Changing Foundations

When a country changes foundations from God's law to man's law (or man's law to God's law), the change can be seen in the culture.  In Europe, the men quit using blue tattoos, donned clothing, and began protecting women and children--all as a result of the preaching of brave Christian missionaries in the years 100-700 A.D.

On the other hand, France changed from God's law to man's law in the 18th century, and it could be seen even in the battle flags that they carried.  France's cavalry was among the best of the time, and the premier cavalry regiment was Regiment Colonel-General.  From 1657 until 1759, the regiment was commanded by various members of the Turenne family.  Under them, the cavalry carried a flag which proudly displayed the pillar of cloud and fire which guided the Israelites.

In 1759, the colonelcy of Regiment Colonel-General passed to Marquis de Bethune.  He changed the flag to show Hercules's club.

This anecdote shows that, by the mid-18th century, France's foundations were changing.  While the flag had upheld Biblical principles, it now glorified pagan Greek myth.  When man's law eclipsed God's law, the stage was set for the bloody French Revolution.
Flag from http://www.kronoskaf.com/syw/index.php?title=Colonel_G%C3%A9n%C3%A9ral_Cavalerie

Royal Ecossais at Culloden

Today marks the Battle of Culloden, the battle that ended the Jacobite Rising of 1745. After a lengthy campaign, the Duke of Cumberland brought the Jacobites to battle at Culloden Moor. Bonnie Prince Charlie, the Jacobite leader, ordered his men to stand and fight. His right wing charged and smashed Barrell's 4th and Monro's 37th, but was decimated in a counter-attack by more British infantry. The Jacobite left did not charge and withdrew at the same time the survivors from the right wing fled. All the Jacobites were fleeing for Inverness. Cumberland's cavalry was brought up, ready to cut many of the Highlanders down...

Illustration by the author

In God's Providence, the French had sent two regiments to support him: Royal Ecossais (in English Royal Scots) and detachments from the Irish Brigade. The Royal Ecossais was in reserve at Culloden, and valiantly covered the retreat. They distracted the cavalry and saved many Jacobites from being cut down. One battalion of the Royal Ecossais was captured, but the other escaped.


The captured battalion was exchanged for captured British soldiers and the Royal Ecossais served gallantly for several more years until they were disbanded in 1762.

Isabel Sharp

"Honour thy father and thy mother, which is the first commandment with promise: That it may be well with thee, and thou mayest live long upon the earth."--Ephesians 6:2-3

Isabel Sharp was the daughter of James Sharp, Archbishop of St. Andrews. She was born c. 1660. I do not know when she died, nor when she married John Cunningham of Fife.
On May 3, 1679, Archbishop Sharp and his daughter Isabel were returning home by carriage when their coachman noticed nine armed men pursuing them. He endeavored to outride them, but one of them stopped the coach. They then dragged the Archbishop out to murder him, but not without interposition, for
"The Primate (Archbishop James Sharp)...protected by his daughter, who, repressing female weakness with a pious courage as rare as admirable, strove to interpose and preserve him. But, wounded in the hand and in the thigh, she at length fell into a swoon, and the villains ceased not from their violence, till they left the old man murdered..."--pg. 259, volume I, Memorials and Letters Illustrative of the Life and Times of John Graham of Claverhouse by Mark Napier.

The injustice of wounding the young woman is recognized by both Mark Napier, a Royalist, and Douglas Bond, a Covenanter. Quotes from King's Arrow, pgs. 76 and 97
"'They dragged out the traitor, who fell to his knees and begged for the life of his daughter.'
'His daughter?'
'Aye, his daughter. Sharp begged for her life--which the noble executioners spared, though she was wounded.'
'Foul indeed' said Sandy M'Kethe, shaking now with anger as he reconstructed the scene in his mind.
'Aye, he was, but he's with the devil now.'
'Ye mistake my meaning, man. Carry on with yer tale of woe.'"
"'Brutally murdering a man--even such a man as Sharp--in full view of his daughter, and wounding her in the bargain, man!'"

The Halkett Family at Monongahela

At the Battle of the Monongahela (July 9,1755), there were two British regiments: Colonel Halkett's 44th and Colonel Dunbar's 48th. Colonel Peter Halkett had his two sons, Lieutenant James Halkett and Captain Francis Halkett, with him on that battlefield.

Colonel Halkett commanded the rearguard when the Indians attacked Braddock's column. The Indians aimed at the officers, and one bullet pierced the Colonel. His son Lieutenant James ran to his father, but was killed by another Indian's bullet.

According to Sargent's History of Braddock's Expedition:

"Among the most distinguished of the dead was Sir Peter Halket of Pitferran, Colonel of the 44th, and a gallant and sagacious soldier; whose two sons were fighting by his side when he fell. One of these, Lieutenant James Halket of his own regiment, hastened at the moment to his aid, and with open arms bent to raise the dying form. But pierced by an Indian bullet his body dropped heavily across his leader's corpse, and father and son lay in death together."

Captain Francis, however, escaped the battlefield alive, and returned to the Monongahela with General John Forbes in 1758. He examined the field and found the bodies of his father and brother, who were respectfully buried.

An interesting story of love of parents and a multigenerational legacy.

This story was recently re-created in 1/30th scale by one of my favorite toy soldier manufacturers, John Jenkins of John Jenkins Designs. Read more about this set at www.johnjenkinsdesigns.com/JJCLUBSET1.htm

Monongahela--Women and Children First

One of the first battles in the French and Indian War was General Edward Braddock's expedition against Fort Duquense. His army was routed by a force of French and Indians on July 9, 1755. One of the records that survived the battle is a diary by a British soldier who was likely a servant to Captain Robert Cholmley. This author survived the battle and captured some aspects of it in his diary.

When Braddock's army was finally shattered, the survivors fled across the Monongahela River to safety. Colonel George Washington and Lieutenant-Colonel Burton (48th) formed a rearguard to protect those crossing the river. According to the diary (18th Century spelling has been kept intact):

"In going Over the River there was an Indien Shot one of our Wimen and began to Scalp her. Her Husband being a little before her Shot the Indien dead. There was another Indien Immediately Shot him through the Arm, but he made his Escape from them. Just after we had passed the River a Captn [captain] that was wounded in the foot bege'd that I would lend him my Horse which I did, altho I had about two hundred miles to march on foot before he could get a horse."

Women did accompany Braddock's army as camp-followers, i. e. laundresses and cooks. To the Indians, killing an enemy woman was a great feat of courage. But to the men on Braddock's expedition, women (especially one's wife) were to be protected. One demonstrated pagan egalitarianism; the other, Biblical self-sacrifice.

Queen Mary of Modena

"But let it be the hidden man of the heart in that which is not corruptible even the ornament of a meek and quiet spirit which is in the sight of God of great price"--1 Peter 3:4

"She was 'the model of what a queen should be, and she bore her misfortunes heroically.'"--Demetrius C. Boulger, The Battle of the Boyne

"And there hope is, that when the Spouse of Christ shall have summoned her grand array to meet the Bridegroom, among the humblest of her handmaidens may be numbered the names of Francoise de Maintenon and Marie of Modena and England."--George S. Smythe, Historic Fancies

Mary of Modena was born on October 5, 1658 to the Duke and Duchess of Modena, a small state in Italy. On November 23, 1673, Mary married James, Duke of York. For over ten years she lived quietly, until February 6, 1685. Charles II died, and the English throne passed to his brother James.

James was crowned as James II and Mary of Modena became Queen. They ruled for three years until on June 10, 1688, the Queen gave birth to a son, triggering William III's invasion. I have already studied the Revolution which drove James, Mary, and their son into exile.

Mary of Modena "bore her misfortunes heroically" as she fled England and sailed to France. Her heroism won praise from Louis XIV, as she endured disaster after disaster including defeats at the Boyne (1690) and Aughrim (1691), and the death of James II (1702). Mary of Modena had one more child: Louisa Maria Teresa Stuart, born on June 28, 1692.

She died in exile on May 7, 1718, but her legacy of perseverance lives on.

Dancing, Bowing, And Chivalry

I wrote on the importance of dance and the covenant community last time, but now I will take on a different aspect of the historical dance. This time it is bowing. What exactly is meant when one bows to a partner in a dance? For a few years, bowing meant nothing to me. It was the beginning of the dance, to be cut out if I was moving slower than the rest of the line. But Kevin Swanson and Dave Buehner altered my concept of dance and bowing after I listened to their radio show on “Dancing with the Stars”. Now I believe that there are at least two important concepts at work here: greeting and chivalry.
1. Greeting
When I bow, I greet my partner in an honorable way. Bowing shows honor to the person receiving it, similar to removing one’s hat. James Fenimore Cooper and N. C. Wyeth bring this out in Last of the Mohicans, as General Montcalm bows to Colonel Monro. Montcalm shows honor to Monro, despite the fact that they bombarded each other with cannons for six days. This idea is elaborated on in Point #2.

2. Chivalry
Bowing also shows chivalry. When I bow, I say by my actions that my partner is a lady, worthy to be treated with respect and honor. On the other hand, her curtsy says that I am a gentleman to be followed and treated with honor. These concepts are as far from egalitarianism (men and women equal in marriage and everything else) as they are from romance. By curtsying, she explodes egalitarianism, by acknowledging my headship. My bow does the same for romance, by committing to treat her with honor and as one to be protected. One may be wondering if these concepts flow through my brain as I bow. Yes, they did. When I bowed, I mentally promised to treat my partner as an honorable lady.
In conclusion, can one make such a big deal of just a simple bow? I believe so. Bowing and curtsying reinforces God’s design for men and women while avoiding the pitfalls of egalitarianism and romance. As one does it in dance, it also guards against one more problem: that of exaggerated bowing to impress one’s partner. It is difficult to bow in an exaggerated fashion when one has less than fifteen seconds (or however long it is) in which to do it.

I also learned an intensely practical lesson. I know why gorgets were worn by officers only on duty and not off duty…especially when they danced. The gorget has a tendency to fly into the wearer’s face when he bows.