Battle of Trafalgar and other great naval battles.

[Wing Nut]

I was just reading up on it tonight and once again, I was amazed by the battle.

[WebbPA]

The Spanish Armada

England's abysmal weather saves it from yet another invader.

[Hagar]

[quote]

[Wing Nut]

There I go talking out of my a$$ again...

What I meant by the Bismarck and the Hood was not that the Hood won, but the intense hunt and battle that ensued from that.

About Hastings, I was just plain wrong, I guess...

[Hagar]

[quote][quote][quote]

[Wing Nut]

As I recall, the Bismarck did not go down quietly.  First, they were attacking the pride of the German Navy with planes that were obsolete before the war even started, then the ship was chased and pounded for something like three days before she went down...

[Hagar]

[quote]As I recall, the Bismarck did not go down quietly.

[H]

King Harold lost the Battle of Hastings in 1066, the last time that Britain was successfully invaded.

The relationship here, and that somewhat distant, is the common Germanic ancestry: the Normans were descendants of vikings (the horde of Rollo, if I remember), Norse cousins of the Angles, Saxons and Jutes (name still reflected in the Jutland penninsula). As to that being the last successful invasion (remember, also, that Harold's army had just made a full march to Hastings after defeating another army of Norse cousins), it's the reason the Nazi's wanted the Bayeaux Tapestry -- a woven depiction of the battle -- in their attempt at another Germanic invasion. Maybe there's a connection here to 'bloody' having been a favorite British byline adjective.
They didn't win all their naval battles in the days of the tall ships, either. During the War of 1812 (by name only) an entire naval squadron surrendered on September 10, 1813, at the Battle of Lake Erie. I know the British frigates Guerriere and Java were lost to the USS Constitution (Old Ironsides) but there is a humorous story (perhaps that only) about the Constitution. It set sail with full compliments of cannon shot, black powder, food, rum and 38,600 gallons of fresh drinking water; it successfully engaged 17 British ships, only salvaging rum. When it arrived back at port, it had no cannon shot, no black powder, no food, no rum but did have 38,600 gallons of stagnant drinking water.

8-)

[Hagar]

King Harold lost the Battle of Hastings in 1066, the last time that Britain was successfully invaded.

The relationship here, and that somewhat distant, is the common Germanic ancestry: the Normans were descendants of vikings (the horde of Rollo, if I remember), Norse cousins of the Angles, Saxons and Jutes (name still reflected in the Jutland penninsula). As to that being the last successful invasion (remember, also, that Harold's army had just made a full march to Hastings after defeating another army of Norse cousins), it's the reason the Nazi's wanted the Bayeaux Tapestry -- a woven depiction of the battle -- in their attempt at another Germanic invasion.

You certainly know your history. I'll give you that. [smiley=thumbsup.gif]

Maybe there's a connection here to 'bloody' having been a favorite British byline adjective.

Your line of thought is a tad too obscure for me.

[H]

Maybe there's a connection here to 'bloody' having been a favorite British byline adjective.

Your line of thought is a tad too obscure for me.

You want it more graphic to prove my point? How bloody British of you...
and my history's not so exhaustive that I could ever list the many battles in which the British engaged.
Zulus? Well, Victoria, the African soil was surely bloody.:P

8-)

[Hagar]

Maybe there's a connection here to 'bloody' having been a favorite British byline adjective.

Your line of thought is a tad too obscure for me.

You want it more graphic to prove my point? How bloody British of you...
and my history's not so exhaustive that I could ever list the many battles in which the British engaged.
Zulus? Well, Victoria, the African soil was surely bloodied.:P

There are various theories on the origin of the word bloody as a mild expletive. I don't think it goes anywhere near as far back as the Saxons. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bloody

[H]

There are various theories on the origin of the word bloody as a mild expletive. I don't think it goes anywhere near as far back as the Saxons. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bloody

I wasn't speaking so much of the bloody usage origin as the bloody spillage...
but thank you for putting me on the hate list...

Aitch
H
8-)

[aussiewannabe]

You want it more graphic to prove my point? How bloody British of you...
and my history's not so exhaustive that I could ever list the many battles in which the British engaged.
Zulus? Well, Victoria, the African soil was surely bloodied.

As I recall from a book I read in a British History graduate course, the British engaged in over 200 battles.

[H]

As I recall from a book I read in a British History graduate course, the British engaged in over 200 battles.

The rest were just physical arguments...

8-)

[Hagar]

As I recall from a book I read in a British History graduate course, the British engaged in over 200 battles.

I'm not qualified to argue with a History graduate but that doesn't seem very many. Depends on the criteria & what you consider a battle I suppose.

This site lists some important battles from Hastings (1066) up to the Second Boer War (1899 to 1901). http://www.britishbattles.com/
It doesn't include WWI, WWII or any other conflicts in the last century.

Note that a lot of these involve English rather than British forces as they took place before Great Britain came into being.