The Battle of Carbisdale: April 27, 1650

The Marquis of Montrose has landed,
An English invader unfounded
By law or decree has he banded
To render Scotland’s north hounded.

Thurso and Dunbeath have fallen,
Castles in rock and heather graven,
His war ships crested Firth Pentland,
Now he’s under Craigcaoinichean.

So up Scotland! Fight thine old cause!
Lift high the old Celtic cross!
Address their king as thy kingship was!
For Covenant, reclaim every loss!

Per Scriptum E. Wesley - Mackinac Center Intern

Negotiation was a precarious thing in the 17th century, but for Scotland, foreign treachery and coerced invasion was not to be tolerated. After the establishment of the Commonwealth of England, and Cromwell's annihilation of Royalist power in Ireland, Charles II turned to Scotland for an alliance. Charles II needed the Scottish Covenanters' support in order to win Scotland, but was not immediately ready to capitulate to their demands regarding the signing of the Covenants (providing for the establishment of Presbyterianism in Scotland). This made negotiation difficult. The ambitious Marquis of Montrose was sent north to the Orkney Islands, and mustered about 1,200 Germans, Danish and local Orcadians to threaten the Covenanters into terms with Charles. After Charles made some preliminary progress with the Covenanters, Marquis without permission from Charles (yet without explicit prohibition) went ahead and attacked prematurely.

Departing from Kirkwall on April 9, 1650, Montrose's Major-General Sir John Hurry crossed Pentland Firth and captured the outposts at Thurso and Wick (see battle map below). Laying siege to Dunbeath castle, Montrose challenged the garrison to join King Charles. Dunbeath surrendered in four days. However, the Earl of Sutherland sent strengthened defenses against Montrose at castles Dunrobin, Skelbo, Skibo, and Dornoch. Montrose made for Dunrobin, but found it to be impenetrable. Furthermore, clans Monro, Ross, and Mackenzie, who were presumed to side with Montrose, actually joined the Covenanter cause. Lieutenant-Colonel Archibald Strachan, under Covenanter Lieutenant-Colonel David Leslie, marched an advance guard to Inverness and then on to Tain. Montrose sidestepped west toward Lairg, after failing to take Dunrobin. Leslie ordered the Earl of Sutherland to move north behind Montrose to the Kyle of Sutherland so as to cut off Montrose's northern escape path, while Strachan was to meet Montrose head on and hold long enough for the Earl to close in. Strachan and Montrose met on April 27, 1650 at Carbisdale.


In the valley of Carbisdale, Montrose set up a line of obstructive earthworks alone the base slopes of Craigcaoinichean, and set his left flank next to the Kyle. To his right and rear was Scroggie Wood, and his front entrenchments were described in C. Wishart's The Deeds of Montrose as being visible years after the battle. This was truly an impregnable place and a daunting opposition; 1,200 infantry and 40 cavalry in all. By comparison, Strachan had only about 200 Covenanter cavalry, 400 unpredictable Highlanders (from clans Ross and Monro), and a few musketeers. Strachan tried the oldest trick in the book. He sent out a small division of cavalry to draw Montrose out of his defenses, while concealing the rest of his force in the high broom of Wester Fearn opposite Dun of Criech. Sure enough, after his detachment returned saying that the Covenanters were few in number, Montrose sent the Orcadian infantry along with the support of Lisle's cavalry to crush Strachan's cavalry. As Lisle thundered across to valley, Strachan released 100 more horse from the ambush, and rode down all of Lisle's cavalry detachment. All of the Orcadians panicked and fled without any further resistance. The Germans and Danes gradually gave ground, as they retreated back to the earthworks. Strachan pursued them back to the forests with great success. The captured numbered 58 lesser officers, 386 soldiers, and two ministers from Orkney, with 450 others dead. Strachan's casualties were comparatively few.

Victory was as triumphant as it was complete. After giving God thanks for His glorious providence on their behalf, the Covenanters under Leslie's orders retook all of the outposts to the north (including Dunbeath and Thurso), and even reclaimed the Orkney Islands. The Battle of Carbisdale remains a testimony to the Presbyterian, freedom-loving spirit of the Covenanters, and Scotland's ever ill taste for sudden and immediate subjugation of their country.

Sources:
Image of Carbisdale castle from Wikipedia
Carbisdale Battle Map from british-civil-wars.co.uk
http://www.british-civil-wars.co.uk/military/1650-carbisdale.htm
http://www.scotwars.com/battle_of_carbisdale.htm

The Battle of Formigny: England vs. France (April 15, 1450)

The knights of Christendom are divided;
For whose cause should their swords be provided?
England boasts of its Author, Lancelot,
And Gareth to whom peasant boons are brought.
Yet, France has its lady warrior saint,
Joan of Arc, who freed France from English taint.

One hundred years bled the heroic test
Edward, Richard, and Henry without rest,
Challenged Philip, John, and Charles in France
For Norman English titled inheritance.
To Charles’ stronghold Orleans they laid siege,
But Joan rode in as knight of France’s liege.

Fire beyond the work of Medieval arts
Proved France that day against the English darts,
Yet Normandy would be saved another day
With the aid of gun powder’s explosive ray.
For on the crossroads of Formigny
Two guns roared against England’s panoply.

Desperately the archers charged where the guns lay,
But Richemont rode up in full array,
And peering down the hill, thundered swiftly,
While Clermont rallied again quickly,
Afterward, France won the One Hundred Years’ War
And England would despise this land of lore.

Per Scriptum E. Wesley - Mackinac Center Intern

Much of Western Civilization in Western Europe has been characterized by the nationalistic animosity between England and France that took two world wars to finally end. But where did this animosity come from? In 1066, the Duke of Normandy (France) invaded England, dethroned Edward the Confessor, and became known as William the Conqueror. At that point, noble titled land in France became linked to the Norman English kings. However, as France followed the Conqueror’s model of royal feudal centralization of the nobility, French lands became a recipe for dynastic contest. Between 1337 and 1453, the kings of England and France waged perhaps the longest single national war in Western history, the Hundred Years’ War. Until 1429, the English were winning the war in almost every land encounter. In that year, nationalist hero of France and Catholic saint, Joan of Arc, broke the English siege of Orleans, setting in motion a twenty four year process of French unification and expulsion of English forces in France. However, the most decisive battle against the English on land was the Battle of Formigny on April 15, 1450. The battle would not only signal the end of the Hundred Years’ War, it would solidify the imperial contest between England and France on the national scale for future eras to come. This division within Western Civilization was born out in many key events of the founding of liberty in the West.

The Battle:
Sir Thomas Kyriell held the last English army in Normandy by April of 1450. Being sent to France by the Duke of Suffolk and linking up with what was left of the Duke of Somerset’s force, Kyriell had now had about 4,000 men under his command (lowest estimation is 3,800 and highest estimation is 5,000). After Kyriell’s landing at Cherbourg, taking of Valognes, and defeating of a small sortie near Carentan, Kyriell camped near Formigny (see map below). Comte de Clermont’s French force of about 3,000 men made straightway from Carentan for Formigny (a distance of about 15 miles bearing east), while Richemont, with a force of about 2,000 from St. Lo (about 19 miles southwest of Formigny) planned to intercept Kyriell before he reached Bayeux.


At about 3:00 pm on the 15th, Kyriell detected Clermont’s movements, and set up his men into the successful formation tried at the Battle of Crecy, with 800 dismounted men-at-arms interspersed between 2,900 longbow archers (see battle map below). Kyriell blocked the road, setting up his center line of archers in front of a stone bridge that crossed a brook further down the road. Clermont’s men dismounted, and launched a probing assault, but were turned back. Clermont then led a mounted attack on the English flanks, but again to no avail. Then, Clermont finally released two “culverin” cannon on the archers, decimating them at an amazing range of about 300 yards. Probably lightweight, breach loaded, and possibly each mounted on a two wheel carriage, these guns would had to have been able to fire very rapidly in order to cause such significant damage to the archer formations. Frustrated, the archers finally left their stake entrenchments, charged, and took possession of the guns. However, whether or not Clermont successfully recaptured the guns in a counterattack is still disputed. What is apparent is that the English were too late. Richemont had mysteriously abandoned his earlier plans to intercept Kyriell further east, and suddenly arrived poised on the brow of the hill behind Kyriell's left flank with about 1,200 mounted knights (800 archers had been left behind). No one knows how he knew where the battle was. Perhaps he heard the guns. Anyway, Kyriell hastily flew back to the brook, and formed a semi-circle around the bridge. In this formation, the English archers were not near as effective, and Clermont, after rallying his men, found it not too difficult to break the lines. Dreading being captured by the French, almost all of Kyriell's men fought to the death in little pockets of skirmishes across the lines, but Kyriell himself was captured. The French only lost about 200. After having driven out the last English army division in Normandy, the Hundred Years' War was coming to a close. Henry VI vainly sent one last army into Normandy which was forcefully put down (again by cannon) at the Battle of Castillon in 1453.


The Hundred Years' War formed France into a new national identity inherently opposed to England. This was due to the fact that during the 15th century, nobility and feudal hierarchy formed the basis of nationhood, and titled land was the foundation for all politically legitimate sovereignty. The English vs. French struggle would last far after feudalism into the 20th century, demonstrating that the national rhetoric for 19th century European empire was a modified extension of national formations from the Medieval era. Far from being totally opposed to liberty, this dichotomy helped found some of the greatest struggles for colonial independence, including America. Had France not been so anxious to dismantle the British Empire during the late 18th century (even at the expense of bankrupting itself and sending itself from financial ruin into a bloody revolution), America might never have had such a persistent ally in its War for Independence. No less important, Napoleon's territorial expansions might never have been stopped at Waterloo had not Great Britain been so stubborn in its somewhat distant excursions into the European Continent. History would not be the same without the Battle of Formigny and the nationalistic conclusion to the Hundred Years' War.

Sources:
Image Král Jan v bitvě u Kresčaku from Wikipedia
Map of France and Formigny Battle Map from xenophongroup.com
http://ehistory.osu.edu/osu/archive/hundredyearswar2.cfm
http://www.jeanne-darc.dk/p_war/0_battles/formigny.html
http://www.xenophongroup.com/montjoie/formigny.htm
http://www.archive.org/stream/cu31924027926272/cu31924027926272_djvu.txt

Declaration of Arbroath: Drafted April 6, 1320

Ye knights of Arthur’s table round,

Hear now the northern war pipe sound,
The restless, marshal pleas abound,
From loch to hill of liberty’s ground.
Land of mythic golden Camelot,
With fabled knights like Lancelot,
Hark now to minstrelsy dearly bought
With the fallen, kilted warriors’ lot,
Recalled in Arbroath.

“From countless evils, English foes,
God saved us by Robert’s toiling woes.
Yet if he betrays; from the cause repose,
We shall surely force him to depose.
For as yet as one hundred live,
We’ll never English fealty give,
Not for riches, honor do we rive,
But for our freedom have we striv’”
Declared the Arbroath.

Arbroath mustered more than Scots.
Including Brederode’s April plots;*
Covenanters signing blood inked dots;
And Americans loading Watts.*
From Wellington’s great victory;
To Blue’s emancipating dignity,
And Churchill’s symbolic “V.”
Worthy men give life for liberty,
Thus said the Arbroath.

Per Scriptum E. Wesley - Mackinac Center Intern

On April 6th, 1320, the Declaration of Arbroath was first drafted at Arbroath Abbey on behalf of the Scottish nobility. It was originally written as a request for Pope John XXII to recognized Scotland as an independent nation, but its significance is far greater. The Declaration of Arbroath defined the concept of contractual monarchy in Europe as well as serving as inspiration for the American Declaration of Independence. Read a translation here.

* During the Dutch Revolt

** Watts refers to the hymn-writer Isaac Watts. During a particular battle in the American War for Independence, a pastor gave the patriot soldiers pages of Watt's hymns as wadding for their guns.

Sources:
Image of William Wallace from Wikipedia
http://www.boisestate.edu/courses/reformation/netherlands/revolt.shtml
http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/scottishhistory/independence/features_independence_arbroath.shtml
http://www.constitution.org/scot/arbroath.pdf

Sir Robert Walpole: A New Executive

"My Lord Bath, you and I are now as insignificant men as any in England." ~Sir Robert Walpole

Per Scriptum E. Wesley - Mackinac Center Intern

If ever a glorious concept of government arose from a scandalous politician, Sir Robert's Walpole's career would fit the description. Despite embezzlement and voting trickery, Walpole's central position in English government set a precedent for a new executive branch within Parliament. Although the term Prime Minister wasn't recognized as a British office until 1905, Walpole is considered the first Prime Minister of Great Britain. Almost of his energies were merely political. He never possessed some great goal for the government, but rather took things as they came. Of course, this may have had a good effect, as he didn't push some sort of arbitrary agenda on the people of Great Britain. Notwithstanding the fact that his contemporary David Hume would not usually be someone trustworthy of character analysis, Hume does give modern readers a tap into the times. In A Character of Sir Robert Walpole, Hume colorfully writes, "During his time trade has flourished, liberty declined, and learning gone to ruin. As I am a man, I love him; as I am a scholar, I hate him; as I am a Briton, I calmly wish his fall." Walpole became the First Lord Commissioner of the Treasury and Chancellor of the Exchequer in 1715, but it wasn't until his second term, beginning on April 3, 1721, that he began establishing procedures for a new and distinct office. He couldn't have been more wrong about his apparent "insignificance." Walpole politically defined the executive for the rest of the Western World to follow.

Sir Robert Walpole was born on August 26, 1676 in Houghton, Norfolk, where his wealthy family had owned the Houghton Hall estate for four hundred years. He attended Great Durham school as a boy, and studied at Eton College in 1690. By that time, King Charles II had died, Parliament had deposed Charles's Catholic brother James II, and William III of Orange was now king. After attending King's College Cambridge from 1696 to 1698, Walpole inherited the Houghton Hall upon the death of his father in 1701, and became an MP to the House of Commons for the Castle Rising district. His political carrier had begun.

Being an ardent Whig, Walpole's often crafty political influence brought Whigs to power in Parliament. While Queen Anne was on the throne, Walpole became Secretary at War in 1708 and Treasurer of the Navy in 1709. However in 1712, the opposing Tory Party accused Walpole of accepting payments that were illegal as Secretary of War, and after being found guilty, Walpole spent six mounts locked up in the Tower of London. Queen Anne's death in 1714 and George I's subsequent coronation gave the Whigs a political advantage. King George I distrusted the Tories, as they more likely to follow the Stuart line to the throne and disregard or marginalize him. Walpole soon rose to power again, and became First Lord of the Treasury and Chancellor of the Exchequer in 1715. According to the King's desire, Walpole devised a plan that would rig elections in Whig favor. He bribed targeted districts with limited electorates in order to win. As the election results did not fairly represent public opinion, riots broke out and were suppressed with the Riot Act. Despite a temporary resignation in 1717 when the Whig Party was split, he returned in 1720 as Paymaster General.

The events of 1720 paved Walpole's road to power. During the South Sea Bubble scandal, Walpole pumped public funds into the sinking company to protect aristocratic directors. This brought him disfavor with the public but equal popularity among prominent leaders, and in an age when public opinion was second in political preference and weight to influential aristocrats, Walpole's efforts didn't go unnoticed. Because of these dealings, he returned to his prestigious post as First Lord of the Treasury and Chancellor of the Exchequer for the second time on April 3, 1721. In 1722, Walpole's counter espionage network uncovered a Tory plot to restore James II's son to the throne (just the sort of thing George I feared from the Tories). George I was properly grateful, and returned the favor with indisputable prestige and personal benefits. Indeed, proof of George I's lavishness on Walpole is still apparent today from the exquisite remodeling begun in 1722 of Walpole's Houghton Hall estate (click the link to view). It was during his second term as First Lord that Walpole began to display the vestments of a modern prime minister. He developed a unique cabinet system based on patronage, and put the House of Commons at the forefront of parliamentary power. Because of this political focus, Britain avoided war for a while. This, in turn, contributed to the stability in government that was much needed in these heated and divided times.

When George II ascended the throne in 1727, Walpole was temporarily replaced by Spencer Compton as First Lord, but was soon reinstalled to the position partly due to his friendship with George II's wife Caroline. Soon after, Walpole attempted to lower the land tax on the wealthy land owners in favor for taxing salt, which he believed would be fairer. This would seem to be popular with the Tory gentry, as they owned most of the land. However, the Tories, seeing the opportunity for a popular demonstration, decided to protest along side the common man in order to weaken Walpole's power. Apparently, they valued political position above personal gain. Walpole backed off of the tax proposal in 1733, and was now in an unstable political position going into the 1734 elections. Once again, intentional voting trickery proved more effective than the opposition. When all else failed, Walpole fell back on political tricks in order to secure his power, "winning" the election. George II then gave 10 Downing Street to Walpole as First Lord in 1735. This remains the residence of the British Prime Minister today.

Walpole's disapproval for a war with Spain eventually led to his political downfall, and he resigned in 1742, after which he was given a position in the House of Lord's (when he is quoted as saying, "My Lord Bath, you and I are now as insignificant men as any in England"). His twenty years as prime minister is still a record. When Walpole died on March 18, 1745, he left behind a political office that would only mature with time. The English prime minister phenomenon pioneered a new executive branch that would be a pattern to other nations in the future. In America, the concept of prime minister was united with the Enlightenment political philosophy of separation of powers to form the modern Western three branch government system. Sir Robert Walpole was simply pursuing his own political gains, but the effect was the beginning of an idea. On the surface of it, Walpole did little to advance liberty through his policy, but his political organization did much to bring about concepts of limited government and liberty throughout the Western world and beyond.

Sources:
Image of Robert Walpole prime minister of Britain from Wikipedia
http://oll.libertyfund.org/?option=com_staticxt&staticfile=show.php%3Ftitle=704&chapter=137573&layout=html&Itemid=27
http://www.archontology.org/nations/uk/bpm/walpole.php
http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/historic_figures/walpole_robert.shtml
http://www.infobritain.co.uk/Robert_Walpole.htm
http://www.number10.gov.uk/history-and-tour/prime-ministers-in-history/sir-robert-walpole