Ye, it was a friendly dig. Every generation of pensioners thinks the world won't survive without them - it's a coping mechanism to feel valued once the opportunity to change the world has passed. There is a level of negativity and running the country down, whilst ignoring all the positives and good things - the UK is a world leader in many sectors, there are problems that politicians need to sort, but the Wheels will keep turning long after you and I are gone.
Off Topic Hull City Centre Public Realm Strategy
- Thread starter originallambrettaman
- Start date
-
Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
-
Huh, says you, never heard such patronising nonsense!
You've omitted the word 'some' in that, I don't think that way.
This popped up on me youtube, made by a German bloke praising hell out of the Deep and at the end, the City too. Even City gets a mention. Worth a watch.
You must log in or register to see media
From to Hull and Back...
In 1643, Hull made a decision that still stands out in British history. It deliberately flooded the land around itself.
This was not an accident.
It was not caused by bad weather.
It was a deliberate military action.
England was deep in the Civil War. Hull was strategically important because it held a major stock of weapons and ammunition. Control of Hull meant control of those supplies. King Charles I wanted the town. Parliament understood what was at stake.
Hull refused the King.
Royalist forces responded by laying siege. They surrounded the town, disrupted supplies, and attempted to force surrender over time. Hull’s walls offered protection, but they were not enough on their own. The surrounding land was flat and open, allowing troops, artillery, and horses to move freely.
Hull’s commanders understood that if Royalist forces could manoeuvre easily, the town would eventually be overwhelmed.
So the land itself was used as a defence.
The drainage systems and dykes around Hull were deliberately opened. Flood defences were breached by order. Water spread across nearby fields, roads, and farmland, creating waterlogged ground outside the town’s defences.
This was not a spontaneous act. Contemporary accounts indicate the flooding was organised and maintained as part of Hull’s wider defensive strategy.
The impact was immediate.
Movement became difficult. Heavy wagons bogged down. Horses struggled. Artillery could not be easily positioned. Ground that had once been firm became unstable and slow to cross.
The siege was hindered.
And eventually, it failed.
Hull remained under Parliamentary control. Royalist forces later withdrew. Parliament retained both the town and its weapons. Historians agree that Hull’s successful defence, including the deliberate flooding of the surrounding land, weakened Royalist efforts in the north during this phase of the war.
The cost, however, was real.
Farmland outside the defences was damaged. Crops were lost. Some homes and communities were affected by the flooding. These were local consequences, felt by people living in and around Hull.
Despite this, the decision was not reversed.
Hull’s leadership chose to sacrifice land rather than surrender the town and its arms.
What makes this episode remarkable is not just the action itself, but the reasoning behind it.
Defence was prioritised over convenience.
Military necessity over immediate hardship.
It remains one of the clearest documented examples in Britain of a town deliberately altering its own landscape as a defensive measure during war.
Today, much of that land has been rebuilt and reshaped. There are no clear markers showing where floodwaters once stood. Streets, fields, and developments now cover ground that was intentionally sacrificed in 1643.
Hull did not simply endure the siege.
It changed the ground beneath it to hold its position.
#hull #history
In 1643, Hull made a decision that still stands out in British history. It deliberately flooded the land around itself.
This was not an accident.
It was not caused by bad weather.
It was a deliberate military action.
England was deep in the Civil War. Hull was strategically important because it held a major stock of weapons and ammunition. Control of Hull meant control of those supplies. King Charles I wanted the town. Parliament understood what was at stake.
Hull refused the King.
Royalist forces responded by laying siege. They surrounded the town, disrupted supplies, and attempted to force surrender over time. Hull’s walls offered protection, but they were not enough on their own. The surrounding land was flat and open, allowing troops, artillery, and horses to move freely.
Hull’s commanders understood that if Royalist forces could manoeuvre easily, the town would eventually be overwhelmed.
So the land itself was used as a defence.
The drainage systems and dykes around Hull were deliberately opened. Flood defences were breached by order. Water spread across nearby fields, roads, and farmland, creating waterlogged ground outside the town’s defences.
This was not a spontaneous act. Contemporary accounts indicate the flooding was organised and maintained as part of Hull’s wider defensive strategy.
The impact was immediate.
Movement became difficult. Heavy wagons bogged down. Horses struggled. Artillery could not be easily positioned. Ground that had once been firm became unstable and slow to cross.
The siege was hindered.
And eventually, it failed.
Hull remained under Parliamentary control. Royalist forces later withdrew. Parliament retained both the town and its weapons. Historians agree that Hull’s successful defence, including the deliberate flooding of the surrounding land, weakened Royalist efforts in the north during this phase of the war.
The cost, however, was real.
Farmland outside the defences was damaged. Crops were lost. Some homes and communities were affected by the flooding. These were local consequences, felt by people living in and around Hull.
Despite this, the decision was not reversed.
Hull’s leadership chose to sacrifice land rather than surrender the town and its arms.
What makes this episode remarkable is not just the action itself, but the reasoning behind it.
Defence was prioritised over convenience.
Military necessity over immediate hardship.
It remains one of the clearest documented examples in Britain of a town deliberately altering its own landscape as a defensive measure during war.
Today, much of that land has been rebuilt and reshaped. There are no clear markers showing where floodwaters once stood. Streets, fields, and developments now cover ground that was intentionally sacrificed in 1643.
Hull did not simply endure the siege.
It changed the ground beneath it to hold its position.
#hull #history
You must log in or register to see images
Love this, wonder if you can get a print, without the yellow banner of course.
You must log in or register to see media
So it supported 28,000 jobs directly and indirectly which I would find completely believable.
You must log in or register to see images
Copy or download file to you phone. Move to pictures. Edit and crop out the banner.
If you're stuck give me a shout or,should I say,I'll ask one the grandkids they'll know howThanks mate, i'll give that a try.
Thanks mate.If you're stuck give me a shout or,should I say,I'll ask one the grandkids they'll know how
But will he make the buses run on time?
www.bbc.co.uk
Buses to come under Hull and East Yorkshire mayor's control
Legal responsibility for local bus services will transfer to Luke Campbell's office in March.
www.bbc.co.uk
As long as they don't have to pick people up...But will he make the buses run on time?
Buses to come under Hull and East Yorkshire mayor's control
Legal responsibility for local bus services will transfer to Luke Campbell's office in March.
You must log in or register to see media