Jump to content

Talk:Garnet Wolseley, 1st Viscount Wolseley

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Indian Campaign

[edit]

Was he a captain or a major at the outset of this campaign? He is labeled as a captain, but mentions that he was also a major. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Vdrj2 (talk • contribs) 16:29, 5 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Now amended - he was a captain. Dormskirk (talk) 15:24, 26 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Orders

[edit]

We say he was KP, GCB and GCMG, and the stars of those grades are indeed the top three stars on his uniform in the main picture, but there's an additional star, at the bottom — what is it? I can't find anything that looks like it. Is it a non-British order? Proteus (Talk) 13:22, 2 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

According to the [1911 Britanica], after the 1882 Egyptian campaign Wolseley was awarded the 1st Class order of the Osmanieh. At a guess that might be the fourth star. ~ Brother William (talk) 13:42, 10 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The breast star of the Order of the Osmanieh looks totally different, if I'm not mistaken the bottom breast star should be that of the Order of the Red Eagle. See the pictures below. Demophon (talk) 18:07, 11 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Order of the Red Eagle
Order of the Osmanieh

New file File:Garnet Joseph Wolseley, 1st Viscount Wolseley by Paul Albert Besnard.jpg

[edit]

Recently the file File:Garnet Joseph Wolseley, 1st Viscount Wolseley by Paul Albert Besnard.jpg (right) was uploaded and it appears to be relevant to this article and not currently used by it. If you're interested and think it would be a useful addition, please feel free to include it. Dcoetzee 08:06, 8 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Image now added. Dormskirk (talk) 21:30, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

silly wikiers bias is for stupids

[edit]

ok so this article reads like a pamphlet written by Rudyard Kipling I'm sure the Asante people who had their houses and capital city burned didn't think his work was "brilliant" I think they would (rightly) classify it as barbaric and extreme. I also don't think that the Africans in Egypt at the time thought his expedition was in any "brilliant". Is this an encyclopedia or the intellectual wing of white supremacy. Tell the facts, be detailed and leave the opinions out. also, Khartoum had not "fallen" it was liberated from the invading British armies. as these may seem like minor issues. they are not minor to the the people touched by these events. peace vap (talk) 19:41, 28 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have now removed both "brilliant" and "fallen". Dormskirk (talk) 21:25, 25 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

U.S. Civil War observer

[edit]

My childhood encyclopedia (1959) has a near-adulatory quote by the viscount about Robert E. Lee following Lee's death. I have never been able to confirm that Wolseley actually said/wrote this. The Lee entry is by someone named Hamilton Eckenrode, who was state archivist for Virginia. Anyone know anything about this?

Assessment comment

[edit]

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Garnet Wolseley, 1st Viscount Wolseley/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

Comment(s)Press [show] to view →
How can we write such biographies in Wikipedia, way into the year 2006, exactly as if Britannia was still ruling the world? Can't there be some sense of objectivity, some respect for the millions of people crushed by the colonial wars? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.197.54.164 (talk) 3 December 2006
My sentiments exactly! No to perpetuating imperialist lies! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Umchanww (talk • contribs) 05:32, 10 July 2007
I have tagged the article with {{worldview}}. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 17:04, 14 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Last edited at 17:04, 14 May 2008 (UTC). Substituted at 15:49, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Garnet Wolseley, 1st Viscount Wolseley. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:05, 8 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Garnet Wolseley, 1st Viscount Wolseley. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:56, 11 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Garnet Wolseley, 1st Viscount Wolseley. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:38, 30 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Legacy please find better.

[edit]

Is there any other legacy than the offensive phrase: "Skill of Sir Garnet in thrashing a cannibal"? There is no need for this to be here.
eg William McGonagall https://www.mcgonagall-online.org.uk/gems/the-battle-of-tel-el-kebir
The Battle of Tel-el-Kebir

YE sons of Great Britain, come join with me,
And sing in praise of Sir Garnet Wolseley;
Sound drums and trumpets cheerfully,
For he has acted most heroically.

194.207.86.26 (talk) 09:12, 10 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Allegiance to Great Britain

[edit]

An editor wants to change Wolseley's allegiance to Great Britain. My understanding is that Great Britain is a geographical area and the nation is, and has been since 1801, the United Kingdom. The suggestion is that we should apply Great Britain for uses prior to World War II. This has significant implications for the allegiences of a large number of senior officers and many monarchs from Edward VIII back through Queen Victoria and before. Views please before any such changes are made. In the meantime, until the matter is resolved, per WP:BRD we should revert to the original position (United Kingdom). Thanks. Dormskirk (talk) 19:31, 24 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

there is not and has never been a nation named "United Kingdom" == that is an abbreviation of the long form. Likewise "UK" and "Great Britain"and "Britain" are abbreviations of the same long form. Historians writing today on the pre-1939 period prefer "Britain" or "Great Britain" and most avoid UK forms. One major advantage is the GB version has "British" as the adjective ("British history") and UK lacks a good adjective. Suggestion: Look at the titles in [our Bibliography] Wikipedia editors should follow the reliable secondary sources. Rjensen (talk) 20:14, 24 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hi - Thanks for that. I agree with your comments about United Kingdom and Great Britain being abbreviations of the long form but it does not change the fact that your proposal has implications for a large number of articles the most prominent of which will be Queen Victoria. It may make sense to move this discussion to that article's talk page to foster more debate before we make a large number of changes. Views from other editors welcome. Dormskirk (talk) 20:38, 24 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Assistant adjutant general

[edit]

As a relative newcomer to Wiki, I am posting here before trying to edit. At the moment, Wolseley's role as assistant adjutant general (and de facto assistant to Cardwell during the period of Cardwell's radical reforms) has only one sentence in the entry. Yet those reforms, for which Wolseley provided most of the military vision - and which he battled to implement against the Army establishment as he rose through various promotions - turned the British Army upside down. I propose to write a new section. Before I start work and offer something up, does this seem a good idea?Julian Brazier (talk) 18:37, 9 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds good as long as it is well sourced. Dormskirk (talk) 19:52, 9 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Dormskirk I propose to make the following additions. As they come under several different sections, I show in each case the heading and then quote the (existing) sentence I propose to put them after:

Canada (final sentence)

Appointed assistant adjutant-general at the War Office in 1871 he furthered the Cardwell schemes of army reform.[25] .

The reforms met strong opposition from senior military figures led by the Duke of York, the Commander in Chief[1]. At their heart was to greatly expand the Army’s latent strength by building reserves, both through introducing legislation for ‘short service’ [2] which allows soldiers to serve the second part of their term on the reserve and by bringing militia (ie non-regular) battalions into the new localised regimental structure. (See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cardwell_Reforms for more details) Resistance in the Army continued and Wolseley fought publicly as well as inside the Army’s structure to implement them long after the legislation had passed and Cardwell had gone (see below).

Ashanti (1st para, line 7) On his return home he was appointed inspector-general of auxiliary forces with effect from 1 April 1874;[30]

As commander of the Auxiliary Forces, in 1876, he directed his efforts to building up an adequate reserve force. Finding himself opposed by the senior military, he wrote a strong memorandum and spoke of resigning when they tried to persuade him to withdraw it[3], He became a lifelong advocate of the volunteer reserves (later) commenting that all military reforms since 1860 in the British Army had first been introduced by the Volunteers[4].

(2nd Para final sentence) Finally as if to signify a meteoric rise in Imperial esteem he was appointed Quartermaster-General to the Forces on 1 July 1880.[15][37]

He found that there was still great resistance to the short service system and used his growing public persona to fight for the reforms, including making a speech at a banquet in Mansion house in which he commented: ‘…how an Army raised under the long service system totally disappeared in a few months under the walls of Sevastopol.’[5]

Egypt, the Nile Expedition and Commander-in-Chief (para 4, first line)

The unexpectedly large force required for the initial phase of the Second Boer War, was mainly furnished by means of the system of reserves Wolseley had originated.

By drawing on regular reservists and volunteer reserves, Britain was able to assemble the largest army it had ever deployed abroad. [6] Julian Brazier (talk) 15:48, 14 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ McElwee, W.L. (1974) The art of war : Waterloo to Mons, London : Weidenfeld and Nicolson, ISBN 0-297-76865-4 pp73
  2. ^ Ensor R. C. K. England 1870–1914 (1936) pp 16
  3. ^ Joseph Lehmann All Sir Garnet, Jonathan Cape p224
  4. ^ Barry Gregory The History of the Artists Rifles 1859-1947,Pen and Sword, ISBN 184415503-X p224 p103
  5. ^ Joseph Lehmann All Sir Garnet,Jonathan Cape p224
  6. ^ https://www.familyhistory.co.uk/the-boer-war/ Second Phase
Fine with me. You may need to tone some of the language: e.g. "meteoric rise". Also you should avoid comments like "see below" as on wikipedia it is seldom apparant as to how far below to look. Best wishes. Dormskirk (talk) 16:30, 14 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks u:Dormskirk - have done so, removing 'see below'. Incidentally, 'meteoric' was in the original text I was appending to. Like you, I hate exaggeration, although in this case, it was remarkable for a guy who gained every promotion on merit, in a world where (up to colonel) it was normally purchased.Julian Brazier (talk) 11:16, 15 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I have tidied up the references to ensure consistency with the rest of the article but the extra material looks fine to me. Dormskirk (talk) 12:20, 15 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Dormskirk Apologies. I never thanked you here for all the improvements. May I ask one question which I cannot find the answer to anywhere? How do I cross reference another Wiki article using slightly different words from the name of the article? For example, on an article I am working on, I wish to cross-refer to the article on Field Marshal Kitchener but the system does not recognise that name. Putting in "Herbert Kitchener, 1st Earl Kitchener" would ruin the flow ....Julian Brazier (talk) 14:29, 1 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hi - You would do it like this Field Marshal Kitchener. Best wishes. Dormskirk (talk) 15:52, 1 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Dormskirk Thanks very muchJulian Brazier (talk) 11:09, 2 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Wolseley helmet

[edit]

Wolseley was active in promoting a version of the light cork helmet, as provided by him for troops on the Ashanti expedition, which was later adopted for Foreign Service in 1877 and is the pattern of helmet depicted in the caricature shown in the article.

This however was not the Wolseley helmet. Although a prototype was first seen worn by Wolseley in Egypt circa 1882-85, the Wolseley helmet with its flatter brim was first adopted by troops in the Anglo-Boer war of 1899-1902 and officially replaced the Foreign Service helmet thereafter. JF42 (talk) 11:28, 14 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Reference to the cartoon removed. Perhaps the image of an actual Wolseley helmet might be inserted; possibly of the RCR headgear mentioned in the current text. JF42 (talk) 07:31, 17 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Frederick Wolseley

[edit]

We should mention that his grandson was Frederick Wolseley, who invented a new type of shears and founded a company that would go on to be a major car maker and plumbing merchant. Overlordnat1 (talk) 08:00, 6 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Garnet_Wolseley,_1st_Viscount_Wolseley&oldid=1210986678"