Commentary on the Expedition to Scotland Made by Charles Edward
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
PUBLICATIONS OF THE SCOTTISH HISTORY SOCIETY THIRD SERIES VOLUME IX MISCELLANY (Fourth Volume) MISCELLANY OF The Scottish History Society (Fourth Volume) CORDARA’S COMMENTARY ON THE EXPEDITION TO SCOTLAND MADE BY CHARLES EDWARD STUART PRINCE OF WALES THE MANUSCRIPT HISTORY OF CRAIGNISH MISCELLANEOUS CHARTERS, 1165-1300, FROM TRANSCRIPTS IN THE COLLECTION OF THE LATE SIR WILLIAM FRASER, K.C.B. EDINBURGH Printed at the University Press by T. and A. Constable Ltd. for the Scottish History Society 1926 Printed in Great Britain CONTENTS INTRODUCTION ................................................. 5 BOOK I ........................................................ 13 BOOK II ....................................................... 79 BOOK III ..................................................... 104 BOOK IV ...................................................... 126 COMMENTARY ON THE EXPEDITION TO SCOTLAND MADE BY CHARLES EDWARD STUART PRINCE OF WALES BY PADRE GIULIO CESARE CORDARA ON THE COMPANY OF JESUS SO LONG AS IT EXISTED Translated into the Vulgar Tuscan by the ex-Jesuit N. N. Edited by SIR BRUCE SETON, BART., C.B. INTRODUCTION AMONG the authorities recognised by writers dealing with the ’45 is Cordara’s Commentary on the Expedition made to Scotland by Charles Edward Stuart, Prince of Wales, written in Latin and translated into Italian. The original work was written in 1751, but it did not become generally known in Europe until it had been translated into Italian early in the 19th century. One version, dated 1815, in Italian, has been printed. The translator was Gussalli, and the work went through three editions, but it has never been translated into English. A review appeared in the Quarterly Review, vol. LXXIX, December 1846 to March 1847, p. 150. The conclusion arrived at by the Reviewer then may be summarised in his own words: ‘We cannot reasonably look for much novelty as to leading incidents of the insurrection and of the two campaigns through which it was protracted. Neither can we regard him as our best authority for the wanderings of their hero. But as to the means whereby the Prince trained himself for what he considered his mission, and the circumstances under which it was prepared in Italy, we feel bound to accept the accomplished Italian as a new and important witness.’ The translation presented below, however, is taken from another Italian, or rather, Tuscan version, by ‘the ex-Jesuit N. N.,’ dated 12th November 1802. The manuscript, which is beautifully written, has only one defect—it is signed by the author with an almost illegible signature. Opinions indeed differ as to what the surname is; but it appears to be Ingo. It was prepared by the said Vincenzo Ingo at the request of ‘Don Francesco Caetani, Duke,’ to whom it is dedicated; and, in a note to the reader, the translator explains that he has endeavoured to express the meaning and spirit of the author, and, at the same time, ‘to respect those who have a right to give the law to our Italian tongue.’ Mr. Collison-Morley, to whom I am indebted for the translation of Ingo’s work into English, has compared the two Italian versions of Cordara’s Book and finds that Gussalli’s is in a more terse style than that of Ingo. The Vincenzo Ingo manuscript came into the London market in 1922, but its previous history is not known. Giulio Cesare di Antonio Cordara, conte di Calamandrana,1 historian and litterateur, 1 Authorities:— Catholic Encyclopaedia.—EDWARD SPILLANE. 6 ON THE EXPEDITION TO SCOTLAND was born at Alessandria 17th December 1704, the son of Count Antonio di Calamandrana. The family was of Flemish origin and had long been established at Nice, but had migrated to Alessandria in Piedmont to escape out of the zone of military operations during the war between the Bourbons and Austrians. Cordara’s mother, Leonora del Cressini, died when he was quite young, and his father then went to Rome, leaving him at the age of seven in charge of the priest of Calamandrana. When he was ten years old he was sent to Rome and entered the Jesuit College there. In December 1717, when he was fourteen, he became a Jesuit himself, to the great disappointment of his father, who had intended him for a political or diplomatic career; and he soon acquired a reputation as satirist, poet, and historian. After completing his novitiate in Rome he was sent to Viterbo as teacher of rhetoric, and later to Ancona and Macerata. Here he made the acquaintance of Cardinal Lambertini, afterwards Pope Benedict xiv., who commended him warmly to the General of the Company at the Conclave. When at Macerata he wrote some satirical poems through which he became involved in controversy, and also a pastoral drama on the death of Clementina Sobieska, wife of the Chevalier de St. George, which was well received and played all over Italy, and which increased his literary reputation. About 1740, Cordara was called to Rome, where he remained for thirty-two years. In 1742 he was selected to write the History of the Society of Jesus, embracing the period from 1616 to 1633. The first volume appeared in 1750; the second was published long after his death. He also wrote the history of the German College in Rome. In Rome he was in great request whenever literary skill was needed, as, for instance, for a description of the funeral of the Chevalier. He also wrote many plays for the Jesuit Colleges. When the Society of Jesus was finally suppressed in 1774, Cordara withdrew from Rome to Alessandria, devoting his remaining years to literature. Altogether he produced some sixty works from first to last. He died in Alessandria on 6th March 1785, aged eighty-one. Cordara was intimately associated with the Jacobite leaders and the exiled Royal Family in Rome, he had known the young Prince and his brother, afterwards Cardinal, Duke of York, since boyhood; and it was at the request of the latter that he undertook in 1751 the compilation of the Expeditio in Scotiam. Carducci, who had translated some of Cordara’s Satires, refers in complimentary terms to the Expeditio, which he says was written ‘in the finest and freest Latin the Jesuits ever wrote.’ Whatever its literary value, his work must be regarded as of peculiar interest, if not of importance, inasmuch as it was written so soon after the disastrous termination of Prince Charles Edward’s expedition, in a milieu in which the author was obviously in a Bibl. de la Compagnie de Jésus 77., 1141 -1432.—SAMMKRVOGD. Nomendator (Innsbruck, 1895), v. 376.—HURTKR. Bibliographic historique de la Comp. de Jésus (Paris, 1864).—CARAYON. position to get first-hand information from some of its survivors, and to know the views held by them and the Jacobite party in Rome on the course of events. The question arises: What were the sources of Cordara’s information? It is improbable that Cordara had access to many of the sources on which we now rely, in dealing with the history of the ’45; but it is possible that he had seen some at least of the correspondence, now called the ‘Stuart Papers,’ preserved in Windsor Castle; and the fact that he wrote his book at the request of the Cardinal, Duke of York, suggests that from the latter he may have obtained information not accessible to other authorities. This would apply specially to such matters as the intimate conversations in Rome between Tencin and the Chevalier, and the account of the Prince’s journey to Antibes. From the modern historical point of view the Expeditio may not be of outstanding importance; in certain details, indeed—notably in connection with the Prince’s wanderings after Culloden—it is often very inaccurate. But it is interesting in regard to the early life of the Prince, his experiences in the field, and the negotiations which led up to his departure from Rome to Paris. The most controversial feature of the work is the account given of these negotiations. Cordara ascribes the activities of France, such as they were, principally to Cardinal Tencin, and he gives in considerable detail the substance of the Cardinal’s speech at the Council of Versailles in December 1743, and the action subsequently taken by the French Government, without making any reference to the part played by Amelot. We are indeed asked to believe that, without Tencin, there would have been no ’45 at all. Here, of course, he is not in accord with modern historians; but, on the assumption that the source of his information was the Jacobite Court in Rome, he presumably expressed the view's there held. These view's may have been inaccurate, but they were certainly held by the Prince, who when he was on the spot in Paris, chafing at the repeated delays in the French preparations for invasion of Great Britain, wrote on 24th February 1745 to Cardinal Tencin, asking what the explanation was. In reply the Cardinal wrote on 15th March: ‘J’ignore la cause . comme j’ai ignoré les raisons du mystère qui m’a été fait.’ Commenting on this letter, Colin, who had access to the records of the Historical Section of the French General Staff, says that it shows that the Cardinal, ‘who was perhaps the first promoter of the enterprise and who had arranged the relations that existed between the Pretender and the French Government, was no longer kept fully informed of the course of negotiations, after the death of Cardinal Fleury—the time when they became serious. It must be concluded that the enterprise was conceived and advised solely by M. de Maurepas, and by M. Amelot, whose disgrace speedily followed the abandonment of the attempt.’1 1 Colin, Louis XV. et les Jacobites, 182.