Re: Culloden

["Ken W Sinclair" <kensin66@sk.sympatico.ca>]

Right on Privateers.
I love that name, I wish I had thought of it.

Ken W Sinclair

----- Original Message -----
From: Privateers <Privateers@privateers.org>
To: <sinclair@mids.org>
Sent: Friday, November 19, 1999 10:39 AM
Subject: Re: Culloden


> Often the Chief would have some clansmen committed to one side and some
> committed to the other.
>
> The Chief could then disown the loser.  Highland honour was subject to
> curious interpretations at times.  Sinclair's still smarting form the
rising
> in 1715, when in 1746 the Italian born Charles Edward Stuart led the last
> feudal army to take the field, in to battles against his cousin did not
> participate. Gathering a few worthies (who never made it to the battle), a
> year after the Young Pretender  landed, been advised to go home only to
> reply that "He had come home" does show the first bit of common sense on
the
> part of our Chiefs vis a vie the Stuart. It show no commitment to the
> Rebellion.
>
> The farmer John Sinclair, who lived on the edge of Drummossie Moor, was
> briefly detained when the information reached Cumberland that he was a
> Rebel.  He was released when the information was proven to be untrue.
>
> A clan followed it's Chief, no law, no Government decree no King stood
above
> the call of a Highland Chief to the Gentleman and Clansman.  We, who bear
> one of the proudest names, have not promoted that name we have failed to
> tell of our collective deeds glorious and times victorious we have the
> opportunity to do that now.
>
> "could these few short summers be mine
> then all the world would cry Sinclair
> and echo with our name"
>
> Sinclair

[ This is the Sinclair family discussion list, sinclair@mids.org
[ To get off or on the list, see http://www.mids.org/sinclair/list.html