever mention one captain, Captain John Scott—who appears in FotH. There, of course, the other captain is Keith Windham, and I wondered whether the identity of the real second captain was lost to history and Broster simply slotted her character into the gap. But now I'm reading The Lyon in Mourning, a collection of letters, journals, speeches and eyewitness accounts relating to the 1745 rising put together by the Jacobite clergyman Robert Forbes, and it appears the name of the other captain is recorded: he was a Captain James Thomson, and he was taken prisoner alongside Scott and the rest. He must have escaped at some point, because he turns up again later on, in charge of a party of Jacobite prisoners and attempting (unsuccessfully) to persuade his superiors to treat one of these prisoners more humanely:

...dreading the worst from this harsh usage he [Buchanan of Arnprior] sent for Captain Thomson, who very readily came to him, and after some conversation upon the unexpected change of treatment desir'd to know what he could do for him. Mr. Buchanan beg'd he would wait upon the commanding officer... Captain Thomson frankly undertook to do as he desir'd, and without loss of time, honestly represented the whole affair to the commanding officer, who said he was heartily sorry for the gentleman, but that it was not in his power to do him any service, because the Solicitor-General was come to Carlisle, and that (now he was in the place) his province it was to determine in these matters. Captain Thomson did not stop here, but like one of generosity and compassion, went directly to the Solicitor-General and laid before him the case of Mr. Buchanan, requesting him to consider it and to allow the gentleman a more easy and comfortable confinement.

I like to think Keith would have approved of his real-world counterpart. :D

Comments

[theseatheseatheopensea]

Hehe, I found this collection at Gutenberg project, but didn't get very far along, just poked at it a bit here and there! It looks fascinating so far--history really comes to life through this type of accounts! And maybe it was one of the 80+ sources Broster read and used for inspiration? :D This captain here certainly fits her ideas of compassionate and decent behaviour towards the enemy!

[regshoe]

Yeah, it certainly is fascinating reading about the Jacobites in their own words, and there are loads of random little details that make the historical figures feel very human.

It was one of Broster's sources, because the epigraph to part 3 is quoted from it! I am enjoying trying to guess which pieces she used when putting the story together—the detail of Captain Scott's horse being given to the Prince turns up in the same section, and I think Keith remarks on it :D

[theseatheseatheopensea]

It was one of Broster's sources, because the epigraph to part 3 is quoted from it!

Duh! You're right! Then that's probably how I found it in the first place? I searched for all of the epigraphs and quotations she used, and it all might have become a bit too overwhelming, haha ;) It really looks like an interesting but tough read, because of how the whole conflict affected real people. But it's definitely a good, important thing, to read people's experiences in their own words.

[regshoe]

Interesting but tough is right, yes—there are things like the last letters written to their families by prisoners condemned to die, which are especially affecting in those little details. But it's all very interesting, and of course good background for writing about the period realistically!

[luzula]

Well, but there was historically a third captain of recruits, too! Captain John Sweetenham marched from Ruthven Barracks towards Fort William two days before Scott, with another company of reinforcements. They were captured by the MacDonells as well (the first skirmish of the war) and both Sweetenham and his men were brought along and witnessed the raising of the standard at Glenfinnan, like Keith and his recruits. Sweetenham was later paroled and made his way back to Edinburgh and then London (I suppose he promised not to take part in the war).

Sweetenham was actually the one who, on his way back, warned Cope not to go over the Corryarrick, which pleases me, because it means that when Keith fails to escape at Fassefern in my current AU, the battle at the Corryarrick is not actually a separate AU branching point. : D (Although to be quite accurate, Cope was also warned by Duncan Forbes.)

I think Keith is an amalgam of Sweetenham and Thomson.

[regshoe]

Huh, there was a mention of Sweetenham (or Switenham—the inconsistency of eighteenth-century spelling keeps you on your toes when reading contemporary accounts!) as a prisoner being handed over to the Prince in one of the bits I read today, but I didn't know he was in a similar situation to Scott—that is interesting. I suppose Scott and Thomson/Keith would have heard of what happened to Sweetenham before they set out—the Government forces clearly weren't having great luck at this time!

Sweetenham was actually the one who, on his way back, warned Cope not to go over the Corryarrick, which pleases me, because it means that when Keith fails to escape at Fassefern in my current AU, the battle at the Corryarrick is not actually a separate AU branching point. : D

How very neat :D