Podcasts about malplaquet

Send me a messageChris Green is The History Chap; telling stories that brings the past to life.The Bloodies European Battle in the 18th Century - Malplaquet 1709.The Duke of Marlborough's fourth victory over the French and the one that led to his downfall.Ways You Can Support My Channel:Become A PatronMake A DonationOther episodes in this series:The Battle of Blenheim 1704The Battle of Ramillies 1706The Battle of Oudenarde 1708You might also be interested in this book, that I used extensively during my research for this series."Marlborough: Britain's Greatest General" by Richard Holmes(This is my Amazon affiliate link)The Battle of Malplaquet, fought on the 11th September 1709 was the Duke of Marlborough's fourth victory over the French. It was also the bloodiest European battle of the whole 18th century.Between 30,000 - 40,000 men were killed or wounded in just one day.Despite, been forced from the field by the comined allied army consisting of Dutch, German, Austrian, Danish and British soldiers, , the French were able to keep their army intact, ready to fight another day - their (sort of) Dunkirk moment.That French escape, along with his heavy losses, was the beginning of the end for John Churchill, Duke of Marlborough. Within two years, arguably the greatest military commander in British history, was sacked. Despite it being a tactical victory, malplaquet was a pyrrhic victory for Marlborough and his allied army.The Allies  lost nearly 21,000 men killed or wounded (almost a quarter of their army).The Dutch alone had lost over 8,000 men, whilst the British had lost nearly 1,800.The French army, on the other hand had suffered somewhere between 11,000 - 14,000 casualties.Support the show

Send me a messageThe real Blackadder who fought at the Battle of Blenheim, 1704.Chris Green is The History Chap; telling stories that brings the past to life.Ways You Can Support My Channel:Become A PatronMake A DonationSign up to my NewsletterLong before Rowan Atkinson's comic creation, a real Blackadder was fighting in some of the bloodiest battles in British military history. Lieutenant-Colonel John Blackadder was a Scottish soldier who served under the Duke of Marlborough and fought at the Battle of Blenheim—where he nearly died from a musket ball to the throat.Born in 1664 to a firebrand Covenanter preacher who died imprisoned on the Bass Rock, John Blackadder joined the newly-raised Cameronians in 1689. This distinctively religious Scottish regiment—nicknamed the "Psalm-singing Regiment"—would become his military home for over two decades. His first taste of battle came at Dunkeld, where 800 Cameronians held off more than 3,000 Jacobite Highlanders.During the Nine Years War, Blackadder fought at Steenkirk, Landen and the Siege of Namur. But his career was nearly derailed when he killed a fellow officer in a duel at Maastricht—an act that haunted this devout Presbyterian for the rest of his life.The War of the Spanish Succession brought Blackadder to Marlborough's greatest victories. He survived Schellenberg, was wounded at Blenheim, served at Ramillies, and was hit twice more at the Siege of Lille. At the catastrophic Battle of Malplaquet in 1709, Marlborough personally promoted him to Lieutenant-Colonel on the battlefield when his commanding officer fell wounded.After retiring in 1711, Blackadder returned to service during the 1715 Jacobite rebellion, commanding the Glasgow Volunteer Regiment. He ended his days as Deputy-Governor of Stirling Castle, and his diaries—published in 1824—remain an invaluable account of early 18th-century military life.Timeline of John Blackadder's Life:1664: Born in Dumfriesshire, Scotland1689: Joins the Cameronians; fights at Battle of Dunkeld1691: Kills Lieutenant Robert Murray in a duel at Maastricht1693: Promoted to Captain1704: Fights at Schellenberg and Blenheim (wounded)1705: Promoted to Major1706: Present at Battle of Ramillies1708: Wounded twice at Siege of Lille1709: Battlefield promotion to Lieutenant-Colonel at Malplaquet1711: Sells commission and retires1715: Commands Glasgow Volunteer Regiment during Jacobite rebellion1729: Dies aged 64; buried in StirlingSupport the show

Nous sommes le 11 septembre 1709, à une quinzaine de kilomètres au sud de Mons, 50 à l'ouest de Charleroi. Nous sommes alors dans les Pays-Bas espagnols. Très exactement sur un terrain vallonné et couvert où s'est déployée l'armée de Louis XIV, le roi de France, qui s'apprête à affronter les troupes coalisées des Anglais, des Hollandais et des Autrichiens. Il n'est pas encore huit heures et nous allons plonger dans l'un des épisodes les plus sanglants de la guerre de succession d'Espagne : plus de 35 000 victimes, en une journée. Les assauts des coalisés sont intenses mais les Français parviennent à les repousser avant de décider de se replier. Les coalisés, ayant subi de très graves pertes, préfèrent ne pas les poursuivre dans leur retraite. Les armées de Louis XIV peuvent alors asseoir leurs positions défensives et éviter toute tentative d'invasion : l'effondrement de la France est évité. Issue paradoxale qui voit les vainqueurs compter le plus grand nombre de morts et les vaincus échapper à l'humiliation. Quelles seront les conséquences de ce dénouement sur les relations européennes ? Retour sur la bataille de Malplaquet. Invité : Daniel Penant, membre des sociétés archéologiques et historiques de Mons et d'Avesnes. Merci pour votre écoute Un Jour dans l'Histoire, c'est également en direct tous les jours de la semaine de 13h15 à 14h30 sur www.rtbf.be/lapremiere Retrouvez tous les épisodes d'Un Jour dans l'Histoire sur notre plateforme Auvio.be :https://auvio.rtbf.be/emission/5936 Intéressés par l'histoire ? Vous pourriez également aimer nos autres podcasts : L'Histoire Continue: https://audmns.com/kSbpELwL'heure H : https://audmns.com/YagLLiKEt sa version à écouter en famille : La Mini Heure H https://audmns.com/YagLLiKAinsi que nos séries historiques :Chili, le Pays de mes Histoires : https://audmns.com/XHbnevhD-Day : https://audmns.com/JWRdPYIJoséphine Baker : https://audmns.com/wCfhoEwLa folle histoire de l'aviation : https://audmns.com/xAWjyWCLes Jeux Olympiques, l'étonnant miroir de notre Histoire : https://audmns.com/ZEIihzZMarguerite, la Voix d'une Résistante : https://audmns.com/zFDehnENapoléon, le crépuscule de l'Aigle : https://audmns.com/DcdnIUnUn Jour dans le Sport : https://audmns.com/xXlkHMHSous le sable des Pyramides : https://audmns.com/rXfVppvN'oubliez pas de vous y abonner pour ne rien manquer.Et si vous avez apprécié ce podcast, n'hésitez pas à nous donner des étoiles ou des commentaires, cela nous aide à le faire connaître plus largement. Hébergé par Audiomeans. Visitez audiomeans.fr/politique-de-confidentialite pour plus d'informations.

Send us a textThe Battle of Nagashino is one of the most famous battles in Japanese history. It was the climax of the Sengoku Jidai, the Age of Warring States, a century-long period of civil wars and social upheaval. It represented the culmination of a revolution that had transformed Japanese warfare. And it punctures many myths of the samurai, the warrior-heroes of Japan.This episode also ends a long hiatus for Great Battles in History. For the past couple of years, I've been working on a book. Researching and writing it took up all the time I would have devoted to this podcast. With the book now done, I'm planning to return to a more regular release schedule.If you enjoy this podcast and would like to support it, please consider buying my book. It's called 1709: The Twilight of the Sun King. In 1709, France faced the coldest winter of the past five centuries, famine, financial collapse, and foreign invasion. The Twilight of the Sun King is an expertly researched, engagingly written narrative history of how France survived one of its greatest crises. It explains how Louis XIV, the aging Sun King, and his state passed their greatest test. It presents a total history of an early modern campaign, one that integrates finances, logistics, and diplomacy with military operations. It culminates with an account of Malplaquet, the largest and bloodiest battle of the eighteenth century in Europe. 1709 offers new insights on the development of the French absolute monarchy and the nature of early modern European warfare.Here's a link to my publisher, Rowman and Littlefield and a link to everyone's favourite online bookseller.You can also order it from your local bookstore. 

Année sombre du règne de Louis XIV, 1709 a été marquée, le 11 septembre, par la bataille sanguinaire et paradoxale de Malplaquet. Mention légales : Vos données de connexion, dont votre adresse IP, sont traités par Radio Classique, responsable de traitement, sur la base de son intérêt légitime, par l'intermédiaire de son sous-traitant Ausha, à des fins de réalisation de statistiques agréées et de lutte contre la fraude. Ces données sont supprimées en temps réel pour la finalité statistique et sous cinq mois à compter de la collecte à des fins de lutte contre la fraude. Pour plus d'informations sur les traitements réalisés par Radio Classique et exercer vos droits, consultez notre Politique de confidentialité.Hébergé par Ausha. Visitez ausha.co/politique-de-confidentialite pour plus d'informations.

Das Söldnerheer war in der Schweiz über die Jahrhunderte hinweg ein wichtiger Wirtschaftszweig. Bis zu der schicksalshaften Schlacht von Malplaquet, als sich 1709 zwei Söldnerheere gegenüberstanden und 8000 Eidgenossen bei dem Bruderkampf ihr Leben verloren. Wir sprechen mit dem Schweizer Autor und Kunsthistoriker Dr. Michael Tomaschett über das Ende des Schweizer Söldnerwesens und seine Arbeit als Inventarisator von Kunstdenkmälern - von der Orgel bis zum Winterthurer Ofen. Michael Tomaschett studierte Kirchengeschichte und klassische Archäologie und arbeitet seit 2009 für das Kultur-Amt des Kantons Schwyz. Ein Chronist der Schweizer Kulturgeschichte im KAP Podcast. Website: www.irh.ch Instagram: kanton_schwyz KAP Podcast website: www.kapture.ch @kap_kapture Unterstützen und Patreon werden: Hier ist der link zu unserer Patreon-Seite patreon.com/kap_podcast Patreon ist eine Crowdfunding Plattform auf der ihr unsere Arbeit oder die Produktion unserer Podcast Folgen unterstützen könnt. Wenn euch also unsere Beiträge gefallen und ihr Patreon werden wollt, ist es ganz einfach. Ihr könnt einen Betrag eurer Wahl anklicken, mit dem ihr uns einmalig oder monatlich unterstützt. Foto Ⓒ KAP

Though common and self-limiting in older children and adults, herpes simplex viral infection can cause a spectrum of neonatal disease from simple lesion to devastating encephalitis. How can we identify babies at risk and provide appropriate treatment? In this episode, Sarah discusses her devastating story of losing a child to neonatal HSV and her work in raising awareness of neonatal HSV. Featuring Emma Lim and Christo Tsilifis with Sarah de Malplaquet, parent of Kit, and founder of the Kit Tarka Foundation.  See transcript at https://www.rcpch.ac.uk/sites/default/files/2023-10/The-paeds-round-HSV-infection-transcript.pdf This podcast is a collaboration between the Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health (https://www.rcpch.ac.uk) and Medisense (https://www.medisense.org.uk). Subscribe to The paeds round for more educational episodes! And, you can find more RCPCH educational resources on RCPCH Learning (https://learning.rcpch.ac.uk).  Want to hear more from RCPCH? Search for and subscribe to RCPCH Podcasts, our main channel.

Prince Andrei and his pregnant wife (Lise) arrive Andrei's father's Smolensk estate known as “Bald Hills.” Andrei only plans to spend the night, as he is rushing toward the career path of his father, Nikolai, who performed a lifetime of (fictional) military service. Nikolai Bolkonsky (nicknamed “The King of Prussia”) is symbolic of the era of expansion and colonization under Catherine the Great.West of Moscow, this involved partitions of Poland, which was split between Russia, Prussia and Habsburg-Austria. A good portion of the territory of modern Ukraine was moved from Polish to Russian influence. These partitions motivated many Poles to join Napoleon's army. This period also involved Russians battling the Ottoman Empire, where Russia gained control of territory north of the Black Sea. The elder Bolkonsky would have internalized all this “glory.” With this epic age passing, Andrei is experiencing a new world ushered in by Napoleon, where Russia is on the precipice of major change. Tolstoy questions whether it is the man himself (Bonaparte) or the vast movement of men that created an inevitable new age. As Andrei arrived to the estate by horse-drawn-carriage, he could hear his sister practicing her clavichord. They are greeted by Mademoiselle Amelie Bourienne, who takes them to Marya, as her father is taking his afternoon nap. It is a warm meeting between sisters-in-law. They discuss the latest gossip and news in the big cities (like who is marrying who). Andrei stood by, the subject of his sister's warm gaze.  Lise feels abandoned with her husband leaving for war, as she is progressing in her pregnancy. The house servant, old Tikhon, takes Andrei to his father, who is getting dressed for a formal meal. The old man sarcastically notes how his son is off to “conquer” Napoleon. Andrei then greets his father with a respectful kiss. They talk about the upcoming conflict with the General revealing what he has learned about the military Coalition against Napoleon. He speaks about who is leading the efforts and name drops a "General Tolstoy," who was likely an ancestor of the author. He asks his son to give his understanding of the overarching plan against Napoleon. Andrei notes that the strategy is that Russia intends to invade Prussia, to “convince” them to align -- a forced treaty. Some units will also unite with Sweden (already an ally). it is expected that 220,000 Austrians and 100,000 Russians will operate in Italy and the Rhine. Other forces, including the English, will land in Naples. In total, the Coalition will be 500,000 strong in a simultaneous attack. The Old General astutely responds that Napoleon surely has a plan of his owe -- and his demeanor implies that it is likely better. He then sings himself a nursery song about a men who go off to war, while family awaits news of their fate. He sings: “Malbrough s'en va-t-en guerre" written after the battle of Malplaquet in France in 1709, during the war of Spanish Succession. It is about the supposed death of the Duke of Marlborough – John Churchill. It has a similar structure as “For He's a Jolly Good Fellow.” Napoleon is rumored to have sung the song to himself on occasion.

L'expression "victoire à la Pyrrhus" signifie qu'une telle victoire s'assimile plutôt à une défaite ou à un échec. Mais quelle est son origine ?Des batailles peu décisivesPour comprendre l'expression "victoire à la Pyrrhus", il faut remonter au IIIe siècle avant notre ère. Pyrrhus Ier, souverain d'Épire, royaume de la Grèce continentale, doit alors affronter les Romains, lancés à la conquête de la région.Il parvient à les battre à deux reprises, à Héraclée d'abord, en 280 avant J.-C., puis, un an plus tard, à Ausculum. Mais, à ses généraux, qui le félicitent de l'issue de ces deux batailles, Pyrrhus aurait répondu, d'après Plutarque : "Encore une victoire comme celle-là, et il serait complètement défait".En effet, les deux batailles avaient fait beaucoup de victimes. Ce n'était pas un problème pour les Romains, qui n'avaient aucune peine à combler les vides en recrutant de nouveaux soldats.En revanche, les ressources humaines du petit royaume d'Épire étaient presque épuisées. D'où la remarque désabusée de son souverain, pour lequel une telle victoire équivalait à une défaite.D'autres victoires à la PyrrhusAu cours de l'Histoire, les généraux eurent à déplorer bien d'autres "victoires à la Pyrrhus". Parmi de nombreux exemples, on peut citer la bataille de Malplaquet, en 1709. Cet affrontement oppose, pendant la guerre de Succession d'Espagne, les Français aux troupes anglaises, autrichiennes et hollandaises.Ces dernières finissent par l'emporter, mais au prix de pertes beaucoup plus importantes que celles de l'armée française. Par ailleurs, le territoire français est sauvé de l'invasion.Le maréchal de Villars, qui commandait l'armée française, aurait dit à Louis XIV que ses ennemis seraient défaits si "Dieu nous fait la grâce de perdre encore une pareille bataille".Autre "victoire à la Pyrrhus", la bataille d'Eylau, qui, en 1807, oppose les Français aux Russes. Napoléon en est bien le vainqueur, mais au prix de telles pertes qu'il n'en retire aucun véritable bénéfice.Le lendemain, le maréchal Ney, parcourant le champ de bataille, où gisent tant de morts et de blessés, s'exclamera d'ailleurs : "Quel massacre ! Et tout cela pour rien !". Voir Acast.com/privacy pour les informations sur la vie privée et l'opt-out.

The war continues with continued victories for Marlborough, but coalition politics and politics in London spell bad news for John Churchill.    A discussion of the strategic realities of seapower leads us to cover Rooke's first expedition in 1702 that ends with the utter destruction of French and Spanish fleets in Vigo Bay.With Camie we discuss the puzzle of the Dutch trading with the enemy, which is some presentism on our part and what I prefer to call a mindset problem for us.  Also of course she is curious about Sara Churchill and her relationship with Anne Stuart and Anne's unhappy efforts to create a family.

The French army of Louis XIV was on the ropes, but fought hard against the British, Dutch, Austrians and Prussians at the Battle of Malplaquet 1709. Peace was finally agreed in with the Treaties of Utrecht 1713 and Rastadt 1714, establishing a new balance of power on the continent.Composer - George Friedrich Handel, Water Musicwww.historyeurope.net See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

Daniel Penant, membre des sociétés archéologiques et historiques de Mons et d’Avesnes.

Bankruptcy, famine in the countryside, and a starving army were just some of the crises facing Louis XIV in 1709. Eight years into the War of the Spanish Succession, the allied armies led by the Duke of Marlborough, had also managed to breach the French defences on the Flanders frontier. Threatened with the prospect of invasion, Marshal Villars and his French forces met Marlborough in the field resulting in the climactic Battle of Malplaquet, halting the allied advance and changing the course of the war. Or so this is how the battle if often remembered. Darryl Dee is not so sure. His research questions the idea that the Battle of Malplaquet, and battles in general, can ever be so decisive. In this episode of On War & Society, Darryl Dee and Kyle Falcon discuss researching and teaching the great battles in history.

9 de Septiembre de 1654. Muere San Pedro Claver. 10 de Septiembre de 1487. Nace Julio III. 11 de Septiembre de 1709. Se libra la batalla de Malplaquet. 12 de Septiembre de 1818. Nace Richard Gatling. 13 de Septiembre del año 81. Muere Tito Flavio. 14 de Septiembre del 891. Muere Esteban V. 15 de Septiembre de 1762. Ocurre la Batalla de Signal Hill.

James Whitman wants to revise our understanding of warfare during the eighteenth century, the period described by my late colleague and friend Russell Weigley as the “Age of Battles.” We commonly view warfare during this period as a remarkably restrained affair, dominated by aristocratic values, and while we recognize their horrors for the participants, we often compare battles to the duels those aristocrats fought over private matters of honor. Not true, claims Whitman, who argues instead that battles during the period 1709 (Battle of Malplaquet) and 1863/1870 (Gettysburg/Sedan) were understood by contemporaries not to be royal duels but “legal procedure[s], a lawful means of deciding international disputes through consensual collective violence.” [3] Understanding war as a form of trial is what gave warfare of the era its decisiveness (sorry Russ) and forces us, according to Whitman, to change the way we interpret, for example, Frederick the Great’s invasion of Silesia. Whitman, who is the Ford Foundation Professor of Comparative and Foreign Law at Yale Law School and an academically trained historian (PhD Chicago 1987), brings the perspective of both lawyer and historian to his work ways that teach us much about both the military history and the law of the period he considers. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

James Whitman wants to revise our understanding of warfare during the eighteenth century, the period described by my late colleague and friend Russell Weigley as the “Age of Battles.” We commonly view warfare during this period as a remarkably restrained affair, dominated by aristocratic values, and while we recognize their horrors for the participants, we often compare battles to the duels those aristocrats fought over private matters of honor. Not true, claims Whitman, who argues instead that battles during the period 1709 (Battle of Malplaquet) and 1863/1870 (Gettysburg/Sedan) were understood by contemporaries not to be royal duels but “legal procedure[s], a lawful means of deciding international disputes through consensual collective violence.” [3] Understanding war as a form of trial is what gave warfare of the era its decisiveness (sorry Russ) and forces us, according to Whitman, to change the way we interpret, for example, Frederick the Great’s invasion of Silesia. Whitman, who is the Ford Foundation Professor of Comparative and Foreign Law at Yale Law School and an academically trained historian (PhD Chicago 1987), brings the perspective of both lawyer and historian to his work ways that teach us much about both the military history and the law of the period he considers. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

James Whitman wants to revise our understanding of warfare during the eighteenth century, the period described by my late colleague and friend Russell Weigley as the “Age of Battles.” We commonly view warfare during this period as a remarkably restrained affair, dominated by aristocratic values, and while we recognize their horrors for the participants, we often compare battles to the duels those aristocrats fought over private matters of honor. Not true, claims Whitman, who argues instead that battles during the period 1709 (Battle of Malplaquet) and 1863/1870 (Gettysburg/Sedan) were understood by contemporaries not to be royal duels but “legal procedure[s], a lawful means of deciding international disputes through consensual collective violence.” [3] Understanding war as a form of trial is what gave warfare of the era its decisiveness (sorry Russ) and forces us, according to Whitman, to change the way we interpret, for example, Frederick the Great’s invasion of Silesia. Whitman, who is the Ford Foundation Professor of Comparative and Foreign Law at Yale Law School and an academically trained historian (PhD Chicago 1987), brings the perspective of both lawyer and historian to his work ways that teach us much about both the military history and the law of the period he considers. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

James Whitman wants to revise our understanding of warfare during the eighteenth century, the period described by my late colleague and friend Russell Weigley as the “Age of Battles.” We commonly view warfare during this period as a remarkably restrained affair, dominated by aristocratic values, and while we recognize their horrors for the participants, we often compare battles to the duels those aristocrats fought over private matters of honor. Not true, claims Whitman, who argues instead that battles during the period 1709 (Battle of Malplaquet) and 1863/1870 (Gettysburg/Sedan) were understood by contemporaries not to be royal duels but “legal procedure[s], a lawful means of deciding international disputes through consensual collective violence.” [3] Understanding war as a form of trial is what gave warfare of the era its decisiveness (sorry Russ) and forces us, according to Whitman, to change the way we interpret, for example, Frederick the Great’s invasion of Silesia. Whitman, who is the Ford Foundation Professor of Comparative and Foreign Law at Yale Law School and an academically trained historian (PhD Chicago 1987), brings the perspective of both lawyer and historian to his work ways that teach us much about both the military history and the law of the period he considers. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

James Whitman wants to revise our understanding of warfare during the eighteenth century, the period described by my late colleague and friend Russell Weigley as the “Age of Battles.” We commonly view warfare during this period as a remarkably restrained affair, dominated by aristocratic values, and while we recognize their horrors for the participants, we often compare battles to the duels those aristocrats fought over private matters of honor. Not true, claims Whitman, who argues instead that battles during the period 1709 (Battle of Malplaquet) and 1863/1870 (Gettysburg/Sedan) were understood by contemporaries not to be royal duels but “legal procedure[s], a lawful means of deciding international disputes through consensual collective violence.” [3] Understanding war as a form of trial is what gave warfare of the era its decisiveness (sorry Russ) and forces us, according to Whitman, to change the way we interpret, for example, Frederick the Great’s invasion of Silesia. Whitman, who is the Ford Foundation Professor of Comparative and Foreign Law at Yale Law School and an academically trained historian (PhD Chicago 1987), brings the perspective of both lawyer and historian to his work ways that teach us much about both the military history and the law of the period he considers. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices