Talk:James Holborne of Menstrie

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles

Military history: Biography / British / European / Early Modern / Wars of the Three Kingdoms

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion not met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion not met

Associated task forces:
/
	Military biography task force
	British military history task force
	European military history task force
	Early Modern warfare task force (c. 1500 – c. 1800)
	Wars of the Three Kingdoms task force

Dating of Holbourne’s career

This article has some very strange construction. Following a description of Sir John's activities during the years 1650-'51 culminating in his unimpressive role at the Battle of Inverkeithing (July 20, 1650) it reverts to the previous year and Holbourne's travels while defeating Montrose's second campaign. Hard to follow!

I studied the battle in some depth in 1977-'78, and Holbourne's role has been criticized, especially in MacLean-friendly sources. Some secondary works claim he fled before the battle, which is unlikely given the English descriptions of the initial fighting. Following the battle he was accused of some kind of failure or misdeeds ("by all honest men was thought to have played the traitor") and apparently charged ("bot he was formally cleared at Stirling thereafter"). If all this happened so quickly he must have had a case. However, he is said to have "quait his charge in the armey, for the haill armey exclaimed against him." The grievous losses of Clan MacLean (of 800 said to have fought, only 35 returned home) help to explain antipathy towards a man accused of not doing his part.

That said, I'm mostly concerned with the confusing presentation.

How can this article be modified?

Sources are in my M.Litt. thesis of 1978 ("South-West Fife and the Scottish Revolution; the Presbytery of Dunfermline, 1633-1652" - University of Edinburgh, 1978), Chapter 7, page 226, specifically notes #143 and #144.

Amalgamated Ben (talk) 13:03, 29 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]