posted on Jun, 1 2020 @ 03:39 AM
The problem is that there are so many different ways in which a battle can be interesting, for different reasons, so anyone who knows the battles of
history would be hard-pressed to fix a choice on one alone.
An Englishman might want to be with the "thin red line, tipped with steel" at Balaclava, or with Churchill at the Brtiish army's last cavalry charge
at Omdurman. Perhaps an American student of history would opt for being one of the aides attending the historic conversation in Appomatox Court
House.
There are the battles with historic signnificance- Harold at Hastings, Drake hovering round the edge of the Armada, Cromwell's charge at Marston Moor,
Wolfe on the Heights of Abraham, the French flagship exploding at Nelson's Battle of the Nile.
Surely there is a particular interest when the battle contains some kind of turnaround. The Athenian fleet caught relaxing on the beach at Aegospotami
after a long day waiting for the Spartans to come out of their own port, and the Spartans suddenly sweeping in behind them. The Flemish peasants
standing together with their pikes and holding off the French armed cavalry at Courtrai. Napoleon's disaster at the battle of Leipzig, when a nervous
corporal blew up a crucial bridge before a large chunk of his army had finished passing over it.
In some cases, it would be interesting to be at an obscurely known battle in order to discover what happened. If you were present at the final battle
of Boadicea, you would find out where it was. Or the classic clan battle held in Perth in the king of Scotland's presence, between two bands of
selected champions. It would be worth being there just to sort out the different clan traditions about which clans were there and what the actual
outcome was.
Decisions, decisions.
edit on 1-6-2020 by DISRAELI because: (no reason given)