Help support TMP


"The Guns of Cinco de Mayo – Mexico’s Victory Over French" Topic


3 Posts

All members in good standing are free to post here. Opinions expressed here are solely those of the posters, and have not been cleared with nor are they endorsed by The Miniatures Page.

For more information, see the TMP FAQ.


Back to the 19th Century Discussion Message Board


Areas of Interest

19th Century

Featured Hobby News Article


Top-Rated Ruleset


Featured Showcase Article

Turkish Keyk-Class Patrol Digs

Personal logo Editor in Chief Bill The Editor of TMP Fezian finally dips his toe into the world of Aeronef.


Featured Workbench Article

Drilling Holes in Minis - Part III: Going Larger

Personal logo Editor in Chief Bill The Editor of TMP Fezian weighs the pros and cons of using a power drill on the minis workbench.


Featured Profile Article

The Gates of Old Jerusalem

The gates of Old Jerusalem offer a wide variety of scenario possibilities.


Current Poll


Featured Book Review


224 hits since 25 Sep 2020
©1994-2020 Bill Armintrout
Comments or corrections?

Tango01 Supporting Member of TMP25 Sep 2020 9:24 p.m. PST

…Forces.


"It's not uncommon for people to mistake Cinco de Mayo as a day to celebrate Mexico's independence, but that's actually September 16, 1810. Instead, Cinco de Mayo celebrates Mexico's May 5, 1862, victory over French forces in Puebla City.


In 1861, Mexico had just ended a civil war and was in a financially ruinous state. As a result, President Juarez suspended all payments of foreign debt. France, Great Britain, and Spain were owed significant sums of money and they were not pleased with this decision, so the three countries banded together to demand repayment…"

picture


Main page
link

Amicalement
Armand

Pan Marek26 Sep 2020 9:34 a.m. PST

I don't trust the information in the article, for the author makes a huge mistake- By 1867, the republicans were indeed largely equipped with percussion rifles, as the US government sent them huge amounts after the Civil War ended. Plus, the article has too many "likely to haves" for something purporting to convey historical information.
Lastly, no support is given for any of the stated "facts".

Tango01 Supporting Member of TMP26 Sep 2020 11:57 a.m. PST

Glup!…


Amicalement
Armand

Sorry - only verified members can post on the forums.