Our post today, although concerning the forgotten British king George II, closes the trilogy of posts about the transition of power between the Stuarts to the Hanovers' dynasty through the background of the Jacobite rebellion that had set its beginning from Queen Anne's reign and ended in King George II's. We intend to discover throughout the post who was George II as a monarch in days where kings had no more the power they once had, as a (historical) person but even so how the Jacobite rebellion shaped his reign and how it affected the Anglo-Scottish relationship that were bounded into one Parliament under the reign of Anne Stuart.
From the beginning, George II was, like his father, the product of a century and the man of another. Born in the year of 1683 in the city of Hanover, he was the oldest and only legitimate son of George I who was by then Elector of Hanover and his stranged wife Sophia Dorothea of Celle. George had a younger sister, also named Sophia Dorothea, who was born three years later.
In matters of his education, it appears that he received an education that was not much different from those of his rank. George was able to speak German, French and English, but it appears he was not the brightest of the men elsewhere: in terms of politics, it was generally regarded that his wife, Caroline of Ansbach, was the mind behind the crown when he inherited the English crown years later.
As for his military career, George
"participated in the Battle of Oudernarde in the vanguard of the Hanoverian cavalry; his horse and a colonel immediately beside him were killed, but George survived unharmed. The British commander, Marlborough, wrote that George 'distinguished himself extremely, charging at the head of and animating by his example [the Hanoverian] troops, who played a good part in this happy victory."
We can assume, from this excerpt, that George was not only interested in military affairs but played a good part in it from his youth accordingly to the expectations of those days towards young men and the army in general. But not much is said after that and most of what we will report onwards regards his life as king of Great Britain.
As for his personal life, around
"June 1705, under the false name of 'Monsieur de Busch', George visited the Ansbach court at their summer residence in Triesdorf to investigate incognito a marriage prospect: Caroline of Ansbach, the former ward of his aunt Queen Sophia Charlotte of Prussia. The English envoy to Hanover, Edmund Poley, reported that George was so taken by 'the good character he had of her that he would not think of anybody else'. A marriage contract was concluded by the end of July. On 22 August/ 2 September 1705. Caroline arrived in Hanover for her wedding, which was held the same evening in the chapel at Herrenhausen."
Caroline, in turn, was born in the mentioned German principiality of Ansbach and before she was married to George, she was under the cares of George's aunt, Sophia Charlotte of Prussia. The two ladies were very close to each other, with the Queen always addressing Caroline as her adoptive daughter. This relationship turned Caroline to a very prospective match for European royals, and her typical beauty (being blonde with blue eyes and pale skin) and the attributes addressed to her personality and bright mind quickly drawn George. Though at first Caroline and George's relationship began as affectionative, she was then acquainted with George's mistresses and he was always telling her about his affairs. Nonetheless, it appears their relationship remained respectful and Caroline's brightness helped her to hold more influence over her husband after he became King than his own mistresses. As a queen, and even before, she held her own court filled with intellectuals, promoting Voltaire and the advancing of medicine. However, she was very discrete in such matters as the king had a dislike for her doings.
As for George's relationship with his father, it was never one of the bests, though, but it grew worse after he became King George I. As we have said in the former post concerning George's father, the first Hanoverian king held a dislike for his oldest son, who in turn represented the opposition for George I's policies. He was even
"Banned from the palace and shunned by his own father, for the next several years the Prince of Wales was identified with opposition to George I's policies, which included measures designed to increase religious freedom in Great Britain and expand Hanover's German territories at the expense of Sweden. His new London residence, Leicester House, became a frequent meeting place for his father's political opponents, including Sir Robert Walpole and Viscount Townshend, who had left the government in 1717."
However, there was an attempt of reconciliation when by 1720,
"Walpole encouraged the king and his son to reconcile for the sake of public unity which they did half-heartedly. Walpole and Townshend returned to political office, and rejoined the ministry. George was soon disillusioned with the terms of the reconciliation; his three daughters who were in the care of the king were not returned and he was still barred from becoming regent during the king's absences."
During this time when George and his wife retired from public life, he and Caroline developed a strange relationship with their oldest son, Frederick. Like George with his father, when the former ascended as George II, the new prince of Wales would live stranged from his parents and hold a court in opposition to George II's policies. Nonetheless, when Frederick died, it was said that he wept with Frederick's widow, princess Augusta, though he claimed that the death of Louise, his favourite child, pained him the most.
When George became King George II, he was clever enough to have "courted popularity with voluble expressions of praise for the English, and claimed that he had no drop of blood that was not English". By then, George held also the title of Duke of Brunswick-Lünebrug (Hanover), Archtreasurer and Prince-Elector of the Holy Roman Empire. In other terms, he was quite the image of Protestant, warrior and powerful royal that was expected. In his first years, he was also popular for not going to his father's funeral, since that George I's travels to Hanover was not seeing with good eyes by the English, who held a strong dislike for foreigners as their rulers.
In domestic affairs, there was a proper establishment for the Tories and Whigs as the system that until our present days marks the British government. It was Caroline mostly the "bridge" between Walpole and George II's political relationship, though this does not mean George II was merely a puppet for the ministers as the british historiography for so long believed. However, what matters for our discussion today was his relationship with the Jacobites and how did the Hanovers managed to secure their crown... For if the Jacobites had moved south and not north, perhaps the Stuarts would be on today's throne and not the House of Windsor.
The French, as usual, historically supported British's pretenders or whomever that could mess with their long time enemies. By then, there was a war concerning the Austrian Succession and the British held quite an empire that Louis XV was eager to dismount, for the lack of better word. So that way he motivated Charles Edward Stuart, otherwise known as Bonnie Prince Charlie, who was the grandson of the late and ill fated king James VII/II, to pursue his crown 'by right'. This rebellion is shown in the popular tv show "Outlander", where we have Claire Beauchamp trying to prevent it to happen as she knows the truth that will come out of this effort. To have a better comprehension of what was this rebellion and the extent of it, we have an excerpt of the letter of Bonnie Prince Charlie for his father, the Old Pretender.
"There is one thing and but one, in which I have had any difference with my faithful highlanders, it was about setting a price upon my kinsman's head, which knowing your majesty's generous humanity I am sure will shock you are much as it did me, when I was shown the proclamation setting a price on my head. I smiled and treated it with the disdain it deserved, upon which they flew out into a most violent rage and insisted on my doing the same by him as this flowed solely from the poor men's love and concern for me I did not know how to be angry with them for it, but tried to bring them to temper by representing to them that it was a mean and barbarous practice among princes that must dishonour them in the eyes of all men of honour, that I could not see how my cousin having set me the example would justify me in imitating that which I blame so much in him. But nothing I could say would satisfy them, some went even so far as to say, shall we go and venture our lives for a man who seems so indiffierent about preserving his own? Thus I have been drawn in to do a thing for which I can damn myself. Your majesty knows that in my nature I am neither cruel or revengeful and God who knows my heart knows that if the very prince who has forced me to this (for it is he that has forced me) was in my power, the greatest pleasure I could feel would be treating him as the brave, black Prince treated his prisoner, the king of France, to make him ashamed of having shown himself so inhumane an enemy to a man for attempting a thing which he himself if he has any [sincerity] would despise for not attempting."¹
What can be implied of this letter below is that resentment and a self sense of being the heir of a crown usurped by his Hanoverian cousin motivate Bonnie Prince Charlie to carry on with the expeditions his father lost and was defeated in the reigns of Queen Anne and King George I. We have not found, unfortunately, nothing written concerning George II's own personal thoughts of the occasion. Nevertheless, we thought interesting to share the thoughts of George's enemy to comprehend the purpose of this rebellion. In the following paragraph, there is another excerpt of the letter written by Bonnie Prince Charlie concerning his plans in case he succeeds in overthrowing George II and his Hanoverian dynasty:
"[...] But should it happen that any Foreign Power contributed to place me on the Throne, it must be visible to all thinking men, that I can neither hope to keep it, nor enjoy Peace and Happiness upon it but by gaining the Love and Affections of my Subjects. I am far from approving the mistakes of former Reigns. I see, I feel the Effects of them, and should be void of all Reflection did I not propose to avoid them with the utmost Care. And therefore I do not entertain the least thoughts of assuming the Government on the footing my Family left it.[...] This Declaration was written in Consequence of the sentiments and Reflections expressed in this Letter. It contains a General Indemnity [compensation] without Exceptions, for all that has passed against me and my Family."²
In other words, he, like the foreign princes before him and even as George II did in the begin of his reign, attempted to use his English/Scottish blood as royal connection to gain the support of the British people, who, as already said before, held a certain kind of reputation for looking upon those foreigners who tried to govern their countries. It was what Queen Anne did after the death of her brother-in-law and George II to distinguish himself from his father, who was constantly travelling to Hanover. But Prince Charles was also aware of the event that culminated in such a situation he was now in: the Glorious Revolution that resulted in James VII of Scotland and II of England being sent to the exile if he did not want to lose his head like his father did. In fact, he makes sure to distance himself from his grandfather in this aspect and even more so from George I, which is why his reign and that of his aunt before the Hanovers, were mentioned although subtle so.
And the result of those letters whose content clearly pointed out to a determined man that would not give his claim to the throne he genuinely believed to be his by right, is the letter written by Charles Edward Stuart's ally, probably the same old duke of Argyll who in the past supported the Old Pretender against George I. The excerpt of the declaration of "war" is seen here:
"the positive Orders we have from his most Christian Majesty are to attack all his Enemies in this Kingdom, whom he has Declared to be those who will not immediately Join, or assist as far will ly in their Power, the Prince of WALES, Regent of Scotland etc. His Ally, and whom he is resolved, with the Concurrence of the King of SPAIN, to Support in the taking Posession of SCOTLAND, ENGLEAND, and IRLAND, if Necessary at the Expence of all the Men and Money, he is Master of, to which three Kingdoms, the Family of STEWART, have so Just and indisputeable a Title."³
To comprehend better this tense and complex situation, see it below:
"In July 1745, the Old Pretender's son, Charles Edward Stuart, popularly known as Bonnie Prince Charlie or the Young Pretender, landed in Scotland, where support for his cause was highest. George, who was summering in Hanover, returned to London at the end of August. The Jacobites defeated British forces in September at the Battle of Prestonpans, and then moved south into England. The Jacobites failed to gain further support, and the French reneged on a promise of help. Losing morale, the Jacobites retreated back into Scotland. On 16/27 April 1746, Chales faced George's military-minded son Prince William, Duke of Cumberland, in the Battle of Culloden, the last pitched battle fought on British soil. The ravaged Jacobite troops were routed by the government army. Charles escaped to France, but many of his supporters were caught and executed. Jacobitism was all but crushed; no further serious attempt was made at restoring the House of Stuart."
In fact, the Duke of Cumberland was later known as 'Butcher Cumberland' "for the actions of his troops after Culloden and in the subsequent suppression of the whole Highland way of life." And this effective end of the gallic language and the mentioned Highland way of life can be seen in the "extracts from a sketch of regulations proposed to be made in Scotland, 28 June 1746".:
"A Bill, to empower the King to issue a Commission or Commissions of Enquiry with proper Powers to enquire concerning the Behaviour of the Clans, within certain Districts, from the Beginning & during the Course of the Rebellion: whether the Inhabitants remained at the Places of their Habitations; to what Places they went; whether armed or not; whether they continued in their Allegiance or joined or assisted the Rebells. [...] It is to be wished that the abolishing the Names of some of the worst clans, may be of use. But, the MacGregors, tho' forbid by Law, continued always to be called so in the Hills, and on all Troubles, publickly took up that Name again, it is to be fear'd, nothing but Transplanting can succeed. [...] Not to call or write themselves by that Name, under Pain of Transportation. [...] for religious worship in Scotland where the King & family shall not be prayed for by Name."
We can see, from this act in particular, the concern of the British in erasing from History the existance of the rebels and how the name and surname were so important for those clans that were even used as defiance, as a way of resisting the English' rule. We see it so in "Outlander" as the enemy clans reunite, and how proud they were of their lineage. Unfortunately, this sad episode in George II's reign mark the complete dominium of the English over his long time enemy, the Scots. This does not mean however the blame is solely on the figure of King George II. He was the head of the State, but figures as the Walpole mininster ruled more actively. But also he had to protect his crown, and in days of "civil war", self protection at any cust was what mattered. Had it been otherwise, certainly George II would have faced a different destiny that Charles Edward Stuart did when the latter fleed back to France.
For better or worse, that was how history worked, made of men and their power. Towards the end of his reign, George II, who by then had "lived longer than any of his English or British predecessors", left his marks in some of the British universities and encouraged scientists and philosophers, though hardly no more than his late wife Caroline did. He was a men of his days, but mostly the product of another century. Like his father, George II was the "best" of both worlds. He died possibly of aortic aneurysm at the age of 77 and was succeeded by his most famoust grandson who became King George III, also known as the Hanoverian who lost the colonies, but this is for another time.
Bibliography:
-https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_II_of_Great_Britain
-http://www.history.ac.uk/reviews/review/659
-http://blogs.bl.uk/untoldlives/2015/10/the-coronation-of-george-ii-and-queen-caroline.html
-http://www.undiscoveredscotland.co.uk/usbiography/monarchs/georgeii.html
-https://www.britroyals.com/kings.asp?id=george2
-http://www.historyextra.com/article/military-history/profile-life-facts-george-ii
-http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/education/resources/jacobite-1745/flora-macdonald/
-http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/education/resources/jacobite-1745/laws-control-scotland/
-http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/education/resources/jacobite-1745/charles-edward-stuart/¹
-http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/education/resources/jacobite-1745/catholic-threat-1745/²
-http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/education/resources/jacobite-1745/jacobite-declaration-war/³
