I often use your video's to demonstrate 'salden's waddle' to people on the historical forums I frequent. As far as I know you are the only re-enectment group that practices this technique and posts video's of the result.
@samipso Hello. The url's were: 'w w w . 7delinie . be' and 'w w w . 7bvl . nl' There are a number of good sources. I suggest you take a look round this site: w w w . nanweb . org if you need more help or anything I'll answer you in PM or you could ask on the forum on the aforementioned website.
Con't.: The French would have taken La Haye Sainte, driven the British from the field and Ney with his heavy cavelery and lancer reserves would have routed Wellington and destroyed him, leaving the Olde Guard to mop up, i.e.: bayonet any survivors of the battle. But fate has a away of protecting this weak and innocent, and Napoleon lost.
@paramedic501 The French DID take La Haye Sainte. In fact, for a short while the occupied the centre of the ridge and managed to prolonge several artillery pieces up the ridge and deploy them near the crossroads where they blew away the entire side of a Hannoverian square with canister, forcing it to form a triangle. The situation was only stabalised by the counter-attack of three battalions from the Duke of Nassau's Regiment led by the Prince of Orange personally.
Con't: Ney believed the British were retreating, from the ridge line, not thinking or realizing that the majority of the British force was laying down behind the ridge (a battle tactic for defence agaist artillary fire), as Naploleaon was a/n artillary officer, and knew how to use it. Had Groucey done his job as orderd and Ney thought for a moment and ordered infantry support to the center and artillary fire to the ridge and beyond.
To all I am a history buff, thiught i do't know of of the units involed in the battle, but this is true: The majority of the British force was behind a ridge, La Haye Sainte was the middle of the field, (the key) and in linar battles that is what needs to be controlled to win. Napoleon, new this as did Wellington. Problem Mashall Groucey did not do what he was order to do: Stop Blucher from reinforcing Wellington. Also Marshall Ney charged without infantry or artillary support.
The thing is crybaby- if you really do read soldiers memoirs- the casualties reported do not reflect the total missing / out of action during the battle. British soldiers report their strengths in THE CLIMAX OF THE BATTLE as mere skeletons- suggesting many unwounded soldiers left their units during the battle:
The Scots Greys were down to a few score men, battalions in Halkett's brigade less than company size- Your idea that Halkett's battalions were more than coy.size is wrong.
And Colville was answerable to General Hill, so Hal was decisively under British Command.
Now, you can accept that as as part of factual basic history that is well known and versed by many intelligent authors of Waterloo, or you can continue been in darkness which you are by using those 2 pathetic, racist threads of yours that are nothing short of an abomanation on the battle.
You won't change, pride, ignorence and hate, they are a bad mix.
Prince Frederick was only Oranges younger brother, and its well known that Colville exercised command of the garrison at Hal. But Hill was Corps Commander, even if he wasnt present at Hal at the time.
I love this, i can take you out on any of you're pathetic little lies.
Play it safe boy and keep laughing, thats what you're best at.
How about a big Ice-Cream cone? Cheer you up a bit, Cully.
LOL- I saw your comment in your other clip which exposed what your agenda is entirely. You have no respect for objectivity clearly. Recall your words;
"When the Imperial Guard breasted the ridge... but despite depleated numbers, Halketts battalions-formed four ranks deep-stood their ground, and within moments the Imperial Guard wavered, broke and fled... it was Halkett's 5th British Brigade that rightfully claim the honours on the Imperial's attempted assault on the right-centre.
Don't worry- I presented the real facts there for everyone to properly research. Most notably the fact that members of Halkett's brigade wrote in their memoirs at how the Grenadiers of the Middle Guard had temporarily routed the British of Halkett, and other adjacent 'foreign brigades'.
A gap was thus created which General Ditmers Brigade of Gen.Chasse's Dutch-Belgian division, poured through at 'storm-pace' and to rout the first of the Imp.Gd attacks on Wellington's center.
@slizzler1 Dont worry slizzler, your real education will start now.
The Prince of Orange had been given command of Dukes I Corps. Hill's Corps consisted of the 2nd British Infantry Division ( general clinton), the 4th British Infantry Division ( General Colville) and a Netherlands Corps under Prince Fredrick.
But of these 27,000 troops, only 10,000 saw action at Waterloo, the bulk of Colvilles command and Fredricks were sent to Hal.
But Colville was in total command of the combined force
@slizzler1 Fredrick boo-hoo to you as well, carrying on from my other comments, by the time Detmers men arrived to chase away what was left of the 1/3 and 4th Grenadiers they were falling back and Halkett's battalions done their job, and witnessed the Dutch chasing them down the hill. Mark Adkin (2001). Brilliant stuff, theres no getting away from it.
@slizzler1 As for my comments on Halketts battalions, they did stand despite their losses, and were decisive so my comments were totally legitimite, but dont worry i will put the innocents right again, i can quote you these verses forever more and they are accurate.
I can see your getting frustrated, because deep down you know i'm quoting factual events, and despite your hatred for everything British it wont change a thing about the battle no matter how much deceit you spread.
Do you really want me to quote the members of Halkett's brigade who wrote in their memoirs that they ran when the Grenadiers of the Middle Guard pushed home their attack in their sector?
LOL
You got caught in a terrible self-exposing lie - You who said Halkett's brigade 'Rightfully' have the honour of turning back those Grenadiers when you know it was Ditmers Dutch-Belgians alone who routed them...
And you squawked earlier about you respect the Dutch-Belgians who fought??! LOL
@slizzler1 And by the way i can also quote you members of the 2/30th Foot that had already beat the guard, and witnessed the Dutch-Belgians chasing an already fleeing French Guard, again Mark Adkin reading soldiers diary and notes.
I stand by General Halkett all the way, because he didnt flee the way you patheticly claim, they were there all the way and it was Halkett that turned these Grenadiers back. So my "Rightfully" comment still stands.
the 3rd Grenadiers caused the 30th and 73rd on the Brigade's 'Left' to retreat whereupon Ditmers Dutch Belgian brigade destroyed those Grenadiers after their attached battery blasted and halted that column -and chased them to La Haye Sainte. The witnesses in Halkett's units on that sector state that fact- boohoo. Look up Sergeant Tom Morris of the 30th.
The 4th Grenadiers caused a panic retreat on the right[ 33rd and 69th] Halkett rallied them and held them off in a firefight.
the 4th Grenadiers dissolved after Maitland, Adam and Hew Halkett destroyed the two Chasseur echelons which were heavily outnumbered- as were the Grenadiers echelons.
Boohoo all you want- Halkett's 4 battalions did retreat and were routed but stopped to rally.
There was no fantasy of all the glory of Halkett standing firm throughout and throwing back the Middle Guard Grenadiers. Halkett's brigade by that time was barely battalion sized! No shame in them having to fall back
@slizzler1 I dont know what shit you're writing now about British troops retreating. The 30th took many casualties that day, but they NEVER, NEVER left the battlefield, so again you are exposed for telling lies.
I know about Sergeant Morris very well, and he was also one of the wittnesses that saw the Dutch-Belgians chasing an already fleeing Guard.
And now you claim that Halkett was routed but stopped to rally, you are dumb,
Routed, meaning "A disorderly retreat or flight following defeat"
Please quote where I said the 30th left the battlefield, Crybaby? LOL
Several Dutch Belgian battalions were routed during D'Erlon's attack- like Halkett's brigade was routed/disorderly retreated-, but they were rallied several hundred yards back from their original battle-line position and brought back to their frontline position. The same with Halkett's brigade crybaby.They went back for 100 yards on their left wing and not so far on their right wing- But they did retreat. boohoo
@slizzler1 You're as contrary as Mary in you're comments, you really are.
Was the word Routed! not mentioned by you? Check the word out in meaning.
You know there are some people in the world that have time to think, but they dont think, they just constantly run away at the mouth, not engaging their brain and try and back it up with Caprice, and inevitably force themselves into a corner, yet still convinced its everyone else with the problem. That person is you, Slizzler, all the way.
When soldiers in Halkett's brigade stated to their officers they would try to halt as ordered but the stampede back had taken them off their feet - that is a rout.... Macready said 50 cuirassiers could've routed the confused retreating mob at that point.
Tell them they are liars..... or finally admit some truth in the matter.
Anyway- now you know- as opposed to the former impression you had the brigade stood its ground throughout the Gren/Mid.Gd attack.
Of course you don't know Halkett's brigade had to retreat before the Grenadiers of the Middle Guard- that's why I'm educating you on the matter.
Look on a map and figure out the following;
When the 3rd Grenadiers hit the first opposition above La Haye Sainte, they at first caused the Brunswickers and Nasseurs to rout- then Kielmanseegge's brigade of Hanoverians broke, the left wing of Halkett's brigade being weakened as they were already- retreated in that confused mess too.
---- it was at that point of a gap opening up, that Ditmers Dutch-Belgian brigade and their attached artillery- Krahmer's battery, appeared in the gap and blasted, charged, routed and pursued the outnumbered 4th Grenadiers..... Halkett's rout-recovered and halted/ relieved left wing battalions watched the whole process.... WATCHED.
Ensign Macready-30th Foot : "Some guns from the rear of our right [Krahmer] poured in canister among them, and the slaughter was dreadful."
- "... there were no troops, not a single man of the allies between my division and the French Guard ..."
In the charge they cheered, 'Long live the House of Orange! Long live the king !' Munter of Ditmers' brigade wrote: "Then we took a few shots at each other with the musket, but the French didn't want to give way."
LOL- You are demented! Your obsessed agenda ranks you as a borderline nutcase.... I always praise British deeds, tactics and resilience in the Waterloo campaign- my criticism aimed is at your skewering events agenda.
What separates me from clowns like you is that I give all soldiers their due credit, Wellington, Napoleon, Blucher, their troops- and I critique them based on facts.
And then there is what I do with pleasure that crushes your pompous ego- I expose your agenda devoted lies.... I'll be here to expose the crap-spreaders whenever I can. So get used to it 'Billy-Boy'... lol
hahahaa- thanks for the classic self exposing ammo as proof;
@slizzler1 I also give soldiers their due and have proven it several times in my comments, but you dont listen or watch, so i will now repay you in kind.
But you seem to be a great fan of Orange, is that the same Orange that meddled and botched up Halkett's battalions in squares, and ordered them into line and troops were slaughtered and scattered before their very eyes.
A British colour was taken and it was all Oranges fault.
An idiot commander for an idiot like you,a match made in hades.
@slizzler1 I also give soldiers their due and have proven it several times in my comments, but you dont listen or watch, so i will now repay you in kind.
But you seem to be a great fan of Orange, is that the same Orange that meddled and botched up Halkett's battalions in squares, and ordered them into line and troops were slaughtered and scattered before their very eyes.
A British colour was taken and it was all Oranges fault.
An idiot commander for an idiot like you,a match made in hades.
Waterloo was Wellingtons victory though, under his leadership the British Army had been transformed from battle-losers into battle-winners, more than that war winners and giant killers who punched well above their weight in battle.
The big difference was the status and respect for the Redcoat that stayed with the British people many years after the battle, whilst other nations like the Dutch, Belgians didnt emphasis so much on their Militery History.
British army ruled the 'land waves' .... you are very transparent....
"- whilst other nations like the Dutch, Belgians didnt emphasis so much on their Militery History."
You come in a clip honouring the memory of Dutch units that fought and died in one of history's most horrific campaigns, just to squawk your 'mighty redcoats' propaganda stupidity.
I mean why not work on your grammar and spelling if you are proud to be British;
@slizzler1 With the Prussians it was a rout at the end with sheer numbers overwhelming the French. The 17,000 and guns from Hal would of perhaps not been enough for a decisive victory, but would of been enough to hold the French to a draw.
And they were no longer needed as a static reserve blocking force, because everyone knew where Napoleon was.
The Hal detachment was a necessary evil in the beginning, but the reason they were kept there was to ensure the road to Louis sancttuary was safe.
It is so simple -> you +others mix-up what sounds like 'would of/ must of/ should of' with the abbreviation for could have = could've etc.,
I never criticized the Hal detachment anywhere. Of course it was a wise strategic deployment. There was no 2 day battle possible- Napoleon's army was smashed ; 1st Corps, 2nd Corps, Cavalry Corps, Guard Infantry, Guard cavalry, artillery all used up. Prussian lll Corps fends off Grouchy.
The British/Dutch soldiers at Hal didnt fire a single shot allday, but they were accesible and Wellington would of and could of called them up.
It's all if's i know, but there are some that love playing that game on here, winging "If it wasnt for the Prussians!"
Maybe they would be right if they had won at Ligny, but Bluchers grudge against the French from 1806 was the main reason he came to Waterloo, the promise to Wellington was second.
Many go on about the timely arrival of the Prussians, but its important to remember that General Colville commander of the 4th British Infantry Division was posted 8 miles west of Waterloo at the settlement of Hal, which had 17,000 men and 22 Artillery guns kicking their heels, and if Wellington had had to fall back to the Soignies forest that night, he could of called that 17,000 men and extra artillery up.
He didnt, but they would of made the difference if it had gone into a day 2.
I knew you were in kahoots with the BNP with talk like that, Shitler the hater BECAUSE YOU HATE BEEN EDUCATED ON WATERLOO. You always have been and continue to be totally owned by me.
Also, yet again you know nothing, i have always given praise to the Dutch-Belgians that fought that day, again you came out with your idiot mindset that i meant everyone, but hey you are a born liar so im not going to get through to a foaming at the mouth racist like you, am i?
First of all you ignorent twat did i send you a message? No, so yet again you're a proven ignorent bag of shit.
Is my grammer annoying you? Then that is good, proves wholly that you are and have been scraping the bottom of the barrel in you're arguments, wasting time with crap because you have nothing.
And you are typically misinformed about Colville, as he was proven to exercise command of this combined force, but he and Fredrick both came under the Corps Commander, Lord Hill.
How is it possible for you to twist anyone, slizzler, i've told you before you're too backward and ignorent with no will to learn anything, so how on earth can you teach anyone? Seriously.
Colville was in command at Hal. Fact. Lord Hill was posted at Waterloo with the remaining 10,000 men of II corps, if you dont understand that then you're very comfortable in you're bed of falsehoods. It's a well versed fact by even the most bloody minded of historians.
LOL! You see what i mean, more LIES. I think anyone with a morsol of knowledge knows that Hill was at Waterloo, because i didnt mention it previous doesnt mean i didnt know it. So yet again slizzler you have contributed and taught nothing to anyone.
Cant you see you're getting yourself all tangled up with your bullshit?
General Hill followed Wellington to Brussels to take command of II corps. He was also tasked with keeping an eye on the "Young Frog" Prince of Orange.
There is no doubt whatsoever that some Dutch and Belgian troops fought hard during the Waterloo campaign, determined to prove themselves and their loyalty to the new Netherlands State.
But the legendry conversation with the Prince of Orange and the Spanish ambassador to the Netherlands, Alava, who was present.
Prince of Orange asked, "Well Alava, what do you think your Spaniards would have done had they been present on this occasion?
Your whole very TRANSPARENT cheesy effort in these YT clips is to slur other nations in battles/ victories involving the British OR at the very least make sure they don't get nearly as much credit as they deserve.
For example- in the Scots Greys yt clip elsewhere you talked of the Brit's victory against the Japanese in Burma. You gloriously left out the huge numbers of allies alongside the Brits who defeated Imperial Japan.... ANZACs, Indians, Asians Africans, Americans.
I didnt leave out the large number of allies at Burma, and these ANZACS, Indians, Africans etc all came under the British Empire back then, so my comments were right, they fought under British command and were very proud to do so, didnt you know that? Doesnt surprise me, you know nothing anyway.
And get it right, 33% of the Allied army were British, you will argue over 3% i know, but your the one that claims to be fair with everything that day, which you are clearly not.
Transparent! Have you been reading Harry Potter? Transparent!
Silly bastard.
And the way you say ONLY 30%! Only! Understand this if nothing else, without them it would of been all different, and forget the Prussians, because they failed, it was The British Army that bled the French in Spain and Waterloo.
As for the Dutch-Belgians, my comment below still stands, and if you have a prob with it then ride it where the monkey shoves his nuts.
The Dutch-Belgians fought as soldiers and died as soldiers-on June 15th they made the whole Waterloo campaign's possible.
They saved Wellington from retreating to re-embark and saved the Prussians from being destroyed entirely.
Perponcher's unit's staff in the Frasnes area, at the start of Napoleon's masterstroke aimed at dividing Wellington and Blucher, used their military experience to ascertain Napoleon's intent. They put themselves in a sacrificial mode to stop the French.
I dont make up crap about who's brave and who's not, i have commented from the books that i have read over the years and always its Prejudice dummys like you and NEW generation historians that are angry and bitter for reasons no better than hatred and Envy that the British army were the finest troops on the field at Waterloo. That is fact, and even the French admitted it later on, and they should know more than you.
Before Zappis barred me from his page i was going to answer you on why you thought i accused you of been a racist. Well i'll gladly answer, with a heavy heart.
And that is you're propensity to violence, abuse and bullying, the very ingredients that you're supposed to hate. But your obsessed with it in the way you talk to people, it works both ways you see, hopefully you will grow out of this and grow up.
British this British that, we this, we that, Rule Britannia this, Rule Britannia that, snore , snore,............................
LOL
so now, having contempt for clowns = being a racist as you see it??? LOLOL
I get along with sane fair minded people very well online and offline-> the minority of you snots and fickle-minds I speak up to- and that makes you a crybaby.
oh- I'll always be here and there exposing your type's of nonsense and slurring of history. Get used to it whiner.
What can i get used to over a dummy like you? You're a thick shit liar, i've told you before, nothing has changed with your Waterloo History. I tell you what impact you have, i stopped reading your comment after the word "that", so what did you say?
But then is important what you have said? Always NO!
Just out of interest, i put the British Waterloo Regiments strength on the Zappis page but he took off my comments without any explanation, another example of favouritism and hypocrisy by some of the holders.
But total numbers officially under British command are 36,538 men, including KGL Battalions and Cavalry.
Page 440 Who was who at Waterloo, Christopher Summerville.
Stop goal post shifting- you know your initial reply was contesting another's comment stating the well known fact that the numbers of British at Waterloo was only 30% of Wellington's army. Now in your 'British Glorification' agenda you are deceitfully implying you meant 'total under British command'. This fact is also common knowledge.
Interesting that you accuse me of deceit, yet it is you who chops and changes comments, suffer convenient memory loss to what you have previously written, become fustrated and accuse everyone of throwing their toys out of the pram for having the nerve to disagree with you on their views, and those 2 joke threads of yours that does nothing but slander the battle. So when you mention the word Deceit, its really talking of you.
@ViccardXViccc Inderdaad, als je geinteresseerd bent om als Franse schietschijf te dienen zijn er wel groepen waarbij je je kunt aansluiten ;P Ik stuur je ff een PM
WOA! Vet Casper! Door deze comment, ben je achter de Grenadiers Hollandais gekomen! Dit is jouw Austerlitz! (ik heb de grenadiers ontmoet bij Austerlitz, als ik nooit was geweest naar Austerlitz dan zat ik er waarschijnlijk nu ook niet bij)
Well good news, I'll be joining the 7th (Belgian branch) this year in Waterloo, although it'll be the first time I re-enact. =) (So I don't suppose I'll get to fight.)
I should be able to go to Ligny next weekend, so I hope to get in touch with the 7th personally. =)
Mind if I pose a few questions through personal message about uniforms, equipment etc. ?
@Conr3der learn how to spell and make note that many reenactors that are here to preserve history and heritage are often indeed "real" soldiers spending their weekends educating
Why would you expect the Dutch/Belgians to be good? From what i've read, most of the Dutch/Belgian contingent were militia.
Militia are militia, not soldiers. Though they did give a fairly good account of themselves at Waterloo, as did the 2nd Dutch Brigades and 2nd Infantry Divisions. They were proper soldiers and were battle hardened from the Peninsular wars, fighting on the side of the French.
You should learn some history. Holland was occupied by France at the time and Dutch army contingents had to take part in their campaigns. The Dutch army performed very well, e.g in Russia where they had extremely high casualty rates due to "fighting to the last man standing" For instance at the Berezina. By the time of Waterloo many of the Dutch soldiers and officers were battle experienced soldiers.
Further, the campaign of Waterloo was abused by the English as an "English victory" whereas they merely played a part like all the others. The Waterloo campaign was saved from desaster by the valiant resistance of the Dutch army at the battle of Quattre Bras and the acual battle of Waterloo was won partly because of the performance of the Dutch army and the Prussians. The English have afterwards been acting "as if they were the only ones around." It's very good that they weren't.
Did you know the famous bridges over the Berezina were built by Dutch pontoniers. These went into the cold water and most of them never came out. They worked and worked in teh icy water to save the rest until their harts stopped from the cold. Literally.
Hmmmno... in April 1815 ALL Dutch and Belgian troops in the field were issued Brown Bess muskets, to make sure all units used weapons of the same calibre. See the report of Van Zuylen van Nijeveld (Chief of Staff, Dutch 2nd Division). IN the Bijlandt Brigade, the 7th Line infantry Bat. was the only unit still equipped with French muskets, these had to be sent to the depot and exchanged for Brown Bess Muskets.
Oh I see, sorry for the false information then. It was what I was told though, but I guess it only applied to th 7th, I assumed the person was talking about the Dutch-Belgian army in general. Thanks for the info!
dutch line infantry was pretty solid at the time but british line and french old guard units were far more superior in terms of training. god i love history.
Hahaha. IIf I had a penny for everytime I heard that... Well, I suggest you read back the rest of the comments on this vid or look up some real historical facts and not the biased British accounts.
Well, OK, but I recommend you read some books on the subject.
To give an example: The Dutch 3rd Division (Chassé) was stationed at Braine L'Ailleud during the battle of Waterloo. It marched up to the centre early in the afternoon, was involved in some skirmishes with Piré's cavalry and came under fire from the French Artillery. When the French Guard marched up the slope, Brunswick and British troops fell back, The 3rd Division closed the gap and later routed the 3rd and 4th Guard Grenadiers.
In fact, several Dutch/Belgian Regiments fought with considerable bravery and distinction during the campaign. However, there was always the risk of defection as many were ex-French regiments, and indeed I thiink Napoleon expected them to change sides, but none did as far as I am aware.
i belief some did, especially the belgians as they saw themselves as french, not dutch which is fair i suppose. belgium as a state was a new idea and had been part of france before then
The soldiers from the Northern Provinces ('Holland') were very anti-French and did not defect. But the Belgians were divided, some pro-French (who fought in Napoleon's army), some anti-French (who fought in the Dutch-Belgian army). This resulted in former comrades from former French campaigns meeting each other on the field and fighting each other. No Belgians defected the Dutch army, the tragedy is that the Belgians were devided about supporting Napoleon, even within families.
Hmmm, first of all: the Belgians didn't kick out the Dutch, it was the intervention of the French and British that forced the Dutch back (the Belgian armies were defeated several times).
Second: the Flemish and Walloons were united against a common enemy: the Dutch. Belgian politicians (especially the Walloon politicians) urged for more democratic reforms, but the King and his ministers, afraid of Catholic influences, ignored that, which resulted in the Belgian Secession.
No, I'm from the Netherlands. Yes, I know the history of Belgium, I wrote an essay on the failure of the unification in 1815.
The militia's did not kick the Dutch out. The Belgian armies were driven back at Hasselt (august 8, 1831), and Boutersem (11th August), and almost at Leven (12th August). A French army entered Belgium on August 9th.
Hostilities ended on August 12th, the Dutch army left Belgium on august 20th, except for a garrison at Antwerp, which was besieged by the French.
Mainly because the Northern part of Tthe Netherlands where protestant, and the Flemmish where Catholic. After their independence the Flemmish where relegated to second class citizens. The Walloons where wealthier, due to their early industrialization, and they weren't shy to show it. Nowadays it's vice versa. But it's fair that you know i'm Dutch. Consult a Flemmish or a Walloon if you want to know more
@Lemmetellya ik ben van Belgie, dus weet ik mijn geschiedenis, wat je zegt is waar, maar je vergeet dat de rijke vlamingen in die tijd ook frans praaten, zodat de lagere klasse hun niet kon verstaan, trouwens komen vlamingen en waloniers in het algemeen goed overeen.
Zelfs met ons westerlingen, de echte Hollanders? Wij kunnen erg arrogant zijn (volgens de rest van Nederland)...Maar goed even serieus, geloof me als ik zeg dat Belgie OK is. Maar toch is het wel ergens jammer dat we niet een groot land zijn.
@Lemmetellya ik kom dagelijks in contact met nederlandse mensen van Breda (holland?)door men werk, al kunnen er misverstanden zijn, komen wij goed overeen, en zien we dat we soms een stukje gezamelijk cultuur hebben.
Het is inerdaad soms jammer dat er grenzen bestaan tussen volkeren.
Europe can not afford these types of divisons. Africans, Middle Easterners, and Asians have much more radically different cultures than the differences between the Walloons and Flemmish. Europe is being transformed for the worst.
True. You might change your cabin, but afterall were on the same ship. I too have some worries abot the future (ethnic tensions and such), but certain events from our past show me that when we have too, we will prevail. it's in our genes.
Typical- do you neo nazi scum and other right wing vermin have to always show up in nice clips and infest your disgusting poison of hatred every where you go.
By the way there were blacks in the British army at Waterloo, and black regiments on the British side in the 1815 battle of New Orleans.
Now piss off you racist nazis. This clip is for intellectuals and admirers of history- this is no place for hatemongering savages.
I never denied blacks were in the British army. However, the vast majority were white or of european decent. Your problem is that you think if Europe becomes minority white its nations will have a similar culture. Are you really that foolish?
I think you should shut your face you filthy neonazi SOB.
You still have the bollocks to show your ugly faces around after the BNP slithered to a 1.87% voter total. Britons spoke and hopefully the rest of Europe follows Britain and squashes the Right Wing Schizoid menace in Europe - you are no better than al quaeda and Taliban psychos.
I am a mere puberal Dutchman at the age of 17, getting sick of people who support left-wing politics wile they don't know what they're doing.
Thanks to your and other people's support on the left-wing parties, my father can barely pay the taxes every year. Left-wing polotics don't give a damn to their foreign people, only about the power they get from the fake democracy we have here, and money wich they get paid 5 years ahead once they quit.
you sound like a crybaby. Conservative parties are just as fragile as liberal parties- that is why we live in a society where we protect our right to vote and exchange leaderships as we see fit- Democracy is not Utopia-> it is a flawed work in progress system, but we do have it better than many other hardlined societies. Instead of following along with a jaded mentor's indoctrination that you should hate Liberals and Democracy, go live in a nation where you have NO Rights nor choices.
The left-wing parties here care more about people outside The Netherlands.
They don't give a shit about what happens over here, as long as they can get payed 357.000 Euro's per year, and get a 5 year full payment when they finally leave the political scene.
I've seen it, followed it, tracked it, researched it, and all is true.
Liberals are transforming this culturefull country into a place made of gas, roads and concrete boxes.
If you say "no", you must also give a reason why. Please explain. I'm sure you know something important us silly historians have overlooked after reading countless books on the subject. ;o)
In 1798 werd de Verenigde Staten van België gesticht. was geen lang leven beschoren maar toch... Overigens was er wel een idee om een onafhankelijk België te creëren na het verdrijven van Napoleon, maar helaas wilde het Wener Congres dat België een deel van het Verenigd Koninkrijk der Nederlanden werd. Vanaf 1814 waren alle plannen voor onafhankelijkheid dus definitief van tafel geveegd. Nou ja, 16 jaar later dan maar...!
Nou, het is wel meer dan een potje op straat marcheren. Je probeert te leven zoals in die tijd, dus daar hoort 15 kilometer marcheren in volle bepakking (30+ kilo) ook bij bijvoorbeeld. Zie het maar als: geschiedenis bestuderen, maar dan niet uit een boekje.
Natuurlijk is deze hobby aantrekkelijk voor prutsers die graag in een mooi pakkie willen rondlopen en een echt wapen wel geil vinden, maar die zijn we vaak bij de eerste aanblik van een tent met stro en alle bepakking al kwijt. ;o)
Het is niet iets wat ik persoonlijk zou gaan doen,Maar ik heb er geen moeite mee als anderen het doen integendeel vind ik het wel gaaf om te zien,Je krijgt wel een goed beeld van hoe het leger er 300 jaar geleden uit zag
The Brunswickers, Hanoverian, Nassauers were the unsteadiess of all the allies in squares during the cavalry attacks, but their officers and sergeants behaved nobly, kept them together, and kept their squares shut, but only just.
Thankfully Mr.Benwick is no longer around slandering Wellington's non-British allied nationalities whose units performed bravely throughout the campaign. Benwick had enough of people enlightening him correctly to counter the skewered fiction he eagerly spread around without checking facts first.
Maybe its interesting to know that the Dutch had the highest survival rate at Napoleons failed Russiain campaign of 1812 and that many of these war-hardened veterans fought against him at Quatre Bras. They never forgave Napoleon for forsaking his troops in Russia and were bent on paying him back for that.
Yes, all the 'Vive L'Empereur' fans here conveniently forget Napoleon abadoned his army in Egypt, in Russia, and after Waterloo [ Grouchy actually made a brilliant fighting withdrawal after Napoleon ran away]
The father of my greatgrandfather had to go to Russia with Napoleon and fought at Waterloo. As a child of traditional christian Eastern Dutch farmers this story, and others about the family-history, was told to me, when I was ''old enough'' (12) to hear them, IN ALL THEIR GRUESOME AND GORY DETAILS.
No space here to tell it all, but I have told my children as well and they will tell their children, etc..
You shouldn't keep that history to yourself when others are very eager to here this story. Don't worry about how long it is.... your ancestor told the stories for others to be aware with what he went through.... take as long as you need to tell the story here- you have all the free space and multiple posts you need. Otherwise make a website and put the story in it to commenorate your brave ancestor [ I'm guessong some cannibalism in the Russian part of the story].
Lol this is a good mod for empire total war. Cars included!!
Mrhahahahatim 1 month ago
I often use your video's to demonstrate 'salden's waddle' to people on the historical forums I frequent. As far as I know you are the only re-enectment group that practices this technique and posts video's of the result.
MrDidz 9 months ago
de laatste zijn uit t napoleon tijdperk als ik me nie vergis toch? ons pa die had daar heel veel intresse in, heel vaak met m naar leiden geweest.
Endarfin 1 year ago
I can't read the url's at the end :S
Are there any good sources on the belgian/united netherlands/nassau armies from this time period? I'd like to know more about it and their uniforms.
samipso 1 year ago
@samipso Hello. The url's were: 'w w w . 7delinie . be' and 'w w w . 7bvl . nl' There are a number of good sources. I suggest you take a look round this site: w w w . nanweb . org if you need more help or anything I'll answer you in PM or you could ask on the forum on the aforementioned website.
Thanks for watching!
rehtged 1 year ago
@rehtged Thanks i'll take a look at those!
samipso 1 year ago
Con't.: The French would have taken La Haye Sainte, driven the British from the field and Ney with his heavy cavelery and lancer reserves would have routed Wellington and destroyed him, leaving the Olde Guard to mop up, i.e.: bayonet any survivors of the battle. But fate has a away of protecting this weak and innocent, and Napoleon lost.
paramedic501 1 year ago
@paramedic501 The French DID take La Haye Sainte. In fact, for a short while the occupied the centre of the ridge and managed to prolonge several artillery pieces up the ridge and deploy them near the crossroads where they blew away the entire side of a Hannoverian square with canister, forcing it to form a triangle. The situation was only stabalised by the counter-attack of three battalions from the Duke of Nassau's Regiment led by the Prince of Orange personally.
MrDidz 9 months ago
Con't: Ney believed the British were retreating, from the ridge line, not thinking or realizing that the majority of the British force was laying down behind the ridge (a battle tactic for defence agaist artillary fire), as Naploleaon was a/n artillary officer, and knew how to use it. Had Groucey done his job as orderd and Ney thought for a moment and ordered infantry support to the center and artillary fire to the ridge and beyond.
paramedic501 1 year ago
To all I am a history buff, thiught i do't know of of the units involed in the battle, but this is true: The majority of the British force was behind a ridge, La Haye Sainte was the middle of the field, (the key) and in linar battles that is what needs to be controlled to win. Napoleon, new this as did Wellington. Problem Mashall Groucey did not do what he was order to do: Stop Blucher from reinforcing Wellington. Also Marshall Ney charged without infantry or artillary support.
paramedic501 1 year ago
2/30th Regiment had 635 fighting men at Waterloo, their casualties were 229 men, so that was still over 400 men fighting on.
33rd Regiment 566 men, with 187 casualties. Over 400 men there fighting on.
69th, numbers 565, casualties 79. Over 470 men there.
73rd Regiment 498 men, with 263 casualties.
And these remaining men still fought on and won, and were counted at the end of the day on the muster roles.
Woodlander65 1 year ago
@Woodlander65
The thing is crybaby- if you really do read soldiers memoirs- the casualties reported do not reflect the total missing / out of action during the battle. British soldiers report their strengths in THE CLIMAX OF THE BATTLE as mere skeletons- suggesting many unwounded soldiers left their units during the battle:
The Scots Greys were down to a few score men, battalions in Halkett's brigade less than company size- Your idea that Halkett's battalions were more than coy.size is wrong.
slizzler1 1 year ago
And Colville was answerable to General Hill, so Hal was decisively under British Command.
Now, you can accept that as as part of factual basic history that is well known and versed by many intelligent authors of Waterloo, or you can continue been in darkness which you are by using those 2 pathetic, racist threads of yours that are nothing short of an abomanation on the battle.
You won't change, pride, ignorence and hate, they are a bad mix.
Woodlander65 1 year ago
Prince Frederick was only Oranges younger brother, and its well known that Colville exercised command of the garrison at Hal. But Hill was Corps Commander, even if he wasnt present at Hal at the time.
I love this, i can take you out on any of you're pathetic little lies.
Play it safe boy and keep laughing, thats what you're best at.
How about a big Ice-Cream cone? Cheer you up a bit, Cully.
Woodlander65 1 year ago
@Woodlander65
LOL- I saw your comment in your other clip which exposed what your agenda is entirely. You have no respect for objectivity clearly. Recall your words;
"When the Imperial Guard breasted the ridge... but despite depleated numbers, Halketts battalions-formed four ranks deep-stood their ground, and within moments the Imperial Guard wavered, broke and fled... it was Halkett's 5th British Brigade that rightfully claim the honours on the Imperial's attempted assault on the right-centre.
slizzler1 1 year ago
@slizzler1
Don't worry- I presented the real facts there for everyone to properly research. Most notably the fact that members of Halkett's brigade wrote in their memoirs at how the Grenadiers of the Middle Guard had temporarily routed the British of Halkett, and other adjacent 'foreign brigades'.
A gap was thus created which General Ditmers Brigade of Gen.Chasse's Dutch-Belgian division, poured through at 'storm-pace' and to rout the first of the Imp.Gd attacks on Wellington's center.
Fact.
slizzler1 1 year ago
@slizzler1 Dont worry slizzler, your real education will start now.
The Prince of Orange had been given command of Dukes I Corps. Hill's Corps consisted of the 2nd British Infantry Division ( general clinton), the 4th British Infantry Division ( General Colville) and a Netherlands Corps under Prince Fredrick.
But of these 27,000 troops, only 10,000 saw action at Waterloo, the bulk of Colvilles command and Fredricks were sent to Hal.
But Colville was in total command of the combined force
Woodlander65 1 year ago
@Woodlander65
boohooooo, booohooooo
Prince Frederick Commanded General Colville and his complement of a British brigade and a Hanoverian brigade..... boohooooo
Colville was in Prince Frederick's Dutch command - boohooooo
LOL
slizzler1 1 year ago
@slizzler1 Fredrick boo-hoo to you as well, carrying on from my other comments, by the time Detmers men arrived to chase away what was left of the 1/3 and 4th Grenadiers they were falling back and Halkett's battalions done their job, and witnessed the Dutch chasing them down the hill. Mark Adkin (2001). Brilliant stuff, theres no getting away from it.
Woodlander65 1 year ago
@slizzler1 As for my comments on Halketts battalions, they did stand despite their losses, and were decisive so my comments were totally legitimite, but dont worry i will put the innocents right again, i can quote you these verses forever more and they are accurate.
I can see your getting frustrated, because deep down you know i'm quoting factual events, and despite your hatred for everything British it wont change a thing about the battle no matter how much deceit you spread.
Class dismissed.
Woodlander65 1 year ago
@Woodlander65
Do you really want me to quote the members of Halkett's brigade who wrote in their memoirs that they ran when the Grenadiers of the Middle Guard pushed home their attack in their sector?
LOL
You got caught in a terrible self-exposing lie - You who said Halkett's brigade 'Rightfully' have the honour of turning back those Grenadiers when you know it was Ditmers Dutch-Belgians alone who routed them...
And you squawked earlier about you respect the Dutch-Belgians who fought??! LOL
slizzler1 1 year ago
@slizzler1 And by the way i can also quote you members of the 2/30th Foot that had already beat the guard, and witnessed the Dutch-Belgians chasing an already fleeing French Guard, again Mark Adkin reading soldiers diary and notes.
I stand by General Halkett all the way, because he didnt flee the way you patheticly claim, they were there all the way and it was Halkett that turned these Grenadiers back. So my "Rightfully" comment still stands.
Look up British Musketry in Spain and Waterloo...
Woodlander65 1 year ago
...then maybe, just maybe you might start understanding, we'll see.
Woodlander65 1 year ago
@Woodlander65
the 3rd Grenadiers caused the 30th and 73rd on the Brigade's 'Left' to retreat whereupon Ditmers Dutch Belgian brigade destroyed those Grenadiers after their attached battery blasted and halted that column -and chased them to La Haye Sainte. The witnesses in Halkett's units on that sector state that fact- boohoo. Look up Sergeant Tom Morris of the 30th.
The 4th Grenadiers caused a panic retreat on the right[ 33rd and 69th] Halkett rallied them and held them off in a firefight.
slizzler1 1 year ago
@slizzler1
the 4th Grenadiers dissolved after Maitland, Adam and Hew Halkett destroyed the two Chasseur echelons which were heavily outnumbered- as were the Grenadiers echelons.
Boohoo all you want- Halkett's 4 battalions did retreat and were routed but stopped to rally.
There was no fantasy of all the glory of Halkett standing firm throughout and throwing back the Middle Guard Grenadiers. Halkett's brigade by that time was barely battalion sized! No shame in them having to fall back
slizzler1 1 year ago
@slizzler1 I dont know what shit you're writing now about British troops retreating. The 30th took many casualties that day, but they NEVER, NEVER left the battlefield, so again you are exposed for telling lies.
I know about Sergeant Morris very well, and he was also one of the wittnesses that saw the Dutch-Belgians chasing an already fleeing Guard.
And now you claim that Halkett was routed but stopped to rally, you are dumb,
Routed, meaning "A disorderly retreat or flight following defeat"
Woodlander65 1 year ago
But then you patheticly claim they stopped to rally!
But how can they? Acoording to you, you tool, they have been routed and defeated.
LOOL! You're a celebration of deceit and lies, slizzler, even you're contradictions have contradictions in them.
As i said before i take no leave of you.
Woodlander65 1 year ago
@Woodlander65
Please quote where I said the 30th left the battlefield, Crybaby? LOL
Several Dutch Belgian battalions were routed during D'Erlon's attack- like Halkett's brigade was routed/disorderly retreated-, but they were rallied several hundred yards back from their original battle-line position and brought back to their frontline position. The same with Halkett's brigade crybaby.They went back for 100 yards on their left wing and not so far on their right wing- But they did retreat. boohoo
slizzler1 1 year ago
@slizzler1 You're as contrary as Mary in you're comments, you really are.
Was the word Routed! not mentioned by you? Check the word out in meaning.
You know there are some people in the world that have time to think, but they dont think, they just constantly run away at the mouth, not engaging their brain and try and back it up with Caprice, and inevitably force themselves into a corner, yet still convinced its everyone else with the problem. That person is you, Slizzler, all the way.
Woodlander65 1 year ago
@Woodlander65
When soldiers in Halkett's brigade stated to their officers they would try to halt as ordered but the stampede back had taken them off their feet - that is a rout.... Macready said 50 cuirassiers could've routed the confused retreating mob at that point.
Tell them they are liars..... or finally admit some truth in the matter.
Anyway- now you know- as opposed to the former impression you had the brigade stood its ground throughout the Gren/Mid.Gd attack.
slizzler1 1 year ago
@Woodlander65
Of course you don't know Halkett's brigade had to retreat before the Grenadiers of the Middle Guard- that's why I'm educating you on the matter.
Look on a map and figure out the following;
When the 3rd Grenadiers hit the first opposition above La Haye Sainte, they at first caused the Brunswickers and Nasseurs to rout- then Kielmanseegge's brigade of Hanoverians broke, the left wing of Halkett's brigade being weakened as they were already- retreated in that confused mess too.
slizzler1 1 year ago
@slizzler1
---- it was at that point of a gap opening up, that Ditmers Dutch-Belgian brigade and their attached artillery- Krahmer's battery, appeared in the gap and blasted, charged, routed and pursued the outnumbered 4th Grenadiers..... Halkett's rout-recovered and halted/ relieved left wing battalions watched the whole process.... WATCHED.
Ensign Macready-30th Foot : "Some guns from the rear of our right [Krahmer] poured in canister among them, and the slaughter was dreadful."
slizzler1 1 year ago
Comment removed
slizzler1 1 year ago
@slizzler1
General Chasse who was there; wrote of the event;
- "... there were no troops, not a single man of the allies between my division and the French Guard ..."
In the charge they cheered, 'Long live the House of Orange! Long live the king !' Munter of Ditmers' brigade wrote: "Then we took a few shots at each other with the musket, but the French didn't want to give way."
slizzler1 1 year ago
@Woodlander65
"Look up British Musketry in Spain and Waterloo"
LOL- You are demented! Your obsessed agenda ranks you as a borderline nutcase.... I always praise British deeds, tactics and resilience in the Waterloo campaign- my criticism aimed is at your skewering events agenda.
slizzler1 1 year ago
@Woodlander65
What separates me from clowns like you is that I give all soldiers their due credit, Wellington, Napoleon, Blucher, their troops- and I critique them based on facts.
And then there is what I do with pleasure that crushes your pompous ego- I expose your agenda devoted lies.... I'll be here to expose the crap-spreaders whenever I can. So get used to it 'Billy-Boy'... lol
hahahaa- thanks for the classic self exposing ammo as proof;
re- 'Halkett's brigade beat the Grenadiers" LOLOL
slizzler1 1 year ago
@slizzler1 I also give soldiers their due and have proven it several times in my comments, but you dont listen or watch, so i will now repay you in kind.
But you seem to be a great fan of Orange, is that the same Orange that meddled and botched up Halkett's battalions in squares, and ordered them into line and troops were slaughtered and scattered before their very eyes.
A British colour was taken and it was all Oranges fault.
An idiot commander for an idiot like you,a match made in hades.
Woodlander65 1 year ago
@slizzler1 I also give soldiers their due and have proven it several times in my comments, but you dont listen or watch, so i will now repay you in kind.
But you seem to be a great fan of Orange, is that the same Orange that meddled and botched up Halkett's battalions in squares, and ordered them into line and troops were slaughtered and scattered before their very eyes.
A British colour was taken and it was all Oranges fault.
An idiot commander for an idiot like you,a match made in hades.
Woodlander65 1 year ago
Waterloo was Wellingtons victory though, under his leadership the British Army had been transformed from battle-losers into battle-winners, more than that war winners and giant killers who punched well above their weight in battle.
The big difference was the status and respect for the Redcoat that stayed with the British people many years after the battle, whilst other nations like the Dutch, Belgians didnt emphasis so much on their Militery History.
Woodlander65 1 year ago
@Woodlander65
British army ruled the 'land waves' .... you are very transparent....
"- whilst other nations like the Dutch, Belgians didnt emphasis so much on their Militery History."
You come in a clip honouring the memory of Dutch units that fought and died in one of history's most horrific campaigns, just to squawk your 'mighty redcoats' propaganda stupidity.
I mean why not work on your grammar and spelling if you are proud to be British;
"Belgians didnt emphasis.. Militery History." hmmm
slizzler1 1 year ago
@slizzler1 With the Prussians it was a rout at the end with sheer numbers overwhelming the French. The 17,000 and guns from Hal would of perhaps not been enough for a decisive victory, but would of been enough to hold the French to a draw.
And they were no longer needed as a static reserve blocking force, because everyone knew where Napoleon was.
The Hal detachment was a necessary evil in the beginning, but the reason they were kept there was to ensure the road to Louis sancttuary was safe.
Woodlander65 1 year ago
@Woodlander65
What's with your persistent use of ;
'would of' .
It is so simple -> you +others mix-up what sounds like 'would of/ must of/ should of' with the abbreviation for could have = could've etc.,
I never criticized the Hal detachment anywhere. Of course it was a wise strategic deployment. There was no 2 day battle possible- Napoleon's army was smashed ; 1st Corps, 2nd Corps, Cavalry Corps, Guard Infantry, Guard cavalry, artillery all used up. Prussian lll Corps fends off Grouchy.
slizzler1 1 year ago
The British/Dutch soldiers at Hal didnt fire a single shot allday, but they were accesible and Wellington would of and could of called them up.
It's all if's i know, but there are some that love playing that game on here, winging "If it wasnt for the Prussians!"
Maybe they would be right if they had won at Ligny, but Bluchers grudge against the French from 1806 was the main reason he came to Waterloo, the promise to Wellington was second.
Woodlander65 1 year ago
Many go on about the timely arrival of the Prussians, but its important to remember that General Colville commander of the 4th British Infantry Division was posted 8 miles west of Waterloo at the settlement of Hal, which had 17,000 men and 22 Artillery guns kicking their heels, and if Wellington had had to fall back to the Soignies forest that night, he could of called that 17,000 men and extra artillery up.
He didnt, but they would of made the difference if it had gone into a day 2.
Woodlander65 1 year ago
@Woodlander65
"....he could of called that 17,000 men and extra artillery up."
Can you not even use simple British grammar?
There is no such thing as 'could of'.
Why do all of you Super-Nationalists make that same silly mistake.....?
Could have = could' ve ; do you not read enough British language literature to know 'could of' is amongst the silliest English language mistakes?
slizzler1 1 year ago
@slizzler1 Super-Nationalists.
I knew you were in kahoots with the BNP with talk like that, Shitler the hater BECAUSE YOU HATE BEEN EDUCATED ON WATERLOO. You always have been and continue to be totally owned by me.
Also, yet again you know nothing, i have always given praise to the Dutch-Belgians that fought that day, again you came out with your idiot mindset that i meant everyone, but hey you are a born liar so im not going to get through to a foaming at the mouth racist like you, am i?
Woodlander65 1 year ago
@Woodlander65
Colville's unit amongst the troops detached UNDER PRINCE FREDERICK'S COMMAND at Hal did not include Mitchell's brigade which was at Waterloo.
You are mistaken in thinking Wellington intended to call up that force covering his flank- there mission was a static reserve blocking force.
The 17,000 troops at Hal is not much of a comparison to 50,000 vengeful driven Prussians.
slizzler1 1 year ago
@slizzler1
First of all you ignorent twat did i send you a message? No, so yet again you're a proven ignorent bag of shit.
Is my grammer annoying you? Then that is good, proves wholly that you are and have been scraping the bottom of the barrel in you're arguments, wasting time with crap because you have nothing.
And you are typically misinformed about Colville, as he was proven to exercise command of this combined force, but he and Fredrick both came under the Corps Commander, Lord Hill.
Woodlander65 1 year ago
@Woodlander65
well....
Your hideous grammar errors annoys everyone British who is offended by other Brits thrashing the written language.
awww- lol----> Lord Hill was at Waterloo.... Prince Frederick commanded Colville's remnants of the 4th division..... how can you twist out of that.
Well at least you ditched that BNP nutjob iamademocrat after I advised you about him attempting to manipulate you to fascist causes.
I actually foam laughing so much at you! LOL
slizzler1 1 year ago
@slizzler1
How is it possible for you to twist anyone, slizzler, i've told you before you're too backward and ignorent with no will to learn anything, so how on earth can you teach anyone? Seriously.
Colville was in command at Hal. Fact. Lord Hill was posted at Waterloo with the remaining 10,000 men of II corps, if you dont understand that then you're very comfortable in you're bed of falsehoods. It's a well versed fact by even the most bloody minded of historians.
Woodlander65 1 year ago
@Woodlander65
LOL- I just told you Lord Hill was himself at Waterloo-??? Why are you repeating what I said and claiming I didn't know that.
Go recheck that comment.
Colville was under Prince Frederick's command of 17,000 troops at Hal.
Not Colville and 6,000 Brits/ Hanoverians at Hal with Prince Frederick's contingent, but 17,000 of all troops under Prince Frederick.
Why are you crying over such a simple fact of life?
Quite literally you are crying..... boohoo
LOL
slizzler1 1 year ago
@slizzler1
LOL! You see what i mean, more LIES. I think anyone with a morsol of knowledge knows that Hill was at Waterloo, because i didnt mention it previous doesnt mean i didnt know it. So yet again slizzler you have contributed and taught nothing to anyone.
Cant you see you're getting yourself all tangled up with your bullshit?
General Hill followed Wellington to Brussels to take command of II corps. He was also tasked with keeping an eye on the "Young Frog" Prince of Orange.
Woodlander65 1 year ago
There is no doubt whatsoever that some Dutch and Belgian troops fought hard during the Waterloo campaign, determined to prove themselves and their loyalty to the new Netherlands State.
But the legendry conversation with the Prince of Orange and the Spanish ambassador to the Netherlands, Alava, who was present.
Prince of Orange asked, "Well Alava, what do you think your Spaniards would have done had they been present on this occasion?
Woodlander65 1 year ago
Alava: "Your Highness, i do not think they would of run away, as your Belgians did, before the first shot was fired."
Unfortunetely, these discussions at Waterloo were quoted and mud sticks.
Woodlander65 1 year ago
@Woodlander65
Your whole very TRANSPARENT cheesy effort in these YT clips is to slur other nations in battles/ victories involving the British OR at the very least make sure they don't get nearly as much credit as they deserve.
For example- in the Scots Greys yt clip elsewhere you talked of the Brit's victory against the Japanese in Burma. You gloriously left out the huge numbers of allies alongside the Brits who defeated Imperial Japan.... ANZACs, Indians, Asians Africans, Americans.
slizzler1 1 year ago
@slizzler1
I didnt leave out the large number of allies at Burma, and these ANZACS, Indians, Africans etc all came under the British Empire back then, so my comments were right, they fought under British command and were very proud to do so, didnt you know that? Doesnt surprise me, you know nothing anyway.
And get it right, 33% of the Allied army were British, you will argue over 3% i know, but your the one that claims to be fair with everything that day, which you are clearly not.
Woodlander65 1 year ago
@slizzler1
Transparent! Have you been reading Harry Potter? Transparent!
Silly bastard.
And the way you say ONLY 30%! Only! Understand this if nothing else, without them it would of been all different, and forget the Prussians, because they failed, it was The British Army that bled the French in Spain and Waterloo.
As for the Dutch-Belgians, my comment below still stands, and if you have a prob with it then ride it where the monkey shoves his nuts.
Woodlander65 1 year ago
@Woodlander65
The Dutch-Belgians fought as soldiers and died as soldiers-on June 15th they made the whole Waterloo campaign's possible.
They saved Wellington from retreating to re-embark and saved the Prussians from being destroyed entirely.
Perponcher's unit's staff in the Frasnes area, at the start of Napoleon's masterstroke aimed at dividing Wellington and Blucher, used their military experience to ascertain Napoleon's intent. They put themselves in a sacrificial mode to stop the French.
slizzler1 1 year ago
@slizzler1
I dont make up crap about who's brave and who's not, i have commented from the books that i have read over the years and always its Prejudice dummys like you and NEW generation historians that are angry and bitter for reasons no better than hatred and Envy that the British army were the finest troops on the field at Waterloo. That is fact, and even the French admitted it later on, and they should know more than you.
Woodlander65 1 year ago
@slizzler1
Before Zappis barred me from his page i was going to answer you on why you thought i accused you of been a racist. Well i'll gladly answer, with a heavy heart.
And that is you're propensity to violence, abuse and bullying, the very ingredients that you're supposed to hate. But your obsessed with it in the way you talk to people, it works both ways you see, hopefully you will grow out of this and grow up.
Woodlander65 1 year ago
@Woodlander65
British this British that, we this, we that, Rule Britannia this, Rule Britannia that, snore , snore,............................
LOL
so now, having contempt for clowns = being a racist as you see it??? LOLOL
I get along with sane fair minded people very well online and offline-> the minority of you snots and fickle-minds I speak up to- and that makes you a crybaby.
oh- I'll always be here and there exposing your type's of nonsense and slurring of history. Get used to it whiner.
slizzler1 1 year ago
@slizzler1
What can i get used to over a dummy like you? You're a thick shit liar, i've told you before, nothing has changed with your Waterloo History. I tell you what impact you have, i stopped reading your comment after the word "that", so what did you say?
But then is important what you have said? Always NO!
Remember who your master is,
Woodlander65 1 year ago
@Woodlander65
Now you are so worked up you are writing non-sensical gibberish- I have no clue about what you just squawked erratically at me.
slizzler1 1 year ago
Just out of interest, i put the British Waterloo Regiments strength on the Zappis page but he took off my comments without any explanation, another example of favouritism and hypocrisy by some of the holders.
But total numbers officially under British command are 36,538 men, including KGL Battalions and Cavalry.
Page 440 Who was who at Waterloo, Christopher Summerville.
Woodlander65 1 year ago
@Woodlander65
Stop goal post shifting- you know your initial reply was contesting another's comment stating the well known fact that the numbers of British at Waterloo was only 30% of Wellington's army. Now in your 'British Glorification' agenda you are deceitfully implying you meant 'total under British command'. This fact is also common knowledge.
slizzler1 1 year ago
@slizzler1
Interesting that you accuse me of deceit, yet it is you who chops and changes comments, suffer convenient memory loss to what you have previously written, become fustrated and accuse everyone of throwing their toys out of the pram for having the nerve to disagree with you on their views, and those 2 joke threads of yours that does nothing but slander the battle. So when you mention the word Deceit, its really talking of you.
Woodlander65 1 year ago
Zijn er ook nederlandse groepen die de fransen naspelen(tjaa, jullie moeten ook iets hebben om op te 'schieten' ;P
ViccardXViccc 1 year ago
@ViccardXViccc Inderdaad, als je geinteresseerd bent om als Franse schietschijf te dienen zijn er wel groepen waarbij je je kunt aansluiten ;P Ik stuur je ff een PM
rehtged 1 year ago
WOA! Vet Casper! Door deze comment, ben je achter de Grenadiers Hollandais gekomen! Dit is jouw Austerlitz! (ik heb de grenadiers ontmoet bij Austerlitz, als ik nooit was geweest naar Austerlitz dan zat ik er waarschijnlijk nu ook niet bij)
meenksellaan1 1 year ago
This year will be my first battle of waterloo I joined 7th line brigade Blyland ( Belgian branche) as a recruit sapper
klauwaerts 1 year ago
This year will be my first battle of waterloo I joined 7th line brigade Blyland ( Belgian branche) as a recruit sapper
klauwaerts 1 year ago
Well good news, I'll be joining the 7th (Belgian branch) this year in Waterloo, although it'll be the first time I re-enact. =) (So I don't suppose I'll get to fight.)
I should be able to go to Ligny next weekend, so I hope to get in touch with the 7th personally. =)
Mind if I pose a few questions through personal message about uniforms, equipment etc. ?
tanotrooper 1 year ago
@tanotrooper allright ;-P, yeah no problem.
Stuur maar door ;-)
rehtged 1 year ago
Nederland tot we allemaal dood zijn (l)
erwinboeruutgrunn 1 year ago
orange boven
rood,wit,blauw
snipeahead 1 year ago
Hup België!
Mievena 1 year ago
song?
SpyWizard2 1 year ago
get a life and joiin the really army .. soldiering isnt a fucking game
Conr3der 2 years ago
@Conr3der learn how to spell and make note that many reenactors that are here to preserve history and heritage are often indeed "real" soldiers spending their weekends educating
HartofLions 2 years ago
congratulations
wojsport 2 years ago
I Know This is John Tams Singing But whats The Song Called?
jimboblyrics1 2 years ago
Ik wil wat meer weten over Nassau iemand enige segesties? en het filmpje is top (i love the movie) :D
steefZ1 2 years ago
Bedoel je het land Nassau?
waslander 2 years ago
waarschijnlijk wel
steefZ1 2 years ago
This recreation is so much more better than the American Civil War recreations in the U.S.
MegaCapitalist 2 years ago
video is great
ichmagmilk 2 years ago
Traitors !
MaxRWF 2 years ago
Because...?
Stupid remark.
Mohawkmarcje 2 years ago
Why would you expect the Dutch/Belgians to be good? From what i've read, most of the Dutch/Belgian contingent were militia.
Militia are militia, not soldiers. Though they did give a fairly good account of themselves at Waterloo, as did the 2nd Dutch Brigades and 2nd Infantry Divisions. They were proper soldiers and were battle hardened from the Peninsular wars, fighting on the side of the French.
CancerousAids 2 years ago
The term militia refers to them being conscripts.
Markvdl25 2 years ago
We were controlled by the french
we could recruit line infantry we
needed to trust militia.
APdocumentary 2 years ago
You should learn some history. Holland was occupied by France at the time and Dutch army contingents had to take part in their campaigns. The Dutch army performed very well, e.g in Russia where they had extremely high casualty rates due to "fighting to the last man standing" For instance at the Berezina. By the time of Waterloo many of the Dutch soldiers and officers were battle experienced soldiers.
Efteling4Ever 2 years ago
Further, the campaign of Waterloo was abused by the English as an "English victory" whereas they merely played a part like all the others. The Waterloo campaign was saved from desaster by the valiant resistance of the Dutch army at the battle of Quattre Bras and the acual battle of Waterloo was won partly because of the performance of the Dutch army and the Prussians. The English have afterwards been acting "as if they were the only ones around." It's very good that they weren't.
Efteling4Ever 2 years ago 2
Did you know the famous bridges over the Berezina were built by Dutch pontoniers. These went into the cold water and most of them never came out. They worked and worked in teh icy water to save the rest until their harts stopped from the cold. Literally.
Efteling4Ever 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
The worst infantry ever.
Antek1500 2 years ago
british grenadiers is red
totalwarfreak1 2 years ago
Thanks, do what I can... and congratulations for the uniform & equipment.
brownbess1967 2 years ago
which muskets used the Belgian/Dutch at Waterloo ? maybe british India Brown Besses ?? Thanks & sorry my english...
mfsm67 2 years ago
No need to apologise ;-)
Yes, the centre compagnies were normally issued Brown Besses, while the flankcompagnies (such as grenadiers) typically had french Charlevilles.
rehtged 2 years ago
Hmmmno... in April 1815 ALL Dutch and Belgian troops in the field were issued Brown Bess muskets, to make sure all units used weapons of the same calibre. See the report of Van Zuylen van Nijeveld (Chief of Staff, Dutch 2nd Division). IN the Bijlandt Brigade, the 7th Line infantry Bat. was the only unit still equipped with French muskets, these had to be sent to the depot and exchanged for Brown Bess Muskets.
Mohawkmarcje 2 years ago
Oh I see, sorry for the false information then. It was what I was told though, but I guess it only applied to th 7th, I assumed the person was talking about the Dutch-Belgian army in general. Thanks for the info!
rehtged 2 years ago
@Mohawkmarcje
thanks- great info details.
slizzler1 1 year ago
your english is fine
filthmonger171 2 years ago
I wan't to know the name of this marching-music. Started from 1.18 seconds.
Thanks
andrewsimons 2 years ago
"British Grenadiers"
rehtged 2 years ago
dutch line infantry was pretty solid at the time but british line and french old guard units were far more superior in terms of training. god i love history.
kidd5290 2 years ago
most dutch and belgian battalions either fled at the first shot or joined the french
filthmonger171 2 years ago
Hahaha. IIf I had a penny for everytime I heard that... Well, I suggest you read back the rest of the comments on this vid or look up some real historical facts and not the biased British accounts.
rehtged 2 years ago
sorry, didnt mean to cause offence
filthmonger171 2 years ago
None taken ;)
rehtged 2 years ago
Well, OK, but I recommend you read some books on the subject.
To give an example: The Dutch 3rd Division (Chassé) was stationed at Braine L'Ailleud during the battle of Waterloo. It marched up to the centre early in the afternoon, was involved in some skirmishes with Piré's cavalry and came under fire from the French Artillery. When the French Guard marched up the slope, Brunswick and British troops fell back, The 3rd Division closed the gap and later routed the 3rd and 4th Guard Grenadiers.
Mohawkmarcje 2 years ago
In fact, several Dutch/Belgian Regiments fought with considerable bravery and distinction during the campaign. However, there was always the risk of defection as many were ex-French regiments, and indeed I thiink Napoleon expected them to change sides, but none did as far as I am aware.
MrDidz 2 years ago
i belief some did, especially the belgians as they saw themselves as french, not dutch which is fair i suppose. belgium as a state was a new idea and had been part of france before then
filthmonger171 2 years ago 3
WRONG REALLY WRONG
Belgium was part of Spain.
waslander 2 years ago
it was. but not by this period
filthmonger171 2 years ago
?? Not since the War of Spanish Succession... (which ended 100 years earlier!).
Mohawkmarcje 2 years ago
The soldiers from the Northern Provinces ('Holland') were very anti-French and did not defect. But the Belgians were divided, some pro-French (who fought in Napoleon's army), some anti-French (who fought in the Dutch-Belgian army). This resulted in former comrades from former French campaigns meeting each other on the field and fighting each other. No Belgians defected the Dutch army, the tragedy is that the Belgians were devided about supporting Napoleon, even within families.
Mohawkmarcje 2 years ago
if the Belgians were so divided, how is it possible that flemmisch and walloons fought together to gain their freedom in 1830?
As far as i know we Belgians (flemmisch ones and walloons) kicked the dutch troops out of belgium.
The people is only divid trough politics.
Ellexhirion 2 years ago
Hmmm, first of all: the Belgians didn't kick out the Dutch, it was the intervention of the French and British that forced the Dutch back (the Belgian armies were defeated several times).
Second: the Flemish and Walloons were united against a common enemy: the Dutch. Belgian politicians (especially the Walloon politicians) urged for more democratic reforms, but the King and his ministers, afraid of Catholic influences, ignored that, which resulted in the Belgian Secession.
Mohawkmarcje 2 years ago
@Mohawkmarcje Youre kidding right? Youre are not from Belgium are you?
The French and Britisch did not fight for us, they only garantzeed our indenpandence.
It was the militia's from Liege, Brussels, Verviers and antwerp who fought the dutch and kikced them out of the country.
You have to learn a country's history before posting.
I am from Belgium and i know how it was done
Ellexhirion 2 years ago
No, I'm from the Netherlands. Yes, I know the history of Belgium, I wrote an essay on the failure of the unification in 1815.
The militia's did not kick the Dutch out. The Belgian armies were driven back at Hasselt (august 8, 1831), and Boutersem (11th August), and almost at Leven (12th August). A French army entered Belgium on August 9th.
Hostilities ended on August 12th, the Dutch army left Belgium on august 20th, except for a garrison at Antwerp, which was besieged by the French.
Mohawkmarcje 2 years ago
@Ellexhirion kop dicht! Jullie wonnen alleen maar omdat frankrijk jullie holp!
Shut up! You only won because France helped you!
ViccardXViccc 2 years ago
niets van!!! franse troepen hebben alleen maar hollanders belegerd in antwerpen en dat was jouw fameuze franse hulp!?
De belgen deden het op hun ééntje in Luik, Brussel, Gent, Verviers, Dinant en Namen. Maar ja dat is een vlek in jullie geschiedenis zeker?
Ellexhirion 2 years ago
Mainly because the Northern part of Tthe Netherlands where protestant, and the Flemmish where Catholic. After their independence the Flemmish where relegated to second class citizens. The Walloons where wealthier, due to their early industrialization, and they weren't shy to show it. Nowadays it's vice versa. But it's fair that you know i'm Dutch. Consult a Flemmish or a Walloon if you want to know more
Lemmetellya 1 year ago
@Lemmetellya ik ben van Belgie, dus weet ik mijn geschiedenis, wat je zegt is waar, maar je vergeet dat de rijke vlamingen in die tijd ook frans praaten, zodat de lagere klasse hun niet kon verstaan, trouwens komen vlamingen en waloniers in het algemeen goed overeen.
Zelf met holanders ;).
Ellexhirion 1 year ago
Zelfs met ons westerlingen, de echte Hollanders? Wij kunnen erg arrogant zijn (volgens de rest van Nederland)...Maar goed even serieus, geloof me als ik zeg dat Belgie OK is. Maar toch is het wel ergens jammer dat we niet een groot land zijn.
Lemmetellya 1 year ago
@Lemmetellya ik kom dagelijks in contact met nederlandse mensen van Breda (holland?)door men werk, al kunnen er misverstanden zijn, komen wij goed overeen, en zien we dat we soms een stukje gezamelijk cultuur hebben.
Het is inerdaad soms jammer dat er grenzen bestaan tussen volkeren.
Ellexhirion 1 year ago
@Ellexhirion Ik vind de grenzen vaag tussen vlamingen en Zuid nederlanders.
Het vloeit wel over met natuurlijk de nodige verschillen.
Maar die zijn maar klein.
Net als er ook verschillen zijn tussen zuid en noord Nederlanders.
Maar uiteindelijk spreken we allebij de zelfde taal ;)
Alleen dan met een ander accent
Raafje84 1 year ago
Europe can not afford these types of divisons. Africans, Middle Easterners, and Asians have much more radically different cultures than the differences between the Walloons and Flemmish. Europe is being transformed for the worst.
WhitePowerForEngland 1 year ago
True. You might change your cabin, but afterall were on the same ship. I too have some worries abot the future (ethnic tensions and such), but certain events from our past show me that when we have too, we will prevail. it's in our genes.
Lemmetellya 1 year ago
@WhitePowerForEngland
Typical- do you neo nazi scum and other right wing vermin have to always show up in nice clips and infest your disgusting poison of hatred every where you go.
By the way there were blacks in the British army at Waterloo, and black regiments on the British side in the 1815 battle of New Orleans.
Now piss off you racist nazis. This clip is for intellectuals and admirers of history- this is no place for hatemongering savages.
slizzler1 1 year ago
@slizzler1
I never denied blacks were in the British army. However, the vast majority were white or of european decent. Your problem is that you think if Europe becomes minority white its nations will have a similar culture. Are you really that foolish?
WhitePowerForEngland 1 year ago
Comment removed
slizzler1 1 year ago
@slizzler1 <----- Black Racist Spam Monkey
tryanjohnson 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@WhitePowerForEngland
I think you should shut your face you filthy neonazi SOB.
You still have the bollocks to show your ugly faces around after the BNP slithered to a 1.87% voter total. Britons spoke and hopefully the rest of Europe follows Britain and squashes the Right Wing Schizoid menace in Europe - you are no better than al quaeda and Taliban psychos.
slizzler1 1 year ago
@slizzler1 Hey, I'm a right-winger and I don't monger hate here, you racist!
Kdssow 1 year ago
@Kdssow
who are you? - ...........
slizzler1 1 year ago
@slizzler1
I am a mere puberal Dutchman at the age of 17, getting sick of people who support left-wing politics wile they don't know what they're doing.
Thanks to your and other people's support on the left-wing parties, my father can barely pay the taxes every year. Left-wing polotics don't give a damn to their foreign people, only about the power they get from the fake democracy we have here, and money wich they get paid 5 years ahead once they quit.
Kdssow 1 year ago
@Kdssow
you sound like a crybaby. Conservative parties are just as fragile as liberal parties- that is why we live in a society where we protect our right to vote and exchange leaderships as we see fit- Democracy is not Utopia-> it is a flawed work in progress system, but we do have it better than many other hardlined societies. Instead of following along with a jaded mentor's indoctrination that you should hate Liberals and Democracy, go live in a nation where you have NO Rights nor choices.
slizzler1 1 year ago
@slizzler1 You don't get it at all, do you?
The left-wing parties here care more about people outside The Netherlands.
They don't give a shit about what happens over here, as long as they can get payed 357.000 Euro's per year, and get a 5 year full payment when they finally leave the political scene.
I've seen it, followed it, tracked it, researched it, and all is true.
Liberals are transforming this culturefull country into a place made of gas, roads and concrete boxes.
Enough prove to you?
Kdssow 1 year ago
@Kdssow
you are 17 and indoctrinated to complain forever as a right winger- you may be lucky to grow out of that one day.
slizzler1 1 year ago
@slizzler1 Meh, you're the one who is indoctrinated, you are being blindfolded by your "superior" left wing parties.
It is no more use to have a conversation to you, since you only keep giving answers and see things like a child at the age of 6.
Good day.
Kdssow 1 year ago
@Kdssow
Let me guess- you don't have to many friends in society.
Blame yourself- or fix yourself..... you are otherwise going to have a sad and angry lonely life
slizzler1 1 year ago
@slizzler1
Yes, just like you. Chip off the old block, eh.
Woodlander65 1 year ago
Comment removed
Woodlander65 1 year ago
ehm no
smoke0imix0god 2 years ago
@smoke0imix0god: "Ehm no"
... because...?
If you say "no", you must also give a reason why. Please explain. I'm sure you know something important us silly historians have overlooked after reading countless books on the subject. ;o)
Mohawkmarcje 2 years ago
because i am bored thats why i leave retarded comments
smoke0imix0god 2 years ago
bij de slag van waterloo bestond belgie nog niet eens
flaarisse 2 years ago
In 1798 werd de Verenigde Staten van België gesticht. was geen lang leven beschoren maar toch... Overigens was er wel een idee om een onafhankelijk België te creëren na het verdrijven van Napoleon, maar helaas wilde het Wener Congres dat België een deel van het Verenigd Koninkrijk der Nederlanden werd. Vanaf 1814 waren alle plannen voor onafhankelijkheid dus definitief van tafel geveegd. Nou ja, 16 jaar later dan maar...!
Mohawkmarcje 2 years ago
ja ma potje paintball is wel ef anders dan bij een club gaan waar men over straat marcheert vind k gwoon wat te wannabe eerlijk gezegt
bleushift 2 years ago
Nou, het is wel meer dan een potje op straat marcheren. Je probeert te leven zoals in die tijd, dus daar hoort 15 kilometer marcheren in volle bepakking (30+ kilo) ook bij bijvoorbeeld. Zie het maar als: geschiedenis bestuderen, maar dan niet uit een boekje.
Natuurlijk is deze hobby aantrekkelijk voor prutsers die graag in een mooi pakkie willen rondlopen en een echt wapen wel geil vinden, maar die zijn we vaak bij de eerste aanblik van een tent met stro en alle bepakking al kwijt. ;o)
Mohawkmarcje 2 years ago
kijk, als ze daar nou met ze 100rde stonde vond ik het mooi, maar met zn 8ten staat nogal raar
vetteed 2 years ago
haha lol
jurdao14785 2 years ago
yeah music from SHARP yeahhhhh !!!
jxpwharton 2 years ago
sorry maar kvind dit beetje overdreve...
ga dan bij het leger ofzo...
bleushift 2 years ago
Het is niet iets wat ik persoonlijk zou gaan doen,Maar ik heb er geen moeite mee als anderen het doen integendeel vind ik het wel gaaf om te zien,Je krijgt wel een goed beeld van hoe het leger er 300 jaar geleden uit zag
sgtjasper 2 years ago
kun je ook zeggen van paintballers..
dit als part-time hobby of bij het leger gaan als full-time job zijn wel heel verschillende dingen.
eXowomb 2 years ago
Hebben jullie een website ofzo? Is dit een groepje uit zowel NL en VL of enkel "reenactors" uit VL?
dunnobe 2 years ago
Er is een Belgische en Vlaamse tak
google maar eens 7e linie
klqm 2 years ago
Belgisch en Vlaamse? Klinkt raar
Belgisch/Vlaamse en Nederlandse neem ik aan?
dunnobe 2 years ago
inderdaad
klqm 2 years ago
The Brunswickers, Hanoverian, Nassauers were the unsteadiess of all the allies in squares during the cavalry attacks, but their officers and sergeants behaved nobly, kept them together, and kept their squares shut, but only just.
JamesBenwick 2 years ago
Thankfully Mr.Benwick is no longer around slandering Wellington's non-British allied nationalities whose units performed bravely throughout the campaign. Benwick had enough of people enlightening him correctly to counter the skewered fiction he eagerly spread around without checking facts first.
slizzler1 2 years ago
What song is this?
tette666 3 years ago
Love Farewell.
sung by John Tams.
Tiwaz81 2 years ago
mooi filmpje, ik ga later dit ook doen.
comanche3fan 3 years ago
Maybe its interesting to know that the Dutch had the highest survival rate at Napoleons failed Russiain campaign of 1812 and that many of these war-hardened veterans fought against him at Quatre Bras. They never forgave Napoleon for forsaking his troops in Russia and were bent on paying him back for that.
helmuthoorn 3 years ago 3
Yes, all the 'Vive L'Empereur' fans here conveniently forget Napoleon abadoned his army in Egypt, in Russia, and after Waterloo [ Grouchy actually made a brilliant fighting withdrawal after Napoleon ran away]
slizzler1 3 years ago
The father of my greatgrandfather had to go to Russia with Napoleon and fought at Waterloo. As a child of traditional christian Eastern Dutch farmers this story, and others about the family-history, was told to me, when I was ''old enough'' (12) to hear them, IN ALL THEIR GRUESOME AND GORY DETAILS.
No space here to tell it all, but I have told my children as well and they will tell their children, etc..
helmuthoorn 3 years ago
You shouldn't keep that history to yourself when others are very eager to here this story. Don't worry about how long it is.... your ancestor told the stories for others to be aware with what he went through.... take as long as you need to tell the story here- you have all the free space and multiple posts you need. Otherwise make a website and put the story in it to commenorate your brave ancestor [ I'm guessong some cannibalism in the Russian part of the story].
slizzler1 3 years ago