MILITARY HISTORY ONLINE

User:  
Password:  
 
 General History
Page 78 of 114 (Page:  1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   11   12   13   14   15   16   17   18   19   20   21   22   23   24   25   26   27   28   29   30   31   32   33   34   35   36   37   38   39   40   41   42   43   44   45   46   47   48   49   50   51   52   53   54   55   56   57   58   59   60   61   62   63   64   65   66   67   68   69   70   71   72   73   74   75   76   77    78    79   80   81   82   83   84   85   86   87   88   89   90   91   92   93   94   95   96   97   98   99   100   101   102   103   104   105   106   107   108   109   110   111   112   113   114 )
Message
Michigan Dave
Muskegon MI USA
Posts: 8302
Joined: 2006
This day in World History! Continued
6/22/2023 7:33:18 AM


Today 6-22 in history, Hitler has France surrender in the same RR car in Paris, that the Germans did in WWI. Is he just ironic, & cruel or what?? Is that surrender car still there??

1611 the mutiny against Henry Hudson in his bay occurs! How depressing to be set free in this desolate region! What evidence is there on what happened to him? Anyone??

1633 Galileo is called a heritic, by the Pope for saying the Earth goes around the Sun! What an idiot the Pope was in retrospect!? But Galileo could have been put to death!? What say you about these heretic acquisations from back then? Catholic Church to powerful? Anyone??

1941 Hitler breaks the non aggression pact, with the USSR, & invades! How foolish was this?? And was it the beginning of the downfall of the Nazis?? What say you??

1969 the Cuyahoga River catches on fire! Talk about polluted?! What river around you is the most polluted? Anyone??

Please comment on any of them, or other recent topics!?

Comments, &
Regards,
MD
----------------------------------
"The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract."
Michigan Dave
Muskegon MI USA
Posts: 8302
Joined: 2006
This day in World History! Continued
6/22/2023 7:34:47 AM
& Phil had these to add!

Quote:
June 22nd : three massively important dates during WWII :

1940 : France capitulates and enters a dark era of defeat, humiliation and collaboration which scars her yet.

1941 : Operation Barbarossa commences, inaugurating the mightiest and deadliest struggle that has ever afflicted humanity.

1944 : Operation Bagration : The Soviet Union marks the third anniversary of Barbarossa by launching its colossal offensive that will carry the Red Army to Berlin.


Regards, Phil

----------------------------------
"The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract."
Michigan Dave
Muskegon MI USA
Posts: 8302
Joined: 2006
This day in World History! Continued
6/22/2023 1:11:01 PM
Quote:
Some may be aware that Canada and Denmark had been squabbling over the ownership so a tiny rock island in the straight between Greenland and Canada's Ellesmere Island. It is called Tartupaluk ( Hans Island) and of course there are navigation and exploration implications to its possession. Recently Canada and Denmark came to an agreement that drew a border between the two countries that divides Hans Island in half.

Canada had claimed that the island was part of the vast territory called Rupert's Land that was owned by the Hudson Bay Co. and purchased by Canada in 1870. Denmark's claim was supported by the fact that Greenlandic Inuit had used by hunters.

For decades there has been a "whiskey war" between the two nations. Members of the Danish armed forces or travellers would periodically land on the island and raise the Greenlandic or Danish flags and leave a bottle of liquor for the Canadians who would sail by, replace the flag with the Maple Leaf and leave a bottle of rye whiskey for the Danes. Now that's the way to fight a war.
It is a significant agreement because the Inuit living in Nunavut, Canada and in Greenland were consulted throughout the negotiations. Tartupaluk is significant to all Inuit. They have visited it forever and the agreement assures that all Inuit may visit the island whenever they wish and may travel over the whole of the island. The agreement acknowledges that both Denmark and Canada can respect the cultural needs and desires of the Inuit and still conclude a treaty that defines the 200 km limit for both countries into the continental shelves of the Lincoln Sea and the Labrador Sea.





Both Inuit groups have been lobbying the governments of Nunavut, Greenland, Denmark and Canada to dispense with the need for passports if they wish to travel between the two countries. After 9-11 travel restrictions were imposed and all Inuit want a return to the days of unrestricted travel when they would cross by boat or small plane or dog sled or snow machine whenever they wished. Since Canada's Inuit and Greenland's Inuit hunt in the same waters, they would like to manage the resources and ecosystems within the waters that they share. The Inuit proposal would give them control over oil and gas exploration and tourism as well. The last time that I read anything on this proposal was about 5 years ago and so I cannot say whether the Canada, and Nunavut and Denmark and Greenland are amenable.

Cheers,

George






Hi George,

Fascinating story on the Inuit s sacred Hans Island! That's a solo island not a chain? Right!?

Hey Hans Solo! ☺

MD

Actually excellent post, I'm sure peaceful countries like Canada, Denmark, & Greenland can settle this peacfully, as the various Inuit have!??
----------------------------------
"The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract."
George
Centre Hastings ON Canada
Posts: 13539
Joined: 2009
This day in World History! Continued
6/22/2023 4:08:18 PM
This is what the argument was all about. When I said, "rock Island", I wasn't kidding.



Danish occupation force



Canadian counter attack



You can see that this place is uninhabited so this is more about sharing resources and rights to minerals under the sea.

[Read More]

Cheers,

George



Brian Grafton
Victoria BC Canada
Posts: 4806
Joined: 2004
This day in World History! Continued
6/22/2023 9:25:44 PM
“[i1941 Hitler breaks the non aggression pact, with the USSR, & invades! How foolish was this?? And was it the beginning of the downfall of the Nazis?? What say you??”

Ivan, meet Fritz! A catastrophic event both for the Germans (it led to their ultimate defeat and the collapse of the 1,000-year Reich after 12 years) and the various states of Soviet Russia (which, in combination, lost some 24,000,000+ dead).

Was Hitler’s move a wise one? The Ribbentrop-Molotov Pact had served Germany well, assuring them avoidance of a two front war as German troops swept across Poland, Denmark, Norway, Netherlands, Belgium and assorted other states, west and east. So, to be honest, Germany had the best trained and most experienced military in Europe (The Japanese might dispute a world-wide claim, given their time and success in Manchukuo and China!). Stalin’s Russia had also gained, in territory, time and training. Russian military was stronger in 1941 than in 1939, without question, but IMHO, the Soviet Army of 1939 could probably not have withstood a German assault in 1939; their military leadership was recently purged, and troops were totally untrained for any kind of modern warfare, and the Supreme Command of the Soviet Army was searching for leaders who were both politially reliable and militarily sophisticated. The Winter War again Finland raised awareness of military tactics, as well as granting even more buffer land between Germany and Leningrad.

Both nations were stronger on 22 June 1940 than either was in September 1939, but it appears that most analysts (political, military, journalistic) had forgotten how to read the entrails. Looking back, it is easy to see why literally nobody expected the Soviets to survive to see the first winter. I’ve read some reasons why Russia was assumed to be doomed after Barbarossa, and why this was the predominant view held – even proclaimed! – during the latter half of 1941.

By the time of Pearl Harbor, the Germans were pressing their noses on the gates of Moscow while facing the nastiness of Mother Winter and the ugliness of insufficient supplies. IMHO, this would be the German’s greatest moment. The inevitable tide of the German offensive came up short. I don’t know whether the fall of Moscow might have led to the collapse of Soviet Russia. Somehow, I doubt it. But those few kms between German troops and the centre of Moscow ultimately defined the European war.

At the root of Barbarossa, of course, was the questionable reality of Hitler’s views on Slavs, Communism, and “Lebensraum”. I’m not sufficiently knowing to discuss exactly how fully those views were seen by Germans to be a war directive. To be honest, I would think Germans by this point hd ben sufficiently propagandized sufficiently to support the Gospel of Hitler as presented by the Apostle Josef.

Lots mre to say.

Cheers
Brian g

----------------------------------
"We have met the enemy, and he is us." Walt Kelly. "The Best Things in Life Aren't Things" Bumper sticker.
Michigan Dave
Muskegon MI USA
Posts: 8302
Joined: 2006
This day in World History! Continued
6/23/2023 7:53:52 AM


Checking 6-23 in history we see,

1314 the battle of Bannockburn, It was great for the underdog Scots to defeat the English! How was this accomplished?? What say you??

1812 Napoleon invaded Russia what went wrong??? Anyone?


1865 Cherokees surrender to the Union! Was it wrong for both sides to bring Native Americans into the war?? Comments? Anyone??

1925 two Canadians scale Mt. Logan, Canada's largest mountain, 2nd highest in N. America! Anyone have the story on this incredible feat??

1961 the Antarctic Treaty goes into effect, making this continent unpolitical, Did it work or is it really full of every countries bases? Does Canada even have some??

2016 Brexit goes into effect! Is it working for the UK? What say you?? Anyone?

On 6-24, check this out??

1497 John Cabot is the 1st European since the Vikings to set foot in America! Does this effect the future of N. America & even Canada?? Anyone?

Regards,
MD
----------------------------------
"The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract."
Lightning
Glasgow  UK
Posts: 1064
Joined: 2005
This day in World History! Continued
6/23/2023 1:59:17 PM
Quote:



1314 the battle of Bannockburn, It was great for the underdog Scots to defeat the English! How was this accomplished?? What say you??




Hi Dave,

The English had the superiority of numbers in infantry, cavarly and archers. Their objective was to break the Scottish siege of Stirling Castle, the final remaining major stronghold controlled by English forces in Scotland. King Edward II of England led the campaign in person, such was the importance of defeating the insurgency of Robert the Bruce, the claimant to the Scottish throne.

23rd June was the first day of the battle, with skirmishing on both sides capped off nicely with Robert the Bruce smashing in the skull of the English lord, Henry de Bohun, during single combat. The English vanguard was pushed back across the River Forth in the aftermath, with the main affair to take place on 24th June. Echoes of the calamitous Battle of Stirling Bridge in 1296 must have been ringing in the ears of the English commanders, who wisely withdrew to reform.

English forces managed to ford the river at the Bannockburn and set up camp on flat ground there. Deserters from the English camp told the Scots army of the low morale in the English army, which encouraged Robert to push out early in the morning of 24th June with his infantry pike formations. Hemmed in against the river, the English struggled to keep in good order and command and control began to break down. A desperate attempt to use their archers to rain down enfilade fire on the Scots' pike formations to push them back was dispersed by a valiant charge of 500 Scottish knights. The battle thus being lost, King Edward II was dragged from the field and made his way to Dunbar, then Berwick. Most of the English army was either massacred or ransomed.

The battle didn't immediately achieve Scottish independence; this took another 14 years of fighting and negotiating before Edward III finally acknowledged the rule of the Bruce family and the sovereignty of Scotland. Scotland would have independent monarchs until 1603, and and an independent Parliament until 1707.

Cheers,

Colin
----------------------------------
"There is no course open to us but to fight it out. Every position must be held to the last man: there must be no retirement. With our backs to the wall and believing in the justice of our cause, each one of us must fight to the end."
Phil Andrade
London  UK
Posts: 6498
Joined: 2004
This day in World History! Continued
6/23/2023 4:15:08 PM
Brian,

Your post on the why’s and wherefores of Barbarossa has got to me.

I’m thinking about an obscure battle in 1939 in Manchuria (?) where Soviet soldiers, under the leadership of Zhukov, won a significant victory over Japanese forces. Who remembers that ?

As for the more immediate question of German Russian conflict, I think it’s important to remember that there was a very tantalising outcome in the record of WW1 : despite fighting a war on two fronts, Imperial Germany succeeded in defeating and dismembering Imperial Russia, imposing a settlement that was unbearably harsh and humiliating.

The terms imposed at Versailles were as nothing compared with those of Brest Litovsk. A bit rich , I reckon, when we lament the harshness of the 1919 Diktat. WTF could the Germans expect ?

But I digress.

If Germany had prevailed so triumphantly in 1914-18 over the monster to the East, despite the enormous odds facing her then, why shouldn’t she aspire to something even more spectacular in 1941 ?

There was an added impetus, perhaps, in the Baltic region where , even in the immediate aftermath of the Great War, German incursions had made a big impact.
Unfinished business writ large.

Regards, Phil
----------------------------------
"Egad, sir, I do not know whether you will die on the gallows or of the pox!" "That will depend, my Lord, on whether I embrace your principles or your mistress." Earl of Sandwich and John Wilkes
Phil Andrade
London  UK
Posts: 6498
Joined: 2004
This day in World History! Continued
6/23/2023 4:27:36 PM
Quote:
Quote:



1314 the battle of Bannockburn, It was great for the underdog Scots to defeat the English! How was this accomplished?? What say you??




Hi Dave,

The English had the superiority of numbers in infantry, cavarly and archers. Their objective was to break the Scottish siege of Stirling Castle, the final remaining major stronghold controlled by English forces in Scotland. King Edward II of England led the campaign in person, such was the importance of defeating the insurgency of Robert the Bruce, the claimant to the Scottish throne.

23rd June was the first day of the battle, with skirmishing on both sides capped off nicely with Robert the Bruce smashing in the skull of the English lord, Henry de Bohun, during single combat. The English vanguard was pushed back across the River Forth in the aftermath, with the main affair to take place on 24th June. Echoes of the calamitous Battle of Stirling Bridge in 1296 must have been ringing in the ears of the English commanders, who wisely withdrew to reform.

English forces managed to ford the river at the Bannockburn and set up camp on flat ground there. Deserters from the English camp told the Scots army of the low morale in the English army, which encouraged Robert to push out early in the morning of 24th June with his infantry pike formations. Hemmed in against the river, the English struggled to keep in good order and command and control began to break down. A desperate attempt to use their archers to rain down enfilade fire on the Scots' pike formations to push them back was dispersed by a valiant charge of 500 Scottish knights. The battle thus being lost, King Edward II was dragged from the field and made his way to Dunbar, then Berwick. Most of the English army was either massacred or ransomed.

The battle didn't immediately achieve Scottish independence; this took another 14 years of fighting and negotiating before Edward III finally acknowledged the rule of the Bruce family and the sovereignty of Scotland. Scotland would have independent monarchs until 1603, and and an independent Parliament until 1707.

Cheers,

Colin


Thanks, Colin.

These narratives you provide are informative and interesting, and whet the appetite for more discussion.

All these Anglo Scottish wars must have imparted something dynamic to the narrative of the British Isles.

English triumphs: Edward the First, Malleus Pictorum - have I got that right, Hammer of the Scots? - Halidon Hill , won by his grandson , Edward III, and then , in the early sixteenth century, Flodden, with an awful massacre of Scottish nobility inspiring the lament Flowers of the Forest. Culloden is the culmination.

Then the Nemesis with English defeats. Is Bannockburn the most celebrated one in Scottish folklore ?

What weapon did Robert the Bruce use to smash de Bohun’s head in ?

Elon Musk might do well to study this story before he makes any more challenges to engage in single combat with his rivals, or with Vladimir Putin 😂

Regards, Phil
----------------------------------
"Egad, sir, I do not know whether you will die on the gallows or of the pox!" "That will depend, my Lord, on whether I embrace your principles or your mistress." Earl of Sandwich and John Wilkes
DT509er
Santa Rosa CA USA
Posts: 1521
Joined: 2005
This day in World History! Continued
6/23/2023 4:57:23 PM
Quote:
Brian,

Your post on the why’s and wherefores of Barbarossa has got to me.

I’m thinking about an obscure battle in 1939 in Manchuria (?) where Soviet soldiers, under the leadership of Zhukov, won a significant victory over Japanese forces. Who remembers that ?

Regards, Phil


The Battles of Khalkhin Gol of which the battle of Nomonhan was the decisive battle that forced Japan to request and accept a ceasefire.

Dan




----------------------------------
"American parachutists-devils in baggy pants..." German officer, Italy 1944. “If your experiment needs statistics, you ought to have done a better experiment.” Lord Ernest Rutherford
Phil Andrade
London  UK
Posts: 6498
Joined: 2004
This day in World History! Continued
6/23/2023 5:25:28 PM
Quote:


Your post on the why’s and wherefores of Barbarossa has got to me.

I’m thinking about an obscure battle in 1939 in Manchuria (?) where Soviet soldiers, under the leadership of Zhukov, won a significant victory over Japanese forces. Who remembers that ?

Regards, Phil


The Battles of Khalkhin Gol of which the battle of Nomonhan was the decisive battle that forced Japan to request and accept a ceasefire.

Dan

Thanks, Dan.

Overlooked, but pretty bloody fierce stuff , judging by the casualty figures I’ve just seen on Wiki.

Regards, Phil




----------------------------------
"Egad, sir, I do not know whether you will die on the gallows or of the pox!" "That will depend, my Lord, on whether I embrace your principles or your mistress." Earl of Sandwich and John Wilkes
Brian Grafton
Victoria BC Canada
Posts: 4806
Joined: 2004
This day in World History! Continued
6/23/2023 6:59:36 PM
Phil, Dan, good points. I should have included it in my summary, perhaps, particularly in my mention of the disarray in the Soviet military.

Nomonhan is indeed a neglected and little-known battle, important in its own right but also because it was the first major defeat of Imperial Japanese forces in a war that had been underway formally for two years and unofficially for seven.

Why isn’t that battle remembered and discussed. Basically because it was not a Eurocentric battle, conducted at a time when Europe was about to erupt. And why was Soviet success seen as an possible indicator of improved capability. I would say for two reasons. First, the victory was against an Oriental (now, I suppose, an Asian) army, which at the time meant an inferior force by definition. That’s a sad commentary on a host of levels. Secondly, initial Soviet ineptitude in the Winter War reinforced the idea that Soviet forces were ill-led and ill-equipped.

Phil, you say: Quote:
As for the more immediate question of German Russian conflict, I think it’s important to remember that there was a very tantalising outcome in the record of WW1 : despite fighting a war on two fronts, Imperial Germany succeeded in defeating and dismembering Imperial Russia, imposing a settlement that was unbearably harsh and humiliating.


If Germany had prevailed so triumphantly in 1914-18 over the monster to the East, despite the enormous odds facing her then, why shouldn’t she aspire to something even more spectacular in 1941 ?

There was an added impetus, perhaps, in the Baltic region where , even in the immediate aftermath of the Great War, German incursions had made a big impact.
Unfinished business writ large.

Again, I agree. I don’t feel very knowledgable about the settlement demanded by Germany and agreed to by a fledgling government, but it strikes me that the Brest-Litovsk Treaty must surely be one of the odder documents of the 20th century – right up there with the Munich Accord which decided Czechoslovakia’s faith without a single representative from Czechoslovakia. But again, that’s a bit of a digression as well.

Cheers
Brian G
----------------------------------
"We have met the enemy, and he is us." Walt Kelly. "The Best Things in Life Aren't Things" Bumper sticker.
Lightning
Glasgow  UK
Posts: 1064
Joined: 2005
This day in World History! Continued
6/24/2023 3:00:08 AM
Phil,

As ever, you offer a most eloquent response to posts on here.

I’m just heading off for a day in the hills and an evening in a pub, but I will come back for further discussion on Bannockburn tomorrow.

I also hope to offer up a post about the Battle of Little Bighorn, whose 147th anniversary begins tomorrow.

Cheers,

Colin
----------------------------------
"There is no course open to us but to fight it out. Every position must be held to the last man: there must be no retirement. With our backs to the wall and believing in the justice of our cause, each one of us must fight to the end."
Michigan Dave
Muskegon MI USA
Posts: 8302
Joined: 2006
This day in World History! Continued
6/24/2023 7:27:09 AM
Quote:
Quote:



1314 the battle of Bannockburn, It was great for the underdog Scots to defeat the English! How was this accomplished?? What say you??




Hi Dave,

The English had the superiority of numbers in infantry, cavarly and archers. Their objective was to break the Scottish siege of Stirling Castle, the final remaining major stronghold controlled by English forces in Scotland. King Edward II of England led the campaign in person, such was the importance of defeating the insurgency of Robert the Bruce, the claimant to the Scottish throne.

23rd June was the first day of the battle, with skirmishing on both sides capped off nicely with Robert the Bruce smashing in the skull of the English lord, Henry de Bohun, during single combat. The English vanguard was pushed back across the River Forth in the aftermath, with the main affair to take place on 24th June. Echoes of the calamitous Battle of Stirling Bridge in 1296 must have been ringing in the ears of the English commanders, who wisely withdrew to reform.

English forces managed to ford the river at the Bannockburn and set up camp on flat ground there. Deserters from the English camp told the Scots army of the low morale in the English army, which encouraged Robert to push out early in the morning of 24th June with his infantry pike formations. Hemmed in against the river, the English struggled to keep in good order and command and control began to break down. A desperate attempt to use their archers to rain down enfilade fire on the Scots' pike formations to push them back was dispersed by a valiant charge of 500 Scottish knights. The battle thus being lost, King Edward II was dragged from the field and made his way to Dunbar, then Berwick. Most of the English army was either massacred or ransomed.

The battle didn't immediately achieve Scottish independence; this took another 14 years of fighting and negotiating before Edward III finally acknowledged the rule of the Bruce family and the sovereignty of Scotland. Scotland would have independent monarchs until 1603, and and an independent Parliament until 1707.

Cheers,

Colin



Thanks Colin,

I appreciate the Scottish History lesson, thanks to the movie Braveheart we amateurs on Scottish history can at least visualize how horrible warfare was back then!

Today in sports, coaches talk about "compete level" being a important factor in victory! The Scots certainly had that!

Regards,
MD
----------------------------------
"The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract."
Michigan Dave
Muskegon MI USA
Posts: 8302
Joined: 2006
This day in World History! Continued
6/24/2023 7:33:07 AM
Tomorrow in 1876, June 25th was the date of Custer's Last Stand! Gen. George Armstrong Custer & the 7th Cavalry were killed basically to the last man, at the Little Bighorn River by the Souix Lakota Nation & their allies! Comments & websites welcome! Anyone on Custer's mistakes & the aftermath of this famous battle! Any other battles you know of very simular?? Anyone?

Regards,
MD
----------------------------------
"The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract."
morris crumley
Dunwoody GA USA
Posts: 3309
Joined: 2007
This day in World History! Continued
6/24/2023 11:43:50 AM
Quote:
Tomorrow in 1876, June 25th was the date of Custer's Last Stand! Gen. George Armstrong Custer & the 7th Cavalry were killed basically to the last man, at the Little Bighorn River by the Souix Lakota Nation & their allies! Comments & websites welcome! Anyone on Custer's mistakes & the aftermath of this famous battle! Any other battles you know of very simular?? Anyone?

Regards,
MD


One battle of similarity took place 8 years prior when Custer and the seventh cavalry attacked the Southern Cheyenne village of Black Kettle, along the Washita. It was in winter, but Custer divided his command into four and without doing proper reconnaissance to determine the proximity of many mixed tribe encampments along the Washita, and to provide the element of surprise, pitched right into the Cheyenne village. One officer, Major Joel Elliott broke off to chase escaping Cheyenne...and was wiped out when he ran into Arapaho, Kiowa, and Cheyennes they did not know to be so close and who were racing to Black Kettle`s village when they heard the sound of the fight.

Custer used women and children captives as hostages and human shields, made a demonstration towards the other encampments, then withdrew for fear of having his trains attacked before he could secure them.

His neglect to determine what happened to Major Elliott`s command would rebound for years. Elliott was very popular in the 7th Cavalry, and Custer`s indifference split his command. When Sheridan and Custer returned to the battlefield many days later, Elliot`s dead and mutilated bodies were found.

At the Little Bighorn, Custer divided his command into four, three battalions - Custer`s five companies, Benteen`s three and Reno`s three, and the company escort for the mule-packs. In his zeal for surprise, he failed to do proper reconnaissance ( he never actually saw the village until too late) and many believe that once he descended Medicine Tail Coulee, and in seeing that he could not attack at the crossing there..he raced his battalion north to the upper end of the village where dust clouds showed the Sioux and Cheyenne women and children to be escaping north in an attempt to repeat his hostage taking along the Washita.

However, in doing that, he rode his battalion farther away from any support from his other battalions and further isolated himself. Perhaps he was feeling desperate at the time..that it was his only chance...we will never know.

Respects, Morris
----------------------------------
"You are a $70, red-wool, pure quill military genius, or the biggest damn fool in northern Mexico."
Lightning
Glasgow  UK
Posts: 1064
Joined: 2005
This day in World History! Continued
6/24/2023 11:58:25 AM
Misfire.
----------------------------------
"There is no course open to us but to fight it out. Every position must be held to the last man: there must be no retirement. With our backs to the wall and believing in the justice of our cause, each one of us must fight to the end."
George
Centre Hastings ON Canada
Posts: 13539
Joined: 2009
This day in World History! Continued
6/24/2023 8:44:27 PM
Quote:
1497 John Cabot is the 1st European since the Vikings to set foot in America! Does this effect the future of N. America & even Canada?? Anyone?


Cabot was Italian, Venetian actually (Giovanni Caboto). He had a busy career but is best known in Canada as the man who bumped into what would eventually become Canada.

I believe that he made three voyages to NA and the second was the most successful. He came to the shores of Newfoundland and Labrador and probably sighted the Beothuk indigenous people on the shore. None of his men wanted to venture too far from shore as they were a bit concerned with whom they might encounter. We know that he had probably arrived at NFLD because of the latitudes that he quoted when describing his position and because he brought a bow and arrow and other artefacts home with him.

Cabot didn't know where he was of course and as he was seeking a route to Asia, he thought that the rocky shores of NFLD and Labrador could have been the eastern shores of Asia.

He also was impressed with the cod stocks found off the Grand Banks of NFLD. It was mentioned that his men dropped baskets weighted with rocks into the water and raised a basket full of fish. So he did inform others that this supply of fish was available in North America.

His discoveries were most important because of the political implications. Cabot was sailing under an English flag. English King Henry VII had granted Cabot to lead a voyage of discovery to any new worlds not known by Christian monarchs. The patent stated that he was to, “find, discover and investigate whatsoever islands, countries, regions or provinces of heathens and infidels, in whatsoever part of the world placed, which before this time were unknown to all Christians.”

Now the king wasn't funding the trip but with the Royal Patent, but it was easy for Cabot to obtain financing.

Politically, Cabot's voyages gave the English the upper hand when it came time to claim parts of North America as their own. Cabot had made his discoveries in the name of the English King.

Cabot made his third voyage in 1498 with five ships in his flotilla. Only one returned to England and Cabot there is speculation that Cabot died on this trip. Historical recored is sketchy but he may have travelled as far south as Long Island. Historians know that the pension that he earned for his efforts continued to be paid until 1499 but it may be that one of his sons or by his wife received the money. Source: Canadian Encyclopaedia

Cheers,

George
Michigan Dave
Muskegon MI USA
Posts: 8302
Joined: 2006
This day in World History! Continued
6/25/2023 1:06:59 PM
From last year at this time, great map & post. Discussions anyone?? Quote:
Quote:
1534 Jacques Cartier land on Prince Edward Island! Is this the beginning of New France??

Cartier made three voyages but it was in 1535 that he headed up the St. Lawrence River to what would become Québec City and Montréal.

The 1534 voyage saw Cartier land on the Gaspé peninsula to raise a great cross to claim the land for the King of France. The First Nations people that were present were unimpressed and fully aware that this guy was trying to claim their land.

EDIT: And yes on June 29, 1534 he did land on what would later become Prince Edward Island. But based on Cartier's comments, it is likely that he did not know that PEI was and island. He did not circumnavigate the land mass but rather stayed on the north side.

The King sought a passage to the east, a north-west passage but Cartier did not find it. In Cartier's last voyage, he thought that he had found diamonds and gold but what he found or was shown by the indigenous people was iron ore and quartz. With that, the French seemed to lose a bit of interest in North American explorations until the end of the century.

The founder of New France is actually considered to be Samuel de Champlain who established a colony at Québec in 1608.


The French were remarkably successful in their colonization efforts. By 1712, New France consisted of five individual North American colonies.

We know of course about Canada (3 sub colonies including Québec and Montréal and also Trois Rivière). But there was also the Hudson Bay colony, Acadia, a small colony on the island of Newfoundland, and finally, Louisiana.

So New France encompassed much more land than did the New England colonies. It extended from Hudson Bay to the Gulf of Mexico. Take a look at the number of forts established by the French in their colonies on the map before.

And they travelled well into these territories as they traded with the First Nations. I have noted before that when Lewis and Clark went on their famous trek, they had French Canadians in their crew and picked up more along the way who were already out there.



Cheers,

George




Hi George,

1534 late June Jacques Cartier lands on Prince Edwards Island, great answer by George showing us all the forts the French built in the New World, (see his awesome map, I have never seen all the French Forts like this? Didnt know they had so many?? you wonder how did they lose all this territory!?? It is inland so you aren't dominated by the RN? Look how small on this map the British Colonies look??

Comments anyone?
MD
----------------------------------
"The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract."
Brian Grafton
Victoria BC Canada
Posts: 4806
Joined: 2004
This day in World History! Continued
6/25/2023 7:20:06 PM
Just so as not to overlook him, even on the day of Custer’s Last Stand, on this day in 1852, Antoni Gaudi, Spanish architect known primarily for the Sagrada Familia in Barcelona. I first saw Sagrada Familia in 1960.when I was 18. It was stunning. I assume that anybody who has visited Barcelona would agree. They might add a few other words: ugly; shocking; sacreligious; unstable (both the building and the mind that designed it). They may, on the contrary, love it. As I did.

In general, Gaudi is often aligned with the Art Nouveau movement. I can see similarities, but feel he goes far beyond the vine-type traceries which were used so magnificently by Nouveau. I believe there is another term used to describe his work, but I can’t remember it at the moment.

I’ve included a gallery of some of his other works below; hope you can access them. IMHO, his work with doors and windows and balconies on non-clerical structures is perhaps even more appealing than his Sagrada.

[Read More]

Thanks for indulging me this post.

Cheers
Brian G
----------------------------------
"We have met the enemy, and he is us." Walt Kelly. "The Best Things in Life Aren't Things" Bumper sticker.
scoucer
Berlin  Germany
Posts: 3269
Joined: 2010
This day in World History! Continued
6/26/2023 4:17:12 AM
Quote:
Just so as not to overlook him, even on the day of Custer’s Last Stand, on this day in 1852, Antoni Gaudi, Spanish architect known primarily for the Sagrada Familia in Barcelona. I first saw Sagrada Familia in 1960.when I was 18. It was stunning. I assume that anybody who has visited Barcelona would agree. They might add a few other words: ugly; shocking; sacreligious; unstable (both the building and the mind that designed it). They may, on the contrary, love it. As I did.

In general, Gaudi is often aligned with the Art Nouveau movement. I can see similarities, but feel he goes far beyond the vine-type traceries which were used so magnificently by Nouveau. I believe there is another term used to describe his work, but I can’t remember it at the moment.

I’ve included a gallery of some of his other works below; hope you can access them. IMHO, his work with doors and windows and balconies on non-clerical structures is perhaps even more appealing than his Sagrada.

[Read More]

Thanks for indulging me this post.

Cheers
Brian G


Agree Brian. Truly beautiful. Visited often when I lived in Barcelona way back in the last millennium.

Trevor
----------------------------------
`Hey don´t the wars come easy and don´t the peace come hard`- Buffy Sainte-Marie Some swim with the stream. Some swim against the stream. Me - I´m stuck somewhere in the woods and can´t even find the stupid stream.
Lightning
Glasgow  UK
Posts: 1064
Joined: 2005
This day in World History! Continued
6/26/2023 6:40:10 AM
Quote:
Tomorrow in 1876, June 25th was the date of Custer's Last Stand! Gen. George Armstrong Custer & the 7th Cavalry were killed basically to the last man, at the Little Bighorn River by the Sioux Lakota Nation & their allies! Comments & websites welcome! Anyone on Custer's mistakes & the aftermath of this famous battle! Any other battles you know of very simular?? Anyone?

Regards,
MD


Hi Dave,

More than half of the 7th Cavalry survived the battle, those being the companies under the command of Major Reno and Captain Benteen. More on this later.

Gold had been discovered in the hills of Dakota (by an expedition protected by cavalry forces under Custer), and despite a treaty being in place between the US Government and the Lakota Sioux that ceded it in perpetuity to the latter, white miners and prospectors poured into the region. President Grant initially tried to use the army to turn the intruders away; the regular army was far too small to be able to do the job effectively. Faced with an economic depression back east, Grant finally relented to the idea that the hills should be cleared of Indians and filled with miners. Attempts to purchase the land from the Sioux were rebuffed entirely; they had won it by bloodshed and were determined to keep it.

Ultimatums were issued demanding all Indians report to reservations by spring or be subject to hostile action by US forces. The Indians saw no need to hurry anywhere; their ponies couldn't feed on the prairies until April or May. It soon became clear that the Indians were not going to report into the reservations and were taking matters into their own hands by trying to expel white miners and prospectors from their lands by killing as many as they could find. Grant's administration authorised a military campaign, devised by Phil Sheridan, where several columns would try and force the Indians into a corner where they could be subjugated. The problem was that nobody was sure where they were, or how many there were of them. Army Indian scouts noted that the plains were emptying in the general direction of the Bighorn. However, it wasn't just the Sioux; the Cheyenne threw their lot in too, along with the Miniconjou and a few Arapaho. It was probably the greatest conference of tribes in the history of the people of the plains.

Lt Col Custer, recalled from a career-ending incident where he publicly hinted at rampant corruption in the War Department involving Grant's brother, was given command of the column nominally commanded by General Terry pushing along the Bighorn valley from the east. General Crook was to approach from the south, with General Terry (Custer's superior) following in from the west. Custer set off with the entire regiment of the 7th Cavalry but refused the aid of Gatling guns (cumbersome beasts flimsily mounted on high carriages) and four additional companies from the 2nd Cavalry, stating the 7th could deal on its own terms anything that came across its path.

Crook made first contact, getting a bloody nose at the Battle of the Rosebud River as the confederation of tribes exacted a heavy toll. The Indians withdrew from the battlefield first, so he claimed victory. However, he sat for a month afterwards to rest his forces and await reinforcements. The Indians moved into the deep valleys, trying to evade the army forces and await their opportunity to inflict a devastating defeat. Crook saw no need to inform Terry or Custer of his contact with the enemy, so they were unaware of the strength of the foe in front of them.

Gibbon had warned Custer to not be greedy and to await the other columns if he found the Indians first. Custer's scouts located the Indian encampment stretched along the Bighorn River; they claimed it went on for several miles. Custer and his officers struggled to see it through their field glasses, but Custer resolved to attack anyway, in the usual army appointment of the following morning at sunrise. However, his scouts also reported seeing Indians scavenging from supplies dropped by his column, giving the strong possibility that his forces had been spotted. Custer suddenly changed tack and decided to attack there and then, in the blistering heat of the mid-afternoon sun.

Custer had twelve companies at his disposal; he assigned B Company to protect the mule train. He took a battalion of five companies for himself, gave three companies to Major Reno and a further three companies to Captain Benteen, including the mule train. Benteen was a captain of the regular army with considerable experience; he had been a Lt Col of volunteers in the Civil War and was known as a hard fighting, hard drinking man. His reputation for hating Custer was even greater, but Custer respected his service and would usually refer to him by his rank of volunteers, as was custom at the time. Reno was nobody’s favourite; a regular drinker who couldn’t hold his liquor, he didn’t have the lengthy experience of Benteen or the flair of Custer but was reasonably well-connected, so had risen to the rank of Major. Nevertheless, as the second-highest ranked field officer in the regiment, he was trusted to take command of a key part of Custer’s force.

Benteen protested that the regiment should be kept together and shadow the Indians until Terry and Crook could arrive. In fact, Terry was only a day’s march away at this point, although Crook was clearly not coming. Despite the reports of scavengers pillaging boxes of hardtack, the Indians were not aware the cavalry were nearby; they had settled down to enjoy the summer heat and graze and water their ponies. Benteen’s protests overruled, Custer sent Benteen on a flanking manoeuvre to try and prevent the Indians from slipping away. Reno was sent with three companies to rush over the river from and demonstrate whilst Custer brought the main force down at the other of the Indian village and take hostages.

Custer’s plan would have been sound if he had known the two key variables; the size of the village and the number of hostiles he was likely to engage. Custer ignored the warnings of his scouts and officers to hold back and reconnoitre. Thus, Reno’s companies landed straight into the middle of a firefight from their front and flanks. Reno called off his charge and formed skirmish lines, delivering volley fire into the village to little effect other than to panic the Indians out of their tents. Custer was able to observe this from his position above the village and moved off to carry out the second part of his plan, but not before sending a rider, Italian-born Giovanni Martini, with a note to Benteen to hurry back and bring the mule train carrying extra ammo. Martini, due to his poor English, was unable to impress upon Benteen the urgency of the situation.

The initial morale shock was shrugged off and Reno’s men were forced back into a small area of timber where they were subject to murderous fire. From there, they made a desperate charge back over the river to a knoll later named Reno Hill where they regrouped. Satisfied they were not a threat for now, the Indians pursuing them broke off and headed back to the village. At the same time, Custer seems to have made a dash right into the middle of the village, mistakenly believing it to be the end. Faced with immediate heavy resistance where at least one officer was sniped, Custer’s command retreated to find better ground.

It is here that history becomes hazy; there were no surviving cavalry participants from this part of the battle. The testimonies of the Indians and the battlefield archaeology suggests that Custer’s force split as it recoiled, hinting the resistance in the village was devastating. Custer’s five companies all managed to escape the river but not as a single force and were crushed in detail on various hills as the Indians pursued them. The Indians stated the fighting was hard, but it was brief. There were probably numerous attempts at stands, where the cavalrymen got into skirmish lines only to be flanked. If Custer survived to this part of the battle, he knew things were getting beyond desperate and ordered the commencement of volley fire, to better deliver a stopping blow and to alert Reno and Benteen he was in trouble (repeated volley fire was a sure sign that things were going bad, and they would be able to recognise this).

Back on Reno Hill, Reno’s companies were in bad shape. They had been thoroughly licked and morale was close to collapse. The timely arrival of Benteen, who decided not to hurry at the gallop to be able to protect the mule train (which had the vital reserve ammo and food), bolstered them. Reno and Benteen discussed moving on to find Custer, but later claimed not to have heard the volley fire. This dither was too much for Captain Weir of D Company, who rode out with his command to offer what assistance he could. He quickly met resistance after a couple of miles, which soon turned out to be the main body of the Indian forces. He retreated quickly and rejoined Reno and Benteen on the hill, reporting that before they were repelled, he and his troopers had seen Indians firing at objects on the ground.

What Weir and his men had seen was the Indians finishing off the wounded and taking spoils. Custer’s attempts to stop the Indian attack by skirmish line volley fire failed, as did a last gasp breakout attempt by the last of his troopers and scouts to reach safety. Indian accounts vary, but it does appear that some of the cavalrymen started to turn their weapons on themselves rather than be taken prisoner. Others fought to the bitter end, using their dead horses as breastworks. The wounded were killed where they lay, and their corpses horribly mutilated and looted. Custer was not mutilated like the others, save for an awning needle through his ears and an arrow stuck into his private parts. No prisoners were known to have been taken, despite the later claims of the relief force claiming to found burnt corpses tied to stakes.

The Indians regrouped and moved onto Reno Hill, where they engaged in a siege last another day which was remarkably tight. Reno recovered his nerve, but it was Benteen who proved the hero of the hour. He organised the defence of the perimeter of the hill, placing the wounded in the middle. Repeated Indian attacks were parried by counterattacks and the casualties began to mount on both sides. The Indians spotted the approach of Terry and his column (the Indians had a healthy respect from the longer range Springfield rifles Terry's infantry were carrying) and withdrew, taking with them their entire village. Terry’s arrival also brought the news that Custer had been defeated and his command wiped out, which Benteen and Reno had trouble believing. Nevertheless, Custer and his men were dead, and they had done little to assist him.

A Court of Inquiry cleared Reno and Benteen of any wrongdoing; they were in no condition to move in force to assist Custer, although this analysis depends heavily upon hindsight. At this point, the 7th cavalry thought it was fighting a few hundred warriors, not several thousand as ended up being the case. Reno and Benteen, to the best of their knowledge, had enough troopers to try and fight their way through to Custer.

I will leave the last words on this to Private William Taylor of Company M, 7th Cavalry, who wrote in 1910:

Quote:
"Reno proved incompetent and Benteen showed his indifference—I will not use the uglier words that have often been in my mind. Both failed Custer and he had to fight it out alone."


Cheers,

Colin
----------------------------------
"There is no course open to us but to fight it out. Every position must be held to the last man: there must be no retirement. With our backs to the wall and believing in the justice of our cause, each one of us must fight to the end."
Michigan Dave
Muskegon MI USA
Posts: 8302
Joined: 2006
This day in World History! Continued
6/26/2023 9:06:43 AM
Hi Colin,

Excellent synopsis of the 7th Cavalry's fight at the Little Big Horn! Great post, btw what I meant when I said Custer's men were wiped out to the last man, was the 5 companies directly with Custer! Not those with Benteen, & Reno! I sure would like to visit the LBH Battlefield, I hear it's a really solumn & beautiful place!? Anyone in MHO ever visit it? What was the result of the post battle, anyone??

Thanks again,
& Regards,
MD

Also perhaps someone could post websites or videos on the battlefield or the battle itself!??
----------------------------------
"The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract."
Lightning
Glasgow  UK
Posts: 1064
Joined: 2005
This day in World History! Continued
6/26/2023 9:27:17 AM
Thanks Dave.

I haven't been to the battlefield, but would very much like to go one day.

'The Son of the Morning Star' starring Gary Cole and Rosanna Arquette is probably the best Custer movie about. It stays reasonably close to the history (as it was known at the time) with little in the way of Hollywood embellishment.

Cheers,

Colin
----------------------------------
"There is no course open to us but to fight it out. Every position must be held to the last man: there must be no retirement. With our backs to the wall and believing in the justice of our cause, each one of us must fight to the end."
Michigan Dave
Muskegon MI USA
Posts: 8302
Joined: 2006
This day in World History! Continued
6/26/2023 10:10:12 AM
BTW, Does anyone think Custer would have won, had he brought the Gatling guns with him??
----------------------------------
"The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract."
Lightning
Glasgow  UK
Posts: 1064
Joined: 2005
This day in World History! Continued
6/26/2023 10:54:33 AM
Quote:
BTW, Does anyone think Custer would have won, had he brought the Gatling guns with him??


On a perfect flat plain, with good line of sight and ready access to ammunition, Gatling guns were lethal. The British used them to great effect at the Battle of Ulundi in 1879, positioning them at the corners of the infantry squares where they exacted a heavy toll on the Zulu attackers.

The terrain at Little Bighorn is undulating, with lots peaks and drops across the area. It would have been easy to find cover from the Gatlings and for marksmen to pick off the crews, as the guns were elevated on high carriages. I think even transporting them would have been tricky; the carriages might not have taken well to plains and would probably have broken down repeatedly. On balance, I think they would have been more of a hindrance than a help.

As for the four companies from the 2nd Cavalry, he should have bitten the hand off when the offer was made. Four companies held in reserve would have given Custer a solid rearguard to fall back upon, or they could have been used with his five companies as part of the main attack. Another couple hundred carbines could have made all the difference.

Cheers,

Colin
----------------------------------
"There is no course open to us but to fight it out. Every position must be held to the last man: there must be no retirement. With our backs to the wall and believing in the justice of our cause, each one of us must fight to the end."
morris crumley
Dunwoody GA USA
Posts: 3309
Joined: 2007
This day in World History! Continued
6/26/2023 11:04:31 AM
Quote:
BTW, Does anyone think Custer would have won, had he brought the Gatling guns with him??


No...because he wouldn`t have found the hostiles in all likelihood. There had already been an incident where one of the Gatling gun carriages had overturned on the journey, injuring two troopers, one rather badly. The terrain of Custer`s march, along the Rosebud was rugged, rutted, and undulating. He would have been significantly slowed down by trying to take them along. The offer of the cavalry companies that was declined by Custer was....mind-numbingly foolish.

Respects, Morris
----------------------------------
"You are a $70, red-wool, pure quill military genius, or the biggest damn fool in northern Mexico."
Michigan Dave
Muskegon MI USA
Posts: 8302
Joined: 2006
This day in World History! Continued
6/27/2023 7:36:08 AM
here is 6-27 in World history,

1787 Englishmen Edward Gibbon finishes, The rise & fall of the Roman Empire! Has anyone actually read it?? Big text, kind of put me off?? How about you??

1844 Joseph Smith of the Mormons is murdered by a mob in Carthage, Illinois! Was this religiously motivated??
Geeze even then people were racially, religiously, & sexual preference oriented & bias?? Why can't we be tollerant, moderate, & just live & let live!? We are so angry & polarized?? What say you??

1917 Greece declares war on the Central Powers! Why so late?.& were they a serious player in WWI!? Comments?

Tomorrow 6-28 These events happened! Comments on any!??

1712 Jean Rousseau, the man who inspired the French Revolution was born! What did he do to stir every one up.?? What say you??

1838 Victoria is crowned Queen of the then British Commonwealth!? Would you say she was their most influential monarch??

1880 Ned Kelly Bush Ranger was killed in a shootout with police! I thought Rangers were good blokes!? Even I was a State park ranger! Why would the Police gun him down!?? Anyone? Perhaps Oz'ers??

1894 the US Congress declares Labor day a holiday!? What say you? End of summer, A good time for a holiday!??

1914 the Assassination of the Arch Duke Franz Ferdinand, starts WWI! How was this purely bad luck for the poor Arch Duke!? & how can 1 guys death cause a world war??? Anyone??

1919 the Treaty of Versailles is signed! Didn't they lay the blame on Germany!? & this was a major factor leading to WWII!?? What say you??.comments anyone??

2007 the Bald Eagle is removed from the list of endangered species! What say you? Are there many in your neck of the woods?.Anyone??

lots to discuss!
Regards,
MD
----------------------------------
"The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract."
George
Centre Hastings ON Canada
Posts: 13539
Joined: 2009
This day in World History! Continued
6/27/2023 7:55:49 AM
The Siege of Québec began on this day in 1759 leading to one of the most important battles ever to take place in North America on the Plains of Abraham on Sept. 13, 1759.

Vice-Admiral Charles Saunders of the RN had, with brilliant seamanship, navigated the treacherous currents and shoals below Québec City to arrive before the city with a fleet that included large ships of the line. French General Montcalm was shocked to see these large ships as the French navy had never been able to negotiate the approach to the city with larger ships.

On board this large fleet of warships and transports was the professional British army led by Major-General James Wolfe. 9,000 strong, this army would begin two months of siege and probing attacks before the brilliantly executed scaling of the cliffs above Québec to defeat Montcalm's army on the Plains of Abraham.

These events did not end the French influence in North America but certainly set the stage. The French forces retreated upstream to Montréal and would return to Québec the next year to defeat the small British garrison holding Québec at the Battle of St. Foy in April of 1760. The French would lay siege as the defeated British garrison headed behind the walls of Québec, but in May of 1760 it was the RN who would return to Québec first as the ice went out. With that, the French were essentially finished and called off their siege. They had been hoping that a French supply and reinforcement fleet would join them but the RN had destroyed the French fleet at Quiberon Bay in Sept. of 1759 and France did not have the naval assets to send aid to the French at Québec.

And so the course of history was altered in North America.

Cheers,

George
Lightning
Glasgow  UK
Posts: 1064
Joined: 2005
This day in World History! Continued
6/27/2023 11:42:01 AM
Quote:
1787 Englishmen Edward Gibbon finishes, The rise & fall of the Roman Empire! Has anyone actually read it?? Big text, kind of put me off?? How about you??


Hi Dave,

I read it a couple of decades ago and must confess it was a slog. The abridged version (which takes you up to the end of western Empire in 476 A.D.) is well worth a look, however. The full collection goes up to the fall of Constantinople in 1453 A.D. The read is not for the fair-hearted, and much of Gibbon's analysis on the causes of the fall of Roman civilisation has now been superseded.

Quote:
1919 the Treaty of Versailles is signed! Didn't they lay the blame on Germany!? & this was a major factor leading to WWII!?? What say you??.comments anyone??


The Treaty was relatively light in comparison to what the Germans imposed upon Russia the previous year. I think Germany was very lucky not to be broken up into dozen or so pieces as the French wished.

Cheers,

Colin
----------------------------------
"There is no course open to us but to fight it out. Every position must be held to the last man: there must be no retirement. With our backs to the wall and believing in the justice of our cause, each one of us must fight to the end."
Phil Andrade
London  UK
Posts: 6498
Joined: 2004
This day in World History! Continued
6/27/2023 5:41:03 PM
The Treaty was relatively light in comparison to what the Germans imposed upon Russia the previous year. I think Germany was very lucky….

Your comments win my agreement, Colin.

Regards, Phil
----------------------------------
"Egad, sir, I do not know whether you will die on the gallows or of the pox!" "That will depend, my Lord, on whether I embrace your principles or your mistress." Earl of Sandwich and John Wilkes
Brian Grafton
Victoria BC Canada
Posts: 4806
Joined: 2004
This day in World History! Continued
6/27/2023 11:16:36 PM
Quote:
1787 Englishmen Edward Gibbon finishes, The rise & fall of the Roman Empire! Has anyone actually read it?? Big text, kind of put me off?? How about you?
Quote:
I read it a couple of decades ago and must confess it was a slog. The abridged version (which takes you up to the end of western Empire in 476 A.D.) is well worth a look, however. The full collection goes up to the fall of Constantinople in 1453 A.D. The read is not for the fair-hearted, and much of Gibbon's analysis on the causes of the fall of Roman civilisation has now been superseded.

Colin, good comments. What I remember of it – from reading it in the late 1960s, and then not reading it all – leaves me concurring with your assessment. What I remember being turned off by was not his subject matter but his prose style; it was not as ponderous as the prose of the 17th century, but it was still pretty turgid. WSC, evidently, found Gibbon’s Rise and Fall riveting reading; I wonder if this explains his various histories?

I sense, however, that it is not the writing style so much as the intellectual stance Gibbon took which causes him to be remembered today. He was, to fill him out just briefly:
• A gentleman of some leisure and an MP for two different ridings for 10 years. These were, IIRC, gifted seats.
• Of independent means though not of great wealth.
• More broadly travelled than most of his class (or betters), spending years on the continent (initially, IIRC, as a religious castaway when he underwent a brief conversion to Catholicism).
• A member of “The Club” (note: not “The Literary Club”, as so many want to call it. It was always, from what I have read, simply “The Club”.), a bit more of which later.

So what, you might say? Well, they say something about Gibbon himself. He felt strongly enough about religious issues to convert to Catholicism, which caused him to be removed from any possible government positions. Yet he would later reject his Catholic commitment and revert (IIUC) to C of E orthodoxy, after a sort. He appeared to hold politics in low regard, serving (or at least voting) as a Whig in service to his patron, a Whig who gifted a seat for Gibbon’s holding.He was comfortable in several languages, in a way that many of his contemporaries would not be.

Most of all, IMHO, he was accepted as a member of “The Club”, which was nothing more that a group of like-minded characters who met in coffee houses and pubs for discussion, friendship, and sometimes a bit of carousing. The Club was initially set up (unofficially) by friends of Sam Johnson, who suffered from ennui and often needed social distraction.

But – though Johnson remained the focus of the Club until his death – it is the people who were drawn to be accepted in “The Club” that tell it’s importance. And Gibbon’s [iDecline and Fall… fits with both their reputations and their accomplishments. Amongst the friends constituting “The Club” are:
• Sir Joshua Reynolds: founding member of The Club (largely with David Garrick). First President of the Royal Academy and leading portraitist in England.
• David Garrick: founding member of The Club (with Reynolds), one-time pupil at Sam Johnson’s school, and leading actor in England.
• Oliver Goldsmith: highly regarded poet.
• James Boswell: Scottish lawyer, but author of A Life of Samuel Johnson, considered the first modern English biography.
• Francis Burney: Royal Musician to George III. His daughter, Fanny Burney, is recognized as a precursor of Jane Austen.
• Edmund Burke: politician; often considered the first modern English political scientist.
Add Sam Johnson, author of “The Lives of the Poets”, Rasselas, the first dictionary to both grace the English language and establish a linguistic format which would become a norm. Add Edward Gibbon, FRS, who is still considered the (English) father of historical writing, and you’ve got a pretty progressive group! God, but I’d love to have had a pint with them. Gibbons wasn’t there by accident!

In case I haven’t made it clear, Gibbon – member of “The Club” – set a new level for historical studies which has become a standard for modern historical writing. Not for style, but for technique. He separated history from its roots in hagiography, and introduced an entirely new concept of primary source material as vital to historical understanding. Gibbon isn’t remembered for his argument or for his style. He’s remembered for removing history from moral assessment, and for introducing the use of primary source material.

IMHO, amateur historians like most of us on MHO should recognize Edward Gibbon as highly significant for our pursuit of our own amateur historical interests. Gibbons was, of course, just because of the time in which he lived, an amateur. With his Rise and Fall of the Roman Empire, he created a large part of the model we should follow in our own studies.

Sorry about being so long-winded.

Cheers,
Brian G
----------------------------------
"We have met the enemy, and he is us." Walt Kelly. "The Best Things in Life Aren't Things" Bumper sticker.
DT509er
Santa Rosa CA USA
Posts: 1521
Joined: 2005
This day in World History! Continued
6/28/2023 12:10:49 AM
Quote:
IMHO, amateur historians like most of us on MHO should recognize Edward Gibbon as highly significant for our pursuit of our own amateur historical interests. Gibbons was, of course, just because of the time in which he lived, an amateur. With his Rise and Fall of the Roman Empire, he created a large part of the model we should follow in our own studies.

Cheers,
Brian G


"Here, here!!"

Dan
----------------------------------
"American parachutists-devils in baggy pants..." German officer, Italy 1944. “If your experiment needs statistics, you ought to have done a better experiment.” Lord Ernest Rutherford
Lightning
Glasgow  UK
Posts: 1064
Joined: 2005
This day in World History! Continued
6/28/2023 5:00:41 AM
Quote:


IMHO, amateur historians like most of us on MHO should recognize Edward Gibbon as highly significant for our pursuit of our own amateur historical interests. Gibbons was, of course, just because of the time in which he lived, an amateur. With his Rise and Fall of the Roman Empire, he created a large part of the model we should follow in our own studies.

Sorry about being so long-winded.

Cheers,
Brian G


Brian,

This is a key point and you've made it splendidly. You're right, it was his model of collecting sources and drawing out conclusions that defined his work. Previously, writers in the post-classical period often drew their conclusions and then gathered (or invented) their sources. What also fueled Gibbon's passion was the fact that he had repeatedly visited the ruins of the Roman forum and the various other monuments around the city. He could see grandeur that had once existed and was driven to understand what had happened. In this he differed from many others who wrote abstractly of an Empire they had read about and perhaps seen the odd ruined fort or temple, then equated its collapse with whatever moral calamity was occurring in their time.

We shouldn't underestimate his work; he studied every source he had available. He was also limited to archaeological studies that were in their absolute infancy; Roman ruins were still being robbed for stone during his lifetime and society of the understood little of what remained around them. I'm grateful for his work; I just didn't particularly enjoy reading it.

Cheers,

Colin


----------------------------------
"There is no course open to us but to fight it out. Every position must be held to the last man: there must be no retirement. With our backs to the wall and believing in the justice of our cause, each one of us must fight to the end."
Michigan Dave
Muskegon MI USA
Posts: 8302
Joined: 2006
This day in World History! Continued
6/28/2023 7:49:26 AM
Quote:
The Siege of Québec began on this day in 1759 leading to one of the most important battles ever to take place in North America on the Plains of Abraham on Sept. 13, 1759.

Vice-Admiral Charles Saunders of the RN had, with brilliant seamanship, navigated the treacherous currents and shoals below Québec City to arrive before the city with a fleet that included large ships of the line. French General Montcalm was shocked to see these large ships as the French navy had never been able to negotiate the approach to the city with larger ships.

On board this large fleet of warships and transports was the professional British army led by Major-General James Wolfe. 9,000 strong, this army would begin two months of siege and probing attacks before the brilliantly executed scaling of the cliffs above Québec to defeat Montcalm's army on the Plains of Abraham.

These events did not end the French influence in North America but certainly set the stage. The French forces retreated upstream to Montréal and would return to Québec the next year to defeat the small British garrison holding Québec at the Battle of St. Foy in April of 1760. The French would lay siege as the defeated British garrison headed behind the walls of Québec, but in May of 1760 it was the RN who would return to Québec first as the ice went out. With that, the French were essentially finished and called off their siege. They had been hoping that a French supply and reinforcement fleet would join them but the RN had destroyed the French fleet at Quiberon Bay in Sept. of 1759 and France did not have the naval assets to send aid to the French at Québec.

And so the course of history was altered in North America.

Cheers,

George





Hi George,

The French fleet losing at Quiberon Bay to the RN, off the French Coast, played a major role in the loss of New France! Luckily for the Patriots, later in naval history the French Fleet would be available to box Lord Cornwallis in at Yorktown! So in this instance navies did play a big part in the history of North America! Also I remember the paintings of a historical artist showing both Montcalm, & Wolfe dieing on the Plains of Abraham! ( what a historical name, for these plains!?

Thanks,& Regards,
MD

Thanks, & regards,
MD
----------------------------------
"The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract."
Michigan Dave
Muskegon MI USA
Posts: 8302
Joined: 2006
This day in World History! Continued
6/28/2023 8:10:49 AM
Quote:
Quote:
1787 Englishmen Edward Gibbon finishes, The rise & fall of the Roman Empire! Has anyone actually read it?? Big text, kind of put me off?? How about you?
Quote:
I read it a couple of decades ago and must confess it was a slog. The abridged version (which takes you up to the end of western Empire in 476 A.D.) is well worth a look, however. The full collection goes up to the fall of Constantinople in 1453 A.D. The read is not for the fair-hearted, and much of Gibbon's analysis on the causes of the fall of Roman civilisation has now been superseded.

Colin, good comments. What I remember of it – from reading it in the late 1960s, and then not reading it all – leaves me concurring with your assessment. What I remember being turned off by was not his subject matter but his prose style; it was not as ponderous as the prose of the 17th century, but it was still pretty turgid. WSC, evidently, found Gibbon’s Rise and Fall riveting reading; I wonder if this explains his various histories?

I sense, however, that it is not the writing style so much as the intellectual stance Gibbon took which causes him to be remembered today. He was, to fill him out just briefly:
• A gentleman of some leisure and an MP for two different ridings for 10 years. These were, IIRC, gifted seats.
• Of independent means though not of great wealth.
• More broadly travelled than most of his class (or betters), spending years on the continent (initially, IIRC, as a religious castaway when he underwent a brief conversion to Catholicism).
• A member of “The Club” (note: not “The Literary Club”, as so many want to call it. It was always, from what I have read, simply “The Club”.), a bit more of which later.

So what, you might say? Well, they say something about Gibbon himself. He felt strongly enough about religious issues to convert to Catholicism, which caused him to be removed from any possible government positions. Yet he would later reject his Catholic commitment and revert (IIUC) to C of E orthodoxy, after a sort. He appeared to hold politics in low regard, serving (or at least voting) as a Whig in service to his patron, a Whig who gifted a seat for Gibbon’s holding.He was comfortable in several languages, in a way that many of his contemporaries would not be.

Most of all, IMHO, he was accepted as a member of “The Club”, which was nothing more that a group of like-minded characters who met in coffee houses and pubs for discussion, friendship, and sometimes a bit of carousing. The Club was initially set up (unofficially) by friends of Sam Johnson, who suffered from ennui and often needed social distraction.

But – though Johnson remained the focus of the Club until his death – it is the people who were drawn to be accepted in “The Club” that tell it’s importance. And Gibbon’s [iDecline and Fall… fits with both their reputations and their accomplishments. Amongst the friends constituting “The Club” are:
• Sir Joshua Reynolds: founding member of The Club (largely with David Garrick). First President of the Royal Academy and leading portraitist in England.
• David Garrick: founding member of The Club (with Reynolds), one-time pupil at Sam Johnson’s school, and leading actor in England.
• Oliver Goldsmith: highly regarded poet.
• James Boswell: Scottish lawyer, but author of A Life of Samuel Johnson, considered the first modern English biography.
• Francis Burney: Royal Musician to George III. His daughter, Fanny Burney, is recognized as a precursor of Jane Austen.
• Edmund Burke: politician; often considered the first modern English political scientist.
Add Sam Johnson, author of “The Lives of the Poets”, Rasselas, the first dictionary to both grace the English language and establish a linguistic format which would become a norm. Add Edward Gibbon, FRS, who is still considered the (English) father of historical writing, and you’ve got a pretty progressive group! God, but I’d love to have had a pint with them. Gibbons wasn’t there by accident!

In case I haven’t made it clear, Gibbon – member of “The Club” – set a new level for historical studies which has become a standard for modern historical writing. Not for style, but for technique. He separated history from its roots in hagiography, and introduced an entirely new concept of primary source material as vital to historical understanding. Gibbon isn’t remembered for his argument or for his style. He’s remembered for removing history from moral assessment, and for introducing the use of primary source material.

IMHO, amateur historians like most of us on MHO should recognize Edward Gibbon as highly significant for our pursuit of our own amateur historical interests. Gibbons was, of course, just because of the time in which he lived, an amateur. With his Rise and Fall of the Roman Empire, he created a large part of the model we should follow in our own studies.

Sorry about being so long-winded.

Cheers,
Brian G



Hi Brian,

This is one of your best posts, from a series of excellent ones! Early on you mention WSC being influenced by Gibbon's, Rise & Fall of RE! I recently picked up Churchill's "the second World War", 7 volume set, hopefully some great insightful reading!?

As far as " The Club" goes, I can see you rubbing elbows with these guys. As far as I go with these guys they may let me hang around, as long as I kept buying the rounds of pints, & I kept my comments to a minimum!? ☺

I also find it hard to call Edward Gibbon author of the "Rise & Fall of the Roman Empire" among other works an Amatuer, even in his time!?

Regardless, Good show!
Carry on,
MD
----------------------------------
"The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract."
Michigan Dave
Muskegon MI USA
Posts: 8302
Joined: 2006
This day in World History! Continued
6/28/2023 8:20:48 AM
MHO,

So here is 6-27 in history, not yet commented on?

1844 Joseph Smith of the Mormons is murdered by a mob in Carthage, Illinois! Was this religiously motivated??
Geeze even then people were racially, religiously, & sexual preference oriented & bias?? Why can't we be tollerant, moderate, & just live & let live!? We are so angry & polarized?? What say you??

1917 Greece declares war on the Central Powers! Why so late?.& were they a serious player in WWI!? Comments?

& Today, 6-28 These world history events happened! Comment on any!??

1712 Jean Rousseau, the man who inspired the French Revolution was born! What did he do to stir every one up.?? What say you??

1838 Victoria is crowned Queen of the then British Commonwealth!? Would you say she was their most influential monarch??

1880 Ned Kelly Bush Ranger was killed in a shootout with police! I thought Rangers were good blokes!? Why would the Police gun him down!?? Anyone? Perhaps Ozers??

1894 the US Congress declares Labor day a holiday!? What say you? End of summer, A good time for a holiday!??

1914 the Assassination of the Arch Duke Franz Ferdinand, starts WWI! How was this purely bad luck for the poor Arch Duke!? & how can 1 guys death cause a world war??? Anyone??

1919 the Treaty of Versailles is signed! Didn't they lay the blame on Germany!? & this was a major factor leading to WWII!?? What say you??.comments anyone??

2007 the Bald Eagle is removed from the list of endangered species! What say you? Are there many in your neck of the woods?.Anyone??

& finally tomorrow, 6-29, these occurred!?

1534 Jacques Cartier land on Prince Edward Island! Is this the beginning of New France??

1767 the Townsand Acts piss of the Colonists again! is this justified!? Crown beware!!?? Comments??

On this day, in 2003 & later 2020, Rich actors like Katherine Hepburn, & then Rob Riener, die at 96, & 98 respectively! Do you think wealthy people live longer?? Bob Hope was 100!?? Anyone??

lots to discuss!
Regards,
MD

BTW great responses to Edward Gibbon, & his "The Club", like Brian I would like to share a pint with those guys! ☺
----------------------------------
"The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract."
Michigan Dave
Muskegon MI USA
Posts: 8302
Joined: 2006
This day in World History! Continued
6/28/2023 8:23:10 AM
Quote:
The Treaty was relatively light in comparison to what the Germans imposed upon Russia the previous year. I think Germany was very lucky….

Your comments win my agreement, Colin.

Regards, Phil




Hi Colin,

I agree with Phil, good point Colin!

MD
----------------------------------
"The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract."
Michigan Dave
Muskegon MI USA
Posts: 8302
Joined: 2006
This day in World History! Continued
6/29/2023 7:11:30 AM
A couple of items for today 6-29,

1534 Jacques Cartier land on Prince Edward Island! Is this the beginning of New France??

1767 the Townsand Acts piss of the Colonists again! is this justified!? Crown beware!!?? Comments??

On this day, in 2003 & later 2020, Rich actors like Katherine Hepburn, & then Rob Riener, die at 96, & 98 respectively! Do you think wealthy people live longer?? Bob Hope was 100!?? Anyone??

Regards,
MD

Also on this day in history 1995 the US, Astronauts in the Space Shuttle docked with the Russian Space Station. Could something like that happen today? Maybe? Look at last night in the NHL draft, teams were drafting Russians! What say you, is better relations on the way??
----------------------------------
"The brave men, living and dead, who struggled here, have consecrated it, far above our poor power to add or detract."
morris crumley
Dunwoody GA USA
Posts: 3309
Joined: 2007
This day in World History! Continued
6/29/2023 8:40:39 AM
Dave....all three people you named were entertainers who loved their work and continued to work into their eighties...nearly ninety. What the hell does "rich" have to do with it? Que up Arlo Guthrie!

Respects, Morris
----------------------------------
"You are a $70, red-wool, pure quill military genius, or the biggest damn fool in northern Mexico."
Page 78 of 114 (Page:  1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   11   12   13   14   15   16   17   18   19   20   21   22   23   24   25   26   27   28   29   30   31   32   33   34   35   36   37   38   39   40   41   42   43   44   45   46   47   48   49   50   51   52   53   54   55   56   57   58   59   60   61   62   63   64   65   66   67   68   69   70   71   72   73   74   75   76   77    78    79   80   81   82   83   84   85   86   87   88   89   90   91   92   93   94   95   96   97   98   99   100   101   102   103   104   105   106   107   108   109   110   111   112   113   114 )

© 2024 - MilitaryHistoryOnline.com LLC