>>17680151>>17680151Britain was not an "emasculated" country like you claimed. It was a hard/tough, violent country.
Read:
The Penguin Social History of Britain: English Society in the Eighteenth Century
Also, have some accounts of visitors to Britain:
Emmanuel Meteren
"The people are bold, courageous, ardent and cruel in war. But very inconstant, rash, vainglorious, light and deceiving. And very suspicious, especially of foreigners, whom they despise"
Jean-Francois Froissart
"The more blood they shed, the crueller and more ruthless they become. They're fiery and furious, they quickly grow angry and take a long time to calm down".
César-François de Saussure visited England in the 1700s and he wrote about how they were CONSTANTLY fighting in the streets. Any insult resulted in fists being thrown until someone was knocked out and bleeding. Dueling was common, ending in death fairly often. Both amongst the working class and the elite.
Even British elites, nobles, prime ministers, were fighting off highway armed robbers all the time. George Berkley shot and killed multiple robbers, as did Lord Montrose, and multiple other British elites around this time period. Every time they went outside at night, they risked getting robbed and killed, since England was full of highway robbers and one of the worst countries in the world for that sort of thing. "We have to travel as if we are going to war" Walpole I believe said.
England was not an emasculated country in the slightest. And their soldiers were really hard, tough bastards. Look at the battle of Fontenoy: the Germans running away with the Dutch while the English pressed on into the enemy fire and fought a brutal hard-pressed battle against the French, who they had on the ropes until the Irish charged in.
As a major fan of history, the claim the English were not tough is simply false. They were an extremely hard people, on the contrary. And many of them still were in 80s, 90s, etc. Football hooliganism
