Police confirming a white man has been arrested. Hmmm, do they always give the race of the arrested perpetrator?
They do, if White. If not, they urge the public not to speculate on the identity of the attacker.
In both instances, it's for reasons of "community relations".
In both instances, they probably have a point, no?
No, if the perpetrator is White, say it, if he is black, say, it if he Hispanic/Muslim/a Martian, say it. Honesty is the only method that doesn't rile people one way or the other
People who say things are two tier aren’t going to be feeling like they were wrong are they? I don’t use the term, but specifying ‘white British’ so early will only rile them
The accusation in Southport was one of "we weren't given enough information".
Now you have been given definitive details by the police you are moaning that you didn't want those details if the suspect is white
Fine if the policy has changed but I doubt it has.
After the Southport riots ( Farage Riots according to James O'Brexit) it would seem expedient to report ethnicity if that helped to avoid race riots.
Let’s wait until the next time it’s not a white male and see, shall we. I know where my money lies.
Do you not understand? If the police can cut Tommy Robinson fanbois off at the pass they might not set fire to Holiday Inns. I don't see a conspiracy, I see practicality.
Do you not understand? By not giving a ‘colour’ or nationality the police instantly drive a narrative. And here, when it’s a pissed off white chap, it’s out of the coppers mouth quicker than he can say ‘sorry serge, he fell down the stairs’.
The Boris fanbase thar is left I think is now more the politics-as-entertainmeht-crowd. Trump has these, but he also still has his believers.
I suspect Boris, and the diehards, think he’s far more popular than he actually is.
I agree. The Tories would be insane to rely on hypothetical polls. If Boris came back I reckon he'd be as unpopular as Starmer within three months. It would be like one of those ancient sitcoms unwisely revived - like Frasier. They never work
We all know his shtick, silly hair, bumbling manner, charming humour, annoying laziness, Greek. We've been there done that, maybe enjoyed it - and then paid the price. Also he is now, quite frankly, quite old. It's harder to pull off the funny man with mad hair stuff when the hair is all falling out
It would be an act of utter desperation and be seen as such, and rejected by voters
That's why he's a good London Mayor candidate. Let's test it, see if the magic is still there.
Cleverly is an 'OK' candidate. He's better than Susan. But he isn't a winning candidate. He has no chance of bringing over Reform voters, or non-political stay-at-home voters. Boris is a wild card. Boris going around in a Routemaster battlebus, reminding everyone how fun London was in his heyday, is dangerous to anyone. *Especially* if Labour select James Corden.
Boris could probably take London on FPTP with the tide going out on Labour and Reform slightly less popular there than other areas. But it doesn't seem to be what he's after - if he wants the top job back he hasn't got time to do it via London
Timings really aren't great. Next London Mayoral election isn't until 2028. In theory- though it seems unlikely- May 2028 is the earliest "not taking the piss" date for the next General Election.
Anyhoo- if Boris became Mayor again in 2028, he really can't ditch that for Parliament in the fifteen months that follow. And if he loses, even losing well, he is a Loser, and that doesn't help him.
(Which is the other thing. Boris's political gambles tend to be on sureish things. It's hard to see a Conservative candidate in London as one of those.)
So more likely he tries this stitch up as leader from outside patliament Hail Mary and intends to run in NW London at the next GE (either of his old seats - Uxbridge or Hendon, both available as lost in 2024) and as his neighbour will be Blackman in Harrow East he cosies up to this head of the 1922 committee and convinces him to run cover on any trouble Something like that brewing in his stupid fluffy head
The casualties were worse than the first day of the Battle of the Somme. Simply horrific.
Why isn't this more widely known?
I'm not quite sure that's accurate. There were more casualties at Waterloo than were suffered by the British Army on the first day of the Somme (around 60,000 against 57,000)
Yes, that's what I meant. And all achieved within less than three square miles with sword, sabre, bayonet, ball and shot; 18th and 19th Century weapons. And arguably worse than a machine gun bullet since such carnage would have been at close quarters, personal, brutal, and highly violent.
Simply horrific.
Horrific indeed. Your initial post got me trawling wiki to improve my understanding a bit and I came across this:
Carabinier-à-Cheval cuirass holed by a cannonball at Waterloo, belonging to Antoine Fauveau
You're not surviving that.
How anyone made it through ancient battles (or just life in general) is beyond me.
We moan, and of course we are not going to compare ourselves to this part of the past, but we don't know how good we have it.
From a recommendaiton on here I read 'By sword and fire: cruelty and atrocity in medieval warfare', which was a bit of an eye opener.
I've not read some of the author's other works, such as 'Blood cries afar' and 'Kill them all', about the Albigensian Crusade.
As much as I have read widely about wars and conflict, I find myself more drawn to the minutiae of everyday life. Simple things that we take for granted, such as fridges and freezers. How did people in Warminster in 1925 keep food? Back in medieval Warminster did everyone have really, really long days in midsummer? Did people keep,gardens with flowers back then? Or was it only ever useful plants?
Modern historians are probably be more interested in that stuff than traditional high politics and war, but of course it's harder to gather evidence on mundane life so on to the archaelogists I guess.
The casualties were worse than the first day of the Battle of the Somme. Simply horrific.
Why isn't this more widely known?
I'm not quite sure that's accurate. There were more casualties at Waterloo than were suffered by the British Army on the first day of the Somme (around 60,000 against 57,000)
Yes, that's what I meant. And all achieved within less than three square miles with sword, sabre, bayonet, ball and shot; 18th and 19th Century weapons. And arguably worse than a machine gun bullet since such carnage would have been at close quarters, personal, brutal, and highly violent.
Simply horrific.
Horrific indeed. Your initial post got me trawling wiki to improve my understanding a bit and I came across this:
Carabinier-à-Cheval cuirass holed by a cannonball at Waterloo, belonging to Antoine Fauveau
You're not surviving that.
How anyone made it through ancient battles (or just life in general) is beyond me.
We moan, and of course we are not going to compare ourselves to this part of the past, but we don't know how good we have it.
From a recommendaiton on here I read 'By sword and fire: cruelty and atrocity in medieval warfare', which was a bit of an eye opener.
I've not read some of the author's other works, such as 'Blood cries afar' and 'Kill them all', about the Albigensian Crusade.
You read about medieval warfare, and think how brutal it was.
Then, go back to the ancient world, or forward to the 17th century, and discover that things like the Albigensian crusade would be called Tuesday, in those periods.
Police confirming a white man has been arrested. Hmmm, do they always give the race of the arrested perpetrator?
They do, if White. If not, they urge the public not to speculate on the identity of the attacker.
In both instances, it's for reasons of "community relations".
In both instances, they probably have a point, no?
No, if the perpetrator is White, say it, if he is black, say, it if he Hispanic/Muslim/a Martian, say it. Honesty is the only method that doesn't rile people one way or the other
People who say things are two tier aren’t going to be feeling like they were wrong are they? I don’t use the term, but specifying ‘white British’ so early will only rile them
The accusation in Southport was one of "we weren't given enough information".
Now you have been given definitive details by the police you are moaning that you didn't want those details if the suspect is white
Fine if the policy has changed but I doubt it has.
After the Southport riots ( Farage Riots according to James O'Brexit) it would seem expedient to report ethnicity if that helped to avoid race riots.
Let’s wait until the next time it’s not a white male and see, shall we. I know where my money lies.
Do you not understand? If the police can cut Tommy Robinson fanbois off at the pass they might not set fire to Holiday Inns. I don't see a conspiracy, I see practicality.
Do you not understand? By not giving a ‘colour’ or nationality the police instantly drive a narrative. And here, when it’s a pissed off white chap, it’s out of the coppers mouth quicker than he can say ‘sorry serge, he fell down the stairs’.
Police confirming a white man has been arrested. Hmmm, do they always give the race of the arrested perpetrator?
They do, if White. If not, they urge the public not to speculate on the identity of the attacker.
In both instances, it's for reasons of "community relations".
In both instances, they probably have a point, no?
No, if the perpetrator is White, say it, if he is black, say, it if he Hispanic/Muslim/a Martian, say it. Honesty is the only method that doesn't rile people one way or the other
People who say things are two tier aren’t going to be feeling like they were wrong are they? I don’t use the term, but specifying ‘white British’ so early will only rile them
The accusation in Southport was one of "we weren't given enough information".
Now you have been given definitive details by the police you are moaning that you didn't want those details if the suspect is white
Fine if the policy has changed but I doubt it has.
After the Southport riots ( Farage Riots according to James O'Brexit) it would seem expedient to report ethnicity if that helped to avoid race riots.
Let’s wait until the next time it’s not a white male and see, shall we. I know where my money lies.
Do you not understand? If the police can cut Tommy Robinson fanbois off at the pass they might not set fire to Holiday Inns. I don't see a conspiracy, I see practicality.
Do you not understand? By not giving a ‘colour’ or nationality the police instantly drive a narrative. And here, when it’s a pissed off white chap, it’s out of the coppers mouth quicker than he can say ‘sorry serge, he fell down the stairs’.
Of course they are driving a narrative to prevent an unpleasant secondary story. Had the police been able to say earlier that Rudicabana was a Cardiff born UK national racists couldn't apply the asylum seeker label to the suspect thus avoiding Holiday Inns being set on fire.
The Boris fanbase thar is left I think is now more the politics-as-entertainmeht-crowd. Trump has these, but he also still has his believers.
I suspect Boris, and the diehards, think he’s far more popular than he actually is.
I agree. The Tories would be insane to rely on hypothetical polls. If Boris came back I reckon he'd be as unpopular as Starmer within three months. It would be like one of those ancient sitcoms unwisely revived - like Frasier. They never work
We all know his shtick, silly hair, bumbling manner, charming humour, annoying laziness, Greek. We've been there done that, maybe enjoyed it - and then paid the price. Also he is now, quite frankly, quite old. It's harder to pull off the funny man with mad hair stuff when the hair is all falling out
It would be an act of utter desperation and be seen as such, and rejected by voters
That's why he's a good London Mayor candidate. Let's test it, see if the magic is still there.
Cleverly is an 'OK' candidate. He's better than Susan. But he isn't a winning candidate. He has no chance of bringing over Reform voters, or non-political stay-at-home voters. Boris is a wild card. Boris going around in a Routemaster battlebus, reminding everyone how fun London was in his heyday, is dangerous to anyone. *Especially* if Labour select James Corden.
Boris could probably take London on FPTP with the tide going out on Labour and Reform slightly less popular there than other areas. But it doesn't seem to be what he's after - if he wants the top job back he hasn't got time to do it via London
Timings really aren't great. Next London Mayoral election isn't until 2028. In theory- though it seems unlikely- May 2028 is the earliest "not taking the piss" date for the next General Election.
Anyhoo- if Boris became Mayor again in 2028, he really can't ditch that for Parliament in the fifteen months that follow. And if he loses, even losing well, he is a Loser, and that doesn't help him.
(Which is the other thing. Boris's political gambles tend to be on sureish things. It's hard to see a Conservative candidate in London as one of those.)
So more likely he tries this stitch up as leader from outside patliament Hail Mary and intends to run in NW London at the next GE (either of his old seats - Uxbridge or Hendon, both available as lost in 2024) and as his neighbour will be Blackman in Harrow East he cosies up to this head of the 1922 committee and convinces him to run cover on any trouble Something like that brewing in his stupid fluffy head
That doesn't really work either.
Suppose Boris finds a constituency to take him on for 2028/9. And that he wins. Either the party has won, in which case their non-Boris leader is safe, or they have lost, and Boris gets five years as LotO.
None of which will stop him, or his acolytes, dreaming.
Police confirming a white man has been arrested. Hmmm, do they always give the race of the arrested perpetrator?
They do, if White. If not, they urge the public not to speculate on the identity of the attacker.
In both instances, it's for reasons of "community relations".
In both instances, they probably have a point, no?
No, if the perpetrator is White, say it, if he is black, say, it if he Hispanic/Muslim/a Martian, say it. Honesty is the only method that doesn't rile people one way or the other
People who say things are two tier aren’t going to be feeling like they were wrong are they? I don’t use the term, but specifying ‘white British’ so early will only rile them
The accusation in Southport was one of "we weren't given enough information".
Now you have been given definitive details by the police you are moaning that you didn't want those details if the suspect is white
Fine if the policy has changed but I doubt it has.
After the Southport riots ( Farage Riots according to James O'Brexit) it would seem expedient to report ethnicity if that helped to avoid race riots.
Let’s wait until the next time it’s not a white male and see, shall we. I know where my money lies.
Do you not understand? If the police can cut Tommy Robinson fanbois off at the pass they might not set fire to Holiday Inns. I don't see a conspiracy, I see practicality.
Do you not understand? By not giving a ‘colour’ or nationality the police instantly drive a narrative. And here, when it’s a pissed off white chap, it’s out of the coppers mouth quicker than he can say ‘sorry serge, he fell down the stairs’.
Don't the police have some kind of duty to protect lives and property? Seems to me that's the duty driving these actions, however much you dislike it.
In the short term our government will creak on, there’ll be budget day rabbits pulled from hats, and we’ll look at the minutiae of who is a winner or a loser on budget day. But by 2030 (probably made even worse by Net Zero promises) entitlements, health spending and other demand-led services will have grown from around 40% of the budget to over 50%. And it still won’t be enough. There will still be sorry tales of living on benefits, the NHS will still have waiting lists and mismanagement, and less ‘important’ services will have been cut to the bone. Charities, NGOs and assorted campaigners will still use misfortune as a lever to get politicians to promise more funding. And nobody will look at the government saying ‘it has no clothes on’. https://www.viewfromcullingworth.com/p/we-cant-afford-the-government?utm_source=share&utm_medium=android&r=4bs8h&triedRedirect=true
I think it's defeatist nonsense to encourage a tax-cutting and austerity agenda. Ignore such siren calls and invest!
Police confirming a white man has been arrested. Hmmm, do they always give the race of the arrested perpetrator?
Farage did in Southport when quoting Andrew Tate's X account. Unfortunately he was wrong.
Did he? What did he say?
That the perp was a Syrian (I believe) asylum seeker. Details he got from Andrew Tate's X account, which turned out to be bollocks.
Wasn't Farage bellyaching after Southport that the police weren't informing the public of the suspect's nationality?
Farage was a fucking disgrace on that. We saw what he is.
I see today that a Syrian asylum seeker stopped an attack by a German woman on multiple people in a train carriage there. A lesson not to prejudge people.
@Casino_Royale for most of the battle, there were about 70,000 each side, so more than one third were casualties.
Musket balls could inflict terrible wounds.
Ney’s cavalry charge was a failure, per se, but it forced the allied infantry to remain in squares, which were torn apart by French artillery.
Was he the one who supposedly had 5 horses shot from beneath him? At some point it's alright to take the hint God is giving you to not push your luck.
He was the “Bravest of the Brave.” He commanded his own firing squad.
The Napoleonic wars are full of men like Etienne Dulong, Thomas Cochrane, Ney, Captain O’Hare performing insane acts of bravery.
Nonsense, Richard Sharpe did it all, no room for others.
Cornwell does make a comment in the postscript of one book about how it was actually some other blokes, but that 'fictional heroes need suitable employment'.
Police confirming a white man has been arrested. Hmmm, do they always give the race of the arrested perpetrator?
They do, if White. If not, they urge the public not to speculate on the identity of the attacker.
In both instances, it's for reasons of "community relations".
In both instances, they probably have a point, no?
No, if the perpetrator is White, say it, if he is black, say, it if he Hispanic/Muslim/a Martian, say it. Honesty is the only method that doesn't rile people one way or the other
People who say things are two tier aren’t going to be feeling like they were wrong are they? I don’t use the term, but specifying ‘white British’ so early will only rile them
The accusation in Southport was one of "we weren't given enough information".
Now you have been given definitive details by the police you are moaning that you didn't want those details if the suspect is white
Fine if the policy has changed but I doubt it has.
After the Southport riots ( Farage Riots according to James O'Brexit) it would seem expedient to report ethnicity if that helped to avoid race riots.
Let’s wait until the next time it’s not a white male and see, shall we. I know where my money lies.
Do you not understand? If the police can cut Tommy Robinson fanbois off at the pass they might not set fire to Holiday Inns. I don't see a conspiracy, I see practicality.
Do you not understand? By not giving a ‘colour’ or nationality the police instantly drive a narrative. And here, when it’s a pissed off white chap, it’s out of the coppers mouth quicker than he can say ‘sorry serge, he fell down the stairs’.
Don't the police have some kind of duty to protect lives and property? Seems to me that's the duty driving these actions, however much you dislike it.
Preventing racists setting hotels on fire or avoiding upsetting sensitive white snowflakes, that's a bit of a conundrum.
Police confirming a white man has been arrested. Hmmm, do they always give the race of the arrested perpetrator?
They do, if White. If not, they urge the public not to speculate on the identity of the attacker.
In both instances, it's for reasons of "community relations".
In both instances, they probably have a point, no?
No, if the perpetrator is White, say it, if he is black, say, it if he Hispanic/Muslim/a Martian, say it. Honesty is the only method that doesn't rile people one way or the other
People who say things are two tier aren’t going to be feeling like they were wrong are they? I don’t use the term, but specifying ‘white British’ so early will only rile them
The accusation in Southport was one of "we weren't given enough information".
Now you have been given definitive details by the police you are moaning that you didn't want those details if the suspect is white
Fine if the policy has changed but I doubt it has.
After the Southport riots ( Farage Riots according to James O'Brexit) it would seem expedient to report ethnicity if that helped to avoid race riots.
Let’s wait until the next time it’s not a white male and see, shall we. I know where my money lies.
Do you not understand? If the police can cut Tommy Robinson fanbois off at the pass they might not set fire to Holiday Inns. I don't see a conspiracy, I see practicality.
Do you not understand? By not giving a ‘colour’ or nationality the police instantly drive a narrative. And here, when it’s a pissed off white chap, it’s out of the coppers mouth quicker than he can say ‘sorry serge, he fell down the stairs’.
Don't the police have some kind of duty to protect lives and property? Seems to me that's the duty driving these actions, however much you dislike it.
They well and truly fucked it over Southport. All they had to say was, "we know he wanted to shoot up his school last week, that's why we don't think it's terrorism." But that would have meant admitting they'd done nothing the previous week.
Police confirming a white man has been arrested. Hmmm, do they always give the race of the arrested perpetrator?
They do, if White. If not, they urge the public not to speculate on the identity of the attacker.
In both instances, it's for reasons of "community relations".
In both instances, they probably have a point, no?
No, if the perpetrator is White, say it, if he is black, say, it if he Hispanic/Muslim/a Martian, say it. Honesty is the only method that doesn't rile people one way or the other
People who say things are two tier aren’t going to be feeling like they were wrong are they? I don’t use the term, but specifying ‘white British’ so early will only rile them
The accusation in Southport was one of "we weren't given enough information".
Now you have been given definitive details by the police you are moaning that you didn't want those details if the suspect is white
Fine if the policy has changed but I doubt it has.
After the Southport riots ( Farage Riots according to James O'Brexit) it would seem expedient to report ethnicity if that helped to avoid race riots.
Let’s wait until the next time it’s not a white male and see, shall we. I know where my money lies.
Do you not understand? If the police can cut Tommy Robinson fanbois off at the pass they might not set fire to Holiday Inns. I don't see a conspiracy, I see practicality.
Do you not understand? By not giving a ‘colour’ or nationality the police instantly drive a narrative. And here, when it’s a pissed off white chap, it’s out of the coppers mouth quicker than he can say ‘sorry serge, he fell down the stairs’.
In the short term our government will creak on, there’ll be budget day rabbits pulled from hats, and we’ll look at the minutiae of who is a winner or a loser on budget day. But by 2030 (probably made even worse by Net Zero promises) entitlements, health spending and other demand-led services will have grown from around 40% of the budget to over 50%. And it still won’t be enough. There will still be sorry tales of living on benefits, the NHS will still have waiting lists and mismanagement, and less ‘important’ services will have been cut to the bone. Charities, NGOs and assorted campaigners will still use misfortune as a lever to get politicians to promise more funding. And nobody will look at the government saying ‘it has no clothes on’. https://www.viewfromcullingworth.com/p/we-cant-afford-the-government?utm_source=share&utm_medium=android&r=4bs8h&triedRedirect=true
I think it's defeatist nonsense to encourage a tax-cutting and austerity agenda. Ignore such siren calls and invest!
The solution or may not be the correct one, but I don't think we're thinking enough about the problem yet.
The Boris fanbase thar is left I think is now more the politics-as-entertainmeht-crowd. Trump has these, but he also still has his believers.
I suspect Boris, and the diehards, think he’s far more popular than he actually is.
I agree. The Tories would be insane to rely on hypothetical polls. If Boris came back I reckon he'd be as unpopular as Starmer within three months. It would be like one of those ancient sitcoms unwisely revived - like Frasier. They never work
We all know his shtick, silly hair, bumbling manner, charming humour, annoying laziness, Greek. We've been there done that, maybe enjoyed it - and then paid the price. Also he is now, quite frankly, quite old. It's harder to pull off the funny man with mad hair stuff when the hair is all falling out
It would be an act of utter desperation and be seen as such, and rejected by voters
That's why he's a good London Mayor candidate. Let's test it, see if the magic is still there.
Cleverly is an 'OK' candidate. He's better than Susan. But he isn't a winning candidate. He has no chance of bringing over Reform voters, or non-political stay-at-home voters. Boris is a wild card. Boris going around in a Routemaster battlebus, reminding everyone how fun London was in his heyday, is dangerous to anyone. *Especially* if Labour select James Corden.
Boris could probably take London on FPTP with the tide going out on Labour and Reform slightly less popular there than other areas. But it doesn't seem to be what he's after - if he wants the top job back he hasn't got time to do it via London
Timings really aren't great. Next London Mayoral election isn't until 2028. In theory- though it seems unlikely- May 2028 is the earliest "not taking the piss" date for the next General Election.
Anyhoo- if Boris became Mayor again in 2028, he really can't ditch that for Parliament in the fifteen months that follow. And if he loses, even losing well, he is a Loser, and that doesn't help him.
(Which is the other thing. Boris's political gambles tend to be on sureish things. It's hard to see a Conservative candidate in London as one of those.)
So more likely he tries this stitch up as leader from outside patliament Hail Mary and intends to run in NW London at the next GE (either of his old seats - Uxbridge or Hendon, both available as lost in 2024) and as his neighbour will be Blackman in Harrow East he cosies up to this head of the 1922 committee and convinces him to run cover on any trouble Something like that brewing in his stupid fluffy head
That doesn't really work either.
Suppose Boris finds a constituency to take him on for 2028/9. And that he wins. Either the party has won, in which case their non-Boris leader is safe, or they have lost, and Boris gets five years as LotO.
None of which will stop him, or his acolytes, dreaming.
No, the point is they change the rules so Boris is leader of the Conservative Party outside Parliament with (say) Jenrick acting as his voice in the Commons (leader of the parliamentary Party or some such). Once 2029 is called that all ceases (Jenrick is no longer an MP, hes a candidate) and Boris just runs as party leader in Uxbridge or wherever and if elected becomes leader in the Commons too or, heaven forfend, PM
The Boris fanbase thar is left I think is now more the politics-as-entertainmeht-crowd. Trump has these, but he also still has his believers.
I suspect Boris, and the diehards, think he’s far more popular than he actually is.
I agree. The Tories would be insane to rely on hypothetical polls. If Boris came back I reckon he'd be as unpopular as Starmer within three months. It would be like one of those ancient sitcoms unwisely revived - like Frasier. They never work
We all know his shtick, silly hair, bumbling manner, charming humour, annoying laziness, Greek. We've been there done that, maybe enjoyed it - and then paid the price. Also he is now, quite frankly, quite old. It's harder to pull off the funny man with mad hair stuff when the hair is all falling out
It would be an act of utter desperation and be seen as such, and rejected by voters
That's why he's a good London Mayor candidate. Let's test it, see if the magic is still there.
Cleverly is an 'OK' candidate. He's better than Susan. But he isn't a winning candidate. He has no chance of bringing over Reform voters, or non-political stay-at-home voters. Boris is a wild card. Boris going around in a Routemaster battlebus, reminding everyone how fun London was in his heyday, is dangerous to anyone. *Especially* if Labour select James Corden.
Boris could probably take London on FPTP with the tide going out on Labour and Reform slightly less popular there than other areas. But it doesn't seem to be what he's after - if he wants the top job back he hasn't got time to do it via London
Timings really aren't great. Next London Mayoral election isn't until 2028. In theory- though it seems unlikely- May 2028 is the earliest "not taking the piss" date for the next General Election.
Anyhoo- if Boris became Mayor again in 2028, he really can't ditch that for Parliament in the fifteen months that follow. And if he loses, even losing well, he is a Loser, and that doesn't help him.
(Which is the other thing. Boris's political gambles tend to be on sureish things. It's hard to see a Conservative candidate in London as one of those.)
So more likely he tries this stitch up as leader from outside patliament Hail Mary and intends to run in NW London at the next GE (either of his old seats - Uxbridge or Hendon, both available as lost in 2024) and as his neighbour will be Blackman in Harrow East he cosies up to this head of the 1922 committee and convinces him to run cover on any trouble Something like that brewing in his stupid fluffy head
That doesn't really work either.
Suppose Boris finds a constituency to take him on for 2028/9. And that he wins. Either the party has won, in which case their non-Boris leader is safe, or they have lost, and Boris gets five years as LotO.
None of which will stop him, or his acolytes, dreaming.
Exactly. He'll need a seat now, get someone to step aside for him.
But if he does that, and Reform have a massive campaign to win the seat, there's a danger at least that they split the vote and let a Labour or Lib Dem in.
Getting selected for London now would be good because it allows Boris to ponce around London (better than pounding the pavements of Yorkshire) slagging off Khan, and yet it doesn't seem disloyal or threatening to the current leader.
In the short term our government will creak on, there’ll be budget day rabbits pulled from hats, and we’ll look at the minutiae of who is a winner or a loser on budget day. But by 2030 (probably made even worse by Net Zero promises) entitlements, health spending and other demand-led services will have grown from around 40% of the budget to over 50%. And it still won’t be enough. There will still be sorry tales of living on benefits, the NHS will still have waiting lists and mismanagement, and less ‘important’ services will have been cut to the bone. Charities, NGOs and assorted campaigners will still use misfortune as a lever to get politicians to promise more funding. And nobody will look at the government saying ‘it has no clothes on’. https://www.viewfromcullingworth.com/p/we-cant-afford-the-government?utm_source=share&utm_medium=android&r=4bs8h&triedRedirect=true
I think it's defeatist nonsense to encourage a tax-cutting and austerity agenda. Ignore such siren calls and invest!
The Boris fanbase thar is left I think is now more the politics-as-entertainmeht-crowd. Trump has these, but he also still has his believers.
I suspect Boris, and the diehards, think he’s far more popular than he actually is.
I agree. The Tories would be insane to rely on hypothetical polls. If Boris came back I reckon he'd be as unpopular as Starmer within three months. It would be like one of those ancient sitcoms unwisely revived - like Frasier. They never work
We all know his shtick, silly hair, bumbling manner, charming humour, annoying laziness, Greek. We've been there done that, maybe enjoyed it - and then paid the price. Also he is now, quite frankly, quite old. It's harder to pull off the funny man with mad hair stuff when the hair is all falling out
It would be an act of utter desperation and be seen as such, and rejected by voters
That's why he's a good London Mayor candidate. Let's test it, see if the magic is still there.
Cleverly is an 'OK' candidate. He's better than Susan. But he isn't a winning candidate. He has no chance of bringing over Reform voters, or non-political stay-at-home voters. Boris is a wild card. Boris going around in a Routemaster battlebus, reminding everyone how fun London was in his heyday, is dangerous to anyone. *Especially* if Labour select James Corden.
Boris could probably take London on FPTP with the tide going out on Labour and Reform slightly less popular there than other areas. But it doesn't seem to be what he's after - if he wants the top job back he hasn't got time to do it via London
Timings really aren't great. Next London Mayoral election isn't until 2028. In theory- though it seems unlikely- May 2028 is the earliest "not taking the piss" date for the next General Election.
Anyhoo- if Boris became Mayor again in 2028, he really can't ditch that for Parliament in the fifteen months that follow. And if he loses, even losing well, he is a Loser, and that doesn't help him.
(Which is the other thing. Boris's political gambles tend to be on sureish things. It's hard to see a Conservative candidate in London as one of those.)
So more likely he tries this stitch up as leader from outside patliament Hail Mary and intends to run in NW London at the next GE (either of his old seats - Uxbridge or Hendon, both available as lost in 2024) and as his neighbour will be Blackman in Harrow East he cosies up to this head of the 1922 committee and convinces him to run cover on any trouble Something like that brewing in his stupid fluffy head
That doesn't really work either.
Suppose Boris finds a constituency to take him on for 2028/9. And that he wins. Either the party has won, in which case their non-Boris leader is safe, or they have lost, and Boris gets five years as LotO.
None of which will stop him, or his acolytes, dreaming.
Exactly. He'll need a seat now, get someone to step aside for him.
But if he does that, and Reform have a massive campaign to win the seat, there's a danger at least that they split the vote and let a Labour or Lib Dem in.
Getting selected for London now would be good because it allows Boris to ponce around London (better than pounding the pavements of Yorkshire) slagging off Khan, and yet it doesn't seem disloyal or threatening to the current leader.
These are all reasons he'll try and be leader from the imperial sofa without the hassle of a by election or campaigning as Mayor. He wants to rock up to Uxbridge in 2029 for the formality of being elected to parliament and becoming Dogbert Prime again
In the short term our government will creak on, there’ll be budget day rabbits pulled from hats, and we’ll look at the minutiae of who is a winner or a loser on budget day. But by 2030 (probably made even worse by Net Zero promises) entitlements, health spending and other demand-led services will have grown from around 40% of the budget to over 50%. And it still won’t be enough. There will still be sorry tales of living on benefits, the NHS will still have waiting lists and mismanagement, and less ‘important’ services will have been cut to the bone. Charities, NGOs and assorted campaigners will still use misfortune as a lever to get politicians to promise more funding. And nobody will look at the government saying ‘it has no clothes on’. https://www.viewfromcullingworth.com/p/we-cant-afford-the-government?utm_source=share&utm_medium=android&r=4bs8h&triedRedirect=true
I think it's defeatist nonsense to encourage a tax-cutting and austerity agenda. Ignore such siren calls and invest!
Investments can go down as well as up.
Government investments more than most.
Reminds me of the advice of my uncle who was for many years an IFA: "The value of your shares can fall as well as plummet."
Police confirming a white man has been arrested. Hmmm, do they always give the race of the arrested perpetrator?
They do, if White. If not, they urge the public not to speculate on the identity of the attacker.
In both instances, it's for reasons of "community relations".
In both instances, they probably have a point, no?
No, if the perpetrator is White, say it, if he is black, say, it if he Hispanic/Muslim/a Martian, say it. Honesty is the only method that doesn't rile people one way or the other
People who say things are two tier aren’t going to be feeling like they were wrong are they? I don’t use the term, but specifying ‘white British’ so early will only rile them
Yes, they will be riled that they cannot falsely claim he was some other ethnicity.
Police confirming a white man has been arrested. Hmmm, do they always give the race of the arrested perpetrator?
They do, if White. If not, they urge the public not to speculate on the identity of the attacker.
In both instances, it's for reasons of "community relations".
In both instances, they probably have a point, no?
No, if the perpetrator is White, say it, if he is black, say, it if he Hispanic/Muslim/a Martian, say it. Honesty is the only method that doesn't rile people one way or the other
People who say things are two tier aren’t going to be feeling like they were wrong are they? I don’t use the term, but specifying ‘white British’ so early will only rile them
The accusation in Southport was one of "we weren't given enough information".
Now you have been given definitive details by the police you are moaning that you didn't want those details if the suspect is white
Fine if the policy has changed but I doubt it has.
After the Southport riots ( Farage Riots according to James O'Brexit) it would seem expedient to report ethnicity if that helped to avoid race riots.
Let’s wait until the next time it’s not a white male and see, shall we. I know where my money lies.
Do you not understand? If the police can cut Tommy Robinson fanbois off at the pass they might not set fire to Holiday Inns. I don't see a conspiracy, I see practicality.
Do you not understand? By not giving a ‘colour’ or nationality the police instantly drive a narrative. And here, when it’s a pissed off white chap, it’s out of the coppers mouth quicker than he can say ‘sorry serge, he fell down the stairs’.
Of course they are driving a narrative to prevent an unpleasant secondary story. Had the police been able to say earlier that Rudicabana was a Cardiff born UK national racists couldn't apply the asylum seeker label to the suspect thus avoiding Holiday Inns being set on fire.
Another one from the ‘I came into politics to do nice stuff and not take difficult decisions’
Get onto the Bank of England. Fire up the printer.
We have had seventeen years of difficult decisions and it always seemed to be "take money from poor people and working people and don't tax the rich or pensioners". Can we stop making difficult decisions please?
Let’s make easy decisions, fire up the printer, give everyone what they want and live with the consequences.
These so called UC/PIP benefits cuts sees the rise in benefits over this Parliament increase by circa 26 billion instead of 33 Billion. It’s slowing the rate of growth.
Getting rid of the WFA is the right decision.
Reforming the triple lock would be the right decision, reforming care costs is something needed that has been kicked down the road.
Due to thresholds being frozen more pensioners are paying tax and the change to inheritance rules on SIPPs, rightly, penalises wealthy pensioners using them as a vehicle to transfer wealth.
They got the WASPE decision right, will they fold on that one ?
Since Covid there has been a massive spike in people on out of work benefits. 25% of Brummies for example. How is that sustainable ? Who pays for it ?
Given the size of our debt I'd like to see someone analyse what would be the consequences of a full on red-blooded default - especially if queued up with a couple of years beforehand of not needing extra day-to-day borrowing.
@Casino_Royale for most of the battle, there were about 70,000 each side, so more than one third were casualties.
Musket balls could inflict terrible wounds.
Ney’s cavalry charge was a failure, per se, but it forced the allied infantry to remain in squares, which were torn apart by French artillery.
Was he the one who supposedly had 5 horses shot from beneath him? At some point it's alright to take the hint God is giving you to not push your luck.
He was the “Bravest of the Brave.” He commanded his own firing squad.
The Napoleonic wars are full of men like Etienne Dulong, Thomas Cochrane, Ney, Captain O’Hare performing insane acts of bravery.
Nonsense, Richard Sharpe did it all, no room for others.
Cornwell does make a comment in the postscript of one book about how it was actually some other blokes, but that 'fictional heroes need suitable employment'.
Patrick O’Brian copy & pasta’d Cochrane and a few others, added some Jane Austen and a bit of James Bond.
Most of the battles were straight out of after action reports.
The casualties were worse than the first day of the Battle of the Somme. Simply horrific.
Why isn't this more widely known?
I'm not quite sure that's accurate. There were more casualties at Waterloo than were suffered by the British Army on the first day of the Somme (around 60,000 against 57,000)
Yes, that's what I meant. And all achieved within less than three square miles with sword, sabre, bayonet, ball and shot; 18th and 19th Century weapons. And arguably worse than a machine gun bullet since such carnage would have been at close quarters, personal, brutal, and highly violent.
Simply horrific.
Horrific indeed. Your initial post got me trawling wiki to improve my understanding a bit and I came across this:
Carabinier-à-Cheval cuirass holed by a cannonball at Waterloo, belonging to Antoine Fauveau
You're not surviving that.
How anyone made it through ancient battles (or just life in general) is beyond me.
We moan, and of course we are not going to compare ourselves to this part of the past, but we don't know how good we have it.
From a recommendaiton on here I read 'By sword and fire: cruelty and atrocity in medieval warfare', which was a bit of an eye opener.
I've not read some of the author's other works, such as 'Blood cries afar' and 'Kill them all', about the Albigensian Crusade.
As much as I have read widely about wars and conflict, I find myself more drawn to the minutiae of everyday life. Simple things that we take for granted, such as fridges and freezers. How did people in Warminster in 1925 keep food? Back in medieval Warminster did everyone have really, really long days in midsummer? Did people keep,gardens with flowers back then? Or was it only ever useful plants?
Modern historians are probably be more interested in that stuff than traditional high politics and war, but of course it's harder to gather evidence on mundane life so on to the archaelogists I guess.
In the short term our government will creak on, there’ll be budget day rabbits pulled from hats, and we’ll look at the minutiae of who is a winner or a loser on budget day. But by 2030 (probably made even worse by Net Zero promises) entitlements, health spending and other demand-led services will have grown from around 40% of the budget to over 50%. And it still won’t be enough. There will still be sorry tales of living on benefits, the NHS will still have waiting lists and mismanagement, and less ‘important’ services will have been cut to the bone. Charities, NGOs and assorted campaigners will still use misfortune as a lever to get politicians to promise more funding. And nobody will look at the government saying ‘it has no clothes on’. https://www.viewfromcullingworth.com/p/we-cant-afford-the-government?utm_source=share&utm_medium=android&r=4bs8h&triedRedirect=true
I think it's defeatist nonsense to encourage a tax-cutting and austerity agenda. Ignore such siren calls and invest!
The solution or may not be the correct one, but I don't think we're thinking enough about the problem yet.
One change I’ve noticed over my adult life, is that debate has changed from “Can we afford this?” to goal based “We must do x, y and z”.
This has broken local government finance. As a start.
Police confirming a white man has been arrested. Hmmm, do they always give the race of the arrested perpetrator?
They do, if White. If not, they urge the public not to speculate on the identity of the attacker.
In both instances, it's for reasons of "community relations".
In both instances, they probably have a point, no?
No, if the perpetrator is White, say it, if he is black, say, it if he Hispanic/Muslim/a Martian, say it. Honesty is the only method that doesn't rile people one way or the other
People who say things are two tier aren’t going to be feeling like they were wrong are they? I don’t use the term, but specifying ‘white British’ so early will only rile them
The accusation in Southport was one of "we weren't given enough information".
Now you have been given definitive details by the police you are moaning that you didn't want those details if the suspect is white
Fine if the policy has changed but I doubt it has.
After the Southport riots ( Farage Riots according to James O'Brexit) it would seem expedient to report ethnicity if that helped to avoid race riots.
Let’s wait until the next time it’s not a white male and see, shall we. I know where my money lies.
Do you not understand? If the police can cut Tommy Robinson fanbois off at the pass they might not set fire to Holiday Inns. I don't see a conspiracy, I see practicality.
Do you not understand? By not giving a ‘colour’ or nationality the police instantly drive a narrative. And here, when it’s a pissed off white chap, it’s out of the coppers mouth quicker than he can say ‘sorry serge, he fell down the stairs’.
Don't the police have some kind of duty to protect lives and property? Seems to me that's the duty driving these actions, however much you dislike it.
Preventing racists setting hotels on fire or avoiding upsetting sensitive white snowflakes, that's a bit of a conundrum.
It’s all so simple to you, isn’t it. Nuance is important. As soon as the police take the decision not to give ethnicity, sex in certain cases not others then they feed a narrative. The idiots that post stupid things on twitter will leap on things like this. It might be that they have risked assessed everything and decided it’s the best approach, but I don’t think that’s what’s going on. Why are they so keen today to release information? Why not the usual no comment? They have a difficult job, for sure, but they don’t help themselves.
@Casino_Royale for most of the battle, there were about 70,000 each side, so more than one third were casualties.
Musket balls could inflict terrible wounds.
Ney’s cavalry charge was a failure, per se, but it forced the allied infantry to remain in squares, which were torn apart by French artillery.
Was he the one who supposedly had 5 horses shot from beneath him? At some point it's alright to take the hint God is giving you to not push your luck.
He was the “Bravest of the Brave.” He commanded his own firing squad.
The Napoleonic wars are full of men like Etienne Dulong, Thomas Cochrane, Ney, Captain O’Hare performing insane acts of bravery.
Nonsense, Richard Sharpe did it all, no room for others.
Cornwell does make a comment in the postscript of one book about how it was actually some other blokes, but that 'fictional heroes need suitable employment'.
Patrick O’Brian copy & pasta’d Cochrane and a few others, added some Jane Austen and a bit of James Bond.
Most of the battles were straight out of after action reports.
I've tried getting in to the Aubrey-Maturin books, but couldn't manage it.
I know that in Sharpe's Waterloo Cornwell talks about how he originally came up with some actual plot for the novel, but he realised that basically the battle was sufficient story in itself.
Police confirming a white man has been arrested. Hmmm, do they always give the race of the arrested perpetrator?
They do, if White. If not, they urge the public not to speculate on the identity of the attacker.
In both instances, it's for reasons of "community relations".
In both instances, they probably have a point, no?
No, if the perpetrator is White, say it, if he is black, say, it if he Hispanic/Muslim/a Martian, say it. Honesty is the only method that doesn't rile people one way or the other
People who say things are two tier aren’t going to be feeling like they were wrong are they? I don’t use the term, but specifying ‘white British’ so early will only rile them
The accusation in Southport was one of "we weren't given enough information".
Now you have been given definitive details by the police you are moaning that you didn't want those details if the suspect is white
Fine if the policy has changed but I doubt it has.
After the Southport riots ( Farage Riots according to James O'Brexit) it would seem expedient to report ethnicity if that helped to avoid race riots.
Let’s wait until the next time it’s not a white male and see, shall we. I know where my money lies.
Do you not understand? If the police can cut Tommy Robinson fanbois off at the pass they might not set fire to Holiday Inns. I don't see a conspiracy, I see practicality.
Do you not understand? By not giving a ‘colour’ or nationality the police instantly drive a narrative. And here, when it’s a pissed off white chap, it’s out of the coppers mouth quicker than he can say ‘sorry serge, he fell down the stairs’.
Of course they are driving a narrative to prevent an unpleasant secondary story. Had the police been able to say earlier that Rudicabana was a Cardiff born UK national racists couldn't apply the asylum seeker label to the suspect thus avoiding Holiday Inns being set on fire.
This a seems pretty simple.
So why didn’t they?
Was the information available? I assume Rudicabana wasn't especially cooperative having just brutally murdered three innocent little girls. "I'm not an asylum seeker, I'm from Cardiff".
Actually in defence of @Sunil_Prasannan given the ID of the alleged perp, 53 year old White man, it is not entirely impossible that this really IS some crazed Evertonian, driven mad by Liverpool's success
People get violently passionate about football, we all know that. People die in football fights all the time - they get stabbed and the like. This could - however impossible it seems - be one step up from that
Thanks for the "intervention" @Leon, though I feel I must apologise for my comment.
I love Liverpool, especially its architectural and railway heritage. I was there less than a year ago, if only to knock off that teeny, weeny extension to Merseyrail to the new Headbolt Lane station from my Bouquet List. Merseyrail is of course notable for its third rail electrification, like the Southern Railway network in south London and southern England, though "interestingly" the Headbolt Lane extension was left unelectrified - a subset of the new Merseyrail trains have battery power available.
Possibly the worlds most incomprehensible ever apology.
@Casino_Royale for most of the battle, there were about 70,000 each side, so more than one third were casualties.
Musket balls could inflict terrible wounds.
Ney’s cavalry charge was a failure, per se, but it forced the allied infantry to remain in squares, which were torn apart by French artillery.
Was he the one who supposedly had 5 horses shot from beneath him? At some point it's alright to take the hint God is giving you to not push your luck.
He was the “Bravest of the Brave.” He commanded his own firing squad.
The Napoleonic wars are full of men like Etienne Dulong, Thomas Cochrane, Ney, Captain O’Hare performing insane acts of bravery.
Nonsense, Richard Sharpe did it all, no room for others.
Cornwell does make a comment in the postscript of one book about how it was actually some other blokes, but that 'fictional heroes need suitable employment'.
Patrick O’Brian copy & pasta’d Cochrane and a few others, added some Jane Austen and a bit of James Bond.
Most of the battles were straight out of after action reports.
The casualties were worse than the first day of the Battle of the Somme. Simply horrific.
Why isn't this more widely known?
I'm not quite sure that's accurate. There were more casualties at Waterloo than were suffered by the British Army on the first day of the Somme (around 60,000 against 57,000)
Yes, that's what I meant. And all achieved within less than three square miles with sword, sabre, bayonet, ball and shot; 18th and 19th Century weapons. And arguably worse than a machine gun bullet since such carnage would have been at close quarters, personal, brutal, and highly violent.
Simply horrific.
Horrific indeed. Your initial post got me trawling wiki to improve my understanding a bit and I came across this:
Carabinier-à-Cheval cuirass holed by a cannonball at Waterloo, belonging to Antoine Fauveau
You're not surviving that.
How anyone made it through ancient battles (or just life in general) is beyond me.
We moan, and of course we are not going to compare ourselves to this part of the past, but we don't know how good we have it.
From a recommendaiton on here I read 'By sword and fire: cruelty and atrocity in medieval warfare', which was a bit of an eye opener.
I've not read some of the author's other works, such as 'Blood cries afar' and 'Kill them all', about the Albigensian Crusade.
As much as I have read widely about wars and conflict, I find myself more drawn to the minutiae of everyday life. Simple things that we take for granted, such as fridges and freezers. How did people in Warminster in 1925 keep food? Back in medieval Warminster did everyone have really, really long days in midsummer? Did people keep,gardens with flowers back then? Or was it only ever useful plants?
Modern historians are probably be more interested in that stuff than traditional high politics and war, but of course it's harder to gather evidence on mundane life so on to the archaelogists I guess.
"How did people in Warminster in 1925 keep food?"
The larder.
How long can you keep a cooked chicken in a larder? These are the thoughts which keep me awake at night (or rather these are the thoughts I think about when I can’t sleep).
@Casino_Royale for most of the battle, there were about 70,000 each side, so more than one third were casualties.
Musket balls could inflict terrible wounds.
Ney’s cavalry charge was a failure, per se, but it forced the allied infantry to remain in squares, which were torn apart by French artillery.
Was he the one who supposedly had 5 horses shot from beneath him? At some point it's alright to take the hint God is giving you to not push your luck.
He was the “Bravest of the Brave.” He commanded his own firing squad.
The Napoleonic wars are full of men like Etienne Dulong, Thomas Cochrane, Ney, Captain O’Hare performing insane acts of bravery.
Nonsense, Richard Sharpe did it all, no room for others.
Cornwell does make a comment in the postscript of one book about how it was actually some other blokes, but that 'fictional heroes need suitable employment'.
Patrick O’Brian copy & pasta’d Cochrane and a few others, added some Jane Austen and a bit of James Bond.
Most of the battles were straight out of after action reports.
I've tried getting in to the Aubrey-Maturin books, but couldn't manage it.
I know that in Sharpe's Waterloo Cornwell talks about how he originally came up with some actual plot for the novel, but he realised that basically the battle was sufficient story in itself.
They are very densely layered - the early ones. Later, he kept writing the same thing.
A trick that he over used is that the more important an event, the fewer words it gets. In one the last books, a long term majorish character dies. In half a sentence.
So you have to read very carefully and repeat to get everything that is actually happening.
Another one from the ‘I came into politics to do nice stuff and not take difficult decisions’
Get onto the Bank of England. Fire up the printer.
We have had seventeen years of difficult decisions and it always seemed to be "take money from poor people and working people and don't tax the rich or pensioners". Can we stop making difficult decisions please?
Let’s make easy decisions, fire up the printer, give everyone what they want and live with the consequences.
These so called UC/PIP benefits cuts sees the rise in benefits over this Parliament increase by circa 26 billion instead of 33 Billion. It’s slowing the rate of growth.
Getting rid of the WFA is the right decision.
Reforming the triple lock would be the right decision, reforming care costs is something needed that has been kicked down the road.
Due to thresholds being frozen more pensioners are paying tax and the change to inheritance rules on SIPPs, rightly, penalises wealthy pensioners using them as a vehicle to transfer wealth.
They got the WASPE decision right, will they fold on that one ?
Since Covid there has been a massive spike in people on out of work benefits. 25% of Brummies for example. How is that sustainable ? Who pays for it ?
Given the size of our debt I'd like to see someone analyse what would be the consequences of a full on red-blooded default - especially if queued up with a couple of years beforehand of not needing extra day-to-day borrowing.
A lot less than that of Japan, Italy, the US, or Singapore for that matter; just a shade over France's.
@Casino_Royale for most of the battle, there were about 70,000 each side, so more than one third were casualties.
Musket balls could inflict terrible wounds.
Ney’s cavalry charge was a failure, per se, but it forced the allied infantry to remain in squares, which were torn apart by French artillery.
Was he the one who supposedly had 5 horses shot from beneath him? At some point it's alright to take the hint God is giving you to not push your luck.
He was the “Bravest of the Brave.” He commanded his own firing squad.
The Napoleonic wars are full of men like Etienne Dulong, Thomas Cochrane, Ney, Captain O’Hare performing insane acts of bravery.
Nonsense, Richard Sharpe did it all, no room for others.
Cornwell does make a comment in the postscript of one book about how it was actually some other blokes, but that 'fictional heroes need suitable employment'.
Patrick O’Brian copy & pasta’d Cochrane and a few others, added some Jane Austen and a bit of James Bond.
Most of the battles were straight out of after action reports.
I've tried getting in to the Aubrey-Maturin books, but couldn't manage it.
I know that in Sharpe's Waterloo Cornwell talks about how he originally came up with some actual plot for the novel, but he realised that basically the battle was sufficient story in itself.
Yes there is a side diversion about some dodgy royalty exposing his troops in line to cavalry three times, but otherwise it might as well be a history book. IIRC Sharpe managed to be one of very few men to fight at Waterloo and Trafalgar.
The casualties were worse than the first day of the Battle of the Somme. Simply horrific.
Why isn't this more widely known?
I'm not quite sure that's accurate. There were more casualties at Waterloo than were suffered by the British Army on the first day of the Somme (around 60,000 against 57,000)
Yes, that's what I meant. And all achieved within less than three square miles with sword, sabre, bayonet, ball and shot; 18th and 19th Century weapons. And arguably worse than a machine gun bullet since such carnage would have been at close quarters, personal, brutal, and highly violent.
Simply horrific.
Horrific indeed. Your initial post got me trawling wiki to improve my understanding a bit and I came across this:
Carabinier-à-Cheval cuirass holed by a cannonball at Waterloo, belonging to Antoine Fauveau
You're not surviving that.
How anyone made it through ancient battles (or just life in general) is beyond me.
We moan, and of course we are not going to compare ourselves to this part of the past, but we don't know how good we have it.
From a recommendaiton on here I read 'By sword and fire: cruelty and atrocity in medieval warfare', which was a bit of an eye opener.
I've not read some of the author's other works, such as 'Blood cries afar' and 'Kill them all', about the Albigensian Crusade.
As much as I have read widely about wars and conflict, I find myself more drawn to the minutiae of everyday life. Simple things that we take for granted, such as fridges and freezers. How did people in Warminster in 1925 keep food? Back in medieval Warminster did everyone have really, really long days in midsummer? Did people keep,gardens with flowers back then? Or was it only ever useful plants?
Modern historians are probably be more interested in that stuff than traditional high politics and war, but of course it's harder to gather evidence on mundane life so on to the archaelogists I guess.
"How did people in Warminster in 1925 keep food?"
The larder.
How long can you keep a cooked chicken in a larder? These are the thoughts which keep me awake at night (or rather these are the thoughts I think about when I can’t sleep).
A surprisingly long time. Larders were low-tech fridges; on the north side of your house, well ventilated, with stone which retained the cold. Not great inthe height of summer but quite efficient nine months of the year.
Police confirming a white man has been arrested. Hmmm, do they always give the race of the arrested perpetrator?
They do, if White. If not, they urge the public not to speculate on the identity of the attacker.
In both instances, it's for reasons of "community relations".
In both instances, they probably have a point, no?
No, if the perpetrator is White, say it, if he is black, say, it if he Hispanic/Muslim/a Martian, say it. Honesty is the only method that doesn't rile people one way or the other
People who say things are two tier aren’t going to be feeling like they were wrong are they? I don’t use the term, but specifying ‘white British’ so early will only rile them
The accusation in Southport was one of "we weren't given enough information".
Now you have been given definitive details by the police you are moaning that you didn't want those details if the suspect is white
Fine if the policy has changed but I doubt it has.
After the Southport riots ( Farage Riots according to James O'Brexit) it would seem expedient to report ethnicity if that helped to avoid race riots.
Let’s wait until the next time it’s not a white male and see, shall we. I know where my money lies.
Do you not understand? If the police can cut Tommy Robinson fanbois off at the pass they might not set fire to Holiday Inns. I don't see a conspiracy, I see practicality.
Do you not understand? By not giving a ‘colour’ or nationality the police instantly drive a narrative. And here, when it’s a pissed off white chap, it’s out of the coppers mouth quicker than he can say ‘sorry serge, he fell down the stairs’.
Of course they are driving a narrative to prevent an unpleasant secondary story. Had the police been able to say earlier that Rudicabana was a Cardiff born UK national racists couldn't apply the asylum seeker label to the suspect thus avoiding Holiday Inns being set on fire.
This a seems pretty simple.
So why didn’t they?
Was the information available? I assume Rudicabana wasn't especially cooperative having just brutally murdered three innocent little girls. "I'm not an asylum seeker, I'm from Cardiff".
Police confirming a white man has been arrested. Hmmm, do they always give the race of the arrested perpetrator?
They do, if White. If not, they urge the public not to speculate on the identity of the attacker.
In both instances, it's for reasons of "community relations".
In both instances, they probably have a point, no?
No, if the perpetrator is White, say it, if he is black, say, it if he Hispanic/Muslim/a Martian, say it. Honesty is the only method that doesn't rile people one way or the other
People who say things are two tier aren’t going to be feeling like they were wrong are they? I don’t use the term, but specifying ‘white British’ so early will only rile them
The accusation in Southport was one of "we weren't given enough information".
Now you have been given definitive details by the police you are moaning that you didn't want those details if the suspect is white
Fine if the policy has changed but I doubt it has.
After the Southport riots ( Farage Riots according to James O'Brexit) it would seem expedient to report ethnicity if that helped to avoid race riots.
Let’s wait until the next time it’s not a white male and see, shall we. I know where my money lies.
Do you not understand? If the police can cut Tommy Robinson fanbois off at the pass they might not set fire to Holiday Inns. I don't see a conspiracy, I see practicality.
Do you not understand? By not giving a ‘colour’ or nationality the police instantly drive a narrative. And here, when it’s a pissed off white chap, it’s out of the coppers mouth quicker than he can say ‘sorry serge, he fell down the stairs’.
Don't the police have some kind of duty to protect lives and property? Seems to me that's the duty driving these actions, however much you dislike it.
Preventing racists setting hotels on fire or avoiding upsetting sensitive white snowflakes, that's a bit of a conundrum.
It’s all so simple to you, isn’t it. Nuance is important. As soon as the police take the decision not to give ethnicity, sex in certain cases not others then they feed a narrative. The idiots that post stupid things on twitter will leap on things like this. It might be that they have risked assessed everything and decided it’s the best approach, but I don’t think that’s what’s going on. Why are they so keen today to release information? Why not the usual no comment? They have a difficult job, for sure, but they don’t help themselves.
I don't think you can avoid the idiots that post stupid things on Twitter. If you don't say anything, they make something up. If you say something, they'll misinterpret it, accuse you of a two-tier approach because you didn't say something last time, or just say you're lying. They're not playing fair in any sense. It's just conspiracy theory after conspiracy theory.
@Casino_Royale for most of the battle, there were about 70,000 each side, so more than one third were casualties.
Musket balls could inflict terrible wounds.
Ney’s cavalry charge was a failure, per se, but it forced the allied infantry to remain in squares, which were torn apart by French artillery.
Was he the one who supposedly had 5 horses shot from beneath him? At some point it's alright to take the hint God is giving you to not push your luck.
He was the “Bravest of the Brave.” He commanded his own firing squad.
The Napoleonic wars are full of men like Etienne Dulong, Thomas Cochrane, Ney, Captain O’Hare performing insane acts of bravery.
Nonsense, Richard Sharpe did it all, no room for others.
Cornwell does make a comment in the postscript of one book about how it was actually some other blokes, but that 'fictional heroes need suitable employment'.
Patrick O’Brian copy & pasta’d Cochrane and a few others, added some Jane Austen and a bit of James Bond.
The casualties were worse than the first day of the Battle of the Somme. Simply horrific.
Why isn't this more widely known?
I'm not quite sure that's accurate. There were more casualties at Waterloo than were suffered by the British Army on the first day of the Somme (around 60,000 against 57,000)
Yes, that's what I meant. And all achieved within less than three square miles with sword, sabre, bayonet, ball and shot; 18th and 19th Century weapons. And arguably worse than a machine gun bullet since such carnage would have been at close quarters, personal, brutal, and highly violent.
Simply horrific.
Horrific indeed. Your initial post got me trawling wiki to improve my understanding a bit and I came across this:
Carabinier-à-Cheval cuirass holed by a cannonball at Waterloo, belonging to Antoine Fauveau
You're not surviving that.
How anyone made it through ancient battles (or just life in general) is beyond me.
We moan, and of course we are not going to compare ourselves to this part of the past, but we don't know how good we have it.
From a recommendaiton on here I read 'By sword and fire: cruelty and atrocity in medieval warfare', which was a bit of an eye opener.
I've not read some of the author's other works, such as 'Blood cries afar' and 'Kill them all', about the Albigensian Crusade.
As much as I have read widely about wars and conflict, I find myself more drawn to the minutiae of everyday life. Simple things that we take for granted, such as fridges and freezers. How did people in Warminster in 1925 keep food? Back in medieval Warminster did everyone have really, really long days in midsummer? Did people keep,gardens with flowers back then? Or was it only ever useful plants?
Modern historians are probably be more interested in that stuff than traditional high politics and war, but of course it's harder to gather evidence on mundane life so on to the archaelogists I guess.
"How did people in Warminster in 1925 keep food?"
The larder.
How long can you keep a cooked chicken in a larder? These are the thoughts which keep me awake at night (or rather these are the thoughts I think about when I can’t sleep).
2 hours if the temperature is above 40f
Edit - technically 'until bacteria spoils it' - bacteria growth starts between 40f and 140f - 2 hours is the recommended safe time 'out of fridge' for cooked meat. If the larder is sub 40f you're good
Police confirming a white man has been arrested. Hmmm, do they always give the race of the arrested perpetrator?
They do, if White. If not, they urge the public not to speculate on the identity of the attacker.
In both instances, it's for reasons of "community relations".
In both instances, they probably have a point, no?
No, if the perpetrator is White, say it, if he is black, say, it if he Hispanic/Muslim/a Martian, say it. Honesty is the only method that doesn't rile people one way or the other
People who say things are two tier aren’t going to be feeling like they were wrong are they? I don’t use the term, but specifying ‘white British’ so early will only rile them
The accusation in Southport was one of "we weren't given enough information".
Now you have been given definitive details by the police you are moaning that you didn't want those details if the suspect is white
Fine if the policy has changed but I doubt it has.
After the Southport riots ( Farage Riots according to James O'Brexit) it would seem expedient to report ethnicity if that helped to avoid race riots.
Let’s wait until the next time it’s not a white male and see, shall we. I know where my money lies.
Do you not understand? If the police can cut Tommy Robinson fanbois off at the pass they might not set fire to Holiday Inns. I don't see a conspiracy, I see practicality.
Do you not understand? By not giving a ‘colour’ or nationality the police instantly drive a narrative. And here, when it’s a pissed off white chap, it’s out of the coppers mouth quicker than he can say ‘sorry serge, he fell down the stairs’.
Don't the police have some kind of duty to protect lives and property? Seems to me that's the duty driving these actions, however much you dislike it.
Preventing racists setting hotels on fire or avoiding upsetting sensitive white snowflakes, that's a bit of a conundrum.
It’s all so simple to you, isn’t it. Nuance is important. As soon as the police take the decision not to give ethnicity, sex in certain cases not others then they feed a narrative. The idiots that post stupid things on twitter will leap on things like this. It might be that they have risked assessed everything and decided it’s the best approach, but I don’t think that’s what’s going on. Why are they so keen today to release information? Why not the usual no comment? They have a difficult job, for sure, but they don’t help themselves.
As you know I am a bit simple. It seems I'm in good company, mind.
The casualties were worse than the first day of the Battle of the Somme. Simply horrific.
Why isn't this more widely known?
I'm not quite sure that's accurate. There were more casualties at Waterloo than were suffered by the British Army on the first day of the Somme (around 60,000 against 57,000)
Yes, that's what I meant. And all achieved within less than three square miles with sword, sabre, bayonet, ball and shot; 18th and 19th Century weapons. And arguably worse than a machine gun bullet since such carnage would have been at close quarters, personal, brutal, and highly violent.
Simply horrific.
Horrific indeed. Your initial post got me trawling wiki to improve my understanding a bit and I came across this:
Carabinier-à-Cheval cuirass holed by a cannonball at Waterloo, belonging to Antoine Fauveau
You're not surviving that.
How anyone made it through ancient battles (or just life in general) is beyond me.
We moan, and of course we are not going to compare ourselves to this part of the past, but we don't know how good we have it.
From a recommendaiton on here I read 'By sword and fire: cruelty and atrocity in medieval warfare', which was a bit of an eye opener.
I've not read some of the author's other works, such as 'Blood cries afar' and 'Kill them all', about the Albigensian Crusade.
As much as I have read widely about wars and conflict, I find myself more drawn to the minutiae of everyday life. Simple things that we take for granted, such as fridges and freezers. How did people in Warminster in 1925 keep food? Back in medieval Warminster did everyone have really, really long days in midsummer? Did people keep,gardens with flowers back then? Or was it only ever useful plants?
Modern historians are probably be more interested in that stuff than traditional high politics and war, but of course it's harder to gather evidence on mundane life so on to the archaelogists I guess.
"How did people in Warminster in 1925 keep food?"
The larder.
How long can you keep a cooked chicken in a larder? These are the thoughts which keep me awake at night (or rather these are the thoughts I think about when I can’t sleep).
A surprisingly long time. Larders were low-tech fridges; on the north side of your house, well ventilated, with stone which retained the cold. Not great inthe height of summer but quite efficient nine months of the year.
Also, a lot of potting and smoking of meat went on.
Actually in defence of @Sunil_Prasannan given the ID of the alleged perp, 53 year old White man, it is not entirely impossible that this really IS some crazed Evertonian, driven mad by Liverpool's success
People get violently passionate about football, we all know that. People die in football fights all the time - they get stabbed and the like. This could - however impossible it seems - be one step up from that
Thanks for the "intervention" @Leon, though I feel I must apologise for my comment.
I love Liverpool, especially its architectural and railway heritage. I was there less than a year ago, if only to knock off that teeny, weeny extension to Merseyrail to the new Headbolt Lane station from my Bouquet List. Merseyrail is of course notable for its third rail electrification, like the Southern Railway network in south London and southern England, though "interestingly" the Headbolt Lane extension was left unelectrified - a subset of the new Merseyrail trains have battery power available.
Possibly the worlds most incomprehensible ever apology.
@Casino_Royale for most of the battle, there were about 70,000 each side, so more than one third were casualties.
Musket balls could inflict terrible wounds.
Ney’s cavalry charge was a failure, per se, but it forced the allied infantry to remain in squares, which were torn apart by French artillery.
Was he the one who supposedly had 5 horses shot from beneath him? At some point it's alright to take the hint God is giving you to not push your luck.
He was the “Bravest of the Brave.” He commanded his own firing squad.
The Napoleonic wars are full of men like Etienne Dulong, Thomas Cochrane, Ney, Captain O’Hare performing insane acts of bravery.
Nonsense, Richard Sharpe did it all, no room for others.
Cornwell does make a comment in the postscript of one book about how it was actually some other blokes, but that 'fictional heroes need suitable employment'.
Patrick O’Brian copy & pasta’d Cochrane and a few others, added some Jane Austen and a bit of James Bond.
@Casino_Royale for most of the battle, there were about 70,000 each side, so more than one third were casualties.
Musket balls could inflict terrible wounds.
Ney’s cavalry charge was a failure, per se, but it forced the allied infantry to remain in squares, which were torn apart by French artillery.
Was he the one who supposedly had 5 horses shot from beneath him? At some point it's alright to take the hint God is giving you to not push your luck.
He was the “Bravest of the Brave.” He commanded his own firing squad.
The Napoleonic wars are full of men like Etienne Dulong, Thomas Cochrane, Ney, Captain O’Hare performing insane acts of bravery.
Nonsense, Richard Sharpe did it all, no room for others.
Cornwell does make a comment in the postscript of one book about how it was actually some other blokes, but that 'fictional heroes need suitable employment'.
Patrick O’Brian copy & pasta’d Cochrane and a few others, added some Jane Austen and a bit of James Bond.
Most of the battles were straight out of after action reports.
I've tried getting in to the Aubrey-Maturin books, but couldn't manage it.
I know that in Sharpe's Waterloo Cornwell talks about how he originally came up with some actual plot for the novel, but he realised that basically the battle was sufficient story in itself.
Yes there is a side diversion about some dodgy royalty exposing his troops in line to cavalry three times, but otherwise it might as well be a history book. IIRC Sharpe managed to be one of very few men to fight at Waterloo and Trafalgar.
There are thought to have been two. One French, one Spanish.
Ironically the Spanish one (Miguel de Alava) was fighting against the British at Trafalgar, and for them at Waterloo...
Police confirming a white man has been arrested. Hmmm, do they always give the race of the arrested perpetrator?
They do, if White. If not, they urge the public not to speculate on the identity of the attacker.
In both instances, it's for reasons of "community relations".
In both instances, they probably have a point, no?
No, if the perpetrator is White, say it, if he is black, say, it if he Hispanic/Muslim/a Martian, say it. Honesty is the only method that doesn't rile people one way or the other
People who say things are two tier aren’t going to be feeling like they were wrong are they? I don’t use the term, but specifying ‘white British’ so early will only rile them
The accusation in Southport was one of "we weren't given enough information".
Now you have been given definitive details by the police you are moaning that you didn't want those details if the suspect is white
Fine if the policy has changed but I doubt it has.
After the Southport riots ( Farage Riots according to James O'Brexit) it would seem expedient to report ethnicity if that helped to avoid race riots.
Let’s wait until the next time it’s not a white male and see, shall we. I know where my money lies.
Do you not understand? If the police can cut Tommy Robinson fanbois off at the pass they might not set fire to Holiday Inns. I don't see a conspiracy, I see practicality.
Do you not understand? By not giving a ‘colour’ or nationality the police instantly drive a narrative. And here, when it’s a pissed off white chap, it’s out of the coppers mouth quicker than he can say ‘sorry serge, he fell down the stairs’.
Don't the police have some kind of duty to protect lives and property? Seems to me that's the duty driving these actions, however much you dislike it.
Preventing racists setting hotels on fire or avoiding upsetting sensitive white snowflakes, that's a bit of a conundrum.
It’s all so simple to you, isn’t it. Nuance is important. As soon as the police take the decision not to give ethnicity, sex in certain cases not others then they feed a narrative. The idiots that post stupid things on twitter will leap on things like this. It might be that they have risked assessed everything and decided it’s the best approach, but I don’t think that’s what’s going on. Why are they so keen today to release information? Why not the usual no comment? They have a difficult job, for sure, but they don’t help themselves.
As you know I am a bit simple. It seems I'm in good company, mind.
A question that no journalist will ask of the police would be why did they release this information so quickly. It’s almost so they can say “look - not an Islamic terrorist”. No one wants riots. Last summers scenes were appalling, as was the actions of the murderous bastard who started it. But if we are to get past the idea of two tier policing, then the powers that be ought to think a bit harder about communication strategy.
Off all recent topics: But possibly hopeful. This NYT article: "Can the U.K.’s Military Spending Push Revive Its Small Towns, Too? Britain is spending billions of pounds more on defense, but wants the money to go beyond nuclear submarines to improve local jobs and prosperity. Barrow-in-Furness may be the model." source$: https://www.nytimes.com/2025/05/12/business/uk-military-spending-economy.html
(I don't recall having read anything by Eshe Nelson before, so I can't say how credible she is.)
Be interested to see thoughts, from many of you, on the possibilities.
Off all recent topics: But possibly hopeful. This NYT article: "Can the U.K.’s Military Spending Push Revive Its Small Towns, Too? Britain is spending billions of pounds more on defense, but wants the money to go beyond nuclear submarines to improve local jobs and prosperity. Barrow-in-Furness may be the model." source$: https://www.nytimes.com/2025/05/12/business/uk-military-spending-economy.html
(I don't recall having read anything by Eshe Nelson before, so I can't say how credible she is.)
Be interested to see thoughts, from many of you, on the possibilities.
Police confirming a white man has been arrested. Hmmm, do they always give the race of the arrested perpetrator?
They do, if White. If not, they urge the public not to speculate on the identity of the attacker.
In both instances, it's for reasons of "community relations".
In both instances, they probably have a point, no?
No, if the perpetrator is White, say it, if he is black, say, it if he Hispanic/Muslim/a Martian, say it. Honesty is the only method that doesn't rile people one way or the other
People who say things are two tier aren’t going to be feeling like they were wrong are they? I don’t use the term, but specifying ‘white British’ so early will only rile them
The accusation in Southport was one of "we weren't given enough information".
Now you have been given definitive details by the police you are moaning that you didn't want those details if the suspect is white
Fine if the policy has changed but I doubt it has.
After the Southport riots ( Farage Riots according to James O'Brexit) it would seem expedient to report ethnicity if that helped to avoid race riots.
Let’s wait until the next time it’s not a white male and see, shall we. I know where my money lies.
Do you not understand? If the police can cut Tommy Robinson fanbois off at the pass they might not set fire to Holiday Inns. I don't see a conspiracy, I see practicality.
Do you not understand? By not giving a ‘colour’ or nationality the police instantly drive a narrative. And here, when it’s a pissed off white chap, it’s out of the coppers mouth quicker than he can say ‘sorry serge, he fell down the stairs’.
Of course they are driving a narrative to prevent an unpleasant secondary story. Had the police been able to say earlier that Rudicabana was a Cardiff born UK national racists couldn't apply the asylum seeker label to the suspect thus avoiding Holiday Inns being set on fire.
This a seems pretty simple.
So why didn’t they?
Was the information available? I assume Rudicabana wasn't especially cooperative having just brutally murdered three innocent little girls. "I'm not an asylum seeker, I'm from Cardiff".
He was pretty clearly a person of colour.
Christ on a bike. What advantage was there in saying Rudicabana was not white?
Dickhead racists would put two and two together and reach the answer of asylum seekers. By saying this suspect is white the racists small brains might assume, well that's ok he's not an asylum seeker so we don't have to set a hotel on fire
The casualties were worse than the first day of the Battle of the Somme. Simply horrific.
Why isn't this more widely known?
I'm not quite sure that's accurate. There were more casualties at Waterloo than were suffered by the British Army on the first day of the Somme (around 60,000 against 57,000)
Yes, that's what I meant. And all achieved within less than three square miles with sword, sabre, bayonet, ball and shot; 18th and 19th Century weapons. And arguably worse than a machine gun bullet since such carnage would have been at close quarters, personal, brutal, and highly violent.
Simply horrific.
Horrific indeed. Your initial post got me trawling wiki to improve my understanding a bit and I came across this:
Carabinier-à-Cheval cuirass holed by a cannonball at Waterloo, belonging to Antoine Fauveau
You're not surviving that.
How anyone made it through ancient battles (or just life in general) is beyond me.
We moan, and of course we are not going to compare ourselves to this part of the past, but we don't know how good we have it.
From a recommendaiton on here I read 'By sword and fire: cruelty and atrocity in medieval warfare', which was a bit of an eye opener.
I've not read some of the author's other works, such as 'Blood cries afar' and 'Kill them all', about the Albigensian Crusade.
As much as I have read widely about wars and conflict, I find myself more drawn to the minutiae of everyday life. Simple things that we take for granted, such as fridges and freezers. How did people in Warminster in 1925 keep food? Back in medieval Warminster did everyone have really, really long days in midsummer? Did people keep,gardens with flowers back then? Or was it only ever useful plants?
Modern historians are probably be more interested in that stuff than traditional high politics and war, but of course it's harder to gather evidence on mundane life so on to the archaelogists I guess.
"How did people in Warminster in 1925 keep food?"
The larder.
With a marble shelf for perishables. Also, daily shopping, milk delivered daily, and fewer exotic foods. Cabbage keeps better when it’s not converted to coleslaw.
NDP have been denied official party status in Canada with their 7 MPs. They'll feel aggrieved by that and it makes a no confidence on Carney at some future date a little more likely as its probably ruined them so beware the (not a) party scorned
The casualties were worse than the first day of the Battle of the Somme. Simply horrific.
Why isn't this more widely known?
I'm not quite sure that's accurate. There were more casualties at Waterloo than were suffered by the British Army on the first day of the Somme (around 60,000 against 57,000)
Yes, that's what I meant. And all achieved within less than three square miles with sword, sabre, bayonet, ball and shot; 18th and 19th Century weapons. And arguably worse than a machine gun bullet since such carnage would have been at close quarters, personal, brutal, and highly violent.
Simply horrific.
Horrific indeed. Your initial post got me trawling wiki to improve my understanding a bit and I came across this:
Carabinier-à-Cheval cuirass holed by a cannonball at Waterloo, belonging to Antoine Fauveau
You're not surviving that.
How anyone made it through ancient battles (or just life in general) is beyond me.
We moan, and of course we are not going to compare ourselves to this part of the past, but we don't know how good we have it.
From a recommendaiton on here I read 'By sword and fire: cruelty and atrocity in medieval warfare', which was a bit of an eye opener.
I've not read some of the author's other works, such as 'Blood cries afar' and 'Kill them all', about the Albigensian Crusade.
As much as I have read widely about wars and conflict, I find myself more drawn to the minutiae of everyday life. Simple things that we take for granted, such as fridges and freezers. How did people in Warminster in 1925 keep food? Back in medieval Warminster did everyone have really, really long days in midsummer? Did people keep,gardens with flowers back then? Or was it only ever useful plants?
Modern historians are probably be more interested in that stuff than traditional high politics and war, but of course it's harder to gather evidence on mundane life so on to the archaelogists I guess.
"How did people in Warminster in 1925 keep food?"
The larder.
How long can you keep a cooked chicken in a larder? These are the thoughts which keep me awake at night (or rather these are the thoughts I think about when I can’t sleep).
A surprisingly long time. Larders were low-tech fridges; on the north side of your house, well ventilated, with stone which retained the cold. Not great inthe height of summer but quite efficient nine months of the year.
Also, a lot of potting and smoking of meat went on.
My gran still had an operating larder when I was a child in 1970s.
NDP have been denied official party status in Canada with their 7 MPs. They'll feel aggrieved by that and it makes a no confidence on Carney at some future date a little more likely as its probably ruined them so beware the (not a) party scorned
The casualties were worse than the first day of the Battle of the Somme. Simply horrific.
Why isn't this more widely known?
I'm not quite sure that's accurate. There were more casualties at Waterloo than were suffered by the British Army on the first day of the Somme (around 60,000 against 57,000)
Yes, that's what I meant. And all achieved within less than three square miles with sword, sabre, bayonet, ball and shot; 18th and 19th Century weapons. And arguably worse than a machine gun bullet since such carnage would have been at close quarters, personal, brutal, and highly violent.
Simply horrific.
Horrific indeed. Your initial post got me trawling wiki to improve my understanding a bit and I came across this:
Carabinier-à-Cheval cuirass holed by a cannonball at Waterloo, belonging to Antoine Fauveau
You're not surviving that.
How anyone made it through ancient battles (or just life in general) is beyond me.
We moan, and of course we are not going to compare ourselves to this part of the past, but we don't know how good we have it.
From a recommendaiton on here I read 'By sword and fire: cruelty and atrocity in medieval warfare', which was a bit of an eye opener.
I've not read some of the author's other works, such as 'Blood cries afar' and 'Kill them all', about the Albigensian Crusade.
As much as I have read widely about wars and conflict, I find myself more drawn to the minutiae of everyday life. Simple things that we take for granted, such as fridges and freezers. How did people in Warminster in 1925 keep food? Back in medieval Warminster did everyone have really, really long days in midsummer? Did people keep,gardens with flowers back then? Or was it only ever useful plants?
Modern historians are probably be more interested in that stuff than traditional high politics and war, but of course it's harder to gather evidence on mundane life so on to the archaelogists I guess.
"How did people in Warminster in 1925 keep food?"
The larder.
With a marble shelf for perishables. Also, daily shopping, milk delivered daily, and fewer exotic foods. Cabbage keeps better when it’s not converted to coleslaw.
Sauerkraut is the way with cabbage. I have a butter bell to keep nice spreadable proper butter outside the fridge
The casualties were worse than the first day of the Battle of the Somme. Simply horrific.
Why isn't this more widely known?
I'm not quite sure that's accurate. There were more casualties at Waterloo than were suffered by the British Army on the first day of the Somme (around 60,000 against 57,000)
Yes, that's what I meant. And all achieved within less than three square miles with sword, sabre, bayonet, ball and shot; 18th and 19th Century weapons. And arguably worse than a machine gun bullet since such carnage would have been at close quarters, personal, brutal, and highly violent.
Simply horrific.
Horrific indeed. Your initial post got me trawling wiki to improve my understanding a bit and I came across this:
Carabinier-à-Cheval cuirass holed by a cannonball at Waterloo, belonging to Antoine Fauveau
You're not surviving that.
How anyone made it through ancient battles (or just life in general) is beyond me.
We moan, and of course we are not going to compare ourselves to this part of the past, but we don't know how good we have it.
From a recommendaiton on here I read 'By sword and fire: cruelty and atrocity in medieval warfare', which was a bit of an eye opener.
I've not read some of the author's other works, such as 'Blood cries afar' and 'Kill them all', about the Albigensian Crusade.
As much as I have read widely about wars and conflict, I find myself more drawn to the minutiae of everyday life. Simple things that we take for granted, such as fridges and freezers. How did people in Warminster in 1925 keep food? Back in medieval Warminster did everyone have really, really long days in midsummer? Did people keep,gardens with flowers back then? Or was it only ever useful plants?
Modern historians are probably be more interested in that stuff than traditional high politics and war, but of course it's harder to gather evidence on mundane life so on to the archaelogists I guess.
"How did people in Warminster in 1925 keep food?"
The larder.
How long can you keep a cooked chicken in a larder? These are the thoughts which keep me awake at night (or rather these are the thoughts I think about when I can’t sleep).
2 hours if the temperature is above 40f
Edit - technically 'until bacteria spoils it' - bacteria growth starts between 40f and 140f - 2 hours is the recommended safe time 'out of fridge' for cooked meat. If the larder is sub 40f you're good
40f, so about 4.5°C? Most fridges fail that test.
If it's a properly cooked chicken the inside will be sterile until bacteria colonise the surface and find their way in. I think we're a bit over cautious these days.
I am sure my mum used to cook up a batch of sausage rolls before Christmas, stick them in the larder, and we still be eating them on New Year's Day. No ill effects.
Police confirming a white man has been arrested. Hmmm, do they always give the race of the arrested perpetrator?
They do, if White. If not, they urge the public not to speculate on the identity of the attacker.
In both instances, it's for reasons of "community relations".
In both instances, they probably have a point, no?
No, if the perpetrator is White, say it, if he is black, say, it if he Hispanic/Muslim/a Martian, say it. Honesty is the only method that doesn't rile people one way or the other
People who say things are two tier aren’t going to be feeling like they were wrong are they? I don’t use the term, but specifying ‘white British’ so early will only rile them
The accusation in Southport was one of "we weren't given enough information".
Now you have been given definitive details by the police you are moaning that you didn't want those details if the suspect is white
Fine if the policy has changed but I doubt it has.
After the Southport riots ( Farage Riots according to James O'Brexit) it would seem expedient to report ethnicity if that helped to avoid race riots.
Let’s wait until the next time it’s not a white male and see, shall we. I know where my money lies.
Do you not understand? If the police can cut Tommy Robinson fanbois off at the pass they might not set fire to Holiday Inns. I don't see a conspiracy, I see practicality.
Do you not understand? By not giving a ‘colour’ or nationality the police instantly drive a narrative. And here, when it’s a pissed off white chap, it’s out of the coppers mouth quicker than he can say ‘sorry serge, he fell down the stairs’.
Of course they are driving a narrative to prevent an unpleasant secondary story. Had the police been able to say earlier that Rudicabana was a Cardiff born UK national racists couldn't apply the asylum seeker label to the suspect thus avoiding Holiday Inns being set on fire.
This a seems pretty simple.
So why didn’t they?
Was the information available? I assume Rudicabana wasn't especially cooperative having just brutally murdered three innocent little girls. "I'm not an asylum seeker, I'm from Cardiff".
He was pretty clearly a person of colour.
Christ on a bike. What advantage was there in saying Rudicabana was not white?
Dickhead racists would put two and two together and reach the answer of asylum seekers. By saying this suspect is white the racists small brains might assume, well that's ok he's not an asylum seeker so we don't have to set a hotel on fire
Christ on a bike. What advantage was there in saying they have arrested a white British male? They almost always say when it’s a white arrest, so when no ethnicity is given the assumption is naturally that it’s not white.
NDP have been denied official party status in Canada with their 7 MPs. They'll feel aggrieved by that and it makes a no confidence on Carney at some future date a little more likely as its probably ruined them so beware the (not a) party scorned
The casualties were worse than the first day of the Battle of the Somme. Simply horrific.
Why isn't this more widely known?
I'm not quite sure that's accurate. There were more casualties at Waterloo than were suffered by the British Army on the first day of the Somme (around 60,000 against 57,000)
Yes, that's what I meant. And all achieved within less than three square miles with sword, sabre, bayonet, ball and shot; 18th and 19th Century weapons. And arguably worse than a machine gun bullet since such carnage would have been at close quarters, personal, brutal, and highly violent.
Simply horrific.
Horrific indeed. Your initial post got me trawling wiki to improve my understanding a bit and I came across this:
Carabinier-à-Cheval cuirass holed by a cannonball at Waterloo, belonging to Antoine Fauveau
You're not surviving that.
How anyone made it through ancient battles (or just life in general) is beyond me.
We moan, and of course we are not going to compare ourselves to this part of the past, but we don't know how good we have it.
From a recommendaiton on here I read 'By sword and fire: cruelty and atrocity in medieval warfare', which was a bit of an eye opener.
I've not read some of the author's other works, such as 'Blood cries afar' and 'Kill them all', about the Albigensian Crusade.
As much as I have read widely about wars and conflict, I find myself more drawn to the minutiae of everyday life. Simple things that we take for granted, such as fridges and freezers. How did people in Warminster in 1925 keep food? Back in medieval Warminster did everyone have really, really long days in midsummer? Did people keep,gardens with flowers back then? Or was it only ever useful plants?
Modern historians are probably be more interested in that stuff than traditional high politics and war, but of course it's harder to gather evidence on mundane life so on to the archaelogists I guess.
"How did people in Warminster in 1925 keep food?"
The larder.
How long can you keep a cooked chicken in a larder? These are the thoughts which keep me awake at night (or rather these are the thoughts I think about when I can’t sleep).
A surprisingly long time. Larders were low-tech fridges; on the north side of your house, well ventilated, with stone which retained the cold. Not great inthe height of summer but quite efficient nine months of the year.
Also, a lot of potting and smoking of meat went on.
My gran still had an operating larder when I was a child in 1970s.
I currently have a larder (though I call it a pantry, apparently incorrectly on a technical basis, according to one of the first comments I ever made on PB).
The casualties were worse than the first day of the Battle of the Somme. Simply horrific.
Why isn't this more widely known?
I'm not quite sure that's accurate. There were more casualties at Waterloo than were suffered by the British Army on the first day of the Somme (around 60,000 against 57,000)
Yes, that's what I meant. And all achieved within less than three square miles with sword, sabre, bayonet, ball and shot; 18th and 19th Century weapons. And arguably worse than a machine gun bullet since such carnage would have been at close quarters, personal, brutal, and highly violent.
Simply horrific.
Horrific indeed. Your initial post got me trawling wiki to improve my understanding a bit and I came across this:
Carabinier-à-Cheval cuirass holed by a cannonball at Waterloo, belonging to Antoine Fauveau
You're not surviving that.
How anyone made it through ancient battles (or just life in general) is beyond me.
We moan, and of course we are not going to compare ourselves to this part of the past, but we don't know how good we have it.
From a recommendaiton on here I read 'By sword and fire: cruelty and atrocity in medieval warfare', which was a bit of an eye opener.
I've not read some of the author's other works, such as 'Blood cries afar' and 'Kill them all', about the Albigensian Crusade.
As much as I have read widely about wars and conflict, I find myself more drawn to the minutiae of everyday life. Simple things that we take for granted, such as fridges and freezers. How did people in Warminster in 1925 keep food? Back in medieval Warminster did everyone have really, really long days in midsummer? Did people keep,gardens with flowers back then? Or was it only ever useful plants?
Modern historians are probably be more interested in that stuff than traditional high politics and war, but of course it's harder to gather evidence on mundane life so on to the archaelogists I guess.
"How did people in Warminster in 1925 keep food?"
The larder.
How long can you keep a cooked chicken in a larder? These are the thoughts which keep me awake at night (or rather these are the thoughts I think about when I can’t sleep).
A surprisingly long time. Larders were low-tech fridges; on the north side of your house, well ventilated, with stone which retained the cold. Not great inthe height of summer but quite efficient nine months of the year.
Also, a lot of potting and smoking of meat went on.
My gran still had an operating larder when I was a child in 1970s.
We had one in our semi when I was a child, although the marble shelf had come out and it was more a pantry by this time - but it had the mesh window etc and was great for storing shelf stable food
The casualties were worse than the first day of the Battle of the Somme. Simply horrific.
Why isn't this more widely known?
I'm not quite sure that's accurate. There were more casualties at Waterloo than were suffered by the British Army on the first day of the Somme (around 60,000 against 57,000)
Yes, that's what I meant. And all achieved within less than three square miles with sword, sabre, bayonet, ball and shot; 18th and 19th Century weapons. And arguably worse than a machine gun bullet since such carnage would have been at close quarters, personal, brutal, and highly violent.
Simply horrific.
Horrific indeed. Your initial post got me trawling wiki to improve my understanding a bit and I came across this:
Carabinier-à-Cheval cuirass holed by a cannonball at Waterloo, belonging to Antoine Fauveau
You're not surviving that.
How anyone made it through ancient battles (or just life in general) is beyond me.
We moan, and of course we are not going to compare ourselves to this part of the past, but we don't know how good we have it.
From a recommendaiton on here I read 'By sword and fire: cruelty and atrocity in medieval warfare', which was a bit of an eye opener.
I've not read some of the author's other works, such as 'Blood cries afar' and 'Kill them all', about the Albigensian Crusade.
As much as I have read widely about wars and conflict, I find myself more drawn to the minutiae of everyday life. Simple things that we take for granted, such as fridges and freezers. How did people in Warminster in 1925 keep food? Back in medieval Warminster did everyone have really, really long days in midsummer? Did people keep,gardens with flowers back then? Or was it only ever useful plants?
Modern historians are probably be more interested in that stuff than traditional high politics and war, but of course it's harder to gather evidence on mundane life so on to the archaelogists I guess.
"How did people in Warminster in 1925 keep food?"
The larder.
How long can you keep a cooked chicken in a larder? These are the thoughts which keep me awake at night (or rather these are the thoughts I think about when I can’t sleep).
2 hours if the temperature is above 40f
Edit - technically 'until bacteria spoils it' - bacteria growth starts between 40f and 140f - 2 hours is the recommended safe time 'out of fridge' for cooked meat. If the larder is sub 40f you're good
40f, so about 4.5°C? Most fridges fail that test.
If it's a properly cooked chicken the inside will be sterile until bacteria colonise the surface and find their way in. I think we're a bit over cautious these days.
I am sure my mum used to cook up a batch of sausage rolls before Christmas, stick them in the larder, and we still be eating them on New Year's Day. No ill effects.
Yes my mother still does that and just puts them in a tin in the kitchen. They probably don't last until New Year's Day but not far off. Never caused me any gastric distress.
NDP have been denied official party status in Canada with their 7 MPs. They'll feel aggrieved by that and it makes a no confidence on Carney at some future date a little more likely as its probably ruined them so beware the (not a) party scorned
The casualties were worse than the first day of the Battle of the Somme. Simply horrific.
Why isn't this more widely known?
I'm not quite sure that's accurate. There were more casualties at Waterloo than were suffered by the British Army on the first day of the Somme (around 60,000 against 57,000)
Yes, that's what I meant. And all achieved within less than three square miles with sword, sabre, bayonet, ball and shot; 18th and 19th Century weapons. And arguably worse than a machine gun bullet since such carnage would have been at close quarters, personal, brutal, and highly violent.
Simply horrific.
Horrific indeed. Your initial post got me trawling wiki to improve my understanding a bit and I came across this:
Carabinier-à-Cheval cuirass holed by a cannonball at Waterloo, belonging to Antoine Fauveau
You're not surviving that.
How anyone made it through ancient battles (or just life in general) is beyond me.
We moan, and of course we are not going to compare ourselves to this part of the past, but we don't know how good we have it.
From a recommendaiton on here I read 'By sword and fire: cruelty and atrocity in medieval warfare', which was a bit of an eye opener.
I've not read some of the author's other works, such as 'Blood cries afar' and 'Kill them all', about the Albigensian Crusade.
As much as I have read widely about wars and conflict, I find myself more drawn to the minutiae of everyday life. Simple things that we take for granted, such as fridges and freezers. How did people in Warminster in 1925 keep food? Back in medieval Warminster did everyone have really, really long days in midsummer? Did people keep,gardens with flowers back then? Or was it only ever useful plants?
Modern historians are probably be more interested in that stuff than traditional high politics and war, but of course it's harder to gather evidence on mundane life so on to the archaelogists I guess.
"How did people in Warminster in 1925 keep food?"
The larder.
How long can you keep a cooked chicken in a larder? These are the thoughts which keep me awake at night (or rather these are the thoughts I think about when I can’t sleep).
That entirely depends on the purpose for which you are keeping the chicken, surely.
Police confirming a white man has been arrested. Hmmm, do they always give the race of the arrested perpetrator?
They do, if White. If not, they urge the public not to speculate on the identity of the attacker.
In both instances, it's for reasons of "community relations".
In both instances, they probably have a point, no?
No, if the perpetrator is White, say it, if he is black, say, it if he Hispanic/Muslim/a Martian, say it. Honesty is the only method that doesn't rile people one way or the other
People who say things are two tier aren’t going to be feeling like they were wrong are they? I don’t use the term, but specifying ‘white British’ so early will only rile them
The accusation in Southport was one of "we weren't given enough information".
Now you have been given definitive details by the police you are moaning that you didn't want those details if the suspect is white
Fine if the policy has changed but I doubt it has.
After the Southport riots ( Farage Riots according to James O'Brexit) it would seem expedient to report ethnicity if that helped to avoid race riots.
Let’s wait until the next time it’s not a white male and see, shall we. I know where my money lies.
Do you not understand? If the police can cut Tommy Robinson fanbois off at the pass they might not set fire to Holiday Inns. I don't see a conspiracy, I see practicality.
Do you not understand? By not giving a ‘colour’ or nationality the police instantly drive a narrative. And here, when it’s a pissed off white chap, it’s out of the coppers mouth quicker than he can say ‘sorry serge, he fell down the stairs’.
Of course they are driving a narrative to prevent an unpleasant secondary story. Had the police been able to say earlier that Rudicabana was a Cardiff born UK national racists couldn't apply the asylum seeker label to the suspect thus avoiding Holiday Inns being set on fire.
This a seems pretty simple.
So why didn’t they?
Was the information available? I assume Rudicabana wasn't especially cooperative having just brutally murdered three innocent little girls. "I'm not an asylum seeker, I'm from Cardiff".
He was pretty clearly a person of colour.
Christ on a bike. What advantage was there in saying Rudicabana was not white?
Dickhead racists would put two and two together and reach the answer of asylum seekers. By saying this suspect is white the racists small brains might assume, well that's ok he's not an asylum seeker so we don't have to set a hotel on fire
If you don’t announce details, is that said racist dickheads get to fill in their own bullshit.
The art of news management, in a democracy, is getting in first with something approximating to truth. With lots of detail.
Hence the old style of reporting - “Two men appended in burglary! At 11:32pm on Wednesday 14th May, two men were apprehended at 11 Shithole Street, by PC Savage, of the Ellsworth Police Station. Two brothers, John and Dave Stabbington, of no fixed address, were bought before magistrates at the town court on the 16th, and remanded in custody until trial.”
The casualties were worse than the first day of the Battle of the Somme. Simply horrific.
Why isn't this more widely known?
I'm not quite sure that's accurate. There were more casualties at Waterloo than were suffered by the British Army on the first day of the Somme (around 60,000 against 57,000)
Yes, that's what I meant. And all achieved within less than three square miles with sword, sabre, bayonet, ball and shot; 18th and 19th Century weapons. And arguably worse than a machine gun bullet since such carnage would have been at close quarters, personal, brutal, and highly violent.
Simply horrific.
Horrific indeed. Your initial post got me trawling wiki to improve my understanding a bit and I came across this:
Carabinier-à-Cheval cuirass holed by a cannonball at Waterloo, belonging to Antoine Fauveau
You're not surviving that.
How anyone made it through ancient battles (or just life in general) is beyond me.
We moan, and of course we are not going to compare ourselves to this part of the past, but we don't know how good we have it.
From a recommendaiton on here I read 'By sword and fire: cruelty and atrocity in medieval warfare', which was a bit of an eye opener.
I've not read some of the author's other works, such as 'Blood cries afar' and 'Kill them all', about the Albigensian Crusade.
As much as I have read widely about wars and conflict, I find myself more drawn to the minutiae of everyday life. Simple things that we take for granted, such as fridges and freezers. How did people in Warminster in 1925 keep food? Back in medieval Warminster did everyone have really, really long days in midsummer? Did people keep,gardens with flowers back then? Or was it only ever useful plants?
Modern historians are probably be more interested in that stuff than traditional high politics and war, but of course it's harder to gather evidence on mundane life so on to the archaelogists I guess.
Accessible sources about lives other than top nobility/royals like the Paston letters, the Luttrell Psalter and Chaucer's prologue are fairly few in number but wonderful.
Helen Castor's book on the Paston family and letters (15th century) is a gem.
The casualties were worse than the first day of the Battle of the Somme. Simply horrific.
Why isn't this more widely known?
I'm not quite sure that's accurate. There were more casualties at Waterloo than were suffered by the British Army on the first day of the Somme (around 60,000 against 57,000)
Yes, that's what I meant. And all achieved within less than three square miles with sword, sabre, bayonet, ball and shot; 18th and 19th Century weapons. And arguably worse than a machine gun bullet since such carnage would have been at close quarters, personal, brutal, and highly violent.
Simply horrific.
Horrific indeed. Your initial post got me trawling wiki to improve my understanding a bit and I came across this:
Carabinier-à-Cheval cuirass holed by a cannonball at Waterloo, belonging to Antoine Fauveau
You're not surviving that.
How anyone made it through ancient battles (or just life in general) is beyond me.
We moan, and of course we are not going to compare ourselves to this part of the past, but we don't know how good we have it.
From a recommendaiton on here I read 'By sword and fire: cruelty and atrocity in medieval warfare', which was a bit of an eye opener.
I've not read some of the author's other works, such as 'Blood cries afar' and 'Kill them all', about the Albigensian Crusade.
As much as I have read widely about wars and conflict, I find myself more drawn to the minutiae of everyday life. Simple things that we take for granted, such as fridges and freezers. How did people in Warminster in 1925 keep food? Back in medieval Warminster did everyone have really, really long days in midsummer? Did people keep,gardens with flowers back then? Or was it only ever useful plants?
Modern historians are probably be more interested in that stuff than traditional high politics and war, but of course it's harder to gather evidence on mundane life so on to the archaelogists I guess.
"How did people in Warminster in 1925 keep food?"
The larder.
How long can you keep a cooked chicken in a larder? These are the thoughts which keep me awake at night (or rather these are the thoughts I think about when I can’t sleep).
A surprisingly long time. Larders were low-tech fridges; on the north side of your house, well ventilated, with stone which retained the cold. Not great inthe height of summer but quite efficient nine months of the year.
Also, a lot of potting and smoking of meat went on.
My gran still had an operating larder when I was a child in 1970s.
I currently have a larder (though I call it a pantry, apparently incorrectly on a technical basis, according to one of the first comments I ever made on PB).
So, do tell, what's the difference between a larder and a pantry?
Police confirming a white man has been arrested. Hmmm, do they always give the race of the arrested perpetrator?
They do, if White. If not, they urge the public not to speculate on the identity of the attacker.
In both instances, it's for reasons of "community relations".
In both instances, they probably have a point, no?
No, if the perpetrator is White, say it, if he is black, say, it if he Hispanic/Muslim/a Martian, say it. Honesty is the only method that doesn't rile people one way or the other
People who say things are two tier aren’t going to be feeling like they were wrong are they? I don’t use the term, but specifying ‘white British’ so early will only rile them
The accusation in Southport was one of "we weren't given enough information".
Now you have been given definitive details by the police you are moaning that you didn't want those details if the suspect is white
Fine if the policy has changed but I doubt it has.
After the Southport riots ( Farage Riots according to James O'Brexit) it would seem expedient to report ethnicity if that helped to avoid race riots.
Let’s wait until the next time it’s not a white male and see, shall we. I know where my money lies.
Do you not understand? If the police can cut Tommy Robinson fanbois off at the pass they might not set fire to Holiday Inns. I don't see a conspiracy, I see practicality.
Do you not understand? By not giving a ‘colour’ or nationality the police instantly drive a narrative. And here, when it’s a pissed off white chap, it’s out of the coppers mouth quicker than he can say ‘sorry serge, he fell down the stairs’.
The casualties were worse than the first day of the Battle of the Somme. Simply horrific.
Why isn't this more widely known?
I'm not quite sure that's accurate. There were more casualties at Waterloo than were suffered by the British Army on the first day of the Somme (around 60,000 against 57,000)
Yes, that's what I meant. And all achieved within less than three square miles with sword, sabre, bayonet, ball and shot; 18th and 19th Century weapons. And arguably worse than a machine gun bullet since such carnage would have been at close quarters, personal, brutal, and highly violent.
Simply horrific.
Horrific indeed. Your initial post got me trawling wiki to improve my understanding a bit and I came across this:
Carabinier-à-Cheval cuirass holed by a cannonball at Waterloo, belonging to Antoine Fauveau
You're not surviving that.
How anyone made it through ancient battles (or just life in general) is beyond me.
We moan, and of course we are not going to compare ourselves to this part of the past, but we don't know how good we have it.
From a recommendaiton on here I read 'By sword and fire: cruelty and atrocity in medieval warfare', which was a bit of an eye opener.
I've not read some of the author's other works, such as 'Blood cries afar' and 'Kill them all', about the Albigensian Crusade.
As much as I have read widely about wars and conflict, I find myself more drawn to the minutiae of everyday life. Simple things that we take for granted, such as fridges and freezers. How did people in Warminster in 1925 keep food? Back in medieval Warminster did everyone have really, really long days in midsummer? Did people keep,gardens with flowers back then? Or was it only ever useful plants?
Modern historians are probably be more interested in that stuff than traditional high politics and war, but of course it's harder to gather evidence on mundane life so on to the archaelogists I guess.
"How did people in Warminster in 1925 keep food?"
The larder.
How long can you keep a cooked chicken in a larder? These are the thoughts which keep me awake at night (or rather these are the thoughts I think about when I can’t sleep).
2 hours if the temperature is above 40f
Edit - technically 'until bacteria spoils it' - bacteria growth starts between 40f and 140f - 2 hours is the recommended safe time 'out of fridge' for cooked meat. If the larder is sub 40f you're good
40f, so about 4.5°C? Most fridges fail that test.
If it's a properly cooked chicken the inside will be sterile until bacteria colonise the surface and find their way in. I think we're a bit over cautious these days.
I am sure my mum used to cook up a batch of sausage rolls before Christmas, stick them in the larder, and we still be eating them on New Year's Day. No ill effects.
Yeah, about 5c. Oh totally over cautious, I've left chicken out in an 18 degree kitchen for much longer and scarfed it. It's what's 'officially' safe versus what you can get away with/risk you're prepared to accept
Police confirming a white man has been arrested. Hmmm, do they always give the race of the arrested perpetrator?
They do, if White. If not, they urge the public not to speculate on the identity of the attacker.
In both instances, it's for reasons of "community relations".
In both instances, they probably have a point, no?
No, if the perpetrator is White, say it, if he is black, say, it if he Hispanic/Muslim/a Martian, say it. Honesty is the only method that doesn't rile people one way or the other
People who say things are two tier aren’t going to be feeling like they were wrong are they? I don’t use the term, but specifying ‘white British’ so early will only rile them
The accusation in Southport was one of "we weren't given enough information".
Now you have been given definitive details by the police you are moaning that you didn't want those details if the suspect is white
Fine if the policy has changed but I doubt it has.
After the Southport riots ( Farage Riots according to James O'Brexit) it would seem expedient to report ethnicity if that helped to avoid race riots.
Let’s wait until the next time it’s not a white male and see, shall we. I know where my money lies.
Do you not understand? If the police can cut Tommy Robinson fanbois off at the pass they might not set fire to Holiday Inns. I don't see a conspiracy, I see practicality.
Do you not understand? By not giving a ‘colour’ or nationality the police instantly drive a narrative. And here, when it’s a pissed off white chap, it’s out of the coppers mouth quicker than he can say ‘sorry serge, he fell down the stairs’.
Of course they are driving a narrative to prevent an unpleasant secondary story. Had the police been able to say earlier that Rudicabana was a Cardiff born UK national racists couldn't apply the asylum seeker label to the suspect thus avoiding Holiday Inns being set on fire.
This a seems pretty simple.
So why didn’t they?
Was the information available? I assume Rudicabana wasn't especially cooperative having just brutally murdered three innocent little girls. "I'm not an asylum seeker, I'm from Cardiff".
He was pretty clearly a person of colour.
Christ on a bike. What advantage was there in saying Rudicabana was not white?
Dickhead racists would put two and two together and reach the answer of asylum seekers. By saying this suspect is white the racists small brains might assume, well that's ok he's not an asylum seeker so we don't have to set a hotel on fire
Christ on a bike. What advantage was there in saying they have arrested a white British male? They almost always say when it’s a white arrest, so when no ethnicity is given the assumption is naturally that it’s not white.
A. Because they didn't want racists to set fire to asylum seeker hotels.
B Racists don't believe white people are asylum seekers.
C. Because they assumed the white guy was not an asylum seeker racists didn't set fire to asylum seeker hotels.
D. Millions of pounds of property and expensive police manpower was saved for the taxpayer by riots being averted.
The casualties were worse than the first day of the Battle of the Somme. Simply horrific.
Why isn't this more widely known?
I'm not quite sure that's accurate. There were more casualties at Waterloo than were suffered by the British Army on the first day of the Somme (around 60,000 against 57,000)
Yes, that's what I meant. And all achieved within less than three square miles with sword, sabre, bayonet, ball and shot; 18th and 19th Century weapons. And arguably worse than a machine gun bullet since such carnage would have been at close quarters, personal, brutal, and highly violent.
Simply horrific.
Horrific indeed. Your initial post got me trawling wiki to improve my understanding a bit and I came across this:
Carabinier-à-Cheval cuirass holed by a cannonball at Waterloo, belonging to Antoine Fauveau
You're not surviving that.
How anyone made it through ancient battles (or just life in general) is beyond me.
We moan, and of course we are not going to compare ourselves to this part of the past, but we don't know how good we have it.
From a recommendaiton on here I read 'By sword and fire: cruelty and atrocity in medieval warfare', which was a bit of an eye opener.
I've not read some of the author's other works, such as 'Blood cries afar' and 'Kill them all', about the Albigensian Crusade.
As much as I have read widely about wars and conflict, I find myself more drawn to the minutiae of everyday life. Simple things that we take for granted, such as fridges and freezers. How did people in Warminster in 1925 keep food? Back in medieval Warminster did everyone have really, really long days in midsummer? Did people keep,gardens with flowers back then? Or was it only ever useful plants?
Modern historians are probably be more interested in that stuff than traditional high politics and war, but of course it's harder to gather evidence on mundane life so on to the archaelogists I guess.
"How did people in Warminster in 1925 keep food?"
The larder.
How long can you keep a cooked chicken in a larder? These are the thoughts which keep me awake at night (or rather these are the thoughts I think about when I can’t sleep).
A surprisingly long time. Larders were low-tech fridges; on the north side of your house, well ventilated, with stone which retained the cold. Not great inthe height of summer but quite efficient nine months of the year.
Also, a lot of potting and smoking of meat went on.
My gran still had an operating larder when I was a child in 1970s.
I currently have a larder (though I call it a pantry, apparently incorrectly on a technical basis, according to one of the first comments I ever made on PB).
So, do tell, what's the difference between a larder and a pantry?
Isn't a larder for meat and a pantry for bread? That I think was at least the technical definition.
The casualties were worse than the first day of the Battle of the Somme. Simply horrific.
Why isn't this more widely known?
I'm not quite sure that's accurate. There were more casualties at Waterloo than were suffered by the British Army on the first day of the Somme (around 60,000 against 57,000)
Yes, that's what I meant. And all achieved within less than three square miles with sword, sabre, bayonet, ball and shot; 18th and 19th Century weapons. And arguably worse than a machine gun bullet since such carnage would have been at close quarters, personal, brutal, and highly violent.
Simply horrific.
Horrific indeed. Your initial post got me trawling wiki to improve my understanding a bit and I came across this:
Carabinier-à-Cheval cuirass holed by a cannonball at Waterloo, belonging to Antoine Fauveau
You're not surviving that.
How anyone made it through ancient battles (or just life in general) is beyond me.
We moan, and of course we are not going to compare ourselves to this part of the past, but we don't know how good we have it.
From a recommendaiton on here I read 'By sword and fire: cruelty and atrocity in medieval warfare', which was a bit of an eye opener.
I've not read some of the author's other works, such as 'Blood cries afar' and 'Kill them all', about the Albigensian Crusade.
As much as I have read widely about wars and conflict, I find myself more drawn to the minutiae of everyday life. Simple things that we take for granted, such as fridges and freezers. How did people in Warminster in 1925 keep food? Back in medieval Warminster did everyone have really, really long days in midsummer? Did people keep,gardens with flowers back then? Or was it only ever useful plants?
Modern historians are probably be more interested in that stuff than traditional high politics and war, but of course it's harder to gather evidence on mundane life so on to the archaelogists I guess.
Accessible sources about lives other than top nobility/royals like the Paston letters, the Luttrell Psalter and Chaucer's prologue are fairly few in number but wonderful.
Helen Castor's book on the Paston family and letters (15th century) is a gem.
I’ve been aware of the Paston letters for a while but not yet got a copy. I assume it’s worth adding to the list?
The casualties were worse than the first day of the Battle of the Somme. Simply horrific.
Why isn't this more widely known?
I'm not quite sure that's accurate. There were more casualties at Waterloo than were suffered by the British Army on the first day of the Somme (around 60,000 against 57,000)
Yes, that's what I meant. And all achieved within less than three square miles with sword, sabre, bayonet, ball and shot; 18th and 19th Century weapons. And arguably worse than a machine gun bullet since such carnage would have been at close quarters, personal, brutal, and highly violent.
Simply horrific.
Horrific indeed. Your initial post got me trawling wiki to improve my understanding a bit and I came across this:
Carabinier-à-Cheval cuirass holed by a cannonball at Waterloo, belonging to Antoine Fauveau
You're not surviving that.
How anyone made it through ancient battles (or just life in general) is beyond me.
We moan, and of course we are not going to compare ourselves to this part of the past, but we don't know how good we have it.
From a recommendaiton on here I read 'By sword and fire: cruelty and atrocity in medieval warfare', which was a bit of an eye opener.
I've not read some of the author's other works, such as 'Blood cries afar' and 'Kill them all', about the Albigensian Crusade.
As much as I have read widely about wars and conflict, I find myself more drawn to the minutiae of everyday life. Simple things that we take for granted, such as fridges and freezers. How did people in Warminster in 1925 keep food? Back in medieval Warminster did everyone have really, really long days in midsummer? Did people keep,gardens with flowers back then? Or was it only ever useful plants?
Modern historians are probably be more interested in that stuff than traditional high politics and war, but of course it's harder to gather evidence on mundane life so on to the archaelogists I guess.
"How did people in Warminster in 1925 keep food?"
The larder.
How long can you keep a cooked chicken in a larder? These are the thoughts which keep me awake at night (or rather these are the thoughts I think about when I can’t sleep).
That entirely depends on the purpose for which you are keeping the chicken, surely.
Well if you're keeping it for laying, you'll get entirely the wrong kind of eggs...
The casualties were worse than the first day of the Battle of the Somme. Simply horrific.
Why isn't this more widely known?
I'm not quite sure that's accurate. There were more casualties at Waterloo than were suffered by the British Army on the first day of the Somme (around 60,000 against 57,000)
Yes, that's what I meant. And all achieved within less than three square miles with sword, sabre, bayonet, ball and shot; 18th and 19th Century weapons. And arguably worse than a machine gun bullet since such carnage would have been at close quarters, personal, brutal, and highly violent.
Simply horrific.
Horrific indeed. Your initial post got me trawling wiki to improve my understanding a bit and I came across this:
Carabinier-à-Cheval cuirass holed by a cannonball at Waterloo, belonging to Antoine Fauveau
You're not surviving that.
How anyone made it through ancient battles (or just life in general) is beyond me.
We moan, and of course we are not going to compare ourselves to this part of the past, but we don't know how good we have it.
From a recommendaiton on here I read 'By sword and fire: cruelty and atrocity in medieval warfare', which was a bit of an eye opener.
I've not read some of the author's other works, such as 'Blood cries afar' and 'Kill them all', about the Albigensian Crusade.
As much as I have read widely about wars and conflict, I find myself more drawn to the minutiae of everyday life. Simple things that we take for granted, such as fridges and freezers. How did people in Warminster in 1925 keep food? Back in medieval Warminster did everyone have really, really long days in midsummer? Did people keep,gardens with flowers back then? Or was it only ever useful plants?
Modern historians are probably be more interested in that stuff than traditional high politics and war, but of course it's harder to gather evidence on mundane life so on to the archaelogists I guess.
Accessible sources about lives other than top nobility/royals like the Paston letters, the Luttrell Psalter and Chaucer's prologue are fairly few in number but wonderful.
Helen Castor's book on the Paston family and letters (15th century) is a gem.
I’ve been aware of the Paston letters for a while but not yet got a copy. I assume it’s worth adding to the list?
The letters are perhaps a bit dry to those without a command of Middle English grammar. I would however recommend the biography by Frances and Joseph Gies.
The casualties were worse than the first day of the Battle of the Somme. Simply horrific.
Why isn't this more widely known?
I'm not quite sure that's accurate. There were more casualties at Waterloo than were suffered by the British Army on the first day of the Somme (around 60,000 against 57,000)
Yes, that's what I meant. And all achieved within less than three square miles with sword, sabre, bayonet, ball and shot; 18th and 19th Century weapons. And arguably worse than a machine gun bullet since such carnage would have been at close quarters, personal, brutal, and highly violent.
Simply horrific.
Horrific indeed. Your initial post got me trawling wiki to improve my understanding a bit and I came across this:
Carabinier-à-Cheval cuirass holed by a cannonball at Waterloo, belonging to Antoine Fauveau
You're not surviving that.
How anyone made it through ancient battles (or just life in general) is beyond me.
We moan, and of course we are not going to compare ourselves to this part of the past, but we don't know how good we have it.
From a recommendaiton on here I read 'By sword and fire: cruelty and atrocity in medieval warfare', which was a bit of an eye opener.
I've not read some of the author's other works, such as 'Blood cries afar' and 'Kill them all', about the Albigensian Crusade.
As much as I have read widely about wars and conflict, I find myself more drawn to the minutiae of everyday life. Simple things that we take for granted, such as fridges and freezers. How did people in Warminster in 1925 keep food? Back in medieval Warminster did everyone have really, really long days in midsummer? Did people keep,gardens with flowers back then? Or was it only ever useful plants?
Modern historians are probably be more interested in that stuff than traditional high politics and war, but of course it's harder to gather evidence on mundane life so on to the archaelogists I guess.
"How did people in Warminster in 1925 keep food?"
The larder.
How long can you keep a cooked chicken in a larder? These are the thoughts which keep me awake at night (or rather these are the thoughts I think about when I can’t sleep).
A surprisingly long time. Larders were low-tech fridges; on the north side of your house, well ventilated, with stone which retained the cold. Not great inthe height of summer but quite efficient nine months of the year.
Also, a lot of potting and smoking of meat went on.
My gran still had an operating larder when I was a child in 1970s.
I currently have a larder (though I call it a pantry, apparently incorrectly on a technical basis, according to one of the first comments I ever made on PB).
So, do tell, what's the difference between a larder and a pantry?
Supposedly it is to do with what you store in them, how big they are etc. with larders more for the things you want to keep relatively cool.
But I don't think any modern terminology police are sufficiently clear on it to arrest anyone over it.
So we’ve done larders quite well, any comments on time keeping in say 1430? Did people just wake up really early in midsummer?
In 1430 people had two sleeps - they'd rise at midnight or just after and commit to tasks about the house and often meet /socialise in this waking time then back to sleep. They'd be up earlier in summer to make use of the light and get heavy work done before the heat of the day (siesta type rest or doing lighter labour was common in hottest times of the day) They had a hell of a lot more time off than modern workers too
Police confirming a white man has been arrested. Hmmm, do they always give the race of the arrested perpetrator?
They do, if White. If not, they urge the public not to speculate on the identity of the attacker.
In both instances, it's for reasons of "community relations".
In both instances, they probably have a point, no?
No, if the perpetrator is White, say it, if he is black, say, it if he Hispanic/Muslim/a Martian, say it. Honesty is the only method that doesn't rile people one way or the other
People who say things are two tier aren’t going to be feeling like they were wrong are they? I don’t use the term, but specifying ‘white British’ so early will only rile them
The accusation in Southport was one of "we weren't given enough information".
Now you have been given definitive details by the police you are moaning that you didn't want those details if the suspect is white
Fine if the policy has changed but I doubt it has.
After the Southport riots ( Farage Riots according to James O'Brexit) it would seem expedient to report ethnicity if that helped to avoid race riots.
Let’s wait until the next time it’s not a white male and see, shall we. I know where my money lies.
Do you not understand? If the police can cut Tommy Robinson fanbois off at the pass they might not set fire to Holiday Inns. I don't see a conspiracy, I see practicality.
Do you not understand? By not giving a ‘colour’ or nationality the police instantly drive a narrative. And here, when it’s a pissed off white chap, it’s out of the coppers mouth quicker than he can say ‘sorry serge, he fell down the stairs’.
Of course they are driving a narrative to prevent an unpleasant secondary story. Had the police been able to say earlier that Rudicabana was a Cardiff born UK national racists couldn't apply the asylum seeker label to the suspect thus avoiding Holiday Inns being set on fire.
This a seems pretty simple.
So why didn’t they?
Was the information available? I assume Rudicabana wasn't especially cooperative having just brutally murdered three innocent little girls. "I'm not an asylum seeker, I'm from Cardiff".
He was pretty clearly a person of colour.
Christ on a bike. What advantage was there in saying Rudicabana was not white?
Dickhead racists would put two and two together and reach the answer of asylum seekers. By saying this suspect is white the racists small brains might assume, well that's ok he's not an asylum seeker so we don't have to set a hotel on fire
Because it was important to know he was not an asylum seeker. The cops should immedoately have given his full history:
Born Rwandan, black, came over as a child with parents, not an asylum seeker, not brought up Muslim, yes a link to Prevent but tenuous
That would have instantly defused so many of the most lurid conspiracies, and I do not believe we would have seen riots. Anger, major suspicion, but not riots
I hope this new policy of Total Instant Revelation is a genuine new policy, because it is the correct policy. Lying and gaslighting made it all worse
However I do not believe our police and government are that sensible
The casualties were worse than the first day of the Battle of the Somme. Simply horrific.
Why isn't this more widely known?
I'm not quite sure that's accurate. There were more casualties at Waterloo than were suffered by the British Army on the first day of the Somme (around 60,000 against 57,000)
Yes, that's what I meant. And all achieved within less than three square miles with sword, sabre, bayonet, ball and shot; 18th and 19th Century weapons. And arguably worse than a machine gun bullet since such carnage would have been at close quarters, personal, brutal, and highly violent.
Simply horrific.
Horrific indeed. Your initial post got me trawling wiki to improve my understanding a bit and I came across this:
Carabinier-à-Cheval cuirass holed by a cannonball at Waterloo, belonging to Antoine Fauveau
You're not surviving that.
How anyone made it through ancient battles (or just life in general) is beyond me.
We moan, and of course we are not going to compare ourselves to this part of the past, but we don't know how good we have it.
From a recommendaiton on here I read 'By sword and fire: cruelty and atrocity in medieval warfare', which was a bit of an eye opener.
I've not read some of the author's other works, such as 'Blood cries afar' and 'Kill them all', about the Albigensian Crusade.
As much as I have read widely about wars and conflict, I find myself more drawn to the minutiae of everyday life. Simple things that we take for granted, such as fridges and freezers. How did people in Warminster in 1925 keep food? Back in medieval Warminster did everyone have really, really long days in midsummer? Did people keep,gardens with flowers back then? Or was it only ever useful plants?
Modern historians are probably be more interested in that stuff than traditional high politics and war, but of course it's harder to gather evidence on mundane life so on to the archaelogists I guess.
Accessible sources about lives other than top nobility/royals like the Paston letters, the Luttrell Psalter and Chaucer's prologue are fairly few in number but wonderful.
Helen Castor's book on the Paston family and letters (15th century) is a gem.
A long time ago there as a programme, on CH4 I think, on greatest national british treasures, and the Vindolanda tablets were on there presumably on that kind of basis.
Police confirming a white man has been arrested. Hmmm, do they always give the race of the arrested perpetrator?
They do, if White. If not, they urge the public not to speculate on the identity of the attacker.
In both instances, it's for reasons of "community relations".
In both instances, they probably have a point, no?
No, if the perpetrator is White, say it, if he is black, say, it if he Hispanic/Muslim/a Martian, say it. Honesty is the only method that doesn't rile people one way or the other
People who say things are two tier aren’t going to be feeling like they were wrong are they? I don’t use the term, but specifying ‘white British’ so early will only rile them
The accusation in Southport was one of "we weren't given enough information".
Now you have been given definitive details by the police you are moaning that you didn't want those details if the suspect is white
Fine if the policy has changed but I doubt it has.
After the Southport riots ( Farage Riots according to James O'Brexit) it would seem expedient to report ethnicity if that helped to avoid race riots.
Let’s wait until the next time it’s not a white male and see, shall we. I know where my money lies.
Do you not understand? If the police can cut Tommy Robinson fanbois off at the pass they might not set fire to Holiday Inns. I don't see a conspiracy, I see practicality.
Do you not understand? By not giving a ‘colour’ or nationality the police instantly drive a narrative. And here, when it’s a pissed off white chap, it’s out of the coppers mouth quicker than he can say ‘sorry serge, he fell down the stairs’.
Of course they are driving a narrative to prevent an unpleasant secondary story. Had the police been able to say earlier that Rudicabana was a Cardiff born UK national racists couldn't apply the asylum seeker label to the suspect thus avoiding Holiday Inns being set on fire.
This a seems pretty simple.
So why didn’t they?
Was the information available? I assume Rudicabana wasn't especially cooperative having just brutally murdered three innocent little girls. "I'm not an asylum seeker, I'm from Cardiff".
He was pretty clearly a person of colour.
Christ on a bike. What advantage was there in saying Rudicabana was not white?
Dickhead racists would put two and two together and reach the answer of asylum seekers. By saying this suspect is white the racists small brains might assume, well that's ok he's not an asylum seeker so we don't have to set a hotel on fire
If you don’t announce details, is that said racist dickheads get to fill in their own bullshit.
The art of news management, in a democracy, is getting in first with something approximating to truth. With lots of detail.
Hence the old style of reporting - “Two men appended in burglary! At 11:32pm on Wednesday 14th May, two men were apprehended at 11 Shithole Street, by PC Savage, of the Ellsworth Police Station. Two brothers, John and Dave Stabbington, of no fixed address, were bought before magistrates at the town court on the 16th, and remanded in custody until trial.”
F*** me, that's uncanny. I live at no 11 Shithole Street. It's a small world.
So we’ve done larders quite well, any comments on time keeping in say 1430? Did people just wake up really early in midsummer?
In 1430 people had two sleeps - they'd rise at midnight or just after and commit to tasks about the house and often meet /socialise in this waking time then back to sleep. They'd be up earlier in summer to make use of the light and get heavy work done before the heat of the day (siesta type rest or doing lighter labour was common in hottest times of the day) They had a hell of a lot more time off than modern workers too
Well, there is debate in history circles around whether biphasic sleep was a big thing or not.
So we’ve done larders quite well, any comments on time keeping in say 1430? Did people just wake up really early in midsummer?
In 1430 people had two sleeps - they'd rise at midnight or just after and commit to tasks about the house and often meet /socialise in this waking time then back to sleep. They'd be up earlier in summer to make use of the light and get heavy work done before the heat of the day (siesta type rest or doing lighter labour was common in hottest times of the day) They had a hell of a lot more time off than modern workers too
Is that actually true though (the two sleeps thing)? I’d read that there is very little evidence for this. I know that the religious calendar before the reformation had a lot of inbuilt ‘bank holidays’ (all the various saints days etc).
The casualties were worse than the first day of the Battle of the Somme. Simply horrific.
Why isn't this more widely known?
I'm not quite sure that's accurate. There were more casualties at Waterloo than were suffered by the British Army on the first day of the Somme (around 60,000 against 57,000)
Yes, that's what I meant. And all achieved within less than three square miles with sword, sabre, bayonet, ball and shot; 18th and 19th Century weapons. And arguably worse than a machine gun bullet since such carnage would have been at close quarters, personal, brutal, and highly violent.
Simply horrific.
Horrific indeed. Your initial post got me trawling wiki to improve my understanding a bit and I came across this:
Carabinier-à-Cheval cuirass holed by a cannonball at Waterloo, belonging to Antoine Fauveau
You're not surviving that.
How anyone made it through ancient battles (or just life in general) is beyond me.
We moan, and of course we are not going to compare ourselves to this part of the past, but we don't know how good we have it.
From a recommendaiton on here I read 'By sword and fire: cruelty and atrocity in medieval warfare', which was a bit of an eye opener.
I've not read some of the author's other works, such as 'Blood cries afar' and 'Kill them all', about the Albigensian Crusade.
As much as I have read widely about wars and conflict, I find myself more drawn to the minutiae of everyday life. Simple things that we take for granted, such as fridges and freezers. How did people in Warminster in 1925 keep food? Back in medieval Warminster did everyone have really, really long days in midsummer? Did people keep,gardens with flowers back then? Or was it only ever useful plants?
Modern historians are probably be more interested in that stuff than traditional high politics and war, but of course it's harder to gather evidence on mundane life so on to the archaelogists I guess.
"How did people in Warminster in 1925 keep food?"
The larder.
How long can you keep a cooked chicken in a larder? These are the thoughts which keep me awake at night (or rather these are the thoughts I think about when I can’t sleep).
A surprisingly long time. Larders were low-tech fridges; on the north side of your house, well ventilated, with stone which retained the cold. Not great inthe height of summer but quite efficient nine months of the year.
Also, a lot of potting and smoking of meat went on.
My gran still had an operating larder when I was a child in 1970s.
I currently have a larder (though I call it a pantry, apparently incorrectly on a technical basis, according to one of the first comments I ever made on PB).
So, do tell, what's the difference between a larder and a pantry?
Isn't a larder for meat and a pantry for bread? That I think was at least the technical definition.
And of course, a buttery is for - wine.
When we sold our house last year the agents insisted in calling our walk-in larder a pantry. Sells better apparently.
Mind you, the corridor between the kitchen and the lounge was a 'walk-through library' apparently. Who knew?
So we’ve done larders quite well, any comments on time keeping in say 1430? Did people just wake up really early in midsummer?
In 1430 people had two sleeps - they'd rise at midnight or just after and commit to tasks about the house and often meet /socialise in this waking time then back to sleep. They'd be up earlier in summer to make use of the light and get heavy work done before the heat of the day (siesta type rest or doing lighter labour was common in hottest times of the day) They had a hell of a lot more time off than modern workers too
Well, there is debate in history circles around whether biphasic sleep was a big thing or not.
I didn't want to preface it with 'i reckon' because it might sound a bit naff but yeah, I've made that a bit more definitive than warranted
The casualties were worse than the first day of the Battle of the Somme. Simply horrific.
Why isn't this more widely known?
I'm not quite sure that's accurate. There were more casualties at Waterloo than were suffered by the British Army on the first day of the Somme (around 60,000 against 57,000)
Yes, that's what I meant. And all achieved within less than three square miles with sword, sabre, bayonet, ball and shot; 18th and 19th Century weapons. And arguably worse than a machine gun bullet since such carnage would have been at close quarters, personal, brutal, and highly violent.
Simply horrific.
Horrific indeed. Your initial post got me trawling wiki to improve my understanding a bit and I came across this:
Carabinier-à-Cheval cuirass holed by a cannonball at Waterloo, belonging to Antoine Fauveau
You're not surviving that.
How anyone made it through ancient battles (or just life in general) is beyond me.
We moan, and of course we are not going to compare ourselves to this part of the past, but we don't know how good we have it.
From a recommendaiton on here I read 'By sword and fire: cruelty and atrocity in medieval warfare', which was a bit of an eye opener.
I've not read some of the author's other works, such as 'Blood cries afar' and 'Kill them all', about the Albigensian Crusade.
As much as I have read widely about wars and conflict, I find myself more drawn to the minutiae of everyday life. Simple things that we take for granted, such as fridges and freezers. How did people in Warminster in 1925 keep food? Back in medieval Warminster did everyone have really, really long days in midsummer? Did people keep,gardens with flowers back then? Or was it only ever useful plants?
Modern historians are probably be more interested in that stuff than traditional high politics and war, but of course it's harder to gather evidence on mundane life so on to the archaelogists I guess.
"How did people in Warminster in 1925 keep food?"
The larder.
How long can you keep a cooked chicken in a larder? These are the thoughts which keep me awake at night (or rather these are the thoughts I think about when I can’t sleep).
A surprisingly long time. Larders were low-tech fridges; on the north side of your house, well ventilated, with stone which retained the cold. Not great inthe height of summer but quite efficient nine months of the year.
Also, a lot of potting and smoking of meat went on.
My gran still had an operating larder when I was a child in 1970s.
I currently have a larder (though I call it a pantry, apparently incorrectly on a technical basis, according to one of the first comments I ever made on PB).
So, do tell, what's the difference between a larder and a pantry?
Isn't a larder for meat and a pantry for bread? That I think was at least the technical definition.
And of course, a buttery is for - wine.
When we sold our house last year the agents insisted in calling our walk-in larder a pantry. Sells better apparently.
Mind you, the corridor between the kitchen and the lounge was a 'walk-through library' apparently. Who knew?
Anyone here with an orangery instead of conservatory?
The casualties were worse than the first day of the Battle of the Somme. Simply horrific.
Why isn't this more widely known?
I'm not quite sure that's accurate. There were more casualties at Waterloo than were suffered by the British Army on the first day of the Somme (around 60,000 against 57,000)
Yes, that's what I meant. And all achieved within less than three square miles with sword, sabre, bayonet, ball and shot; 18th and 19th Century weapons. And arguably worse than a machine gun bullet since such carnage would have been at close quarters, personal, brutal, and highly violent.
Simply horrific.
Horrific indeed. Your initial post got me trawling wiki to improve my understanding a bit and I came across this:
Carabinier-à-Cheval cuirass holed by a cannonball at Waterloo, belonging to Antoine Fauveau
You're not surviving that.
How anyone made it through ancient battles (or just life in general) is beyond me.
We moan, and of course we are not going to compare ourselves to this part of the past, but we don't know how good we have it.
From a recommendaiton on here I read 'By sword and fire: cruelty and atrocity in medieval warfare', which was a bit of an eye opener.
I've not read some of the author's other works, such as 'Blood cries afar' and 'Kill them all', about the Albigensian Crusade.
As much as I have read widely about wars and conflict, I find myself more drawn to the minutiae of everyday life. Simple things that we take for granted, such as fridges and freezers. How did people in Warminster in 1925 keep food? Back in medieval Warminster did everyone have really, really long days in midsummer? Did people keep,gardens with flowers back then? Or was it only ever useful plants?
Modern historians are probably be more interested in that stuff than traditional high politics and war, but of course it's harder to gather evidence on mundane life so on to the archaelogists I guess.
"How did people in Warminster in 1925 keep food?"
The larder.
How long can you keep a cooked chicken in a larder? These are the thoughts which keep me awake at night (or rather these are the thoughts I think about when I can’t sleep).
A surprisingly long time. Larders were low-tech fridges; on the north side of your house, well ventilated, with stone which retained the cold. Not great inthe height of summer but quite efficient nine months of the year.
Also, a lot of potting and smoking of meat went on.
My gran still had an operating larder when I was a child in 1970s.
I currently have a larder (though I call it a pantry, apparently incorrectly on a technical basis, according to one of the first comments I ever made on PB).
So, do tell, what's the difference between a larder and a pantry?
Isn't a larder for meat and a pantry for bread? That I think was at least the technical definition.
And of course, a buttery is for - wine.
Can I check with Penny Mordant. She is well versed in community pantries and these days tobacco. Does one store fags in a pantry?
The casualties were worse than the first day of the Battle of the Somme. Simply horrific.
Why isn't this more widely known?
I'm not quite sure that's accurate. There were more casualties at Waterloo than were suffered by the British Army on the first day of the Somme (around 60,000 against 57,000)
Yes, that's what I meant. And all achieved within less than three square miles with sword, sabre, bayonet, ball and shot; 18th and 19th Century weapons. And arguably worse than a machine gun bullet since such carnage would have been at close quarters, personal, brutal, and highly violent.
Simply horrific.
Horrific indeed. Your initial post got me trawling wiki to improve my understanding a bit and I came across this:
Carabinier-à-Cheval cuirass holed by a cannonball at Waterloo, belonging to Antoine Fauveau
You're not surviving that.
How anyone made it through ancient battles (or just life in general) is beyond me.
We moan, and of course we are not going to compare ourselves to this part of the past, but we don't know how good we have it.
From a recommendaiton on here I read 'By sword and fire: cruelty and atrocity in medieval warfare', which was a bit of an eye opener.
I've not read some of the author's other works, such as 'Blood cries afar' and 'Kill them all', about the Albigensian Crusade.
As much as I have read widely about wars and conflict, I find myself more drawn to the minutiae of everyday life. Simple things that we take for granted, such as fridges and freezers. How did people in Warminster in 1925 keep food? Back in medieval Warminster did everyone have really, really long days in midsummer? Did people keep,gardens with flowers back then? Or was it only ever useful plants?
Modern historians are probably be more interested in that stuff than traditional high politics and war, but of course it's harder to gather evidence on mundane life so on to the archaelogists I guess.
"How did people in Warminster in 1925 keep food?"
The larder.
How long can you keep a cooked chicken in a larder? These are the thoughts which keep me awake at night (or rather these are the thoughts I think about when I can’t sleep).
A surprisingly long time. Larders were low-tech fridges; on the north side of your house, well ventilated, with stone which retained the cold. Not great inthe height of summer but quite efficient nine months of the year.
Also, a lot of potting and smoking of meat went on.
My gran still had an operating larder when I was a child in 1970s.
I currently have a larder (though I call it a pantry, apparently incorrectly on a technical basis, according to one of the first comments I ever made on PB).
So, do tell, what's the difference between a larder and a pantry?
Isn't a larder for meat and a pantry for bread? That I think was at least the technical definition.
And of course, a buttery is for - wine.
When we sold our house last year the agents insisted in calling our walk-in larder a pantry. Sells better apparently.
Mind you, the corridor between the kitchen and the lounge was a 'walk-through library' apparently. Who knew?
Anyone here with an orangery instead of conservatory?
We're going to have a plant room in our new house... but no windows.
The casualties were worse than the first day of the Battle of the Somme. Simply horrific.
Why isn't this more widely known?
I'm not quite sure that's accurate. There were more casualties at Waterloo than were suffered by the British Army on the first day of the Somme (around 60,000 against 57,000)
Yes, that's what I meant. And all achieved within less than three square miles with sword, sabre, bayonet, ball and shot; 18th and 19th Century weapons. And arguably worse than a machine gun bullet since such carnage would have been at close quarters, personal, brutal, and highly violent.
Simply horrific.
Horrific indeed. Your initial post got me trawling wiki to improve my understanding a bit and I came across this:
Carabinier-à-Cheval cuirass holed by a cannonball at Waterloo, belonging to Antoine Fauveau
You're not surviving that.
How anyone made it through ancient battles (or just life in general) is beyond me.
We moan, and of course we are not going to compare ourselves to this part of the past, but we don't know how good we have it.
From a recommendaiton on here I read 'By sword and fire: cruelty and atrocity in medieval warfare', which was a bit of an eye opener.
I've not read some of the author's other works, such as 'Blood cries afar' and 'Kill them all', about the Albigensian Crusade.
As much as I have read widely about wars and conflict, I find myself more drawn to the minutiae of everyday life. Simple things that we take for granted, such as fridges and freezers. How did people in Warminster in 1925 keep food? Back in medieval Warminster did everyone have really, really long days in midsummer? Did people keep,gardens with flowers back then? Or was it only ever useful plants?
Modern historians are probably be more interested in that stuff than traditional high politics and war, but of course it's harder to gather evidence on mundane life so on to the archaelogists I guess.
Accessible sources about lives other than top nobility/royals like the Paston letters, the Luttrell Psalter and Chaucer's prologue are fairly few in number but wonderful.
Helen Castor's book on the Paston family and letters (15th century) is a gem.
I’ve been aware of the Paston letters for a while but not yet got a copy. I assume it’s worth adding to the list?
The letters are perhaps a bit dry to those without a command of Middle English grammar. I would however recommend the biography by Frances and Joseph Gies.
Good modern versions available. Oxford World Classics is one from memory.
So we’ve done larders quite well, any comments on time keeping in say 1430? Did people just wake up really early in midsummer?
In 1430 people had two sleeps - they'd rise at midnight or just after and commit to tasks about the house and often meet /socialise in this waking time then back to sleep. They'd be up earlier in summer to make use of the light and get heavy work done before the heat of the day (siesta type rest or doing lighter labour was common in hottest times of the day) They had a hell of a lot more time off than modern workers too
Is that actually true though (the two sleeps thing)? I’d read that there is very little evidence for this. I know that the religious calendar before the reformation had a lot of inbuilt ‘bank holidays’ (all the various saints days etc).
The 'more time off' thing often feels like it could be misunderstod to me. I would suspect they needed frequent days off to not be worked literally to death whilst on poor diet, whereas I get weekends anyway and won't keel over if I don't take my annual leave for awhile.
Ok, maybe not quite that dramatic, but point being my unevidenced assumption is that saints days were more of a necessary reprieve than a sign of modern society not giving us enough free time.
So we’ve done larders quite well, any comments on time keeping in say 1430? Did people just wake up really early in midsummer?
In 1430 people had two sleeps - they'd rise at midnight or just after and commit to tasks about the house and often meet /socialise in this waking time then back to sleep. They'd be up earlier in summer to make use of the light and get heavy work done before the heat of the day (siesta type rest or doing lighter labour was common in hottest times of the day) They had a hell of a lot more time off than modern workers too
Is that actually true though (the two sleeps thing)? I’d read that there is very little evidence for this. I know that the religious calendar before the reformation had a lot of inbuilt ‘bank holidays’ (all the various saints days etc).
Yes, I believe "two sleeps" has been debunked
That said, I do it occasionally. Esp if I wake up at 5am with a raging hangover. Then I drink a litre of water, take a xanax, a valium, some ibuprofen, aspirin and paracetamol (my wife and I did this so much in our hedonistic marriage we called it the "the proty" - ie the "protocol")
An hour later you fall fast asleep and wake up at 11am feeling absolutely fine, Fit as a fiddle. It is superb. An actual hangover cure
So we’ve done larders quite well, any comments on time keeping in say 1430? Did people just wake up really early in midsummer?
In 1430 people had two sleeps - they'd rise at midnight or just after and commit to tasks about the house and often meet /socialise in this waking time then back to sleep. They'd be up earlier in summer to make use of the light and get heavy work done before the heat of the day (siesta type rest or doing lighter labour was common in hottest times of the day) They had a hell of a lot more time off than modern workers too
Is that actually true though (the two sleeps thing)? I’d read that there is very little evidence for this. I know that the religious calendar before the reformation had a lot of inbuilt ‘bank holidays’ (all the various saints days etc).
Good old church and those zany saints! I think it was about 150 days off a year of the 365 in one thing I saw/read. In Norfolk, for example, Plough Monday is the first Monday after Epiphany which was the first day back in the fields after the Christmas feasting period. I make Plough pudding every year on it. But it shows the Christmas feast was a good 2 and a half weeks
The casualties were worse than the first day of the Battle of the Somme. Simply horrific.
Why isn't this more widely known?
I'm not quite sure that's accurate. There were more casualties at Waterloo than were suffered by the British Army on the first day of the Somme (around 60,000 against 57,000)
Yes, that's what I meant. And all achieved within less than three square miles with sword, sabre, bayonet, ball and shot; 18th and 19th Century weapons. And arguably worse than a machine gun bullet since such carnage would have been at close quarters, personal, brutal, and highly violent.
Simply horrific.
Horrific indeed. Your initial post got me trawling wiki to improve my understanding a bit and I came across this:
Carabinier-à-Cheval cuirass holed by a cannonball at Waterloo, belonging to Antoine Fauveau
You're not surviving that.
How anyone made it through ancient battles (or just life in general) is beyond me.
We moan, and of course we are not going to compare ourselves to this part of the past, but we don't know how good we have it.
From a recommendaiton on here I read 'By sword and fire: cruelty and atrocity in medieval warfare', which was a bit of an eye opener.
I've not read some of the author's other works, such as 'Blood cries afar' and 'Kill them all', about the Albigensian Crusade.
As much as I have read widely about wars and conflict, I find myself more drawn to the minutiae of everyday life. Simple things that we take for granted, such as fridges and freezers. How did people in Warminster in 1925 keep food? Back in medieval Warminster did everyone have really, really long days in midsummer? Did people keep,gardens with flowers back then? Or was it only ever useful plants?
Modern historians are probably be more interested in that stuff than traditional high politics and war, but of course it's harder to gather evidence on mundane life so on to the archaelogists I guess.
"How did people in Warminster in 1925 keep food?"
The larder.
How long can you keep a cooked chicken in a larder? These are the thoughts which keep me awake at night (or rather these are the thoughts I think about when I can’t sleep).
A surprisingly long time. Larders were low-tech fridges; on the north side of your house, well ventilated, with stone which retained the cold. Not great inthe height of summer but quite efficient nine months of the year.
Also, a lot of potting and smoking of meat went on.
My gran still had an operating larder when I was a child in 1970s.
I currently have a larder (though I call it a pantry, apparently incorrectly on a technical basis, according to one of the first comments I ever made on PB).
So, do tell, what's the difference between a larder and a pantry?
Isn't a larder for meat and a pantry for bread? That I think was at least the technical definition.
And of course, a buttery is for - wine.
When we sold our house last year the agents insisted in calling our walk-in larder a pantry. Sells better apparently.
Mind you, the corridor between the kitchen and the lounge was a 'walk-through library' apparently. Who knew?
The casualties were worse than the first day of the Battle of the Somme. Simply horrific.
Why isn't this more widely known?
I'm not quite sure that's accurate. There were more casualties at Waterloo than were suffered by the British Army on the first day of the Somme (around 60,000 against 57,000)
Yes, that's what I meant. And all achieved within less than three square miles with sword, sabre, bayonet, ball and shot; 18th and 19th Century weapons. And arguably worse than a machine gun bullet since such carnage would have been at close quarters, personal, brutal, and highly violent.
Simply horrific.
Horrific indeed. Your initial post got me trawling wiki to improve my understanding a bit and I came across this:
Carabinier-à-Cheval cuirass holed by a cannonball at Waterloo, belonging to Antoine Fauveau
You're not surviving that.
How anyone made it through ancient battles (or just life in general) is beyond me.
We moan, and of course we are not going to compare ourselves to this part of the past, but we don't know how good we have it.
From a recommendaiton on here I read 'By sword and fire: cruelty and atrocity in medieval warfare', which was a bit of an eye opener.
I've not read some of the author's other works, such as 'Blood cries afar' and 'Kill them all', about the Albigensian Crusade.
As much as I have read widely about wars and conflict, I find myself more drawn to the minutiae of everyday life. Simple things that we take for granted, such as fridges and freezers. How did people in Warminster in 1925 keep food? Back in medieval Warminster did everyone have really, really long days in midsummer? Did people keep,gardens with flowers back then? Or was it only ever useful plants?
Modern historians are probably be more interested in that stuff than traditional high politics and war, but of course it's harder to gather evidence on mundane life so on to the archaelogists I guess.
"How did people in Warminster in 1925 keep food?"
The larder.
How long can you keep a cooked chicken in a larder? These are the thoughts which keep me awake at night (or rather these are the thoughts I think about when I can’t sleep).
A surprisingly long time. Larders were low-tech fridges; on the north side of your house, well ventilated, with stone which retained the cold. Not great inthe height of summer but quite efficient nine months of the year.
Also, a lot of potting and smoking of meat went on.
My gran still had an operating larder when I was a child in 1970s.
I currently have a larder (though I call it a pantry, apparently incorrectly on a technical basis, according to one of the first comments I ever made on PB).
So, do tell, what's the difference between a larder and a pantry?
Isn't a larder for meat and a pantry for bread? That I think was at least the technical definition.
And of course, a buttery is for - wine.
When we sold our house last year the agents insisted in calling our walk-in larder a pantry. Sells better apparently.
Mind you, the corridor between the kitchen and the lounge was a 'walk-through library' apparently. Who knew?
Anyone here with an orangery instead of conservatory?
"Sells better apparently." ??
I'm sorry Hugo, we are simply not putting in an offer on that place. It had a larder instead of a pantry!
Comments
Something like that brewing in his stupid fluffy head
Then, go back to the ancient world, or forward to the 17th century, and discover that things like the Albigensian crusade would be called Tuesday, in those periods.
This a seems pretty simple.
Suppose Boris finds a constituency to take him on for 2028/9. And that he wins. Either the party has won, in which case their non-Boris leader is safe, or they have lost, and Boris gets five years as LotO.
None of which will stop him, or his acolytes, dreaming.
Edit: sorry - Thought Policeperson obvs.
Cornwell does make a comment in the postscript of one book about how it was actually some other blokes, but that 'fictional heroes need suitable employment'.
But if he does that, and Reform have a massive campaign to win the seat, there's a danger at least that they split the vote and let a Labour or Lib Dem in.
Getting selected for London now would be good because it allows Boris to ponce around London (better than pounding the pavements of Yorkshire) slagging off Khan, and yet it doesn't seem disloyal or threatening to the current leader.
Government investments more than most.
I never did invest anything through him.
(French Open is £31 to watch this year up from £6 last year. The buggers.)
Most of the battles were straight out of after action reports.
The larder.
This has broken local government finance. As a start.
They have a difficult job, for sure, but they don’t help themselves.
I know that in Sharpe's Waterloo Cornwell talks about how he originally came up with some actual plot for the novel, but he realised that basically the battle was sufficient story in itself.
https://x.com/collinrugg/status/1927014129824366945
A trick that he over used is that the more important an event, the fewer words it gets. In one the last books, a long term majorish character dies. In half a sentence.
So you have to read very carefully and repeat to get everything that is actually happening.
https://www.imf.org/external/datamapper/CG_DEBT_GDP@GDD/CHN/FRA/DEU/ITA/JPN/GBR/USA/SGP/ESP
Edit - technically 'until bacteria spoils it' - bacteria growth starts between 40f and 140f - 2 hours is the recommended safe time 'out of fridge' for cooked meat. If the larder is sub 40f you're good
Ironically the Spanish one (Miguel de Alava) was fighting against the British at Trafalgar, and for them at Waterloo...
No one wants riots. Last summers scenes were appalling, as was the actions of the murderous bastard who started it. But if we are to get past the idea of two tier policing, then the powers that be ought to think a bit harder about communication strategy.
Britain is spending billions of pounds more on defense, but wants the money to go beyond nuclear submarines to improve local jobs and prosperity. Barrow-in-Furness may be the model." source$: https://www.nytimes.com/2025/05/12/business/uk-military-spending-economy.html
(I don't recall having read anything by Eshe Nelson before, so I can't say how credible she is.)
Be interested to see thoughts, from many of you, on the possibilities.
Dickhead racists would put two and two together and reach the answer of asylum seekers. By saying this suspect is white the racists small brains might assume, well that's ok he's not an asylum seeker so we don't have to set a hotel on fire
I have a butter bell to keep nice spreadable proper butter outside the fridge
If it's a properly cooked chicken the inside will be sterile until bacteria colonise the surface and find their way in. I think we're a bit over cautious these days.
I am sure my mum used to cook up a batch of sausage rolls before Christmas, stick them in the larder, and we still be eating them on New Year's Day. No ill effects.
The art of news management, in a democracy, is getting in first with something approximating to truth. With lots of detail.
Hence the old style of reporting - “Two men appended in burglary! At 11:32pm on Wednesday 14th May, two men were apprehended at 11 Shithole Street, by PC Savage, of the Ellsworth Police Station. Two brothers, John and Dave Stabbington, of no fixed address, were bought before magistrates at the town court on the 16th, and remanded in custody until trial.”
Helen Castor's book on the Paston family and letters (15th century) is a gem.
Bye bye then, I presume you will be off
Oh totally over cautious, I've left chicken out in an 18 degree kitchen for much longer and scarfed it.
It's what's 'officially' safe versus what you can get away with/risk you're prepared to accept
https://x.com/suespeaksup/status/1927097222560190955
B Racists don't believe white people are asylum seekers.
C. Because they assumed the white guy was not an asylum seeker racists didn't set fire to asylum seeker hotels.
D. Millions of pounds of property and expensive police manpower was saved for the taxpayer by riots being averted.
And of course, a buttery is for - wine.
But I don't think any modern terminology police are sufficiently clear on it to arrest anyone over it.
They had a hell of a lot more time off than modern workers too
Born Rwandan, black, came over as a child with parents, not an asylum seeker, not brought up Muslim, yes a link to Prevent but tenuous
That would have instantly defused so many of the most lurid conspiracies, and I do not believe we would have seen riots. Anger, major suspicion, but not riots
I hope this new policy of Total Instant Revelation is a genuine new policy, because it is the correct policy. Lying and gaslighting made it all worse
However I do not believe our police and government are that sensible
I know that the religious calendar before the reformation had a lot of inbuilt ‘bank holidays’ (all the various saints days etc).
Mind you, the corridor between the kitchen and the lounge was a 'walk-through library' apparently. Who knew?
Ok, maybe not quite that dramatic, but point being my unevidenced assumption is that saints days were more of a necessary reprieve than a sign of modern society not giving us enough free time.
That said, I do it occasionally. Esp if I wake up at 5am with a raging hangover. Then I drink a litre of water, take a xanax, a valium, some ibuprofen, aspirin and paracetamol (my wife and I did this so much in our hedonistic marriage we called it the "the proty" - ie the "protocol")
An hour later you fall fast asleep and wake up at 11am feeling absolutely fine, Fit as a fiddle. It is superb. An actual hangover cure
In Norfolk, for example, Plough Monday is the first Monday after Epiphany which was the first day back in the fields after the Christmas feasting period. I make Plough pudding every year on it. But it shows the Christmas feast was a good 2 and a half weeks
I'm sorry Hugo, we are simply not putting in an offer on that place. It had a larder instead of a pantry!
https://x.com/Aliimran112__/status/1927066107317264724