"Can the Jacobites win at Culloden??" Topic

The wife has me watching "Outlander" with her. Very good I must say, and that spurred me to re-watch the excellent 1964 BBC film on Culloden. With the wonderful Crann Tara minis available, this conflict is intriguing me. I wonder though, seeing all the mis-management and in-fighting among the Jacobite forces, how much tweaking would one have to do with the scenario to give the Jacobites a chance?

Given that most of the Jacobite army was exhausted by the abortive night march, they had very little to eat, they were outnumbered and they were facing a well trained Hanoverian army, the scenario would have to be more than tweaked to give them a hope in hell.

No.

My ancestors fought on the losing side and it is a comfort to me to know that they lost for all the reasons set out by steamingdave47 above rather than just having made a horse's hoojah out of it.

The Jacobites lost the campaign long before the battle due to stellar incompetence and indecision. The mere fact that the battle was fought where and when it was shows that.

Go to Culloden.
You'll see they had to charge steady cannon & musket across a flat, featureless terrain (except for a walled enclosure on one side).
And then the English had plentiful cavalry on the flanks, waiting.

A very courageous decision to attack. Not smart but courageous.

Could the Jacobites win? A heavy downpour just before the charge? Hard to see anything other than an Act of God changing the sad result.

These boys in Belgium know how to put on a game!

Looks like the Jacobites almost pulled it off.

YouTube link

Go to Culloden.

I couldn't believe how awful the charge would have been until I saw it in person and what must have been worse, running through that gorse/heather/tangle foot barbed wire had to have been something past horrid.

The 1964 BBC Film is very misleading. Kind of, " See how the Evil English abused and massacred the poor freedom fighters." A product of its time, ie. the Retreat From Empire.

That said it was cleverly done.

As an avid wargamer of the '45, and a Cameron, I can honestly say that Culloden can't be won under the conditions it was fought. The whole night attack on Cumberland at Nairn has to be avoided, and in fact fighting at all at Culloden should be avoided, except as a rear guard action. The farther Prince Charlie retires to the interior the stronger he becomes. He actually had more troops at Ruthven Barracks a few days later when he chucked it in than he had at Culloden! The farther Cumberland marches from the coast and his source of supply ( the navy ) the weaker he becomes.

Okay, thanks all for the input. Culloden aside then, is the '45 a gameable conflict? I assume there is enough scope for small skirmishes, raids and th elike.

What Hanoverian army was that? The only Hanoverian unit present at Culloden were the 16 men of Cumberland's bodyguard, the Duke of Cumberland's Hussars.

nnascati said

Okay, thanks all for the input. Culloden aside then, is the '45 a gameable conflict? I assume there is enough scope for small skirmishes, raids and the like.

Well the Jacobites won at Prestonpans and, perhaps more marginally, at Falkirk. As you say there were plenty of small actions as well.

I have just started to build a "45" set up, commencing with the units at Prestonpans, so it should be interesting.

Rod

The '45 is a very game able campaign and it is best played as such.
Also it's full of skirmishes etc. you could even consider the mini campaign of the Hessians around Dunkeld and siege of Blair Atholl castle.

One of the reasons I'm doing a full range is to open up the whole range of what ifs, so you will see Georgia Scouts, Marines, Manchester Regiment etc.

A very gamable campaign indeed. If you are interested in this as a project I believe Old Glory still have Vrank Chadwick's two volume set for V&B. Very easily adaptable to the rules of your choice. Gives all the historical battles, a few might have beens, and a map campaign of the whole works.

Also includes painting guides, and a discussion of how the Jacobites could have own and why they lost. Interestingly according to Chadwick there were more supporters of the Jacobite cause in England than in Scotland at the time.

I think a tweak of TSATF would work well, yep, another mod for TSATF. Historically, the Jacs are screwed. Before it even begins. Unsure of the excesses post action by govt troops, but,,,,,,,,,was there not companies of loyal highlanders in Cumberland line of battle? Which of course were well armed and drilled and equipped. That just a loose believe and I have NO idea where that information came from.

Clays Russians wrote

was there not companies of loyal highlanders in Cumberland line of battle?

At Prestonpans one company of 43rd (Black Watch) and four companies of 64th (Loudoun's Highlanders). At Falkirk one company each of 43rd and 64th plus 12 companies of Argyllshire Militia (loyal to the government, or perhaps just loyal to the Duke of Argyll, but probably no better trained than the Jacobites). At Culloden one company each of 43rd and 64th plus 6 companies of Argyllshire Militia.

Quite apart from the Highlanders, the British Army contained several Scottish (although Lowland) Regiments, including 1st Foot (Royal Scots), 21st Foot (Royal Scots Fusiliers) and 25th Foot (then the Edinburgh Regiment but later the King's Own Scottish Borderers), all of whom were at Culloden. Several 3rd Foot Guards (Scots Guards) officers participated in the campaign. There were also 12 companies of Lowland volunteers (mainly from Glasgow, but some from Paisley, Stirling and Edinburgh) in the Government Army at Falkirk.

Plenty of Scots supporting the Government.

Rod

You could tweak musket fire to have the same minimal effect as in Outlander Ep 1. That would even the odds.

Hawk- LOL. But don't most Horse and Musket skirmish rules prevent any firing if the figures "ran" during their move?

I think you can and perhaps should – depending on why you game and what motivates you to select a particular battle.

I believe that all cultures romanticize war – especially the disasters – and offset them with parallel victories for public consumption., Not always consciously, we propagandize our history and shy away from bitter truths.

Some of our most famous battles in the English speaking world were inflated beyond their true importance and may be 'ungameable' but are so high in our consciousness that you can be forgiven for making them work no matter how long a bow you may have to string.

I've been seriously looking at Little Big Horn but you can say the same for the Alamo or Rorke's Drift. I say go for it.

Glengarry, my reference to "Hanoverians" obviously was short hand for "the Royal Army of the House of Hanover". I am fully aware that the army was actually a mixture of English, Scots (in spite of what some might think), Ulstermen, Austrians and a few genuine Germans, both Hessian and Hanoverians. "Hanoverian" is a convenient term, often used by writers on this period.

Why not, it's a war game. Anything is possible. Why shouldn't they.

Otto

Many years back, a friend and I played out Culloden using Volley and Bayonet. He was the evil English and I was the brave and fair Scots. He had regiments of shooty troops that did well when they stayed put. I had regiments of crazies that did well when they charged and closed.

Well,turn 1 he decides to advance all across the line. I was expecting him to stay put of course like any sane commander would. My eyes of course got big as quarters at the sight and of course, I ordered my men forward at the run. The battle was really over at that point. The Scots made very short work of the unprepared English regulars.

I asked him why he did it. his reply: "Because I wanted to see what would happen."

So to answer your question. Yes. Yes they can win.

If you really like a period, game it and have fun with it. It is not whether the Scots have a chance, take the challenge and see if you can accomplish more. Set up victory conditions and accumulate points.
I remember reading about an incident in the "45". A patrol of British Dragoons encountered a very insulting highlander on the top of a hill. The officer sent a dragoon after him and he ran over the hill and the dragoon gave chase. After 5 minutes no dragoon. The officer sent 2 dragoons to scout, after 5 minutes no dragoons. This time he sent 10 dragoons and after 5 minutes 1 dragoon came over the hill at full gallop yelling " RUN FOR YOUR LIVES, IT'S AN AMBUSH, THERE ARE TWO OF THEM".
take care,
Keith

"And the English had plentiful cavalry". I understand the 11th Dragoons were known as Kerr's Dragoons as they were led by a Kerr of the Clan Kerr. So along with the aforementioned 1st Royal Scots, 21st Royal Scots Fusiliers and the 25th Royal Scottish Borderers, the Highland Battalion of the Clan Cambell and the Irish of the 27th Inniskilling and those Scots and Irish serving in ostensibly English regiments, there you have it, a British army.
And back on topic. I gamed it a number of times with a friend who's an Irish nationalist of the United Irishmen persuasion. The games were closely run and pretty much to the script. The Jacobites are unable to trade volleys with regular infantry and rely on closing the gap where the courage and fighting prowess of the front rank gentlemen can be best used. If the regulars hold their nerve, surely not a given when facing the Highlander's charge, then the advantage shifts to them.

Zulus frequently win battles against more modern armies on the tabletop. If brave highland laddies can't do so too, there's a flaw in the rules. So I'd agree that the '45 could be a Jacobite victory, though an accurate refight of Culloden is no contest.

@ Sobieski

What an intriguing idea.

Fight the battles of the AZW in a campaign of linked battles but use Jacobites & Hanoverians. I think this is brilliant & is being filed away as a future project.

Further to my earlier post, an Outlander specific rule modification:

If a Highlander is hit by musket fire, on a roll of 4-6 a warm compress has been applied and the hit has No Effect.

I won't name the popular rules set that already works like this.

Linked battles would be the way to go with variables on local Scots support and possible English risings. Further French support is a possible add on, just look at the AWI.
As my learned friend remarked, "The way to win the war is not to fight Culloden". He again was very interested in the war with the Zulus and his suggestion was to introduce rules allowing movement to be concealed by terrain/weather etc and therfore the Jacobites could surprise government forces or even the other way around ( Philiphaugh 1645 ). Just my two penn'orth.

@ Sobieski;

I've fought Culloden as a purely accurate game, and lost while playing the British! I wondered what the heck my opponent was doing with the miserable little Jacobite cavalry units, only to find that my British line infantry don't care how miserable they are, when they suddenly turn up in your rear!

In fond remembrance of Andy Farquhar!