I found the book I was referring to, which is "Scottish Swords from the Battlefield at Culloden" by Lord Archibald Campbell (1894) and was edited, annotated and published by the late E. Andrew Mowbray in 1971.
Mowbray notes in his introduction (p.13). "...frequently a family heirloom-often in its second or third hilting- the Highlanders sword was far more than just a weapon. The great symbolic value of these arms was not lost upon the Duke of Cumberland. A bounty was paid from the royal purse of one shilling for every broadsword picked up from the battlefield".
He notes that along with cannon, ammunition and 2320 muskets, there were about 190 broadswords claimed. Considering the dead and wounded from both during and after the battle, that seems a paltry number of swords.
In any case, Campbell in his original work of 1894 describes a very curious fence from Twickenham House, a former residence of Sir John Hawkins.
The fence had been acquired in 1893 by a Mr Edward Ross who in turn had obtained it from a Lord Tweedale. The fence was formed of sword blades gathered from the field at Culloden and this particular nobleman had "...caused them to be put up in this extraordinary and barbaric way".
Perhaps this Lord Tweedale acquired this ghastly fence from Cumberland?
which Campbell describes further in that, "...the taste of the period at which the railing was formed was about as bad as taste could be. The style of rail can be seen in many hideous examples still extant".(p.19).
The author notes that 137 blades came into his possession from this railing when it was finally dismantled.
It was from this perspective that I added this instance to the topic here, the wanton destruction or rudely disfigured display of the treasured weapons of a people . As a lifelong arms historian, it is these kinds of treatments of these valued icons of history that I find disturbing regardless of the circumstances which compelled them.
|