False histories. What irks you the most?

[James Grant]

Throughout history many things have been reported either falsely, been blown out of proportion or covered up so well that the general consensus today is that of the false history.

Mine has certainly got to be the Charge of the Light Brigade at the battle of Balaclava in 1854. The general belief is that due to some rivalry between Captain Nolan and Lord Lucan the Brigade was ordered to charge at and capture the Russian artillery but that Nolan had actually changed the order from Raglan to suit him, this is a false truth. Raglan did order them to capture the artillery but the actual commanders decided to ignore the vague order and in fact made the much smarter decision to attack the large cavalry force behind.They charged, captured the battery and routed the much larger force of Russian cavalry behind it. They took pretty bad casualties, but not anywhere near as bad as those usually reported.

The general idea is that the light brigade of about 650 men charged and only about 163 survived. The reality is that 300 returned completely unharmed, many returned wounded and 58 were taken prisoner. But only 110 actually died in the action or from wounds gained in it. The press reported various figures which all turned the story onto it's head, it was often reported that they charged 32 russian guns rather than the actual 8.

The charge was a resounding success, the Russian cavalry was completely routed and 8 Russian cannons were captured, the actual blunder was by one General Cathcart leading the 4th Division who refused to capture a Russian emplacement which would have won the battle and led to the destruction of the Russian force.
Another false belief is that the entire force charged straight at the cannons, the truth being that two of the five regiments actually successfully flanked around the artillery and hit the cavalry behind in the sides.

So yes, everyone thinks this was one of the biggest blunders of the Crimean war when it was actually one of it's greatest successes, showing how infinitely superior the British cavalry was.



So what false histories piss you off lads?

[Connzcdf]

How Zulu changed everything at Rorkes Drift. EVERYTHING!
_{Well maybe not all it.}

[James Grant]

How Zulu changed everything at Rorkes Drift. EVERYTHING!
_{Well maybe not all it.}

Rorkes Drift was such a minor action....

It was an important victory only because it gave Chelmsford something to distract the public from the disaster at Isandlwana.

[König]

Definitely the myth that the Poles sent their cavalry to charge German tanks in WWII.

It really irks me when people try and pull that one out of their you-know-where during discussions on Polish cavalry... 

[Karth]

Christopher Colombus.

[Connzcdf]

Also that Napoleon wad short. He was normal sized people!

[Craig]

All of these things are petty things that don't warrant getting angry over. The Crimean War was a disaster in all aspects from what I studied at college. Apart from some highlanders saving the English arses. I was taught that the commanders were generally incompetent, there was poor administration, leading to many men dying of the cold and various things relating to the cold, hospitals being built on top of cess pits, CO's not giving out the necessary supplies even though they had them in stores. Let's face it the British dun goofed (at least from what I have been taught by my history lecturer who's specialty was Victorian era Britain. IMO It sounds like you're butthurt that we sucked.

Anyway here's a cool picture of the Highlanders messing with some Russian cav.

[Bluehawk]

They did not so much capture the guns (they certainly didn't take them with them back west through the valley) as they did use their bodies and the bodies of their horses to absorb all of its ammunition - which I suppose is an admirable sacrifice - and with the causeway and its captured Allied guns still (spiked though they were) securely in Russian hands, I would not call the charge of the Light Brigade a success. It was an excellent display of discipline among the rankers, and an excellent display of the lack of critical thinking on the part of its officers. The really successful and  unblemished force in that valley were the French chasseurs that had the presence of mind to clear the brigade's left flank and silence Zhabokritskiy's northern battery before it was too late.


I hate when my fellow Canadians imply that our militias marched all the way down to Washington and sacked the American capital in 1814 (or even worse, in 1812). The British force under Ross that struck the capital came from Europe and were mostly all veterans of the Spanish campaigns. Even in the early defensive actions, the regular British regiments stationed in Canada did most of the fighting.

[Matthew]

Mine has certainly got to be the Charge of the Light Brigade at the battle of Balaclava in 1854. The general belief is that due to some rivalry between Captain Nolan and Lord Lucan the Brigade was ordered to charge at and capture the Russian artillery but that Nolan had actually changed the order from Raglan to suit him, this is a false truth. Raglan did order them to capture the artillery but the actual commanders decided to ignore the vague order and in fact made the much smarter decision to attack the large cavalry force behind.They charged, captured the battery and routed the much larger force of Russian cavalry behind it.

I was just wondering where you got this information from James. I had always read that their mistake was in charging the wrong guns due to the vagueness of Lord Raglans orders. I have never seen anything speaking of the light brigade flanking the position, Lord Cardigans description of the events simply say 2 regiments broke through the artillerys lines swept through and cut through the gunners, 2 more regiments then followed after them then one more regiment followed after that. Also that they charged the russian cavalry then turned about and simply charged through it again in order to get back to there original position.

[Craig]

Mine has certainly got to be the Charge of the Light Brigade at the battle of Balaclava in 1854. The general belief is that due to some rivalry between Captain Nolan and Lord Lucan the Brigade was ordered to charge at and capture the Russian artillery but that Nolan had actually changed the order from Raglan to suit him, this is a false truth. Raglan did order them to capture the artillery but the actual commanders decided to ignore the vague order and in fact made the much smarter decision to attack the large cavalry force behind.They charged, captured the battery and routed the much larger force of Russian cavalry behind it.

I was just wondering where you got this information from James. I had always read that their mistake was in charging the wrong guns due to the vagueness of Lord Raglans orders. I have never seen anything speaking of the light brigade flanking the position, Lord Cardigans description of the events simply say 2 regiments broke through the artillerys lines swept through and cut through the gunners, 2 more regiments then followed after them then one more regiment followed after that. Also that they charged the russian cavalry then turned about and simply charged through it again in order to get back to there original position.

Basically Nolan was all mad at the general incompetence of Lucan, Cardigan, Raglan the lot. He was the only one there who was actually half competent,  and I'm pretty sure he was raised from the ranks which was obviously very unconventional at the time. Nolan eventually lost his marbles at Cardigan and the whole situation (he was sent back and forth), and flung his arm out behind him saying that is where he needs to charge, Cardigan took this as an indication of charging the artillery infront rather than the artillery on the hill. They began charge, Nolan realised they were going wrong way, indicated that they need to start going up the hill, he gets killed anyway, the charge continues, regardless of how well they did they suffered heavy casualties and didn't manage to take out the artillery. So then Cardigan goes to a severely pissed off Raglan, tells him that it was all Lucan's fault (seeing as Lucan commanded both brigades overall, and Cardigan & Lucan had a well known hatred for eachother) Cardigan returns to his Yatch with a completely clear conscience and parties hard with his Victorian era babes.

[GoldenEagle]

The armenian genocide thing that have given us Turks bad name. I just know, by my heart, that no organized Turkish soldier would so such thing. Its just not in our blood to do so. If they had said : Turkish soldiers killed 2000 or something men, then ok, but they claim that Turkish soldiers killed 1 500 000 people including women and children, and there is no proof for it and most historians say them selves that there wasn't that many armenians living in Armenia in that time.

http://www.topix.com/forum/world/turkey/TT3JLVRCDTJ5BB8D5

[Duuring]

The armenian genocide thing that have given us Turks bad name. I just know, by my heart, that no organized Turkish soldier would so such thing. Its just not in our blood to do so. If they had said : Turkish soldiers killed 2000 or something men, then ok, but they claim that Turkish soldiers killed 1 500 000 people including women and children, and there is no proof for it and most historians say them selves that there wasn't that many armenians living in Armenia in that time.

http://www.topix.com/forum/world/turkey/TT3JLVRCDTJ5BB8D5

You do know that you are teached a different story?

I hate the British for taking all the glory of the Waterloo campaign, especially the attack of the French guard. It's incredibly vague, but there are reports that the BRITISH line actually broke (or had almost reached breaking point), but then a Netherlands Brigade attacked and rolled up the French flank, giving the Brits time to recover. The NL brigade (Ditmers brigade) actually chases the guard all the way to la haye sainte, poured some fire into them and chases them again. All PRIOR to the famous 'General advance'.

Another 'fact' that bugs me is that the Prince of Orange is seen and portrayed as an idiotic cowardly boy. Which goes hand in hand with the general opinion on the Netherlands army.

[Millander]

I just know, by my heart, that no organized Turkish soldier would so such thing. Its just not in our blood to do so.

Im sure a German would think the same thing about the Holocaust

[Millander]

The armenian genocide thing that have given us Turks bad name. I just know, by my heart, that no organized Turkish soldier would so such thing. Its just not in our blood to do so. If they had said : Turkish soldiers killed 2000 or something men, then ok, but they claim that Turkish soldiers killed 1 500 000 people including women and children, and there is no proof for it and most historians say them selves that there wasn't that many armenians living in Armenia in that time.

http://www.topix.com/forum/world/turkey/TT3JLVRCDTJ5BB8D5

You do know that you are teached a different story?

I hate the British for taking all the glory of the Waterloo campaign, especially the attack of the French guard. It's incredibly vague, but there are reports that the BRITISH line actually broke (or had almost reached breaking point), but then a Netherlands Brigade attacked and rolled up the French flank, giving the Brits time to recover. The NL brigade (Ditmers brigade) actually chases the guard all the way to la haye sainte, poured some fire into them and chases them again. All PRIOR to the famous 'General advance'.

Another 'fact' that bugs me is that the Prince of Orange is seen and portrayed as an idiotic cowardly boy. Which goes hand in hand with the general opinion on the Netherlands army.

on the same subject. in the mid 1830's a man in london made a extremely accurate panorama of waterloo at the battles height. Troops movements terrain. Very cools sounding stuff 1:3 scale.

The Duke of wellington forced the guy to cut the dutch troop numbers in half and to nearly remove the prussians altogether for he was enraged that it depicted the Prussians coming in and saving the british (which they did)

[Mr T]

Indeed, it is most Irking that the British goverment and Wellington himself attempted to make Waterloo a completley British victory, despite the massive contribution of the other 2 thirds of the Allied army that consisted of Dutch-Belgians, Hannoverians and Germans. And of course the battle changing arrival of the Prussians was portrayed as a minor event. And the French get a rough time for losing the battle despite how had and well they fought, and how close they came and could've come to victory. 

Makes me ashamed to be British! Buuuuuuuur!