Peterloo - The Movie.

I have just watched the movie Peterloo on Amazon. It was a powerful film based on the Peterloo Massacre of 1819 in Manchester. It made me angry with the powerful ruling classes of the land. 

It was a hard-hitting film showing the watcher the build-up that led to the events. I had heard of the young soldier that was at Waterloo in 1815. The young man that fought for King and country. The opening shots show the young man at the famous 1815 battle. Then we go to the opening sequence of the discharged soldier walking home to Manchester in England. We see all through the eyes of his loving family struggling against the harsh ways of the industrial revolution. This young man from Waterloo is not even given the price of transport for a journey back to Manchester while the Duke of Wellington is awarded £750,000 as a reward for his part in the battle. This young soldier's character is fictional, but he is an image of an actual soldier that was at Peterloo four years after Wellington's Grand Battle. His real name was John Lees and he was from Oldham.

I do not think the movie was appreciated too much at the box office. I do not know why, because I found it very moving. I knew something about the historical significance of the Peterloo event. There were 15 people killed including a mother and baby. (To be honest, I thought there were larger numbers) But this does not diminish the viciousness of the dreadful event. There were a further 700 injuries during the panic as the various military units waded in against the 80,000 peaceful protesters.

The film had some splendid actors with Maxine Peake, Rory Kinnear, David Bamber and many more. The problem is, I liked the movie and thought it was well presented. But I found it so angrily moving. It was too powerful in some parts. Especially, the ending. I was almost spitting razor blades.

It made my blood boil at the thought of the Yeomanry getting away with this. I wonder if it will happen again one day? I think many of our political classes would be capable of doing such a thing. During the story, we are also shown the corridors of power. Here were men with complete conviction of their own vanity. Their diabolical view of the plebiscite was extreme and very barbaric. Such vile and wicked people! The real rogues of the nation in all their finery. 

Scotland and England Relationship.

A YouTube video of Scotty. 

I don't always agree with Scotty on historical things but he makes a lot of entertaining and thought provoking clips. I get all passionate when England play Scotland in football or Rugby. The thought of losing against them and suffering a year of bragging rites is horrendous.

When they (Scotland) play other national teams, I don't like seeing them defeated, but don't get too bothered about it if they do lose. I find many Scots to be argumentative and find them generally disagreeable in their views. Perhaps its me? I just find Scots to be often cynical about lots of issues. They see glory over grabbing defeat from the jaws of victory and sing songs about a bold prince that run away after such a dire undertaking.

However, I also know of lines of Highlanders standing in squares at Waterloo and this Scottish King that came down to London in 1603 with a grand idea of forming Great Britain. We English were not too enthusiastic about it. We did not like the Union Jack because the cross of Saint Andrew was of equal importance to the Cross of Saint George. How very wrong we English were and how far sighted the Scottish King James VI was when he became King James I of England.

The thought of Scotland leaving the UK is extremely sad and something I would genuinely hate to see. I find Scots very trying most of the time, but I still vote for the best Briton in elections. Being English, Scottish or Welsh does not come into it when I think of the UK. I'm English and a Brit. As a Brit, I'm proud of all Brits, including the founders of the Union.

War of 1812 - 1814 (USA against UK and Canada)

The War of 1812 was a little known military conflict in Britain, which was fought between the forces of the young USA and those of the British Empire – predominantly today’s Great Britain and Canada. The USA publicly declared war on Britain in 1812 for a number of reasons, including trade restrictions, press ganging of American merchant sailors into the Royal Navy, British support of American Indian tribes against US expansion, and the humiliation of American honor. These reasons were real on the part of the USA, and Britain was aiding the development of Indian nations to thwart the USA expanding westward.

However, behind the scenes, the USA was stealthily planning to absorb Canadian provinces into the American union and while Britain was engaged in a war in Europe against Napoleonic France. The US saw, what they believed, a good opportunity to strike. The USA was expecting more support from French Canadians then she got and upon this basis, the USA under estimated the over all Canadian will not to be part of the USA. In this theatre of the conflict, the USA lost. As far as Britain was concerned in thwarting US expansion westward and imposing international treaty restriction upon the young USA - well, Britain lost. These were strong issues of the time for both nations but their prominence diminished as the fruitless war almost got out of control. Britain had more pressing things to worry about in Europe and the USA got her nose bloodied against the Canadian militias. It was in the other theatres that the war began to take more unexpected turns.



From the British aspect, Napoleon's grand army was all but destroyed after the ill fated invasion of Russia. The joint forces of Austria, Prussia, Russia, Sweden and Great Britain were able to defeat France. This brought about an unexpected change of events for the USA. She was suddenly faced with a more focused and formidable force then expected.  

At first, the war was fought on a defensive basis by Britain. She relied on the strategy of Canada's volunteer forces. The Canadian militias were formidable against US aggression and managed to repel various American invasion attempts of her nation's provinces. The USA did manage to win control of Lake Erie and control parts of Ontario. They also defeated the Indian allies both in Canada and in the south west of their country which Britain had been manipulating.

However when things radically changed for the British Empire with the defeat of Napoleon in 1814; they were able to adopt a more aggressive approach and sent larger combat forces to the conflict. What followed was an upping of the political stakes. Britain and Canada won victories and the USA was able to win victories too. During one episode, the British managed to capture and burn Washington D.C. but eventually the Americans managed to repulse the British in this theatre of the war.

The White House during 1812 - 1814 War

At sea, both naval forces attacked one another scoring victories that were memorable on both sides, but neither side could seem to gain an upper hand.

The British no longer wanted or hoped to try and control the new USA and the Americans could not hope to gain Canadian provinces, though some of their own northern states came close to seceeding from the union and joining Canada. There was no gain for either side in the long run, just an escalating stalemate that neither side could afford to loose. Britain even tried to invade the US from the south but was stopped at New Orleans. At the end of the war, both sides occupied parts of the other's territory, but these areas were restored by the Treaty of Ghent.

In the end it was a war that neither USA or Britain could claim to have won. The Americans could claim it further united and bought their nation together. However, this could also be said of Canada and this was a harsh lesson, not lost, on the USA. 


Britain had more pressing matters and would leave the USA alone to continue with other far flung reaches of her Empire and stayed out of the USA's way concerning trade and supporting the Indian nations in future.