White Cockade?

[Peter Crowe]

Merovingian – I’m sorry if I seemed to put you down. I’ve realised on this thread how much I also don’t know.

You might like to look at Walter Scott’s novel Waverley, a story of the 45 with a young Englishman caught up fighting for the Jacobites.

Before Waverley, Jacobites were often regarded as uncivilised terrorists. After Scott they were gallant, romantic and tragic. The major railway station in Edinburgh is named after the novel.

Scott’s prose is heavy going, but just skip the stodgy bits. It’s what Scott expected.

I agree that Scott is a bit heavy-going and would say that for historical insights of the period accessed through prose novels, Robert Louis Stevenson's Kidnapped and Catriona (David Balfour in the US) although aimed at younger readers are a good point of entry (the historical nuance and detail have adult levels of sophistication), and Neil Munro's New Road and Doom Castle are excellent and aimed at a more mature reader.

[MacRob]

Yes, I'm planing to read Scott soon. One of the areas I have intense interest in is the cultural psyche of 1700s and 1800s Scotland that eagerly embraced romanticized origins of everything from Freemasonry (Knights Templar via Bannockburn) to the tartans (Vestiarium Scoticum via Bonnie Prince Charlie himself). It seems the tendency to embrace mythological or romanticized origins of many valued cultural themes was pervasive and peaked with Ivanoe and the fascination with medieval romanic chivalry. Again, I don't claim to be an expert on any of this, just en enthusiastic student in search of knowledge.

Gee..that's almost too deep for me. You will find, when you study this period, that the things you mentioned were embraced primarily by the gentry in the south. The Highlanders had little interest or motivation, especially those who were being cleared from the lands on which they had lived for hundreds of years, to learn about the romance of living there, if there was any. That period so distorted what being a Scottish Highlander was about that it is likely that a time traveler from, say, 17Th c. Skye would be lost in the world that it created.

You mentioned the Templars at Bannockburn. I have done considerable research on that story and have found that it is total hogwash. The claim that Freemasonry stemmed from an underground group of Templars is just as preposterous, yet today I am constantly bombarded with it at Highland Games (I am a member of the modern Military Order, not the Masonic group) by folks who simply will not believe it is a myth. The truth is that it was the invention of one Father Hay who, about 300 years ago, postulated that without assistance from a group of Templars, Bruce could never have won Bannockburn. He did this at the time that the Masonic movement was about to reveal itself. It was a good story, seemed plausible to anyone who had done no real research and there was a need to tack some glory onto the Freemasons' pedigree. Bannockburn was not the only myth developed for the Freemasons but it has taken on a life of its own, especially since Dan Brown's books became popular. I am not knocking Freemasons here. They get persecuted enough. Any group which has as its basic tenets, helping others, self-improvement and belief in a higher power, is going to get beaten upon regularly, as they are. I am simply saying that what we actually know about The Bruce, Bannockburn, the terrain and tactics and his opponents in the battle does not even once suggest that the Templars were there or that they were even needed. I welcome comments about this.

Enjoy the exercise upon which you are about to embark. Sir Walter was quite a writer and he, arguably more than anyone else, created the tartan revival, for which I think any kilt-wearing Scot or Scottish descendant is grateful.

[ThistleDown]

For boths sides in the Templar/Bannockburn discussion, read "The Knights Templar and Scotland" by Robert Ferguson.

[JonathanB]

I'm sure Kidnapped is an easier read than Scott, but Scott got there first.

I enjoyed reading a writer who was the most internationally popular author of his day (Rossini in Naples wrote an opera of La donna del largo only a couple of years after Scott published The Lady of the Lady) and held his position for a century but then sunk without a trace in popular esteem.

Any account of how Scotland saw itself and others saw it, has to take account of Scott for better or worse.

[MacRob]

For boths sides in the Templar/Bannockburn discussion, read "The Knights Templar and Scotland" by Robert Ferguson.

I will see if I can round up a copy because I do not believe I have one here. However, I have read a few other pieces on the subject all of which relied on Father Hay rather than research to make their points. Hopefully Mr. Ferguson did not do that.

[merovingian]

Another great book on the subject that prioritizes history over fantasy.

http://www.amazon.com/Rosslyn-Hoax-I.../dp/0853182558

[ThistleDown]

I will see if I can round up a copy because I do not believe I have one here. However, I have read a few other pieces on the subject all of which relied on Father Hay rather than research to make their points. Hopefully Mr. Ferguson did not do that.

Let's not go far off the OP's bit on the white cockade, but at the Templar inquisition in Scotland there were very few Templars acknowledged and only two formally but mildly dealt with. There may have been a few sergeants around, but history hasn't kept track of them. The timing and ethic is right for Templars to be at Bannockburn, of course, but if they were there they would have been nothing more than additional heavy horse.

[ThistleDown]

Another great book on the subject that prioritizes history over fantasy.

http://www.amazon.com/Rosslyn-Hoax-I.../dp/0853182558

Yes, by a careful and knowledgeable researcher.

[MacRob]

Let's not go far off the OP's bit on the white cockade, but at the Templar inquisition in Scotland there were very few Templars acknowledged and only two formally but mildly dealt with. There may have been a few sergeants around, but history hasn't kept track of them. The timing and ethic is right for Templars to be at Bannockburn, of course, but if they were there they would have been nothing more than additional heavy horse.

Yes, we have strayed way off topic. There were only two Templars in residence in Scotland when Bruce dealt with them. Prior to that there were very few others around, most being concentrated in France and Cyprus after the Latin Christians were expelled from The Holy Land. Of course, for the true believers, that means they had gone underground in order to train Bruce's army, procure arms, etc. There is no evidence that any of that happened. The problem with Templars fighting their Christian counterparts is that the RULE forbade it. By the time of the suppression a lot of the Templar rule was being ignored but that particular requirement was a strong one and less likely to be violated. I have ordered Ferguson's book for my Kindle and will let you know what I think although perhaps there should be somewhere else in the Forum for this sort of thing.

[Father Bill]

*Snip* I have ordered Ferguson's book for my Kindle and will let you know what I think although perhaps there should be somewhere else in the Forum for this sort of thing.

Yup! You can always start a thread in "The Library" here: http://www.xmarksthescot.com/forum/f264/