Waterloo or not...

[kronckew]

Originally Posted by fernando

Yes, but a wounded may recover and return to battle; thus a good enemy is a dead one.
I like the peas ... not loose, but with meat cubes and poached eggs.

Medicine in those days was pretty terrible. They'd probably have bled them to strengthen their humours, most died of infection, some recovered tho. Minor wounds were a bit different tho.

A general on horseback that was next to Wellington at Waterloo had his leg taken off at the knee by a roundshot, he looked at Welly and said 'My Dod, sir, I've lost my leg!' - Wellington replied 'My Sod, sir, so you have". The general recoverd, sans a legs tho.

When the movie Zulu came out, people were horrified to learn the Zulu wounded left behind were executed by the Brits. (the Zulu did likewise). This was done frequently as a kindness rather than letting them suffer thru infections they couldn't cure. And of course a bit of revenge thrown in. Hard to condemn them when conditions were so different than the lives we lead now with modern medicine. Heck, the Roman legions had better medical care and a much better chance of survival than an 18-19c and very early 20c soldier. Lister made a big difference.