Topic Actions

Topic Search

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: TFLYTSNBN, tlb and 9 guests

Now we know when the British Monarchy...Manticore....

Join us in talking discussing all things Honor, including (but not limited to) tactics, favorite characters, and book discussions.
Re: Now we know when the British Monarchy...Manticore....
Post by Fox2!   » Thu May 31, 2018 11:36 pm

Fox2!
Captain of the List

Posts: 548
Joined: Wed Feb 25, 2015 12:34 am
Location: Huntsville, AL

Nimitz1923PD wrote:
Fox2! wrote:
To either push the native population into the poorest fifth of the country, or kill them (Cromwell infamously gave the Irish the choice of either going to Connaught, or to Hell) would qualify under modern understanding of ethnic cleansing, as would the Highland Clearances. Ireland considered itself to be illegally occupied by a foreign army, as did some parts of Scotland. Resistance was considered to be essential for national and ethnic survival.


So that is where Hitler got the idea - Who knew?

Nimitz


Forgot - there was another option for the native Irish (and presumably unruly Scots, as well): transportation as slaves to the Sugar Islands. That's why Jamaica has such a high percentage of Irish ancestry.
Top
Re: Now we know when the British Monarchy...Manticore....
Post by chrisd   » Mon Jun 04, 2018 8:09 am

chrisd
Captain (Junior Grade)

Posts: 346
Joined: Tue Apr 30, 2013 9:38 am
Location: North-East England (70%) and also Thailand (30%)

n7axw wrote:Actually, Cromwell wasn't a bad man. In fact he was an honorable man with good character. Parliament wasn't in its best form afer the Roundhead triumph. Most of England probably was relieved whem he dismissed it in rather dramatic fashion with the Ironsides. The real issue was that even though the Roundheads had won the Civil War, they weren't even close to being represenative of England as a whole.
-

Just as the American Rebels were in no way representative of the population of the Colonies, either.

THEY only succeded by dint of French "realpolitik"
Top
Re: Now we know when the British Monarchy...Manticore....
Post by n7axw   » Mon Jun 04, 2018 8:37 am

n7axw
Fleet Admiral

Posts: 5100
Joined: Wed Jan 22, 2014 7:54 pm
Location: Viborg, SD

chrisd wrote:
n7axw wrote:Actually, Cromwell wasn't a bad man. In fact he was an honorable man with good character. Parliament wasn't in its best form afer the Roundhead triumph. Most of England probably was relieved whem he dismissed it in rather dramatic fashion with the Ironsides. The real issue was that even though the Roundheads had won the Civil War, they weren't even close to being represenative of England as a whole.
-

Just as the American Rebels were in no way representative of the population of the Colonies, either.

THEY only succeded by dint of French "realpolitik"


The rebels were actually about a third of the population and the loyalists about the same. I've pondered your thought for years. The French contribution, though not huge, may well have been decisive. Without it the conflict would have gone on longer and the question would have been who wore out first. There was "wear" showing on both sides prior to the French involvement and how it would have turned out and how long it would have gone on is impossible to say. I suspect that the rebels would have still won, but the final battle would have been in London, not Yorktown.

Don

-
When any group seeks political power in God's name, both religion and politics are instantly corrupted.
Top
Re: Now we know when the British Monarchy...Manticore....
Post by roseandheather   » Mon Jun 04, 2018 11:54 am

roseandheather
Admiral

Posts: 2032
Joined: Sun Dec 08, 2013 9:39 pm
Location: United Kingdom

n7axw wrote:
The rebels were actually about a third of the population and the loyalists about the same. I've pondered your thought for years. The French contribution, though not huge, may well have been decisive. Without it the conflict would have gone on longer and the question would have been who wore out first. There was "wear" showing on both sides prior to the French involvement and how it would have turned out and how long it would have gone on is impossible to say. I suspect that the rebels would have still won, but the final battle would have been in London, not Yorktown.

Don

-


I actually don't think we would've won without French involvement. Face it - all the odds on the planet were against us then. We were facing not only a professional army used to policing an empire, but the greatest navy to ever rule the seas. Add to that the fact that we were torn straight down the middle - you're right, we were roughly a third revolutionaries, a third Loyalists, and a third who just wanted it all to stop, even if the Colonies were officially "unanimous" in declaring independence - and without the French on our side, we almost certainly wouldn't have made it.

The fact that the French government's involvement in our successful revolution brought it crumbling down around its ears less than two decades later is.... I'm not even sure there's a word for what that is, honestly.
~*~


I serve at the pleasure of President Pritchart.

Javier & Eloise
"You'll remember me when the west wind moves upon the fields of barley..."
Top
Re: Now we know when the British Monarchy...Manticore....
Post by saber964   » Mon Jun 04, 2018 3:45 pm

saber964
Admiral

Posts: 2328
Joined: Thu Dec 13, 2012 7:41 pm
Location: Spokane WA USA

roseandheather wrote:
n7axw wrote:
The rebels were actually about a third of the population and the loyalists about the same. I've pondered your thought for years. The French contribution, though not huge, may well have been decisive. Without it the conflict would have gone on longer and the question would have been who wore out first. There was "wear" showing on both sides prior to the French involvement and how it would have turned out and how long it would have gone on is impossible to say. I suspect that the rebels would have still won, but the final battle would have been in London, not Yorktown.

Don

-


I actually don't think we would've won without French involvement. Face it - all the odds on the planet were against us then. We were facing not only a professional army used to policing an empire, but the greatest navy to ever rule the seas. Add to that the fact that we were torn straight down the middle - you're right, we were roughly a third revolutionaries, a third Loyalists, and a third who just wanted it all to stop, even if the Colonies were officially "unanimous" in declaring independence - and without the French on our side, we almost certainly wouldn't have made it.

The fact that the French government's involvement in our successful revolution brought it crumbling down around its ears less than two decades later is.... I'm not even sure there's a word for what that is, honestly.



Actually it was less than a decade later. IIRC Battle of Yorktown took place in 1783. The storming of the Bastille took place in 1789, which set off the French Revolution, and is counted as the French equivalent of our July Fourth.
Top
Re: Now we know when the British Monarchy...Manticore....
Post by n7axw   » Mon Jun 04, 2018 6:05 pm

n7axw
Fleet Admiral

Posts: 5100
Joined: Wed Jan 22, 2014 7:54 pm
Location: Viborg, SD

roseandheather wrote:
n7axw wrote:
The rebels were actually about a third of the population and the loyalists about the same. I've pondered your thought for years. The French contribution, though not huge, may well have been decisive. Without it the conflict would have gone on longer and the question would have been who wore out first. There was "wear" showing on both sides prior to the French involvement and how it would have turned out and how long it would have gone on is impossible to say. I suspect that the rebels would have still won, but the final battle would have been in London, not Yorktown.

Don

-


I actually don't think we would've won without French involvement. Face it - all the odds on the planet were against us then. We were facing not only a professional army used to policing an empire, but the greatest navy to ever rule the seas. Add to that the fact that we were torn straight down the middle - you're right, we were roughly a third revolutionaries, a third Loyalists, and a third who just wanted it all to stop, even if the Colonies were officially "unanimous" in declaring independence - and without the French on our side, we almost certainly wouldn't have made it.

The fact that the French government's involvement in our successful revolution brought it crumbling down around its ears less than two decades later is.... I'm not even sure there's a word for what that is, honestly.


It's hard to know. Washington and the other colonial generals had gained a lot of experience and their troops had been trained and hardened. Even before the French intervened, the British record was mixed at best. And even worse, "Lord North's war" was unpopular at home. In at least some respects, there are some interesting parallels between the English experience in America and the American experience in Vietnam.

Don

-
When any group seeks political power in God's name, both religion and politics are instantly corrupted.
Top
Re: Now we know when the British Monarchy...Manticore....
Post by Peter2   » Thu Jun 14, 2018 2:56 pm

Peter2
Captain (Junior Grade)

Posts: 334
Joined: Tue Sep 02, 2014 9:54 am

ldwechsler wrote:
I think it's reasonably clear that the Winton Dynasty has not much in common with the Windsor Dynasty.

The last really strong, effective ruler in the latter dynasty was, well, never.


Absolutely right. A constitutional monarch is supposed to reign, not to rule. The writing began to appear on the wall for ruling British monarchs during the years when Robert Walpole became the first Prime Minister of Britain, in first half of the 18th century. The first Windsor monarch was George V, who changed the family name from Saxe-Coburg after the First World War.

The last British monarch who ruled by Divine right (in his opinion, anyway) was Charles I. There are arguments in support of that being one of the reasons he got his head chopped off. In this context, parts of the satirical song "The Vicar of Bray" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Vicar_of_Bray_(song) are worth a look ;)
.
Top
Re: Now we know when the British Monarchy...Manticore....
Post by runsforcelery   » Fri Jun 15, 2018 2:44 pm

runsforcelery
First Space Lord

Posts: 2228
Joined: Sun Aug 09, 2009 10:39 am
Location: South Carolina

n7axw wrote:
n7axw wrote:
The rebels were actually about a third of the population and the loyalists about the same. I've pondered your thought for years. The French contribution, though not huge, may well have been decisive. Without it the conflict would have gone on longer and the question would have been who wore out first. There was "wear" showing on both sides prior to the French involvement and how it would have turned out and how long it would have gone on is impossible to say. I suspect that the rebels would have still won, but the final battle would have been in London, not Yorktown.

Don

-


roseandheather wrote:I actually don't think we would've won without French involvement. Face it - all the odds on the planet were against us then. We were facing not only a professional army used to policing an empire, but the greatest navy to ever rule the seas. Add to that the fact that we were torn straight down the middle - you're right, we were roughly a third revolutionaries, a third Loyalists, and a third who just wanted it all to stop, even if the Colonies were officially "unanimous" in declaring independence - and without the French on our side, we almost certainly wouldn't have made it.

The fact that the French government's involvement in our successful revolution brought it crumbling down around its ears less than two decades later is.... I'm not even sure there's a word for what that is, honestly.


It's hard to know. Washington and the other colonial generals had gained a lot of experience and their troops had been trained and hardened. Even before the French intervened, the British record was mixed at best. And even worse, "Lord North's war" was unpopular at home. In at least some respects, there are some interesting parallels between the English experience in America and the American experience in Vietnam.

Don

-



French intervention was far less significant on the ground in North America than it was elsewhere, because it was French recognition of the rebels that turned an insurrection/civil war that just happened to have the Atlantic in the middle of it into a genuine world war. From the French perspective, it was round 2 of the French and Indians War. Aside from a handful of people like Lafayette, the French aristocracy could have cared less about the Declaration of Independence. What they and (more importantly) the French court saw was a chance to break England's kneecaps and take advantage of English distraction in North America as a way to gain ground elsewhere.

I'm sure there were French aristocrats and philosophes who thought the American Revolution was a great thing, as long as it didn't impact their world of salons and gracious living. After all, there are members of the American elites who think Hugo Chavez was a great idea, but I very much doubt they'd have cared to have him making the rules for them. The entire impetus behind the official French decision to intervene was the chance to regain lost ground from the Brits after the last set to. As part of that, they saw the creation of a new nation that gobbled up most of Great Britain's existing empire and created a new threat to Canada --- and whose radical notions (which, of course, not good French aristo could take seriouslt) were safely quarantined on the far side of the Atlantic --- as a move with no downside for them.

For the Americans who wanted independence, it was a godsend. No matter how much experience Washington and his generals might have acquired --- and I'll concede that they'd gotten far better as they went along --- the colonists simply did not have the resources to defeat the mother country in the end any more than North Vietnam could have defeated the US without massive support from its sponsors. In the end, they won for the same reason North Vietnam won: Great Britain decided to cut its losses in the face of the far larger threat arising from the Franco-Spanish alliance against it in Europe. We declined to pay the cost of a major invasion of the North, with all the attendant crisis of great power confrontation; the Brits declined to pay the cost of a major invasion to regain a foothold after Yorktown.

But the collapse of the French monarchy so soon after "The World Turned Upside Down" in Virginia was at least as much due to the . . . unfortunate way in which France's rivalry with England ended (with a collapsing exchequer and the loss of the rest of its overseas empire) as it did to the "contamination" leaking back across the Atlantic. The American contagion was the final impetus for a fall which had been a long time coming. Indeed, for a fall which had already begun even before Saratoga and the decision to officially recognize the rebels.


"Oh, bother!" said Pooh, as Piglet came back from the dead.
Top
Re: Now we know when the British Monarchy...Manticore....
Post by cthia   » Fri Jun 15, 2018 6:41 pm

cthia
Fleet Admiral

Posts: 10579
Joined: Thu Jan 23, 2014 12:10 pm

I don't think animosity or the negative posts is fair to Lord Skimper. What exactly did he say that was incorrect? England is the cradle of the fair toned Elizabethan complexions. Milky white complexions were considered beautiful way back when, and a sign of affluence. It was treasured and protected. It is still considered beautiful to some now. I'm a fan of it. At any rate, tanning booths would not have made it back then. LOL

Dark skin tones is not something one would expect to find from a seeding of the galaxy hailing from England. I think it is a "lightly toned" (pardon the pun) observation that it may all have started with Megan. That's not a bad thing, just an observation. And unless he says otherwise, it's just an observation.

Actually, I think it is quite relevant, since marrying a commoner is so central to the monarchy, commoners can be anyone. And darker complexioned royalty can happen as a result. It is the beauty of it. I'd like to think that is one of the reasons why the Queen seems to like Meghan so much. She highlights the very soul of what England is and can become.

Son, your mother says I have to hang you. Personally I don't think this is a capital offense. But if I don't hang you, she's gonna hang me and frankly, I'm not the one in trouble. —cthia's father. Incident in ? Axiom of Common Sense
Top

Return to Honorverse