History Dates, coincidences, and interesting juxtapositions

[Cthulhu.Science]

I just happened upon a Documentary TV series about British history, Magna Carta: Unlocked

Episode 1 discusses the signing of the Magna Carta, 15 June 1215
Episode 5 (final) is about the Battle of Waterloo, 18 June 1815

Nearly exactly 600 years apart.

It doesn't mean anything in any way. I just found it worthy of remark.

 

[Cthulhu.Science]

I'm a fan of these comparative timelines as well.

 

[Venusian Broon]

I just happened upon a Documentary TV series about British history, Magna Carta: Unlocked

Episode 1 discusses the signing of the Magna Carta, 15 June 1215
Episode 5 (final) is about the Battle of Waterloo, 18 June 1815

Nearly exactly 600 years apart.

It doesn't mean anything in any way. I just found it worthy of remark.

<Pedantic Mode ON/>

Unfortunately you have to take into account the fact that the Gregorian Calendar was adopted by the UK on September 2 1752 (the very next day was September 14) Also note that this alteration was required to correct the total drift that the Julian calendar had caused since its adoption, hence if you went back 600 years just using the Gregorian definition the drift is another different number of days - 4.5 given the average lengths of the years* (Gregorian years are a tiny tad shorter than Julian years)



* Okay, it's more complicated than that, we have 600 years where some are Julian, some are Gregorian....

<Pedantic Mode OFF/>

 

[Cthulhu.Science]

<Pedantic Mode ON/>

Unfortunately you have to take into account the fact that the Gregorian Calendar was adopted by the UK on September 2 1752 (the very next day was September 14) Also note that this alteration was required to correct the total drift that the Julian calendar had caused since its adoption, hence if you went back 600 years just using the Gregorian definition the drift is another different number of days - 4.5 given the average lengths of the years* (Gregorian years are a tiny tad shorter than Julian years)



* Okay, it's more complicated than that, we have 600 years where some are Julian, some are Gregorian....

<Pedantic Mode OFF/>

Interesting point. That fits in with the question of some famous people's birthdays -- George Washington was known to have personally changed his birthday when the British switched calendars.

 

[Venusian Broon]

Interesting point. That fits in with the question of some famous people's birthdays -- George Washington was known to have personally changed his birthday when the British switched calendars.

The most well-known change was for the British government to move the tax year from the traditional 25th March start date to the 5th of April. So rather than take 11 days off that particular tax year and take a small temporary revenue hit, the government lengthened the tax year for 1752/53.

They did this again in 1800 and moved it to the 6th of April, because the Gregorian calendar did not have a leap day that year, compared to the Julian calendar.

Seems a bit pointless to me, but that's tax and governments for ya!

However if you want to see even bigger calendar shenanigans, then look up 'the longest year in human history', namely 46 BCE. It lasted 446 days, was nicknamed 'year of confusion' and was when the Julian calendar was initially implemented. Plenty of videos on YouTube going through that one.

 

[Elckerlyc]

The most well-known change was for the British government to move the tax year from the traditional 25th March start date to the 5th of April. So rather than take 11 days off that particular tax year and take a small temporary revenue hit, the government lengthened the tax year for 1752/53.

They did this again in 1800 and moved it to the 6th of April, because the Gregorian calendar did not have a leap day that year, compared to the Julian calendar.

Seems a bit pointless to me, but that's tax and governments for ya!

They probably feared the taxpayers would otherwise rebel. There were already enough angry people who felt that by skipping 11 days* of the calendar their lives were shortened by as much days.

On dates and coincidences - and on a smaller scale - while delving into my genealogical ancestry I found that both my parents and my parental great grandparents married on the exact same date; 18 august (both Gregorian dates, just to be clear .)

* This varies between 10 and 14 days depending on where you lived and when the calendar-change was implemented locally In the Dutch Republic and the (so called) United Provinces there were 6 different dates on which the 7 Provinces went Gregorian, between 1582 and 1701.

 

[Venusian Broon]

They probably feared the taxpayers would otherwise rebel. There were already enough angry people who felt that by skipping 11 days* of the calendar their lives were shortened by as much days.

A nice story, but...

...this apparently is an urban myth and there were no riots or angry people.

 

[Montero]

Mm, people of that period had to be calendar aware because of all the saint's festivals, but maybe they more did it at the level of the church told them what day it is. Perhaps the more literate might worry. I frequently have to stop to think which day it is as don't have a regular schedule that reminds me.

 

[farntfar]

Mm, people of that period had to be calendar aware because of all the saint's festivals,

This is not such an old thing in Catholic countries, like France, where every day is the feast of one saint or another.
My father in law would quite regularly say to his friends, " well I'll see you on saint Otto's" or whatever, which were often quite obscure saints, but there is at least one saint for every day of the year.
It was also common to wish people happy saint's day on the festival of the saint that corresponded to their name. So today (21/07) you might say "Bonne fête!" to your friend, Victor, for instance.
This is more or less an anachronism now, especially with the young.

There was even a saint for never, because he doesn't exist. "I'll have it ready for the Saint Glinglin!" (pronounced "san glanglan"), means it'll never be ready, or at least I have no idea when.

Incidentally, my father in law was a fairly militant atheist.

Oh. It's still common to have a party on the Saint Sylvestre, which is the French way of saying new year's eve.

 

[Danny McG]

@Pyan
Is this thread not too religious and taboo now?
*Sticks bottom lip out*

 

[Montero]

Well, religion is part of history. There was a lot of religious involvement in calendars because the priests were the literate ones. As long as we don't argue about it, hopefully we can avoid being closed down. Or we change the subject and start talking about atomic clocks......

How about going back to that histogram of what all the different civilisations were doing in the same period? Anyone have any more of those? For a later period?

Or indeed

I just happened upon a Documentary TV series about British history, Magna Carta: Unlocked

Episode 1 discusses the signing of the Magna Carta, 15 June 1215
Episode 5 (final) is about the Battle of Waterloo, 18 June 1815

Nearly exactly 600 years apart.

It doesn't mean anything in any way. I just found it worthy of remark.

I can't help thinking that the coincidence of June at least, is you did outdoor large scale things like pin down the King, fight giant armies, in good weather - hence June. Anyone know what the weather was supposed to be like at those two events?

 

[paranoid marvin]

Well, religion is part of history. There was a lot of religious involvement in calendars because the priests were the literate ones. As long as we don't argue about it, hopefully we can avoid being closed down. Or we change the subject and start talking about atomic clocks......

How about going back to that histogram of what all the different civilisations were doing in the same period? Anyone have any more of those? For a later period?

Or indeed



I can't help thinking that the coincidence of June at least, is you did outdoor large scale things like pin down the King, fight giant armies, in good weather - hence June. Anyone know what the weather was supposed to be like at those two events?

Well at Waterloo the ground was so mud soaked with rain that Napoleon had to delay his initial assault so thst his csnnon could be used effectively.

Which effectively lost him the battle.

 

[Montero]

Well at Waterloo the ground was so mud soaked with rain that Napoleon had to delay his initial assault so thst his csnnon could be used effectively.

Which effectively lost him the battle.

Well that I didn't know. Was it they took longer to bring into position due to the mud?

I tried searching for what was the weather like when Magna Carta was signed but didn't see anything, though the National Trust's webpage on the history and survival of the site was quite interesting.

Runnymede and Ankerwycke's History |Surrey

Learn about the historic sealing of the Magna Carta, a medieval priory, an ancient tree where Henry VIII wooed Anne Boleyn – and the site of a 1930s nightclub.

www.nationaltrust.org.uk

 

[paranoid marvin]

Well that I didn't know. Was it they took longer to bring into position due to the mud?

I tried searching for what was the weather like when Magna Carta was signed but didn't see anything, though the National Trust's webpage on the history and survival of the site was quite interesting.

Runnymede and Ankerwycke's History |Surrey

Learn about the historic sealing of the Magna Carta, a medieval priory, an ancient tree where Henry VIII wooed Anne Boleyn – and the site of a 1930s nightclub.

www.nationaltrust.org.uk

The mud affected movement of cannon, but more importantly the bounce of the balls. Their lethal effectiveness was their ability to 'skip' along and take out a number of enemies Landing 'plop' in the mud waa no good.

As for Runnymede, paintings show an idyllic Summer's day, although these were done later. What they don't adequately display are the black thunderclouds louring above John's head as he is forced to sign the document!.

As far as the King was concerned, as few records of that humiliating day as possible would have survived intact.

 

[THX1138]

@paranoid marvin Very true, coming from an old Moutain Man Black Pouder buff.
If an artillery of the time had to fight during bad weather (wet muddy ground) most likely they would load canisters or grape rounds for an up-close full out Slog Fest. At this point it would be most likely hand-to-hand. Muskets/pistols becoming clubs as knives, bayonets and fists being the norm and grenades being used if available. The artillery crews would either be trying to retreat the cannons and caissons back or would be part of the melee.

So, we are talking about loading and firing flint locks and cap locks of the time.

Here is a link to the 18th-19th century Americas. Though, it is the same for the whole of Europe, Canada and elsewhere in the world at the time.
The Effects of Weather on 18th Century Warfare

True these are not about artillery pieces, but artillery are just big guns! It still applies, just more so as more smarts are needed.

Now granted, in battle and in the time of war, this would have all been done much, much faster. But you all knew that!

 

[paranoid marvin]

Napoleon had made a number of odd tactical decisions by this time.

He had a large army, but no guarantee of reinforcements. And he was up against all the armies of Europe. The only way to win at this point was to overwhelm each individual opponent before they could join together.

This meant that he had to have vastly superior numbers so that each individual battle was over quickly, decisively, but most importantly with as few casualties as possible.

Just prior to Waterloo, he had faced the Prussians at Ligny. He defeated them, but for some reason let them retreat in relatively good order. The most destructive part of a battle was usually in retreat, when the victorious side harried the defeated opponent. This caused significant casualties and meant that the defeated opponent would be spread wide and far, unable to quickly regroup.

Napoleon made three major mistakes here. He let the Prussians retreat in good order, then catastrophically he sent a significant proportion of his forces after them, but inexplicably waited several hours before doing so.

So when it came to Waterloo, he no longer had the overwhelming force to ensure a swift victory with few casualties. Wellington had chosen a mud soaked killing ground, with two garrisoned farm house in the middle, meaning that any attacking force would have to waste valuable time and men capturing them. Not only that, but Wellington's forces were behind a ridge, relatively protecting them from enemy cannin and musket until up close.

Waterloo was a defeat for Napoleon before the battle even began. Even if he had won the say, it would have been an incredibly hard slog for his men. They would have been exhausted after the battle, with significant casualties and little hope of rest and reinforcement. As well as the retreating English army (which would have been replenished and reinforced in quick time), there was still the Prussian army nearby as well as the prospect of facing Russian and Austrian armies in the near future.

But by this stage Naopleon was an ill man, and he only had the loyal (and not the best) Marshalls at his side. He also had made many enemies back in Paris, who were doing all they could to undermine him. As well as enemies all across Europe in Austria, Britain, Prussia Russia and Spain. His return from Elba to once again be French Emperor was quite brilliant, but by this stage all of Europe - including the French themselves - were sick of the bloodshed his reign had caused them.

 

[THX1138]

@paranoid marvin So very true. Good post and good history info!

 

[Cthulhu.Science]

In Cat's Cradle, the penultimate plot motivation for all of the major (and most of the minor characters) starts with the military hatred of fighting in mud.

 

[paranoid marvin]

Many significant English/British battles were fought in muddy/marshy conditions: Waterloo, Flodden, Crecy Agincourt and just about every major encounter in WWI. In quite a lot of these encounters, the victorious side used this to their advantage


It's perhaps not coincidence that the casualties were almost without exception high. Perhaps one of the worst ways to due in a battle was drowning in mud, as your own comrades trampled over your body.

Supposedly the highest bodycount in a battle fought in England was at Towton in the Wars of the Roses, but that occurred on frozen ground and in the midst of a blizzard.

 

[Ursa major]

then look up 'the longest year in human history', namely 46 BCE. It lasted 446 days, was nicknamed 'year of confusion' and was when the Julian calendar was initially implemented.

It's good that the year's Wikipedia entry tells us that:

the actual planetary orbit-year remained the same

otherwise, we might never have known this.