in the end, at who's feet did the blame fall?
-
robertomartinez1980 — 18 years ago(January 28, 2008 01:47 PM)
Apparently Lucan addressed the house of lords after the battle and recieved an ovation. In the address he placed the blame squareley on Nolan, who, being dead, was convieniently unable to defend himself. Wether Nolan deserved the blame is unknown to me, but it would seem all of the top brass were the ones that ordered and therefore carried out the blunder.
-
rglasby — 17 years ago(February 27, 2009 07:25 AM)
Flashman does not blame Cardigan, though there was no love lost between the two.
Yeah and then later has some pretty wild sado-masochist sex with a sexy Russian countess.
I think I trust Flashman's account of events more than Lucan's. -
barnsleyguy — 17 years ago(September 05, 2008 04:57 AM)
Well, Raglan, who gave the order but didn't make it clear what exactly the orders were, or if he did Airey didn't write it down. The order simply said the cavalry were to prevent the enemy carrying away the guns, but didn't specify which guns. This was obvious to the senior officers on the Fedioukine Heights, but not to the cavalry in the valley who couldn't see what was happening. Nolan may have contributed to the disaster by not passing on any verbal instructions he may have been given by Airey, but the ultimate blame must be Raglan's.
-
Sonlee — 16 years ago(April 05, 2009 05:52 AM)
The reason the charge was a disaster was because sensible orders were not clearly understood and misinterpreted to be an insensible order. That incorrect and insensible order was carried out without question. Who says the blame lies squarely on a single person's shoulders? Raglan is to blame for not understanding the importance of giving detailed orders to a subordinate who could not see the same things he saw. Cardigan and Lucan are to blame for not refusing to carry out an impossible order. Nolan? He's just the messenger. If you find yourself trying to divide blame between a trio of Senior Officers and a single Junior Officer, I can tell you where the fault definitely does NOT lie: with the junior officer. True, Nolan could have done a better job of explaining the order, but then the entire weight of the failure should hardly rest upon him just because his superiors were so bloody stupid as to have to rely on a mere Captain to prevent a disaster of epic proportions.
-
Xeokym — 14 years ago(May 10, 2011 08:54 PM)
The reason the charge was a disaster was because sensible orders were not clearly understood and misinterpreted to be an insensible order. That incorrect and insensible order was carried out without question. Who says the blame lies squarely on a single person's shoulders? Raglan is to blame for not understanding the importance of giving detailed orders to a subordinate who could not see the same things he saw. Cardigan and Lucan are to blame for not refusing to carry out an impossible order. Nolan? He's just the messenger. If you find yourself trying to divide blame between a trio of Senior Officers and a single Junior Officer, I can tell you where the fault definitely does NOT lie: with the junior officer. True, Nolan could have done a better job of explaining the order, but then the entire weight of the failure should hardly rest upon him just because his superiors were so bloody stupid as to have to rely on a mere Captain to prevent a disaster of epic proportions.
I absolutely agree!
sensible orders were not clearly understood and misinterpreted to be an insensible order. That incorrect and insensible order was carried out without question.
How could it be
Nolan's
fault? Nolan was the ONLY one who had any sense about him to recognize the blunder in the instructions. It's just that no one wanted to listen to his 'babble' because they didn't consider very much of him. All the guys in charge were up on a high dune ready to watch the battle like a football match, they didn't want to bother listening to Nolan's panicky (and somewhat disrespectful) yelling about something wrong.
IMO it's specifically no one's fault. It was an unfortunate experience where directions & instructions were misunderstood in more ways than one,
|{(V)
I can't understand your crazy moon language. -
Hancock_the_Superb — 14 years ago(August 27, 2011 08:59 AM)
Given a) the era's code of military honor and b) Lucan and Cardigan's relationship, how likely was it that they could have refused the order to attack?
"I shall tread uncommon wary and keep my pepperbox handy." -
highwaystar50 — 16 years ago(June 30, 2009 09:42 AM)
Raglan gave the command. Airey wrote it down and read it back to Raglan. Nolan carried the order to Lucan. From that point on, it was the senior command in the field's responsibility to carry out the order. Recall that Raglan said something to the effect that he expected the cavalry to attack the enemy's flank when instead they were charging straight down the middle of the valley. Should Raglan have specified how he wanted the attack carried out or should Lucan or Cardigan have known how to do it is the question. As written, the order was rather vague but as anyone knows who has been in the military, it's always the senior commanding officer who has overall responsibility and therefore shoulders the blame.
KS -
Hancock_the_Superb — 14 years ago(August 27, 2011 08:47 AM)
I'd say you have to give Raglan the lion's share of the blame. Giving Nolan a vague and contradictory order was the primary problem here. The personal animosity between Cardigan, Lucan and Nolan would not (at least on the basis of evidence presented) have been a problem if Raglan had made himself comprehensible in the first place.
"I shall tread uncommon wary and keep my pepperbox handy." -
Hancock_the_Superb — 14 years ago(November 27, 2011 09:22 AM)
True but for certain books, the depiction of events is outdated due to new research. Not to mention Fraser not-infrequently injects his own opinions into the mix. On the whole though, Flashman is certainly an excellent model for historical fiction.
"My child is God to billions of Asians!" -
Hancock_the_Superb — 13 years ago(May 03, 2012 04:53 PM)
Court martial aside, public censure and loss of reputation would have resulted from refusing Raglan's order. Look what happened to Lord Sackville over Minden. He was denounced as a coward and it took a decade of back-biting and arm twisting to get back into favor.
"I had a big lunch that DIDN'T tempt fate!" -
estocade — 14 years ago(November 11, 2011 06:54 AM)
SPOILER
I liked the ending, somewhat unexpected, yet faithful to the whole picture. Men arguing who's fault was it, then the credits roll, there's no music only the sound of flies buzzing over a dead horse.
I guess all of them were guilty at some point and in some measure. It's war and there's no words for it. -
Hancock_the_Superb — 14 years ago(November 27, 2011 04:59 PM)
The CD liner notes claim that the end credits was originally to be accompanied by an ironic reprisal of the main title music. I think the final choice works much better.
"My child is God to billions of Asians!" -
mousalope — 13 years ago(April 29, 2012 03:18 AM)
It appears to me the fog of war was blamed. Sticky wicket that. The individual commanders pretty much got a pass.
A month after the charge Raglan was promoted to Field Marshall. Still in the field a year later he contracted dysentery and died.
Cardigan returned home a hero and was promoted to Inspector General of the Cavalry.
Lucan was made a member of the Order of the Bath in July of that same year. Although he never again saw active duty, he reached the rank of General in 1865 and was made a Field Marshal in the year before his death.
And Nolan got to be portrayed by Errol Flynn. Not bad. -
Hancock_the_Superb — 13 years ago(May 03, 2012 04:49 PM)
I don't know if I'd agree. Lucan was harshly vilified by the English press for the charge and even Cardigan didn't completely escape censure (thanks to memoirs and correspondence of his Crimean associates). Raglan was a hero at the time but his reputation has certainly suffered over the years.
"I had a big lunch that DIDN'T tempt fate!" -
ewfleming-616-650888 — 13 years ago(April 29, 2012 11:51 AM)
It is clear to me as a retired solier that the point of the movie was to place the blame on the system. A system where commanding officers made decisions based upon insecurity if not paranoia. A system where officers were of the gentry and not professional soldiers and damn proud of it. A system where the cadre could be arbitrary and capricious and then expect that they could command respect through harsh punishments and flogging. Just another example of British hubris watch A Bridge Too Far and you will see nothing changed even during WWII. One of the reasons American generals hated Montgomery he was an idiot. Just to let you know I am not prejudiced, read anything you want about MacArthur in Korea and you will see the same stubborness and hubris on his part.