Historum - History Forums  

Go Back   Historum - History Forums > Themes in History > Speculative History
Register Forums Blogs Social Groups Mark Forums Read

Speculative History Speculative History Forum - Alternate History, What If Questions, Pseudo History, and anything outside the boundaries of mainstream historical research


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old January 10th, 2017, 11:18 PM   #41
Historian
 
Joined: Dec 2014
From: Spain
Posts: 5,358

Quote:
Originally Posted by Edric Streona View Post
Denying it as a British victory? When all descriptions of the battle admit, the Austro Spanish contingent took no part in the fighting.
The Catalans, as I saw it, are described as volunteers not soldiers and were unopposed.
But finally you concede the British hoisted their own flag but not later. They hoisted it first.
Not first.. thatīs untruth...Write here, please, the paper show the British flag was hoisted in Gibraltar that day the first.. It was the Spanish Flag adn the city was taken in Name of Charles III of Spain. So easy.
Catalanan soldies were Habsbourgīs soldiers. They wanted an Habsbourg in the throne.

Yes, it was not a British Victory at all. You should write here the forces attacked Gibraltar. You should here write Gibraltar was taken in the name of a British King. You should here write the declaration of war between Britain and Spain... etc etc etc.

Otherwise, we can see the Battle of Brunete (1937) a Spanish military victory over the Soviet Army...it was Soviet regular tanks, planes, artillery etc in that battle...but it was a battle in Civil War.. as Gibraltar.
martin76 is offline  
Remove Ads
Old January 11th, 2017, 12:16 AM   #42

johnincornwall's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: Nov 2010
From: Cornwall
Posts: 5,863

Quote:
Originally Posted by martin76 View Post
Not first.. thatīs untruth...Write here, please, the paper show the British flag was hoisted in Gibraltar that day the first.. It was the Spanish Flag adn the city was taken in Name of Charles III of Spain. So easy.
Catalanan soldies were Habsbourgīs soldiers. They wanted an Habsbourg in the throne.

.
Ah, anyway you were only looking after Gibraltar Martin

Romans - roughly 200 BC to roughly 450 BC - about 650 years
Goths - roughly 450 to 711 - around 260 years
Muslims - 711 to 1462 - 751 years with a small gap
Castilla/Spain - 1462 to 1704 - 242 years
Britain - 1704 to 2017 - 313 years

A mere 242 years, hardly a blip in history!
johnincornwall is offline  
Old January 11th, 2017, 05:26 AM   #43
Historian
 
Joined: Dec 2014
From: Spain
Posts: 5,358

Quote:
Originally Posted by johnincornwall View Post
Ah, anyway you were only looking after Gibraltar Martin

Romans - roughly 200 BC to roughly 450 BC - about 650 years
Goths - roughly 450 to 711 - around 260 years
Muslims - 711 to 1462 - 751 years with a small gap
Castilla/Spain - 1462 to 1704 - 242 years
Britain - 1704 to 2017 - 313 years

A mere 242 years, hardly a blip in history!

Not John, you are wrong in this issue. I donīt agree wit you.

First you, as specialist, you should know Spain is the Goth Kingdom. Second, Spain is not Castille but Castile is Spain.
Third.. not british dominion in Gibraltar in 1704.. save you have prove Charles III was King of England. The British OWNERSHIP (Never JURISDICTION) begun in 1713 in Utrecht, not before... and you can read Utrecht. Jurisdiction belong to the Catholic King and Ownership belong to British King.

Flag hoisted? In name of who was taken?

Utrecht treaty... very clear:

The Catholic King does hereby, for himself, his heirs and successors, yield to the Crown of Great Britain the full and entire propriety of the town and castle of Gibraltar, together with the port, fortifications, and forts thereunto belonging; and he gives up the said propriety to be held and enjoyed absolutely with all manner of right for ever, without any exception or impediment whatsoever.

But that abuses and frauds may be avoided by importing any kind of goods, the Catholic King wills, and takes it to be understood, that the above-named propriety be yielded to Great Britain without any territorial jurisdictionand without any open communication by land with the country round about.

As Gibraltar was taken in name of a Spanish King (till in English wikipedia you can read).. Rooke was a Pirate without honor but that is other history.. as Gibraltr was taken in name of Charles III... in Utrecht in 1713... the JURISIDICTION over Gibraltar belong to the Catholic King and the OWNERSHIP to the British King.

Last edited by martin76; January 11th, 2017 at 05:36 AM.
martin76 is offline  
Old January 11th, 2017, 01:41 PM   #44

Edric Streona's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: Feb 2016
From: Japan
Posts: 2,680

Quote:
Originally Posted by martin76 View Post
Not John, you are wrong in this issue. I donīt agree wit you.

First you, as specialist, you should know Spain is the Goth Kingdom. Second, Spain is not Castille but Castile is Spain.
Third.. not british dominion in Gibraltar in 1704.. save you have prove Charles III was King of England. The British OWNERSHIP (Never JURISDICTION) begun in 1713 in Utrecht, not before... and you can read Utrecht. Jurisdiction belong to the Catholic King and Ownership belong to British King.

Flag hoisted? In name of who was taken?

Utrecht treaty... very clear:

The Catholic King does hereby, for himself, his heirs and successors, yield to the Crown of Great Britain the full and entire propriety of the town and castle of Gibraltar, together with the port, fortifications, and forts thereunto belonging; and he gives up the said propriety to be held and enjoyed absolutely with all manner of right for ever, without any exception or impediment whatsoever.

But that abuses and frauds may be avoided by importing any kind of goods, the Catholic King wills, and takes it to be understood, that the above-named propriety be yielded to Great Britain without any territorial jurisdictionand without any open communication by land with the country round about.

As Gibraltar was taken in name of a Spanish King (till in English wikipedia you can read).. Rooke was a Pirate without honor but that is other history.. as Gibraltr was taken in name of Charles III... in Utrecht in 1713... the JURISIDICTION over Gibraltar belong to the Catholic King and the OWNERSHIP to the British King.
Regardless. The British rose their flag. They didn't carry or fly anyone else's. You said they had Spanish flags. That's not true. The British flag was flown to show Gibraltar had fallen. 3 days later Austro Spanish troops marched in.
The Catalan volunteers as far as I can tell were local sympathisers and not regular troops.
Edric Streona is offline  
Old January 12th, 2017, 06:04 AM   #45
Historian
 
Joined: Dec 2014
From: Spain
Posts: 5,358

Quote:
Originally Posted by Edric Streona View Post
Regardless. The British rose their flag. They didn't carry or fly anyone else's. You said they had Spanish flags. That's not true. The British flag was flown to show Gibraltar had fallen. 3 days later Austro Spanish troops marched in.
The Catalan volunteers as far as I can tell were local sympathisers and not regular troops.

The british flag was not hoisted but the Spanish one...till the English Wikipedia say... the Foreigners (Spanish-Austrian-Dutch) NEVER would have allowed the British Flag in a clear violation of Treaty. Gibraltar was taken in name of Charles III and with the Spanish flag (Viceroy of Catalonia, Prince of Hesse-Darmstadt). Later, Rooke hoisted the English flag.
That British regiment used the british flag.. it is logic as catalonian used the Spanish flag and Austrian the HRE flag... the matter the flag was hoisted in Gibraltar Castle was not the British flag but Spanish.. later Rooke changed the flag... a "gentleman" this pirate...
martin76 is offline  
Old January 13th, 2017, 02:02 AM   #46

johnincornwall's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: Nov 2010
From: Cornwall
Posts: 5,863

Quote:
Originally Posted by martin76 View Post
Not John, you are wrong in this issue. I donīt agree wit you.

First you, as specialist, you should know Spain is the Goth Kingdom. Second, Spain is not Castille but Castile is Spain.
Third.. not british dominion in Gibraltar in 1704.. save you have prove Charles III was King of England. The British OWNERSHIP (Never JURISDICTION) begun in 1713 in Utrecht, not before... and you can read Utrecht. Jurisdiction belong to the Catholic King and Ownership belong to British King.
]
Ah but friend Martin, you talk of 'Spain' as the Iberia of the Romans and before, whereas I refer to the modern country 'Spain' which I'm sure you will agree came about under the Emperor Carlos V, thanks to the political brain-power of Fernando El Catolico.

Spiritually today is surely connected with the Visigothic kingdom - after all both are strongly Catholic. But the Goth kingdom was just that - a Hispano-Roman people ruled by a Visigothic heirarchy, most of which later became muslim!

You could take a view (just throwing it out there) that 'Spain' was at one point mostly the Caliphate. They just called it 'Al Andalus'. After all most of the Christian repopulation was by immigrants. Some radical loonies today even want to restore their 'Spain' (Al Andalus)

Apart from the land being in the same place, links are whatever you want them to be!
johnincornwall is offline  
Old January 13th, 2017, 05:21 AM   #47
Historian
 
Joined: Apr 2011
From: Georgia, USA
Posts: 5,999

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lord Fairfax View Post
Independant kingdoms of Scotland and Wales

I'm not sure Wales was ever an independent kingdom as such...

But all Edward I was doing was trying to unite Britain

This is a long way from trying to dominate Europe.
Poly is offline  
Old January 13th, 2017, 11:29 PM   #48
Historian
 
Joined: Dec 2014
From: Spain
Posts: 5,358

Quote:
Originally Posted by johnincornwall View Post
Ah but friend Martin, you talk of 'Spain' as the Iberia of the Romans and before, whereas I refer to the modern country 'Spain' which I'm sure you will agree came about under the Emperor Carlos V, thanks to the political brain-power of Fernando El Catolico.

Spiritually today is surely connected with the Visigothic kingdom - after all both are strongly Catholic. But the Goth kingdom was just that - a Hispano-Roman people ruled by a Visigothic heirarchy, most of which later became muslim!

You could take a view (just throwing it out there) that 'Spain' was at one point mostly the Caliphate. They just called it 'Al Andalus'. After all most of the Christian repopulation was by immigrants. Some radical loonies today even want to restore their 'Spain' (Al Andalus)

Apart from the land being in the same place, links are whatever you want them to be!
Yes, John, I agree with you in his last post. in fact, also the unification or restoration the Old Kingdom of Spain (The Gothic) was in the mind of the elites in the different kingdoms (Asturias, León etc etc) it was Aragon under Ferdinand who succeeded to stablish almost the Old Kingdom and Philip II was really the first King of the Old Kingdom of Spain (only three kings: Philip II, Philip III and Philip IV).

Regards
martin76 is offline  
Reply

  Historum > Themes in History > Speculative History

Tags
attempt, britain, continental, europe, make



Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Are there any ways to make Britain win world war 1 without running out of money Thomson1190 Speculative History 27 November 16th, 2016 01:10 PM
Britain's Continental Objectives - 1914 vs 1991 thesaintoftheinternet European History 82 July 30th, 2016 11:42 AM
Did the slave trade really cause the Industrial Revolution or make Britain rich? notgivenaway General History 139 July 13th, 2016 07:33 AM
Railroads in 19th Century Continental Europe Salah European History 3 April 6th, 2016 11:22 PM

Copyright © 2006-2013 Historum. All rights reserved.