My My! At Waterloo, Napoleon did surrender

[Rogin the Armchair fan]

No thread for the 200th anniversary? I've been to the site of the battlefield, it's a fairly modest site, with a big man-made hill in the middle with a lion on top.

Was Waterloo the last time British and German forces fought together in battle?

[Duncan Gardner]

My My! At Waterloo, Napoleon did surrender

Berlin 1948, does that count as a battle?

Nice views from the Butte de Lion, although motorway junctions dominate to be fair.

[Guy Profumo]

My My! At Waterloo, Napoleon did surrender

Rogin the Armchair Fan wrote: No thread for the 200th anniversary? I've been to the site of the battlefield, it's a fairly modest site, with a big man-made hill in the middle with a lion on top.

Was Waterloo the last time British and German forces fought together in battle?

Were the "Germans" in the Crimea? (Runs off to Wiki…)

(… runs back. - No.)

[Sash08]

My My! At Waterloo, Napoleon did surrender

Waterloo-Schmaterloo... we all know that the battle that really broke Napoleon's back was Leipzig. And that's the biggie for all the Germans out there.

[Stumpy Pepys]

My My! At Waterloo, Napoleon did surrender

I used to work on Lower Marsh SE1 and it's scandalous there's no commemoration of this epic battle of south London.

[Paul S]

My My! At Waterloo, Napoleon did surrender

It's a mystery Stumpy.

[San Bernardhinault]

My My! At Waterloo, Napoleon did surrender

Sash08 wrote: Waterloo-Schmaterloo... we all know that the battle that really broke Napoleon's back was Leipzig. And that's the biggie for all the Germans out there.

Surely Borodino was really the end of Napoleon.

Waterloo was a little fluffy afterthought, stamping out the embers.

[Capybara]

My My! At Waterloo, Napoleon did surrender

Stumpy Pepys wrote: I used to work on Lower Marsh SE1 and it's scandalous there's no commemoration of this epic battle of south London.

You're not Steve out of Steve's Bed and Breakfast by any chance, are you?

[NickSTFU]

My My! At Waterloo, Napoleon did surrender

Rogin the Armchair Fan wrote:
Was Waterloo the last time British and German forces fought together in battle?

They did in what European historians call the 'Boxer Rebellion' along with other western powers and Japan.

I imagine Chinese historians call it something else.

[Guy Profumo]

My My! At Waterloo, Napoleon did surrender

Stumpy Pepys wrote: I used to work on Lower Marsh SE1 and it's scandalous there's no commemoration of this epic battle of south London.

Similar thing for me - I could never work out what Afrikaners were doing in the middle of rural Nottinghamshire…

[N est ŕ?]

My My! At Waterloo, Napoleon did surrender

You'd think they would have done something for the centenary.

[John Godot]

My My! At Waterloo, Napoleon did surrender

NickSTFU wrote:

Was Waterloo the last time British and German forces fought together in battle?

They did in what European historians call the 'Boxer Rebellion' along with other western powers and Japan.

I imagine Chinese historians call it something else.

The Yihetuan Movement, with Yihetuan being the Militia United in Righteousness, known in English as the "Boxers" due to their martial arts proclivities.

[Sash08]

My My! At Waterloo, Napoleon did surrender

La Lanterne Rouge wrote:

Waterloo-Schmaterloo... we all know that the battle that really broke Napoleon's back was Leipzig. And that's the biggie for all the Germans out there.

Surely Borodino was really the end of Napoleon.

Waterloo was a little fluffy afterthought, stamping out the embers.

No, Borodino was arguably the beginning of the end. Napoleon had to break the Russians there and then. He failed to do so and his campaign was doomed.

But in 1813 Napoleon still had allies. After Leipzig he was pretty much on his own. In fact, some, like the Saxons, switched sides midway through the battle. He fought on in France but that defeat was truly catastrophic.

[NickSTFU]

My My! At Waterloo, Napoleon did surrender

John Godot wrote:

Was Waterloo the last time British and German forces fought together in battle?

They did in what European historians call the 'Boxer Rebellion' along with other western powers and Japan.

I imagine Chinese historians call it something else.

The Yihetuan Movement, with Yihetuan being the Militia United in Righteousness, known in English as the "Boxers" due to their martial arts proclivities.

On thanks, but I was wondering if the Chinese refer to it as a rebellion.

Some Indian historians for example refer to the set to in 1858 as the first war of independence.

[Rogin the Armchair fan]

My My! At Waterloo, Napoleon did surrender

ITV3 are showing "Mamma Mia!", presumably in homage.

[Diable Rouge]

My My! At Waterloo, Napoleon did surrender

TG4 after doing a 90-minute special here, seems 30% of the Allied army was Irish, and a quarter Scottish, so Irish and Gaelic would have been as frequently heard on the battlefield as English.

[anton pulisov]

My My! At Waterloo, Napoleon did surrender

But would the non-English speakers necessarily be the ones who were taking part?

[Fussbudget]

My My! At Waterloo, Napoleon did surrender

I'm not just saying that because I'm on the wrong side of that particular battle, sort of (though god knows I'd tell anyone thinking of celebrating Austerlitz's anniversary to give their head a shake), but isn't celebrating 200-year-old military victories really fucking weird? What is that all about?

[Etienne]

My My! At Waterloo, Napoleon did surrender

Yeah, completely. I mean, I understand why you might commemorate/celebrate a battle of national liberation, or one that transformed the world. But Waterloo? Might as well celebrate the anniversary of Malplaquet.

[Diable Rouge]

My My! At Waterloo, Napoleon did surrender

Antonio Pulisao wrote: But would the non-English speakers necessarily be the ones who were taking part?

Much of the Anglicisation of the west didn't take effect until after the Famine, and because of poverty, most recruiting would have happened along the Atlantic seaboard.

[Etienne]

My My! At Waterloo, Napoleon did surrender

The Irish population was much higher relative to the English one then too - pre-famine and mass emigration, and the massive increase in English population in the 19th century.

[Eggchaser]

My My! At Waterloo, Napoleon did surrender

Fussbudget wrote: I'm not just saying that because I'm on the wrong side of that particular battle, sort of (though god knows I'd tell anyone thinking of celebrating Austerlitz's anniversary to give their head a shake), but isn't celebrating 200-year-old military victories really fucking weird? What is that all about?

Two crossed dead Frenchmen, emblazoned on a mound of dead Frenchmen.

[Hugh Fatbastard]

My My! At Waterloo, Napoleon did surrender

Etienne wrote: Yeah, completely. I mean, I understand why you might commemorate/celebrate a battle of national liberation, or one that transformed the world. But Waterloo? Might as well celebrate the anniversary of Malplaquet.

pure jingoism - and sticking a finger in France's eye.

[Etienne]

My My! At Waterloo, Napoleon did surrender

Sure, of course. But why not Malpaquet for that reason too? Or throw in Agincourt for some kind of double header?

[Etienne]

My My! At Waterloo, Napoleon did surrender

Mind you, by the same rationale, I could see why France might have a Valmy station, but can see no reason for Gare d'Austerlitz.