Talk:Battle of Sobraon

Untitled

I have removed the following:

"In fact, Jind Kaur and her senior commanders, General Tej Singh and Vizier Lal Singh were playing a double game, seeking to reduce the rebellious Khalsa's influence in the state, and were apparently arranging for its defeat on the battlefield."

This is a fictional and unproven account and was also a major story arc in the book Flashman and the Mountain of Light which I assume it has been copied from.

The account is unprovable "beyond reasonable doubt", but not fictional. It has been drawn from the works I have cited (Hernon, and Farwell). Jind Kaur would have no love for the Khalsa, since they murdered her brother Jawahir Singh at a parade on 21 September 1845. I have not read the Flashman novel. HLGallon 21:14, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Fair enough. I admit I was careless in forgetting that Jind Kaur's brother was butchered in front of her and she was known for manipulating them but liek you said it is unprovable beyond reasonable doubt. If it is to be reincluded it would probably be best if the sentence were re-worded. Other than that the article is pretty neutral and you have done an excellent job considering there was almost nothing here before! All we need now is the famous plate of the battle by Henry Martens. And you should read Flashman ;o)

The friendship between the 10th Regiment of Foot and the 29th Regiment of Foot

"To this day Officers and Sergeants of both regiments address each other as “My Dear Cousin”".

To which period does 'this day' refer?

I note that there is no source cited for the above statement. In any case, it should be amended since (as noted by HLGallon 04:22, 27 June 2015‎) in 1881 the 10th and the 29th ceased to be numbered regiments of the line, becoming, respectively, the 1st Bn., The Lincolnshire Regiment and the 1st Bn., The Worcestershire Regiment (29th & 36th). In the later C20th those regiments were in turn amalgamated to form, respectively, 2nd East Anglian Regiment (1960), now part of the Royal Anglian Regiment, and the Worcestershire and Sherwood Foresters Regiment (1970), now part of the Mercian Regiment.

Do officers of those successor regiments today address each other as 'My Dear Cousin'? If so then the text should be amended to reflect that.

Otherwise, rather than 'To this day'- which cannot be accurate as it stands- it might be best to amend the text to say something like ' For many years afterwards it was the custom for Officers and Sergeants ' etc., etc.

I noted that there is no source cited for this statement but a quick search indicates Queen Victoria's Little Wars, by Byron Farwell to be a possible source. It reads:

"To this day, sergeants and officers are honorary members of each other's messes and the adjutants of the two regiments address each other as 'My dear cousin' in official correspondence."

Written in 1973, this would have been out of date at time of writing since both regiments were by then amalgamated several times as described above. Since Farwell also states the date of the battle of Sobraon to be 1848, he should not perhapa be regarded as the most reliable source. Perhaps he was quoting an earlier history.

As it is, it seems that the (alleged) facts have been mis-stated in the Wikpedia article, since apparently it was only the adjutants of the two regiments who, we are told, addressed each other as 'My Dear Cousin.'

Unless more accurate information can be supplied re. the observance of the custom in the C20th and C21st, I suggest the passage might be revised thus:

A long-standing friendship between the 10th (Lincolnshire) Regiment and 29th (Worcestershire) Regiment was cemented at the battle when the two regiments met in the captured trenches that had cost so many lives to take. For many years afterwards, it was the custom that sergeants and officers were honorary members of each other's messes and the adjutants of the two regiments addressed each other as 'My Dear Cousin' in official correspondence.

-'Long-standing' introduces the fact of a previous friendship, dating from the Napoleonic Wars, more smoothly - The insertion of the county titles identifies the regiments as British, which was assumed before, and projects the identities of both regiments beyond the Childers reforms when they dispensed with their regimental numbers; 'of Foot' becomes superfluous.

The rest I hope is self-explanatory. JF42 (talk) 16:50, 23 May 2020 (UTC)