# Wars pre 1800?



## Lucky13 (Jul 9, 2007)

Like the American Independence War (is that the correct name? Is it Revolutionary War?) and others, is that ok to post questions about them here?


----------



## outremerknight (Jul 9, 2007)

The name of the 1775-1783 armed fight between Britain (not the UK) and the American colonies I suppose depends which side you're on. To the British the colonists were revolting. The Colonists were fighting for Independance.


----------



## Lucky13 (Jul 9, 2007)

True....


----------



## pbfoot (Jul 9, 2007)

outremerknight said:


> The name of the 1775-1783 armed fight between Britain (not the UK) and the American colonies I suppose depends which side you're on. To the British the colonists were revolting. The Colonists were fighting for Independance.


and lets not forget the loyalists .


----------



## Lucky13 (Jul 9, 2007)

Was the Rangers formed in a way during this conflict?


----------



## pbfoot (Jul 9, 2007)

I can't speak for the US but Butlers Rangers a local group was raised on the Niagara frontier from people fleeing the American Revoulution of which there was quite a number
Butler's Rangers, Col. John Butler's Coy


----------



## Lucky13 (Jul 9, 2007)

Good stuff PB.


----------



## mkloby (Jul 9, 2007)

pbfoot said:


> and lets not forget the loyalists .



Those bastards! Glad they all got on boats and went to England after the war was over.


----------



## ToughOmbre (Jul 9, 2007)

Lucky13 said:


> Like the American Independence War (is that the correct name? Is it Revolutionary War?) and others, is that ok to post questions about them here?



We call it the *American Revolution* or the *Revolutionary War*.


----------



## pbfoot (Jul 9, 2007)

mkloby said:


> Those bastards! Glad they all got on boats and went to England after the war was over.


Yeah well I'm still starin at you .I want my land back


----------



## mkloby (Jul 9, 2007)

pbfoot said:


> Yeah well I'm still starin at you .I want my land back



Loyalist meaning American colonists that sided with the Crown. Towards the end of the war the British took thousands of them off our hands. I suppose some of them did end up in Canada (if that's what you were getting at) - but I don't know any estimates on that.

If you want your land back - come and get it


----------



## pbfoot (Jul 9, 2007)

Lots came up, and as for the land I'll take your word for that as an Officer and a gentleman8)


----------



## timshatz (Jul 9, 2007)

pbfoot said:


> and lets not forget the loyalists .



Yeah, let's forget the loyalist. Talk about betting on the wrong horse.


----------



## pbfoot (Jul 9, 2007)

Im happy with my horse now just me comp for the dirt you stole of my family  You must have a ringing sensation from that defective bell


----------



## mkloby (Jul 9, 2007)

pbfoot said:


> Im happy with my horse now just me comp for the dirt you stole of my family  You must have a ringing sensation from that defective bell



Was your family in Canada at the time???

Mine was still in Poland/Ireland/Scotland/Croatia/Germany.


----------



## pbfoot (Jul 10, 2007)

My dads family left the US during the revoulution and settled here the story says from near Lancaster PA


----------



## timshatz (Jul 10, 2007)

Lancaster?! About 40 miles away from where I live. Place where the Amish are, that and Stoudt's Brewery. Nice place, plenty of rolling hills. Mostly farm land.


----------



## Njaco (Jul 10, 2007)

and great Apple Strudel! Just don't buy a dog around there


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Jul 10, 2007)

Well there you have it pbfoot...

Tim is living on your families land!


----------



## pbfoot (Jul 10, 2007)

Excellent. Now the negotiations


----------



## timshatz (Jul 10, 2007)

So that's where it came from!? Thought we stole it from the Indians. Turns out it was the Canadians. Who woulda thunk it?

I live almost exactly between the Brandywine Battlefield and Valley Forge. Not quite in Lancaster County (about a county away) but close enough to say, "PB, Dude, Your ancestors blew it."


----------



## timshatz (Jul 10, 2007)

pbfoot said:


> Excellent. Now the negotiations



Possession is 9/10ths of the law.


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Jul 10, 2007)

You guys could allways do a gun duel. Winner gets the land and the women!


----------



## pbfoot (Jul 10, 2007)

timshatz said:


> Possession is 9/10ths of the law.


well could change that without much fuss I'm actually surprised no one has tried to claim damages from that period. Stats show about 1 in 10 fled the revolution about 50% came north


----------



## timshatz (Jul 10, 2007)

DerAdlerIstGelandet said:


> You guys could allways do a gun duel. Winner gets the land and the women!



Dude! I've got the land, I've got the women! Besides, I win, I get an ice box with women looking like Grizzly Adams , well, the ones that don't come south earlier in life (Aka, Shania Twain). 

And you have to keep Celine Dion too! (the whole post is worth it just to toss that part in)


----------



## pbfoot (Jul 10, 2007)

timshatz said:


> Dude! I've got the land, I've got the women! Besides, I win, I get an ice box with women looking like Grizzly Adams , well, the ones that don't come south earlier in life (Aka, Shania Twain).
> 
> And you have to keep Celine Dion too! (the whole post is worth it just to toss that part in)


 I think the weather is comparable we get a little more sun and less snow Temps are pretty close . As for the women I make mine shave once a week and Celine I have no come back except for Wayne Newton


----------



## timshatz (Jul 10, 2007)

Wayne Newton! Mr Las Vegas! Ya' know, it's kind of unfortunate that both he and Celine ever leave that town. It suits them perfectly. But I digress.

Ok, Wayne is definitely the result of 100 million men and 100 million women having kids, one of them is going to be....Wayne Newton. Not sure what that means but that same situation will also produce:

-Pee Wee Herman
-Nick Lachey
-Paris Hilton
-Rosie Odonell
-Micheal Jackson
-any of the Baldwin Brothers. 

Law of large numbers has some really nasty side affects.


----------



## Emac44 (Jul 10, 2007)

Can name 2 wars before the American Revoluntary War which tie in greatly. More so 2 Rebellions both Jacobites 1715 and 1745. Both had Loyalists and Rebels but the lines of who was who and which families (Clans) took part is skewed and for what reasons. For example you had Clan Families with more than one or two persons on either side of the fence posts so to speak politically wise etc. But basically you had 3 major Clans fighting of control in the Highlands. Stewarts (Stuarts) MacDonalds (no not the burger giant) and Campbells with other Clans with alligencies to any of the aforementioned at any one time and baring in mind these alligencies could and did go back many centuries well before King MacAlpin who was a legendary King of Scotland (long before William Wallace). These family ties could be of marriage or guardianship or even by birth of one brother to another. Simply put by blood kinship. Which makes trying to sort out why politcally very difficult to do so. And added to the mix England sticking its 2 cents in plus what is known as the French Alliance( Old Alliance) for example some Clans came originally from Normandy or France itself. Like the Bruce Clan and the Stewarts for example and the Old Alliance with France came into play as well.

But the calling out of the Clans was an amazing feat. What would occur for example if the Clan Chieftan wanted to turn out his Clansmen for battle he would send a runner across the part of the Highland he controlled with a burning cross which was a symbol for all Clansmen to gather to the Chieftan's Standard at a predetermined time and place. In this process literally hundreds if not thousands of Clansmen in an Army could be raised in a relatively short time if the process called for more than just an inter Clan battle etc.

After 1745/6 the power of the Clans was broken and many a Clansman and his families were either jailed, executed or hunted down and killed, or even transported to such places as North America (Canada Or the Carolinas or Antigua) and many of which became rebels again in the War of Independance in the US or became Loyalists in either Canada or the US. Add to this after 1745 up until the early 1800s came what is known as the Clearnaces of the Highlands as well which fuelled many more Scots into the US and Canada over that 50 to 60 year period. Basically the Clearnaces of the Highlands came about when the Old Clan Chieftans decided that raising sheep and cattle on the Land was more profitable then raising of oats by Clansmen and families. These parcels of lands were called Crofts hence where the name Crofters comes from. With former Jacobites and now Crofters in the new world of the Americas from 1745 to the 1800s came a ready supply of either rebels or loyalists depending on which side of the border you was on in either Canada or the new USA. But putting politics to one side what appealled to the Scots was LAND. And Land meant power and wealth. Argiculture and farming played a significant role in the minds of the Scots in the NEW WORLD and it didn't matter who owned the LAND previously for example in the various North American Indian Tribes. (But the same can be said about the reasons Scots migrated to Australia and New Zealand as well, basically the same process occured in Australia and New Zealand). My own family came from this ideology as well. My family originally comes from the Island of Skye and had kinship with the MacDonalds of Skye and Clan MacLeod of Skye. Yes my family were also Jacobites in both rebellions of 1715 and 1745 and had lands in Skye Iona and Mull. The family is also linked to another story from Jacobite times in 1745 to that of the escape of Bonnie Prince Charlie back to France after the rebellion failed. He gave to my Clan a gift for services to the Stewart Cause which can still be obtained today. The gift was called Drambuie and was given to family Clan members who managed to smuggle Prince Charley by boat back to France. This was some time afterwards when Flora MacDonald of the Clan MacDonald of Skye helped Prince Charles to escape. If by this stage you are thinking of the song Speed Bonnie Boat it is quiet possible that members of the Clan I belong to had a hand in the smuggling of Prince Charles on that particular boat the song evolves around.

But that is getting of the point. Many Scots took part in the War of Independance in the USA but also took part in the Battles for Canada so hence the tie in with both Canada and US, Prior during and afterwards. And again the decendants of these Scots in the USA took part in the American Civil War on both the sides of the North and the South.

And going back further to Scotland the forming of Regiments of Scots came from the 1600s through to the 1800s. For example these Regiments could and did form parts of the British Army or a Police Force of the Highlands depending who had raised the Regiments and for what purpose. Regiments like the King's Own Scottish Borderers (KOSBIES) The Gordon Highlanders ,Argyle and Sutherland Highlanders. Royal Scots Dragoon Guards or the Scot's Guards, The Scot's Greys, The Black Watch Regiments all or formed or were incorporated into the Military of both Scotland and England for various purposes for the Crown. The Crown could just as easily be that of Stewart or Orange as that of King George 1 2 and 3 etc. The Duke of Cumberland William of Orange had a particular name given to him by the Clansmen after 1745. He was called STINKING BILLY a noxious weed that was found in Scotland. But the ties in with what occured in North America during the Revoluntary War has its tie in with the Jacobites and The Clearances of Scotland if you look further into it


----------



## Emac44 (Jul 11, 2007)

Of course as you know. Each Clan had its own traditional lands Chieftan or Laird etc. Each Family had not only the Chieftan or Laird but also Family Sept Names to each Clan and these could number depending on the size of the Clan in question. For example the Chieftan of the Isles MacDonald could have at least 10 or 15 Clansman Sept names under the MacDonald Banner or Chief etc. And each Clan had its own Tartan made up of a blend of different weaves blended into the wool and weave of that Tartan. For example a dark green wool weave could signify a certain make up of the family Tartan. Say for arguement sake that the Dark Green Wool Weave signified the marriage of Fiona Stewart of Balbane to Chieftan Alexander MacDonald of Mull. The blending of the 2 weaves in the marriage making up another part of the Tartan and the Weave etc. Then of course most Clans had their own Motto Heraldary Symbols War Cries Shields and Standards. And Highland Clans also had their own of behaviour and set rules. They difinitely had their own Language Celtic Gael of the Scots Their own Religion, Universities and other seats of Learning Their own Nobility seperate from England Ireland and Wales.

The Highlands of course were different not only geographically speaking to that of the Lowlands but also in some cases a different physcological make up to each other in as such the Highlanders spoke the Gael and practised the Clanship were the Lowlanders were more adjusted to that of say Northern England. The problem the English had with understanding the Highlanders was one of specifics. The English viewed Highland Scotland as it is seen geographically on a map. For example looking at whole of Scotland as one would read a map of the entire United Kingdom. This is a problem as the Highlands have to be literally turned on its axis with the Outer and Inner Hebridies at the bottom of the map and you gaze towards Europe. Which means looking at Scotland from West to East. The Highlands traditional thinking to the Highland Scot begins in the Western Islands of Scotland with the power base resting with the Lord of the Isles Chieftan Clan MacDonald or the Clan Donald of Skye. And that is where quiet numerous problems occur with the English dealing with the Clans. They look upon some one like Robert the Bruce as being King of Scotland Or James Stewart etc. But he is King yes but the power base in the Highlands came from one or 2 or even 3 Clan Families in the Highlands and rivalary accordingly. There was an old Clanic saying in Scotland " There is no joy without Clan Donald". And the importance of these Clan Families in Scotland was the formation of Scottish Warrior Clansman Farmer and the make up of the families in Highland Scotland. 

For example one historian regarded that the Scottish Clans in their structure could be compared with the Mafia Families of Sicily in the make up of the family etc. Lowlanders if venturing into the Highlands for business or family reasons often signed their will before entering the Highlands or so its is reported. The Highlands in themselves could be regarded like entering Indian Territory of Western USA. But this does not bring into account that each Clan had its own courtesy and behaviour. For example if a Chieftan from one Clan was to visit another. No weapons were to be worn except maybe a Skeen Dhu. Claymores Dirks Pistols Targes had to be left say for example on a table at the main door of hall where the visitation was taking place. And all courtesy was extended to each one and other. Hospitality was a main stay of the Clans to each other in these events. 

The Chieftan or Laird was like any other Vassal Lord. He was the Strong Man of the area and demanded loyalty via blood kinship and oath from those under him. At times he was the only law and order around and could execute imprison or hold for ransom any one he decided was fit for his displeasure. But he could also give alligence to say for example the Crown or one of the larger Clans depending on circumstances of the day. Banditry was also a problem as various Clans would raid each other and blood fueds arose from this banditry. Cattle stealing was a problem as cattle meant wealth. But the blood fueds could and did occur from insults or slights to other family members from time to time or a killing unlawful or lawful had occured. Its little wonder why the Lowlanders felt unsafe in the Highlands.

In retrospect as well the Waterways around the Western Islands of Scotland were also areas of trade from Textiles Minerals Alcohol Barley all types of Grain Malt Cattle Sheep and other livestock and most importantly transportation of people to and from the Islands to the Mainland. And of course the spread of influence by the Major Clans Education and Christianity etc. Hence why the English failed to understand the significance of the Western Highland Chiefs into Scotland.

Now most people today have a romantic type of tingly touchy feeling about Scotland. Most have seen Brave Heart with Mel Gibson. To say the movie was historically inaccurate would be an understatement. Yes there was a William Wallace yes he was Scottish but no he wasn't a Highlander. Wallace came from around Paisely or the Glasgow area of Scotland as best as some historians believe. He studied it appears around the time of the 13th Century in one of the Monastries set up in Scotland. From what I understand Wallace came from a quiet well to do moderately well off family at the time who owed alliegence to the Stewarts. Wallace was also quiet well educated by the standard of the day. And no he wasn't quiet the Bobbin Boy Gibson Protrays him as in the movie. He also was not likely to have had a romantic interlude with the Princess of Wales as suggested in the movie. As the Princess of Wales at the time was only 3 years old just prior to Wallace's execution. But also there were Clans clammering for promince in the Lowlands as well from Bruce Stewart Baiols and several other families at the time. Wallace by all means is a figure of intrigue and one of enduring freedom in Scotland but there were others and not just Robert the Bruce who in 1314 at the Battle of Bannock Burn defeated Edward 11s Army but it wasn't until some 7 to 8 years later after this battle that England finally recognised the right of Scotland to independance. There were such figures as the real life Rob Roy MacGregor a Highlander from the Clan of MacGregor. He was some what of a bandit come tax collector until he fell out of favour with the Lord Chief Justice who if I remember was a Campbell over debts MacGregor owed and a fair amount of skullduggery came about due to this. 

Scotland can be seen as the type of romantic place with the idea of the Scottish Clansman with Claymore Kilt Targe Dirk at the ready with Bag Pipe Music and Drums playing in the back ground etc and the Clansman ready to do battle etc. But Scotland of course is more than that and I have just given a short convuluted history of such. Scotland means THE BLOOD IS STRONG and effects those of us with Celtic Scottish Blood in different ways. The BLOOD OF SCOTLAND can call in a variety of different ways. from Family and the Clanship our Heritage to our Language( long lost in most) Calls to our mind set and it calls us HOME. It calls to us by the MUSIC and to the HISTORY of SCOTLAND. But mostly it calls to our WARLIKE CELTIC NATURE and this is shared both with Lowlanders and Highlanders in equal proportions.

It is no small wonder why Scots played very significant roles in North America Australia and New Zealand. In particular in North America with Canada and the US after the rebellions in Scotland with Scots taking up arms against or for the Crown in the New World of North America


----------



## Njaco (Jul 11, 2007)

Nice post Emac.


----------



## Emac44 (Jul 11, 2007)

Njaco said:


> Nice post Emac.



Thanks Scotland as you could imagine is one my all time favourite subjects. Sorry to get of from the thread that was began, but felt compelled to type why Scots were in the Americas and why they took part etc


----------



## renrich (Jul 12, 2007)

E-Mac, good post, thank you. In fact, the Scotch-Irish as they have come to be called played a major role in the fomenting of the American Revolution. When those groups came to America they carried with them the hatred caused by the persecution of those ethnic groups during the centuries before the American Revolution by the English. In fact the friction between the Scotch-Irish and the English was still in evidence in 1860 and was a contributing factor to the War Between the States. The first Scotch-Irish president was Andrew Jackson and he helped found the Democrat Party.


----------



## pbfoot (Jul 12, 2007)

Just took a look at the list of loyalists and there seems to be lots of Scots judging by surname including mine . In retrospect it looks like the Sunnis vs S'hia death and mayhem if you weren't part of the mob. In the pivotal battle of Yorktown French troops outnumbered Americans 3to 1
http://www.uelac.org/PDF/loyalist.pdf


----------



## mkloby (Jul 12, 2007)

pbfoot said:


> Just took a look at the list of loyalists and there seems to be lots of Scots judging by surname including mine . In retrospect it looks like the Sunnis vs S'hia death and mayhem if you weren't part of the mob. In the pivotal battle of Yorktown French troops outnumbered Americans 3to 1
> http://www.uelac.org/PDF/loyalist.pdf



The Scot blood in me comes from Roy - the Robertson clan. What about you???


----------



## pbfoot (Jul 12, 2007)

mkloby said:


> The Scot blood in me comes from Roy - the Robertson clan. What about you???


Stewart same as my surname


----------



## Njaco (Jul 13, 2007)

The first documented source of Scots in the new world comes from the Saga of Eric the Red and the Viking expedition to Vinland, modern Newfoundland in 1010AD. Viking prince Thorfinn Karlsefni led an expedition to Vinland (the land of wine) and took with him 160 Viking men, three ships, and two Scottish slaves, a man named Haki and a woman named Hekja, who were reputed to be as swift or faster than a deer at running. When the long boats moored along the coast, they sent the slaves ashore to run along the waterfront to gauge whether it was safe for the rest of the crew to follow. After the Scots survived a day of baiting for potential foes (native or animal), the Vikings deemed it safe to spend the night ashore. The expedition was abandoned three years later; the original sagas were passed on in an oral tradition and then written down 250 years later. The sagas demonstrate how daring and pioneering Viking culture was at the turn of the first millennium and are open to considerable breadth of interpretation.

An apocryphal voyage in 1398 by a captain named Zichmni, believed to be Henry I Sinclair, Earl of Orkney, who was of joint Norse-Scottish title and family, is also claimed to have reached Atlantic Canada as well as New England.

The first attempts in earnest to entice Scottish settlers to Canada began as early as 1622, when Sir William Alexander obtained permission from King James VI of Scotland (James I of England) to establish new Scotland or Nova Scotia. Only a small number of Scottish families settled in Canada, however, prior to the conquest of New France in 1759. Those who did make a home on Canadian soil were Highlanders who sought political and religious asylum following the failed Jacobite uprisings in Scotland in 1715 and 1745.

Those immigrants who arrived after 1759 were mainly Highland farmers who had been forced off their rented land or "crofts" due to the Highland Clearances (Scottish Gaelic: Fuadaich nan Gàidheal) to make way for sheep grazing. Most of these Scots settled in what is now the Atlantic coast. A large groups of Ulster Scots, many of whom had first settled in New Hampshire, moved to Truro, Nova Scotia, in 1761. Their descendants have provided many of the country's leading justices, statesmen, clergymen, businessmen and scholars. In 1772 a wave of Scots began to arrive in Prince Edward Island. In 1773 the little brig Hector brought 200 Scots to Pictou, starting a new stream of Highland emigration. To this day the town's slogan is "The Birthplace of New Scotland". At the end of the 18th century Cape Breton Island became a centre of Scottish settlement where only Scottish Gaelic was spoken.

Some info about the early wars.

The northern English colonies increased the competitive pressure on New France for control of the fur trade and other commerce on the Great Lakes and along the upper Mississippi valley. In response, the French built new forts on the Great Lakes and hastened their plans to settle the Mississippi River valley and "Louisiana." With the outbreak of war in Europe between France and England in 1689, the competition in North America escalated into a subsidiary war.* Although the English colonial population far surpassed the French in North America—250,000 to 12,000 in 1682—the competitive edge lay not with numbers but with alliances, strategy, and execution. After eight years of attacks and counterattacks, however, the French and English negotiated a fragile peace in 1697, neither side the victor.

The strategic center of the war was Albany, New York, situated 150 miles due north of Manhattan and 225 miles due south of Montreal, the fur trading center of New France. This north-south line along the Hudson River marked the boundary at the time between the New England colonies and Iroquois territory to the west. "_Albany's fur trade competition_," writes historian Alan Taylor, "_merged into both the imperial rivalry between England and France for commercial dominance and the Iroquois' struggle to maintain their edge in a violent and disrupted world of native peoples_" For the Indians are the third major party in this war. The Iroquois allied with the English and the Algonquian with the French, all anxiously aware that their fates had become inextricably linked.

 French-English in Northeast, American Beginnings: 1492-1690, Primary Resources in U.S. History and Literature, Toolbox Library, National Humanities Center


----------



## Emac44 (Jul 13, 2007)

renrich said:


> E-Mac, good post, thank you. In fact, the Scotch-Irish as they have come to be called played a major role in the fomenting of the American Revolution. When those groups came to America they carried with them the hatred caused by the persecution of those ethnic groups during the centuries before the American Revolution by the English. In fact the friction between the Scotch-Irish and the English was still in evidence in 1860 and was a contributing factor to the War Between the States. The first Scotch-Irish president was Andrew Jackson and he helped found the Democrat Party.



Renrich we are Scots or of Scottish decent etc. Scotch is what you drink another name for WHISKY. You call a person from Ireland Irish man or woman etc etc. You call a person from Scotland Scottish or Scotsman or Scotswoman. Not SCOTCH ok. Sorry for being picky but I don't pour very well into a tumbler glass ok. Thank you for your comment about my post and I am sorry if I seem picky but I was brought up to know I come from a Scottish Family not a Scotch one ok


----------



## timshatz (Jul 13, 2007)

Emac, not to be picky either but around here (Mid-Altantic States of the US) that gets used by the Scotch all the time. Scottish is used a single decendent, Scotch-whatever is used for multiple. And everybody around here is a multiple.


----------



## Emac44 (Jul 13, 2007)

timshatz said:


> Emac, not to be picky either but around here (Mid-Altantic States of the US) that gets used by the Scotch all the time. Scottish is used a single decendent, Scotch-whatever is used for multiple. And everybody around here is a multiple.



Multiple what precisely Tim? But as I said Tim SCOTCH is a drink to be A SCOT OR SCOTTISH is far from being a liquidified quantity


----------



## Njaco (Jul 14, 2007)

Emac, I can vouch for Tim that its just a mannerism in the Northeast, instead of Scot we say Scotch. No harm intended. Kinda like we say Canadian Goose instead of Canada Goose (proper name). Its a wonder people understand what we're saying!  We never go to the beach but we love going to the shore!!


----------



## renrich (Jul 15, 2007)

Emac, I apologise to you because I know that the proper term to use would be Scots Irish but I guess that the term popular usage is in play here. If you look on the map that pbfoot posted they use Scotch Irish there. Anyway, the film, "The Last Of the Mohicans" with Daniel Day Lewis, if you watch closely shows the prejudice that the English had toward the Scots Irish settlers who were settled on the frontier. They have also have been called "Borderers" and many famous frontiersmen in American History were of that racial group, Daniel Boone, David Crockett, Sam Houston, Joe Walker, etc.


----------



## mkloby (Jul 15, 2007)

Emac44 said:


> Multiple what precisely Tim? But as I said Tim SCOTCH is a drink to be A SCOT OR SCOTTISH is far from being a liquidified quantity



Just a cultural difference Emac. Maybe they don't use that term around your neck of the woods. Like they said - it is a common reference in the US. You can even look up census statistics on various groups such as Irish, Scottish, or Scotch-Irish.


----------



## bomber (Jul 16, 2007)

renrich said:


> Anyway, the film, "The Last Of the Mohicans" with Daniel Day Lewis, if you watch closely shows the prejudice that the English had toward the Scots Irish settlers who were settled on the frontier.



Cricky you're so right... I thank Hollywood, for without it there'd be no accurate portrayal of historic events...

btw... it wasn't

"the prejudice that the English had toward the Scots Irish settlers"

It was...

"the prejudice that the English upper classes had towards the lower class settlers"

It didn't make a difference whether you were Scotish crofter, Irish farmer, Welsh miner or Yorkshire millrat... you were common white trash to be looked down on, and at the very best cannon fodder.

The constant portrayal of the majority of 'English' as being some master race, that lauded it over everyone else is inacurate and tiring... when the real numbers of the landed gentry (who stole farm more land from the Common Englishman) were very very vert few.

And if you watch Rob Roy, with Leam Neilson you'll see Landed Scotish gentry weren't shy when it came to sticking the knife into their own lower class people..


Simon


----------



## Emac44 (Jul 16, 2007)

Whoa gentlemen I wasn't serious and no I am not offended. Sorry if you thought I was. I can understand its just a type of generic term from your part of the world. SCOTCH etc. I was in part joking


----------



## Emac44 (Jul 16, 2007)

bomber said:


> Cricky you're so right... I thank Hollywood, for without it there'd be no accurate portrayal of historic events...
> 
> btw... it wasn't
> 
> ...



Simon tell me about it. One being an Australian with supposively convict/colonial attitudes and artributes looked down upon by Higher British Upper Class TWITS and having definite Scottish Celtic Blood and heritage to match etc. As for Rob Roy and Scottish gentry they were no different from English Gentry JUST BASTARDS with a different accent


----------



## timshatz (Jul 16, 2007)

Emac44 said:


> Whoa gentlemen I wasn't serious and no I am not offended. Sorry if you thought I was. I can understand its just a type of generic term from your part of the world. SCOTCH etc. I was in part joking



No worries, didn't take it seriously myself. Just something we're kicking around.


----------



## Emac44 (Jul 16, 2007)

Oops forgot to tell you my surname. Its MacKinnon from Clan MacKinnon of Skye. My family immigrated to Australia in the 1840s. Which makes me 5th generation Australian. I am still all Aussie but I do love my Scottish Heritage and Celtic Blood. Both keep you warm hot blooded and PROUD. I raised my kids the same as my father and mother raised me. Be proud of Family Country and Loyalty towards family name country and heritage. Give respect to others but above all have respect for your family name in all things and never besmirch it in any actions not befitting the family name. Also to except responsibilities for your own actions. These maybe old fashioned ideas according to some but they work for me and my family


----------



## renrich (Jul 16, 2007)

I am not surpried to hear of your values and heritage, Emac. One can tell because of your posts about your antecedents. Hats off to you. My bloodlines are similar to yours and I value our heritage.


----------



## Emac44 (Jul 16, 2007)

FAMILY Renrich its FAMILY and that is how I raise mine. Not interested one bit in the NEO SOCIAL ideas of self indulgence and self promotion of ignorance and gross attitudes of indifference from today's society. as I have instructed my kids to say to society. Society does not put bread in our stoamches nor a roof over our heads. We live in society but we are the masters of our own industry. Be proud of who you are and your family.

Renrich its part of my overall upbringing. I was raised by a Mother and Father who schooled us in family respect for each other and I have imparted that education to my own children. And being of Scottish Bloodline and Family I have carried onto the next generations to our Family. I do not believe in a society that says to its members that its ok to behave as animals and have no regards for others in society. Thank you for your comments Renrich


----------



## renrich (Jul 16, 2007)

Well said Emac. The world would be a better place with more people like you around. Both my parents were raised on farms in Texas and their parents were living on the frontier when they were young. In fact my Grandfather Connally was a Texas Ranger in 1882. My father who was too old to serve in WW2 had ten siblings and four served in the Navy, Marines and AAF with three seeing combat, two extensive combat. No mother in Texas had more sons in the military than my Grandmother Connally. Great Grandfathers on all sides served in the Armies of the Confederacy. No wonder we had pioneer values taught to us.


----------



## Njaco (Jul 16, 2007)

Emac, I admire your resolve. All those values I try to impart to my children (although I'm from an English/German bloodline) and its a struggle. Divorce and 2 families sometimes is a strain. But reading how you persevre, just boosts my commitment to my family.

It is family. Something this world has lost the last 40 years.


----------



## bomber (Jul 17, 2007)

Njaco said:


> It is family. Something this world has lost the last 40 years.



Do you think the worlds lost it ?

The whole world or just those brought up in a materialistic environment ?
How many families break up citing money issues as being the prime cause for disharmony..

It seems to me in the instrustialised (western) countries of the world we've forgotten whats really important in life, and replaced it with wanting more and more money and possessions.

I've refused to work away from home taking lower payed jobs to be with my family and kids.... and I've brought my kids up to not want the newest item, be it a pair of trainers or mobile phone that's just come out on the market. To question whether they really need it or are just being made to belive they need it, whilst understanding that a bit of what you fancy doesn't do you any harm...

My son has an X-box.... he doesn't really need it, however he wanted one, and bought it out of his Birthday and Christmas money..

Simon


----------



## Njaco (Jul 17, 2007)

Yes, I meant the world. Your point about the materialistic western countries I agree with. But does that hold true for Sudan or Rwanda? The ME is a wealth of family values?

A core belief in family with a modicum of faith is whats missing. If you believe in family, it spreads to those you meet and outward through the community. The values of a family can be interposed on the country as a whole and I believe respect, understanding and peace can be the result.



> from Emac...I was raised by a Mother and Father who schooled us in family respect for each other and I have imparted that education to my own children.



The key word is respect, the core of family values. Do you think we would have Bosnia, Estonia, Iraq, Iran, Hamas, Fattah, the Westboro Baptist Church, etc. fighting, bitchin, protesting, killing, if they respected each other?

I applaud Emac for his part in upholding that value.

I know what you mean by the games and money. I also sacrifice for my kids even though I'm divorced and have them half the time. But I refuse to move away, even though it hurts my money-making potential. I will be living in a 5 bedroom house in a few weeks even though its only me and my pre-wife. We all sacrifice at some point, its just how deep are we willing to sacrifice. Thats family.


----------



## Emac44 (Jul 17, 2007)

Gentlemen I too was married once before. The struggle was to continue imparting family values to my own son whilst the family broke down into divorce etc. However that was just an inconvience a hic up in the road. I still instilled into my son family values which he still has. I received his report card for the 1st semester this year. His attitude at school and his behaviour at school was marked with STRAIGHT "A"s in class in all subjects. His academic achievements varied from English and mathematics with "A"s Bs And one C in other subjects. Which I am extremely pleased with. But I am more pleased to the fact that his teachers resoundly report back to me that my son is a pleasure to teach as his behaviour and his dilligence to his school studies is excellent. Just means to me as a parent my ex wife and I raised a young man who has good manners and is proud of his family name. And if it seems I am bragging. Well I am sorry I am. I am pleased with my sons behaviour and his school report card for Year 9 secondary schooling. And I too was raised in a family that didn't have oodles of money. What we didn't have we didn't miss. You made do with what you had and appreciated what you was given. When I was first married to my ex wife same ideals carried through. After I was divorced from my ex wife I was promoted at work. And its only in the last 6 years I have been abled to spoil my son a little more but made sure it wasn't excessive and still informed him of the value of money work and saving.

When in 2003 I managed to save enough money for another deposit on my current home 3 years after my divorce. I took my son along with me to show him all the fundamentals in buying a home and areas of mortgage finance banking and dealing with real estate agents etc. He came to understand that without work without goals you achieve nothing. Some people asked me why I took my son with me and showed him how things were done as he was only a kid. I answered you teach your child the value of money your way. I will teach mine child my way


----------



## Njaco (Jul 17, 2007)

Too true, Emac. One of my pet peeves with our current school system here in the states.

Do they know how to secure a mortgage?
Do they know how to buy a new car?
Do they know about budgeting?
Do they know about the local court system and how to survive it (I'm talking traffic tickets and minor infractions as I'm sure we've all done at one time )?

Basic everyday life trials and tribulations. I try to teach my kids the same.

Wow, talk about off topic!


----------



## Stupid (Jul 17, 2007)

Ah in the immortal words of my father "Next time I'll beat you until you stop bleeding!"
A lot of kids these days don't get wooped for doing bad things, they get put into a corner and then when they come out they get a lollipop for learning there lesson. I don't know about elsewhere but America's values are getting warped.

D.C. Sniper Coverage: up to one week after the case was closed.
Virginia Tech: A a couple weeks to a month depending on where you are.
200 Iraqi's dying in car bombs: 15 seconds
Anna Nicole Smith's death: Still talking about it.


----------



## Emac44 (Jul 17, 2007)

Stupid I don't shield my son from any of what you mentioned. But I do impart with him what to put into perspectives. I explain to him about the Media and its warped attitudes on reporting the news. When for example the news networks covered more on Paris Hilton going to jail then the space shuttle etc. I explained to my son. If you break the law this is what occurs no matter who you are. left it at that and went onto the Space Shuttle being more important scientifically then some spoiled litte rich girl getting thrown into jail for drunk driving. I have never wooped my kids but given firm balanced discipline there is a difference between that and arse wooping a kid

And yes Nijaco talk about being off subject. its gone from post 1800s warfare to how Emac raises his children and Emac's Scottish Heritage


----------



## Njaco (Jul 18, 2007)

Sorry if I started that.  

Here we go....

List of wars 1500â€“1799 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

*List of wars 1500–1799*
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

*1500 - 1599*
1500–1504 Second Italian War 
1508–1516 War of the League of Cambrai 
1520–1522 Castilian War of the Communities 
1521–1526 Italian War of 1521 
1526–1530 War of the League of Cognac 
1531-1532 War of the two brothers 
1535–1538 Italian War of 1535 
1542–1546 Italian War of 1542 
1551–1559 Italian War of 1551 
1499–1503 Third Turkish-Venetian War 
1509–1513 Ottoman Civil War 
1514–1516 Ottoman-Safavid War 
1516–1517 Ottoman-Mamluk War 
1520–1521 Spanish Conquest of Mexico 
1520–1522 Uprising of the Comuneros in Castile 
1521–1523 The Swedish War of Liberation 
1521–1526 Ottoman-Hungarian War 
1522 Ottoman Conquest of Rhodes 
1522 The Knights' War 
1524–1525 The Peasants' War 
1524–1697 Spanish wars against the Mayas. 
1526–1528 Hungarian Civil War 
1526–1555 Ottoman-Safavid War 
1526–1555 Fourth Turkish-Venetian War 
1526-1576 Mughal Conquest of India 
1528–1533 Ottoman-Habsburg War in Hungary 
1531 Swiss Civil War 
1532-1544 Spanish Conquest of Peru 
1532–1546 Ottoman-Spanish Habsburg War in the Mediterranean 
1533–1536 The Counts' War in Denmark 
1542-1543 Dacke War 
1537–1544 Renewed Ottoman-Habsburg War in Hungary 
1546–1547 Schmalkaldic War 
1551–1562 Ottoman-Habsburg War in Hungary 
1551–1581 Ottoman-Habsburg War in the Mediterranean 
1552–1555 Charles V's war with Maurice of Saxony 
1552 Conquest of Kazan 
1554–1557 Second Russo–Swedish War 
1557–1571 Livonian War 
1559–1560 Scottish Rebellion against the French 
1562–1598 Wars of Religion (aka War of the Three Henries or Huguenot Wars) in France 
1562–1563 First War of Religion 
1567–1568 Second War of Religion 
1568–1570 Third War of Religion 
1572–1573 Fourth War of Religion 
1575–1576 Fifth War of Religion 
1576–1577 Sixth War of Religion 
1580 Seventh War of Religion (Lovers' War) 
1585–1598 Eighth War of Religion 
1589–1598 Franco-Spanish War 
1562–1568 Ottoman-Habsburg War in Hungary 
1563–1570 Northern Seven Years' War (aka Dano–Swedish War) 
1568–1571 Morisco Revolt in Spain 
1568–1648 Eighty Years' War (war of Dutch independence) 
1568–1609 First Phase 
1588–1654 Dutch-Portuguese War 
1621–1648 Second Phase 
1570-1573 Fifth Ottoman-Venetian War 
1570–1595 Twenty-five Years' War 
1570-1871 Native revolts against the Spanish empire in the Philippines 
1571 Russo-Crimean War (1571) 
1577–1582 Livonian War 
1577–1590 Turkish-Persian War 
1580–1583 Portuguese Civil War 
1585–1604 Anglo–Spanish War (Defeat of the Spanish Armada, 1588) 
1590–1595 Fourth Russo–Swedish War 
1592–1598 Japanese invasions of Korea (Japan against Korea and China) 
1593–1606 "Long War" between the Habsburgs and the Turks 
1593–1617 Moldavian Magnate Wars 
1594–1603 Nine Years War in Ireland (Tyrone Rebellion) 
1596–1597 Cudgel War in Finland 

*1600 - 1699*
1600–1611 Polish–Swedish War 
1602–1612 Turkish-Persian War 
1609–1618 Russo–Polish War 
1609 First Anglo-Powhatan War 
1610–1617 Ingrian War 
1611–1613 War of Kalmar 
1614–1621 Polish-Turkish War 
1616–1618 Turkish-Persian War 
1617–1629 Polish-Swedish wars 
1618–1648 Thirty Years' War 
1618–1625 Bohemian/Palatine Phase 
1618–1629 Austro-Transylvanian War 
1625–1629 Danish Phase 
1625–1630 Anglo–Spanish War 
1626–1630 Anglo-French War 
1627–1631 War of the Mantuan Succession 
1630–1635 Swedish Phase 
1635–1648 French Phase 
1635–1659 Franco-Spanish War 
1643–1645 The "Hannibal War" (aka Torstenssons War) 
1645 Renewed Austro-Transylvanian War 
1620-1645 Manchu Conquest of China 
1623–1638 Turkish-Persian War 
1625–1629 Huguenot Uprising in France 
1627-1636 Manchu invasion of Korea 
1632–1634 Smolensk War 
1634 Polish-Swedish War 
1637 Pequot War 
1639–1645 Kieft's War 
1639–1652 Wars of the Three Kingdoms (aka the British Civil Wars) 
1639 First Bishops' War 
1640 Second Bishops’ War 
1641–1650 Irish Confederate Wars 
1642–1646 First English Civil War 
1644–1647 Wars of the Three Kingdoms in Scotland 
1648 Second English Civil War 
1649–1651 Third English Civil War 
1649–1651 Cromwellian conquest of Ireland 
1650–1652 Cromwellian conquest of Scotland 
1640–1656 Catalan Revolt 
1640–1668 Portuguese War of Independence 
1640–1701 French and Iroquois Wars (aka "Iroquois Wars" or the "Beaver Wars") 
1641–1649 Wars of Castro 
1644 Second Anglo-Powhatan War 
1620-1645 Manchu Conquest of China 
1645–1669 Sixth Turkish-Venetian War ("Cretan War") 
1648–1653 The Fronde 
1648–1649 First Fronde 
1650–1653 Second Fronde 
1648–1660 The Deluge/Northern Wars, a series of wars involving Poland, Sweden, Brandenburg, Russia and Transylvania and Denmark-Norway 
1648–1654 Khmelnytsky Rebellion 
1654–1667 Russo-Polish War (1654–1667) 
1655–1656 Swedish-Brandenburg War 
1656–1658 Russo-Swedish War (1656–1658) 
1656–1660 Danish-Swedish War 
1657–1660 Dutch-Swedish War 
1652–1654 First Anglo-Dutch War 
1654–1659 Anglo-Spanish War 
1655–1660 Peach Tree War 
1657–1662 Turkish-Transylvanian War 
1662–1664 Austro-Turkish War 
1665–1667 Second Anglo-Dutch War 
1667–1668 War of Devolution 
1670–1671 Stenka Razin Rebellion 
1671–1676 Polish-Turkish War 
1672–1678 Franco-Dutch War 
1672–1674 Third Anglo-Dutch War 
1672–1679 War between Brandenburg and Sweden 
1675–1679 Scanian War between Sweden and Denmark–Norway 
1673-1681 War of the Three Feudatories 
1675–1677 King Philip's War 
1676–1681 Russo-Turkish War 
1681-1707 War of 27 years between Mughals and the Maratha Empire 
1682–1699 War of the Holy League 
1684-1699 Seventh Turkish-Venetian War 
1683–1684 War of the Reunions 
1685 Monmouth's Rebellion 
1685-1689 Sino-Russian War 
1686–1700 Russo-Turkish War 
1687–1689 Crimean campaigns 
1695–1696 Azov campaigns 
1688–1697 War of the Grand Alliance 
1689–1697 King William's War North American part of the War of the Grand Alliance 
1689–1691 Williamite war in Ireland 
1689–1691 Jacobite Rising in Scotland 
1696 Chinese-Mongolian War 
1699–1700 Darién War 

*1700 - 1799*
1700–1721 Great Northern War 
1710–1711 Pruth Campaign 
1715–1717 Polish revolt against King Augustus II 
1701–1714 War of Spanish Succession 
1702–1713 Queen Anne's War The North American part of the War of Spanish Succession 
1703–1711 Hungarian Revolt 
1707–1709 Astrakhan Rebellion 
1711 Tuscarora War 
1712–1714 First Fox War 
1714–1718 Eighth Turkish-Venetian War 
1715–1717 Yamasee War 
1715–1716 Jacobite Rising known as "The 'Fifteen" 
1716–1718 Austro-Turkish War 
1718–1720 War of the Quadruple Alliance 
1722 Dummer's War in Maine 
1722–1723 Russo-Persian War, 1722–1723 
1722–1727 Turco-Persian War, 1722–1727 
1727–1729 Spanish war between England and France 
1728–1737 Second Fox War 
1730–1736 Turco-Persian War, 1730–1736 
1733–1738 War of the Polish Succession 
1736–1739 Russo-Turkish War, 1736–1739 
1737–1739 Austro-Turkish War, 1737–1739 
1740–1748 War of the Austrian Succession 
1739–1748 War of Jenkins' Ear 
1740–1742 1st Silesian War 
1741–1743 Hats' Russian War 
1744–1748 King George's War The North American part of the War of Austrian Succession 
1744–1745 2nd Silesian War 
1744–1748 First Carnatic War 
1745–1746 Jacobite Rising known as "The 'Forty–five" 
1743–1747 Turco–Persian War 
1756–1763 Seven Years' War 
1749–1754 Second Carnatic War 
1754–1763 French and Indian War (U.S. name for North American phase) 
1756–1763 3rd Silesian War 
1759–1763 Anglo-Cherokee War 
1761–1763 Spanish-Portuguese War 
1763–1766 Pontiac's Rebellion 
1766–1799 Anglo–Mysore Wars 
1766–1769 First Anglo-Mysore War 
1780–1784 Second Anglo-Mysore War 
1789–1792 Third Anglo-Mysore War 
1798–1799 Fourth Anglo-Mysore War 
1768–1774 Russo–Turkish War, 1768–1774 
1768–1776 War of the Confederation of Bar in Poland 
1773–1774 Pugachev's Rebellion 
1774–1783 First Anglo–Maratha War 
1775–1783 American Revolutionary War or American War of Independence 
1778–1783 Anglo-French War 
1779–1783 Anglo–Spanish War 
1780–1784 Fourth Anglo-Dutch War 
1777–1779 War of the Bavarian Succession 
1779–1879 Cape Frontier Wars 
1779 1st Cape Frontier War 
1793 2nd Cape Frontier War 
1799–1801 3rd Cape Frontier War 
1811 4th Cape Frontier War 
1818–1819 5th Cape Frontier War 
1834–1836 6th Cape Frontier War 
1846 7th Cape Frontier War 
1851–1853 8th Cape Frontier War 
1877–1878 9th Cape Frontier War 
1785–1787 Dutch Civil War 
1787–1791 Austro-Turkish War, 1787–1791 
1787–1792 Russo–Turkish War, 1787–1792 
1788–1790 Gustav III's Russian War (aka Russo-Swedish War) 
1788 The Lingonberry War between Denmark-Norway and Sweden 
1791–1804 Haitian Revolution 
1792 War in defence of the constitution in Poland 
1792–1802 French Revolutionary Wars 
1792–1797 War of the First Coalition 
1792–1795 Franco-Prussian War 
1792–1797 Franco-Austrian War 
1793–1795 Franco-Spanish War 
1793–1795 Franco-Dutch War 
1793–1802 Franco-British War 
1793–1796 Revolt in the Vendée 
1798–1801 War of the Second Coalition 
1798–1799 Franco-Russian War 
1799–1801 Franco-Austrian War 
1798–1801 Quasi-War 
1794 Kosciuszko Uprising in Poland 
1795–1804 United Irishmen Revolt see Irish Rebellion of 1798, against British rule in Ireland. 
1796 Persian Expedition of Catherine the Great


----------



## Emac44 (Jul 19, 2007)

Good God Nijaco. Seems we humans are a cranky mob when it comes to how MANY WARS you posted up on the site


----------



## Njaco (Jul 19, 2007)

And thats just the 300 years since 1500. After 1800 should be a doozy too!


----------



## Graeme (Jul 20, 2007)

This is from the book, 'The Odd Body-3', by Dr Stephen Juan. 2007.

Believe it or not, human warfare is actually declining. Over the 20th century, combat deaths exceeded 100 million and over 170 million people died at the hands of governments. This was due to the enormous growth of war technology which still continues at an alarming rate. However, as a ratio of total population, adult war deaths have plummeted, especially in modern democracies. As anthropologist Lawrence H. Keeley argues "Archaeological evidence tells us that with very few exceptions, most foraging societies and early agricultural civilisations were at war almost incessantly- or at least far more frequently than modern societies today. Whereas among foraging and early agricultural societies an average of 25% of adults would die by warfare, this figure fell to less than 10% in early modern societies (about 200 years ago)."
According to Lloyd deMause an average of less than 1% of adult deaths among modern democratic nations today are war casualties.
This should make us pause, and maybe generate a little hope.


----------



## ToughOmbre (Jul 20, 2007)

Graeme said:


> Believe it or not, human warfare is actually declining.



Wonder if ant warfare is declining or increasing. They're the only other species of animals, besides humans, that wage war.


----------



## Negative Creep (Jul 21, 2007)

In my view, there will always be wars as long as there are humans. Perhaps it is because after two massive wars and new global media, we now understand what is involved in war. A few hundred years ago war was unlikely to affect civilians unless the combat occurred near them. Otherwise, their only exposure would be veteran's stories or descriptions. The First World War was the turning point, as the scale and cost of the fighting was far greater than they could have ever envisaged. Within te last 50 years or so, we have also developed weapons that could cause massive destruction. In 1900, no nation possessed a weapon remotely close to a nuclear weapon; there was no possibility of mutually assured destruction. There is also the growth in democracy, and that we are able to question or protest against actions that we disagree with. Another possibility (at least in the West) is the decline of religion, and people more willing to conserve their earthly life


----------



## plan_D (Jul 28, 2007)

It's quite an impressive list; that isn't even complete as it doesn't list those without names; those that were never declared; those between colonies; local wars or wars between pirates and companies with no nation politically involved (but a war nevertheless). And that doesn't include the skirmishes the colonial nations were having at sea time and time again without a declaration of war.

Recently I've been delving into the naval of the British Isles for past few weeks and it's safe to say, I'm quite shocked by what I didn't know - and in fact what most people seem not to know. 

To think of all the Scottish that have a certain dislike for England because of the current situation; without realising that Scotland was too one of the colonial powers of Europe with exactly the same aims as England. So, in all reality, nothing bad can be said about England without looking at any other nation in Europe; including Scotland, and realising they were exactly the same. 

It's interesting to note that until Sir Francis Drake circumnavigated the globe (1579 - 1580); English navigators were considered some of the worst in the world. The Scots were considered to be superior when it came to ocean voyages - and even had a colony in the Caribbean. While England found no friends in Europe; Scotland was considered a worthy ally - throughout the ages Scotland found friends against England from Sweden to Spain. 

The Royal Navy had a lot of influence on the wars between Scotland and England; and many times saved England from a potential disaster which would have been a combined French/Scottish invasion - or Spanish/Scottish invasion (although some Spanish troops did land in Scotland). Even the Battle of Culloden was influenced by the Royal Navy. But the conquest of England by Scotland could have been and was very close many-many times. 

But since the world of monarcy is all very muddled, to be polite, England "conquering" Scotland (as some people think it did) doesn't make a difference. England hasn't been ruled by an "English" monarch since before James I (who was Scottish), if I remember correctly, we've had William III (Dutch) who was allied with himself - but not officially because he didn't sign his name twice and then the Georgian era of Hanoverian origin which pulled England out of wars against France because George I and II were scared of losing Hanover - and was hostile toward Sweden in the Great Northern Wars; while England merely wanted to protect its trade. 

I guess what I'm trying to say is; for all Europeans to think about (descendants or currently living here) - Because of the monarchy of Europe; whichever country you hate for a war that happened several hundred years ago; just forget it because you're all f*cking related!  - except the French, you can still hate them - Louis XIV was a tw*t.

Oh, and Americans, did you know that New York was considered a second Port Royal! Pirate bast*rds !  I'm kidding


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Jul 29, 2007)

Thanks for that list. I have been looking for something like that. Never thought to look at wiki though.


----------



## renrich (Jul 31, 2007)

earlier someone asked about the Rangers during the American Revolution. I believe they were first formed during the French and Indian War. There is an old movie about Roger's Rangers called "Northwest Passage" starring Spencer Tracy and Robert Montgomery. Not a bad movie. If I recall correctly, Rogers got disenchanted with the Revolution and went back to England.


----------

