On the 5th November 1854 a smaller British and (yes) French army beat off an assault by the Russians at Inkerman in the Crimea. It was known as “The Soldier’s Battle” as men fought small engagements due to poor visibility in dense fog.
The Russians had massed 32000 men on the Allied flank and headed for the 2700 man 2nd Division, commanded today by the aggressive Pennefather. Instead of falling back in the face of superior numbers, he advanced. The British had their rifles to thank this day as they took a terrible toll on the musket armed Russian Infantry, who were hemmed in by the valley’s bottle neck shape. The British 2nd Division pushed the Russians back onto their reinforcements and should have been routed by the Russians’ numbers, but the fog and the British Light Division saved them. Three successive Russian commanders were killed in this engagement.
The Russians other 15000 men approached and assailed the Sandbag Battery, but they were routed by 300 British defenders vaulting the wall, blunting the lead Battalions, who were then attacked in the flank. More Russian attacks ensured the Battery exchanged hands several times.
The British 4th Division was not as lucky. Arriving on the field, its flanking move was itself flanked and its commander, Cathcart, killed. This enabled the Russians to advance, but not for long. They were soon driven off by French units arriving from their camps and made no more headway.
The battle was lost and they had to withdraw.
This was the last time the Russians tried to defeat the Allied troops in the field. Despite this reverse, however, the Russian attack had seriously stalled the Allies from capturing Sevastopol. They had to instead, spend one harsh winter on the heights overlooking the city, before it fell in September of 1855.
The British suffered 2573 casualties, the French 1800 and the Russians 11959.
A Bastard takes England for himself today in 1066
-
Today, the 14th October, in 1066 the battle of Hastings was fought in southern England. The victor was the Norman Duke William, who had landed at Pevensey on the 28th September. The new King of England, Harold II, had recently beaten the Norwegian King Harald Hardrada at Stamford Bridge, near York, in the North.
Harold had chosen the site as it blocked the road to London. He probably had 8000 men, very few of whom were archers. His best men were in the front line, with the unarmoured Sussex Militia behind them. He had no cavalry and he awaited William’s attack atop a ridge.
William, who had 7500 men, opened the battle with his archers, but the slope and Saxon shields meant they were ineffectual in softening up Harold’s front line. Next he sent in his Infantry, who were met with all manner of missiles from Harold’s men. William’s men could not break into the Saxon line and soon his left flank force, Bretons for the most part, started to run. His centre, which was made up of Normans, had to withdraw slightly to compensate. His right were Franco Flemish troops. A part of Harold’s force followed the Bretons down the hill and were dispatched by fast moving Norman cavalry. Despite this reverse, Harold still looked strong.
William sent in his numerous cavalry more than once, but they too found it impossible to make a break in the line. Saxon double handed axes cleaved through many of the knights’ armour and into their mounts.
The turning point came when Harold was killed; his two younger brothers were already dead. It was late afternoon and the Saxons soon started to melt away. Pursuit was not possible as darkness fell early and the Norman Horse were tired from the day’s exertions. Before this happened there had been a scare in the Norman ranks, as a rumour started William was dead. It was unfounded and possibly this gave the Normans the Boost they needed.
William had indeed been lucky, as he had no option of retreat or reinforcements from across the Channel. -
What is a A b��t��d ?
-
Knowing history would help. It looks like the bad word detector noticed bast_ard and replaced it with b��t��d.
As always I appreciate the time you take to provide us with these wonderful factoids. Pity the site has to rely on a bad word detector which is easily circumvented using unicode.
-
Morning Malachi. No problem.
I never considered bastardo a swear word. It was meant derogatively, of course. I would have prefered a Saxon win over a Latin one. But then England’s history and great animosity with the French might never have been! -
Silly swear word detectors……
I was told the family history of the Churchill’s originated about that time. I really should verify this but a cousin went to somerset house 20 some odd years ago to do some research on the family tree. I was told the genesis was a French knight who was granted land in England after a victory in about this era. Shortly after that the family tree diverged to my fathers side and Winston’s side! Normally I would wish for English victories all the time but this once has a personal connection. Had the Saxons won there might never have been a Winston Churchill…or me!
GG, I disagree but understand your position. Is this better? “For a smart aleck…some people really are not that smart and have to ask silly questions for what should be an obvious answer in order to rain on good people’s parades”?
-
I was told the family history of the Churchill’s originated about that time. I really should verify this but a cousin went to somerset house 20 some odd years ago to do some research on the family tree. I was told the genesis was a French knight who was granted land in England after a victory in about this era. Shortly after that the family tree diverged to my fathers side and Winston’s side! Normally I would wish for English victories all the time but this once has a personal connection. Had the Saxons won there might never have been a Winston Churchill….or me!
Long live William!
I know more good things came of the invasion, than bad ones.
I was being naughty.
Suggested Topics
