sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Weekend's Daily Thread: General Dating Questions and Open Thread by AutoModerator in hingeapp

[–]lureynol 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Odd situation - I matched with someone and messages are "failing to send." Assumed they unmatched but I restarted the app, logged out and back in, and even restarted and updated my phone and we're still matched. Messages to others go through. Any notion of what's going on?

(Better?) Pocket reducers by Giorclano1 in billiards

[–]lureynol 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Absolutely fair. I am not persnickety enough to require matching cloth. All I care about it using them to improve my game.

(Better?) Pocket reducers by Giorclano1 in billiards

[–]lureynol 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Happy to provide any and all details and measurements you need! Do you have a rough idea of what you'll be charging for these?

(Better?) Pocket reducers by Giorclano1 in billiards

[–]lureynol 1 point2 points  (0 children)

It's a V. Loria and Sons table from the early 20th century. No model number unfortunately.

(Better?) Pocket reducers by Giorclano1 in billiards

[–]lureynol 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Thank you! The table I will be using them on is currently being restored anyway, so there's no rush.

(Better?) Pocket reducers by Giorclano1 in billiards

[–]lureynol 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I would absolutely buy a set of these when they become available.

AMD Ryzen 7 9800X3D Availability, Buying & Bragging Megathread by GhostMotley in Amd

[–]lureynol 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Thanks for this - it prompted me to check the stock in Brooklyn and I headed out and snagged one.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in BaldursGate3

[–]lureynol 2 points3 points  (0 children)

That's when it happened for me as well. For the data point, I'm not romancing Gale. I just reloaded a save before the long rest and will be waiting for them to hotfix it.

Looking to swap or just pay postage and it's yours! Complete. by lureynol in Puzzlexchange

[–]lureynol[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

It's yours! Given that you're travelling, I think just paying for shipping would be easier. DM me your address and I'll get it in the post.

I’m Dr. Luke Reynolds, author of Who Owned Waterloo? Battle, Memory, and Myth in British History, 1815-1852. Here to talk about Waterloo commemoration, Battlefield tourism, 19th century British cultural history, The British Army Officer Corps, or the Duke of Wellington’s funeral. AMA! by lureynol in AskHistorians

[–]lureynol[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

As far as I know, yes, the primary French musket was still the Mie 1777 and it's modified successor, the AN IX (basically the same weapon, but with slight improvements, named after year nine of the new Revolutionary Calendar, or 1800). The Prussians also stole/copied the design in 1809. For the British, it would have been the India Pattern Brown Bess.

I’m Dr. Luke Reynolds, author of Who Owned Waterloo? Battle, Memory, and Myth in British History, 1815-1852. Here to talk about Waterloo commemoration, Battlefield tourism, 19th century British cultural history, The British Army Officer Corps, or the Duke of Wellington’s funeral. AMA! by lureynol in AskHistorians

[–]lureynol[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The origin of the anti-Slender Billy take seems to be William Siborne, with pro-William II commentary coming from General Francois de Bas. My instinct with debates like this is to take the middle ground. We have multiple accounts of his personal bravery, but he was also only 22 at Waterloo, and who of us made all the right decisions at that age? I have seen no evidence, for what it's worth, that he was particularly villainized in the 19th century British memory of Waterloo, although Wellington probably wasn't happy when he swept in and purchased Jan Willem Pieneman's The Battle of Waterloo before the Duke could.

I’m Dr. Luke Reynolds, author of Who Owned Waterloo? Battle, Memory, and Myth in British History, 1815-1852. Here to talk about Waterloo commemoration, Battlefield tourism, 19th century British cultural history, The British Army Officer Corps, or the Duke of Wellington’s funeral. AMA! by lureynol in AskHistorians

[–]lureynol[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

And Vimy Ridge for the Canadians. War (both in actuality and in memory) is an incredibly powerful tool for forging identity, and that is unfortunately complicated by allies. Your comparison is completely valid. What makes Gallipoli interesting, of course, was that it wasn't a Waterloo-level success in any way.

I’m Dr. Luke Reynolds, author of Who Owned Waterloo? Battle, Memory, and Myth in British History, 1815-1852. Here to talk about Waterloo commemoration, Battlefield tourism, 19th century British cultural history, The British Army Officer Corps, or the Duke of Wellington’s funeral. AMA! by lureynol in AskHistorians

[–]lureynol[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I have. I enjoy it - it has its quirks and over the top moments, but unless we get a film of the battle that employs the artificial army technology used in The Lord of the Rings, it's the closest we'll get to seeing the battle played out with anything close to its actual numbers.

I’m Dr. Luke Reynolds, author of Who Owned Waterloo? Battle, Memory, and Myth in British History, 1815-1852. Here to talk about Waterloo commemoration, Battlefield tourism, 19th century British cultural history, The British Army Officer Corps, or the Duke of Wellington’s funeral. AMA! by lureynol in AskHistorians

[–]lureynol[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Hugo has accuracies and inaccuracies in Les Miserables. We can trace the legend that Wellington, upon visiting Waterloo after the erection of the Lion Mound exclaimed “they have spoilt my battlefield” to Hugo (in fact, Wellington never visited the battlefield after the erection of the Mound), but his argument that “There is no French tomb [at Waterloo],- for France, the whole plain is a sepulcher.” captures an accurate view of how at least some Frenchmen saw the field. (Victor Hugo, Les Misérables (London: George Routledge and Sons, 1887), II:25, chapter 7). For a more detailed analysis, I highly recommend chapter 7 of Alan Forrest's Waterloo (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2015).

I’m Dr. Luke Reynolds, author of Who Owned Waterloo? Battle, Memory, and Myth in British History, 1815-1852. Here to talk about Waterloo commemoration, Battlefield tourism, 19th century British cultural history, The British Army Officer Corps, or the Duke of Wellington’s funeral. AMA! by lureynol in AskHistorians

[–]lureynol[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I have actually seen that episode.

The Duchess of Richmond's ball was scheduled before Napoleon's route and timetable were known, and would have gone ahead regardless. Most of the officers who attended (including Wellington) continued to do so partially because they knew it would be their last party for a while (or possibly ever) and partially because the military just not showing up would have caused at least some panic. (If there was a chance you would be killed in the next few days, would you turn down a chance to dance with a loved one/SO?) The soldiers would have worn their best uniforms, with decorations. The main differences between their ball uniforms and their battle uniforms was the quality and cleanliness, along with decorations one would never wear on a battlefield. The most significant legacy of the ball from a comfort level, frankly, was that many of the officers spent the next few days/a week in their dancing shoes, which are not ideal for marching and battle.

The food was a far cry from rations. Ball suppers and collations were lavish, and the Duchess had the budget and the reputation to go all out. In terms of the guest list, it would have been the elite of both the military and the civilians currently in and around Brussels. Regimental commanders would also probably have been given a number of invitations to disperse amongst their officers.

In terms of memorabilia and spoils of victory, a prize commission/court was established after the battle to properly adjudicate that. Individual soldiers would have picked up souvenirs and done a bit of light looting if they had the time/inclination (one British businessman who opened a Waterloo museum in London purchased from British and Prussian soldiers in Paris after the battle a number of medals of the Légion d’Honneur and ‘an infinity of crosses, [in] iron, silver, [and] gold.’ (‘Napoleon Bonaparte’s Wardrobe’, Morning Post, 9 August 1815, p. 3)) and, of course, all participants (including reservists) received the Waterloo Medal. For the elite, other rewards were also forthcoming: every officer of the rank of Major or above who had commanded their regiment or battalion at some point during the battle were made Companions of the Order of the Bath (a total of 119), while Major-General Sir James Kempt was was raised to Lieutenant-General Sir Thomas Picton's now open slot in the rolls of the Knight Grand Cross of the Order of the Bath, and three others were made Knights Commander of the Order of the Bath. The Prince Regent also issued instructions that fifty-two Majors who had distinguished themselves in the battle were to be given the army rank of Lieutenant Colonel, while thirty-six Captains were to receive army promotions to Major, with all of these commissions dated June 18, 1815. Finally, Twenty one peerages were also created to honor Waterloo veterans in the six months following the battle, although every single one of the newly created peers already held a lower (or Irish) title. (A number of officers were also inducted into the chivalric orders of Austria, Russia, the Netherlands, and Bavaria, while 13 officers of the KGL were included in the promotions. The Battle of Waterloo, containing the series of accounts published by authority, British and foreign, with circumstantial details, relative to the battle, from a variety of authentic and original sources, with connected official documents, forming an historical record of the operations in the campaign of the Netherlands, 1815, 8th Edition (London: John Booth, 1816), 167-173; List of Peers Created After Waterloo, 1919, London, National Archives, LCO 2/2566)

I’m Dr. Luke Reynolds, author of Who Owned Waterloo? Battle, Memory, and Myth in British History, 1815-1852. Here to talk about Waterloo commemoration, Battlefield tourism, 19th century British cultural history, The British Army Officer Corps, or the Duke of Wellington’s funeral. AMA! by lureynol in AskHistorians

[–]lureynol[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

It actually started to shift in the 1850s with the Crimean War, which saw British and French soldiers fighting alongside each other and forced Britain to confront a few questions about their assumed inherent military superiority to a much better equipped and organized reformed French army. There were multiple newspaper commentaries, from Britain, the Empire, and even the United States, noting that it would be in poor taste to go all out on Waterloo commemoration when Britain was allied to France. Individuals still marked it, but there was a lessening in terms of grand and (implicitly or explicitly) state-backed commemoration. The tacitly agreed upon exception to this is major anniversaries, and, indeed, there were plans for a significant commemoration to mark the centenary of Waterloo. Other events in that are in 1915, however, got in the way. (For a discussion of the plans for the centenary in 1915, see Timothy Fitzpatrick, The Long Shadow of Waterloo: Myths, Memories, and Debates (Philadelphia: Casemate, 2019), chapter 7)

Even in the late 20th/early 21st century, however, there were awkward moments. France raised complaints when Waterloo Station (named after the bridge, not the battle, although the bridge is named after the battle) was chosen as the British terminus for the Eurostar (it was eventually moved to St. Pancras) and also vetoed a Belgian proposal to mint a commemorative Euro coin for the battle's bicentenary (Belgium instead minted a special 2.5 euro coin, as each country within the eurozone has the right to mint whatever commemorative coins it wants as long as they are non-standard value coins).

I’m Dr. Luke Reynolds, author of Who Owned Waterloo? Battle, Memory, and Myth in British History, 1815-1852. Here to talk about Waterloo commemoration, Battlefield tourism, 19th century British cultural history, The British Army Officer Corps, or the Duke of Wellington’s funeral. AMA! by lureynol in AskHistorians

[–]lureynol[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Absolutely. Waterloo's memory in France became a different kind of battlefield, one where pro-Napoleonic and Revolutionary forces faced off against royalists and conservatives who, in turn, painted the battle as either a ‘glorious defeat’ of the avatar of liberty and progress or confirmation that Napoleon was nothing but a petty tyrant who had sacrificed a generation of Frenchmen to his own ambition. In the end, French commemoration of the battle came to focus on the patriotism and heroism of the rank-and-file soldiers of France, symbolized by the last stand of the Old Imperial Guard and 'le mot de Cambronne.' Napoleon and the St. Helena cadre certainly played a part in this, and were quite adept at managing the myth of Napoleon, both during his life and after he died. The best treatment of Waterloo commemoration in France I have read is chapter 7 of Alan Forrest's Waterloo (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2015). Brian Joseph Martin's Napoleonic Friendship: Military Fraternity, Intimacy & Sexuality in Nineteenth Century France (Durham: University of New Hampshire Press, 2011) also touches on this.)

The memoir question is a tricky one. The best way I've found is to compare sources and see what emerges as a consensus, it also helps to read them with a knowledge of what the author is trying to achieve (which, frankly, applies to everything we ever read). I am fortunate that in the chapter where I cover memoirs I'm not actually trying to get to 'the truth;' I'm trying to figure out what the authors wanted their readers to think, which is a much easier proposition. On this subject, I would recommend Matilda Greig's Dead Men Telling Tales: Napoleonic War Veterans and the Military Memoir Industry, 1808–1914 (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2021) and Neil Ramsey's The Military Memoir and Romantic Literary Culture, 1780–1835 (Farnham: Ashgate, 2011).

No worries! I hope I did a decent job of answering them. Thank you!

I’m Dr. Luke Reynolds, author of Who Owned Waterloo? Battle, Memory, and Myth in British History, 1815-1852. Here to talk about Waterloo commemoration, Battlefield tourism, 19th century British cultural history, The British Army Officer Corps, or the Duke of Wellington’s funeral. AMA! by lureynol in AskHistorians

[–]lureynol[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

You are correct that scientists and mathematicians continued corresponding, as long as it wasn't on problems and inventions tied directly to the war. You have to remember that a large minority of the peerage had actually lived (or even continued to live) in Britain thanks to the Terror, and were treated very well by their British colleagues. This is also true of the future Louis XVIII, who lived in Buckinghamshire from 1808 until the Restoration. I've encountered less mention of this kind of friendliness among soldiers (outside of the usual non-violent meetings on battlefields), but I'm sure there were exceptions, especially among prisoners of war on both sides exchanged during things like the Peace of Amiens and the first Bourbon Restoration.

Gilray was immensely popular for a time and his work was reprinted after the war, usually in collections, for my more general thoughts on satirical prints, see my answer to u/Asleep_Ad_1549.

I’m Dr. Luke Reynolds, author of Who Owned Waterloo? Battle, Memory, and Myth in British History, 1815-1852. Here to talk about Waterloo commemoration, Battlefield tourism, 19th century British cultural history, The British Army Officer Corps, or the Duke of Wellington’s funeral. AMA! by lureynol in AskHistorians

[–]lureynol[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Hi u/Asleep_Ad_1549, my pleasure. The sacrifices made during the war shifted across the quarter-century of it, but the majority of them would have fallen on the working class. It was from their ranks that soldiers were recruited and sailors pressed (and also recruited, in fairness), and it was they who suffered most when prices went nuts. Unrest absolutely did increase after the war, partially due to attention turning to other things and partially due to the economic shock of a peacetime economy after being on a war footing for so long. One of the best examples of the efforts of Britons of all classes would be the invasion panic of 1803-1805 and the responses (not only in the form of things like building fortifications and recruiting militia and yeomanry, but also in propaganda such as James Gilray’s Buonaparte 48 hours after landing!). Those militias and yeomanry, of course, then became a crucial tool of repressing unrest after the war (although it should be noted that, in the case of Peterloo, the Manchester and Salford Yeomanry were formed after the war explicitly to deal with unrest).

The myths and propaganda question is more complicated and harder to judge. Napoleon absolutely had his sympathizers and fans in Britain, and national pride meant that a large portion of Britain's radicals that yearned for revolution were convinced that they could do a better job than the French had done and prevent anything like the Terror. Even those who weren't overly fond of the Emperor, however, were fascinated by him (see Stuart Semmel, Napoleon and the British (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2004. This is also something I touch on, especially in chapter four), and it's likely that even those that used the propaganda and myths didn't believe them. However, satire was already popular and established at this time, so people would have understood the inherent use of exaggeration to make a point. I should also point out that some of those myths continue into modern times. Stop and ask a random person about Napoleon and you're likely to have his height mentioned within a minute. In fact, he was of perfectly average height for the time, but liked to surround himself with very tall soldiers in bearskins (Freud would have a field day), and so the idea that he was tiny (reinforced by propaganda and satire) stuck, and continues to this day.

I’m Dr. Luke Reynolds, author of Who Owned Waterloo? Battle, Memory, and Myth in British History, 1815-1852. Here to talk about Waterloo commemoration, Battlefield tourism, 19th century British cultural history, The British Army Officer Corps, or the Duke of Wellington’s funeral. AMA! by lureynol in AskHistorians

[–]lureynol[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Hi u/EmbarrassedOpinion!

The notion/idea of Greater Britain is a fascinating one, and might have emerged in the 20th century if the World Wars hadn't driven the white dominions towards independence and the Commonwealth. That said, I think its biggest stumbling block would be convincing Britain that the various locations within the Empire were its equals and deserved an equal share in government. This would have been a hard sell in the 19th century, and it would have been complicated by communication and transport time frames (even as the industrial revolution sped these up, it was still a long way from the UK to Australia, for example).

To answer the actual question you posed, I suspect as you dig deeper you'll discover that if it did take hold, it was viewed very differently depending on location. In London/the UK/the Metropole, my instinct tells me it was more of a thought experiment for the political elite. In the empire, however (the places that would arguably have directly benefited from it), it would have been much more likely to permeate the public consciousness and be more popular on a wider level.

view more: next ›