National army museum 20 british battles that shaped history vote

#1
The NAM is holding an online poll to vote for the British Battle that shaped history the most -you can vote for your choice.
it runs to March 20th

Britain's Greatest Battles | Online Exhibitions | National Army Museum, London

They have a list of 20 nominations earliest is Naesby the most recent being Musa Qala
It's just land battles so( sadly) no Trafalgar etc (I'll get my sou'wester and duffle)
 

Travelgall

LE
Kit Reviewer
#2
No Cambrai? The battle that taught the British Army Maneuver warfare with combined arms support, rather than ever more extravagant methods of marching in line towards the enemy after the Artillery had given them a good pounding.
 
#3
Too complicated to vote - should have a simple button to click on.

I'll give it a miss.

Rodney2q
 
#4
Oh I bloody well know!
One criticism I'd make is that some of the "nominations" are a bit ...
Oh I don't know what exactly the word is ... PC? or multicultural? or romantic /sentimental?

Yeah Waterloo -obvious agreed
Alamein won't argue..

But the reasoning for including Concord/Lexington ? Rorke's drift? Balaklava? Meddigo?
(Not taking anything away from the actions fought)

You could say Amiens , Omdurman, the Boyne... FIRST Alamein... Arnhem even ( after all if Arnhem had worked the map of post war europe might have been v different)
 
#5
Musa Qal'eh? How could a battle less than 7 years ago shape Britain's history?

Naseby would be a strong contender for battle that shaped the British Army as Cromwell's New Model Army is our antecedent.

Otherwise it would have to be something that changed teh situation in Europe or the world and therefore affected us - Waterloo, Marne for WW1 maybe, and a load to choose from WW2 (Alamein, Battle of Britain, D-Day, the Ardennes).
 
#6
Musa Qal'eh? How could a battle less than 7 years ago shape Britain's history?

Naseby would be a strong contender for battle that shaped the British Army as Cromwell's New Model Army is our antecedent.

Otherwise it would have to be something that changed teh situation in Europe or the world and therefore affected us - Waterloo, Marne for WW1 maybe, and a load to choose from WW2 (Alamein, Battle of Britain, D-Day, the Ardennes).
Think you might be right about Musa Qaleh it's one I suspect that's nominated for PC reasons

Waterloo is a funny one really : it was assymetric - absolutely decisive for Bonaparte - if he loses
but NOT decisive if he won - the war would have gone on- there would have been another battle within the year probably which would have ended up with Bonaparte being beaten down he was running out of assets


Oh yes voted for Naseby here
 
#7
Shaped Britain's history? Imjin? Goose Green? Rorke's Drift? To name only a few on the list, stirring though they may have been and bravely fought though hardly history shaping. Any mention of the Indian Mutiny battles? They really DID shape Britain's history.
I'm thinking only Naseby, The Boyne, Culloden, Waterloo, Delhi, The Somme, Imphal/Kohima, D-Day, had the biggest positive, bacon saving, effects on the UK.

There were others, Singapore, for example which hastened Britain's removal from centre stage as a world power. And of course Yorktown - which really DID shape world history!
 
#8
Almost random choices to me.

Goose green, Balaklava and the Imjin are definitely second division.

Missing, as a first guess over two minutes:-

Brentford, 1642 - more a confrontation than a battle but defined the character of the Civil War.
Dunkirk (1655-ish) introduced the continent to the New Model Army.
Kabul (First Afghan War) - we're still getting over it as far as the Afghans are concerned.
Amiens, 1918 , the real definition of mobile war in WW1.
 
#9
Almost random choices to me.

Goose green, Balaklava and the Imjin are definitely second division.

Missing, as a first guess over two minutes:-

Brentford, 1642 - more a confrontation than a battle but defined the character of the Civil War.
Dunkirk (1655-ish) introduced the continent to the New Model Army.
Kabul (First Afghan War) - we're still getting over it as far as the Afghans are concerned.
Amiens, 1918 , the real definition of mobile war in WW1.
Agree-ish with Amiens though it would only have shaped Britain's history had we continued with that school of thought after WW1!
 
#11
Stuck between Quebec and Balaclava, although can i vote for Cullodon just to see whose flags it adorns.
 
#13
Been thinking about El Alamein and the FIRST battle - the one in July 1942 is probably more important than the SECOND...

OK in July it's the Axis on the attack, Rommel chucks everything at us, if he wins he's having a dip in the Suez canal, Alexandria naval base goes, the route to India and Australia is shut, the middle eastern oil is up for grabs... It might even make Turkey enter the war on the Axis side... Lose the canal and Churchill probably falls from power, the UK probably accepts terms and Hitler gets on with Barbarossa.

Anyway at the FIRST El Alamein we stop him, we dig in, take everything he's got, the canal does not fall. and Rommel has a smashed up army and he knows he can't make another attack- so he digs in.

SECOND El Alamein is the "the empire strikes back"
it's now Britain that's on the attack.
If we fail it's not a disaster it would probably be a stalemate the positions would probably stay the same, Rommel still wouldn't be in any position to attack us, Montgomery would be sacked and Churchill would draw another general's name out of the hat...


Here's the link again for anyone who's saying "WTF are they talking about?"

http://www.nam.ac.uk/exhibitions/online-exhibitions/britains-greatest-battles
 

FORMER_FYRDMAN

LE
Book Reviewer
#14
What a crap list. What about Arras - 1940 which panicked Adolph into issuing a stop order and directly enabled Dunkirk, or the Retreat from Mons in 1914 or Corunna - all three of which kept us in the game, staved off total defeat in three of our four greatest wars and were necessary preludes to final victory? How on earth does Rorke's Drift feature as an important battle?
 
#15
Battle of Lexington and Concord... Hmmm.. well, it's hard to pick either side as none of the combatants proved to be a friend to the Red Man. There were gold mad colonists digging up the Virginia Tidewater causing a ruckus with the Powhatans and religious extremist nutcases landed at Plymouth Bay spouting the Bible to the unwilling Wampanoag natives so not a real appealing choice between the two types in my opinion.

It was a dark day for us Indians when you fellers rocked up and said "We claim this vacant land in the name of our King (Queen)." (Vacant? WTF? :? )Personally I would have been fine with it if you British had just established trading factories on the coast, traded with the natives for a time and went home. We don't need any of the sweepings from your gaols or Liverpool to establish colonies here thank you very much. ;-)

Indian warrior crop 2.jpg
 

FORMER_FYRDMAN

LE
Book Reviewer
#16
Battle of Lexington and Concord... Hmmm.. well, it's hard to pick either side as none of the combatants proved to be a friend to the Red Man. There were gold mad colonists digging up the Virginia Tidewater causing a ruckus with the Powhatans and religious extremist nutcases landed at Plymouth Bay spouting the Bible to the unwilling Wampanoag natives so not a real appealing choice between the two types in my opinion.

It was a dark day for us Indians when you fellers rocked up and said "We claim this vacant land in the name of our King (Queen)." (Vacant? WTF? :? )Personally I would have been fine with it if you British had just established trading factories on the coast, traded with the natives for a time and went home. We don't need any of the sweepings from your gaols or Liverpool to establish colonies here thank you very much. ;-)

View attachment 108824
I'd play down the Liverpool link if I were you - unless you want to pay a shedload of compo for all those Indian raids you carried out.
 
#17
I know the poll only goes as "far" back as ECW, but I would say that Hastings (1066) would be THE defining battle for English (British) history. We stopped looking "North" and became part of Continental Europe...

Had William been repulsed, and lost heavily enough, he may not have been able to attempt a second invasion, leaving England (or the constituent Kingdoms) fighting / trading with the Scandinavian bloc who had been raiding / trading and inter-marrying with the locals for some time.

The Scandinavians converted our lands and climate (for growing crops) and our ice free harbours. The "Vikings" has explored as far as the Ukraine and had - probably - reached North America at around this time. What would the World, let alone "England" be like if "1492" had occurred c. 300-400 years earlier?

What would North America be like with Europeans in possession of technology not too far advanced than that enjoyed by the North American natives? No gun powder for starters so the battles would be fought with swords / shields / bows and arrows on both sides. Also, without the split with Rome under Henry VIII and the later religious turmoil would there have been religious zealots to settle the new lands and create the "Beacon on the Hill" that the US sought to become? America without its underlying religious fundamentalism would be a very different creature to what it is today. Would there even be a “USA” as we know it, without the tensions and causes that played such a part from 1760 and the wars fought against France in North America and the taxation issues that largely arose from said war…
 
#18
Battle of Lexington and Concord... Hmmm.. well, it's hard to pick either side as none of the combatants proved to be a friend to the Red Man. There were gold mad colonists digging up the Virginia Tidewater causing a ruckus with the Powhatans and religious extremist nutcases landed at Plymouth Bay spouting the Bible to the unwilling Wampanoag natives so not a real appealing choice between the two types in my opinion.

It was a dark day for us Indians when you fellers rocked up and said "We claim this vacant land in the name of our King (Queen)." (Vacant? WTF? :? )Personally I would have been fine with it if you British had just established trading factories on the coast, traded with the natives for a time and went home. We don't need any of the sweepings from your gaols or Liverpool to establish colonies here thank you very much. ;-)

View attachment 108824
Just go and find me some more of that yellow metal and there'll be as much firewater as you can drink, there's a good chap.
 

FORMER_FYRDMAN

LE
Book Reviewer
#19
Shaped Britain's history? Imjin? Goose Green? Rorke's Drift? To name only a few on the list, stirring though they may have been and bravely fought though hardly history shaping. Any mention of the Indian Mutiny battles? They really DID shape Britain's history.
I'm thinking only Naseby, The Boyne, Culloden, Waterloo, Delhi, The Somme, Imphal/Kohima, D-Day, had the biggest positive, bacon saving, effects on the UK.

There were others, Singapore, for example which hastened Britain's removal from centre stage as a world power. And of course Yorktown - which really DID shape world history!
I don't have a problem with Goose Green. I remember it as the point where it became 'clear' that we would win in the Falklands and the Falklands turned round the fortunes of the Thatcher Government. In my view, no Goose Green, no Maggie - the pros and cons of which are a separate debate.
 
#20
It only goes back to the Civil War because it's battles have been fought by the Army and what we call the Army came into being with the New Model Army
 

Similar threads

Latest Threads

Top