Page 6 of 13 FirstFirst ... 45678 ... LastLast
Results 51 to 60 of 129

Thread: been awhile since i studied the civil war regarding melee deaths

  1. #51

    USA Major

    Lightfoot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2017
    Location
    Houston, Tx
    Posts
    167
    I am afraid that the evidence is overwhelming that the bayonet was seldom used to kill anyone in the Civil War. That isn't the same as saying the bayonet charge wasn't effective. It was very effective if the regiments could maintain the discipline to carry it through. The reason it seldom resulted in bayonet casualties is that the American soldier had a strong sense of self preservation and rally stayed around to have a bayonet fight. They ran or surrendered. What you will see in any battle where charges were made to take positions is a high capture rate. Most charges lead to the other side falling back if they didn't feel they could stop the charge. This usually disorganized both sides to the extent no follow up was made.

    European soldiers were trained professionals not volunteers. Their armies had strict enforcement of discipline making standing and taking a bayonet charge preferable to what would happen to them if they didn't. Although I haven't seen any medical records like they had on the Civil War to confirm that they really used them either.
    Lightfoot

  2. #52

    USA General of the Army

    Bravescot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Location
    Perthshire, Scotland
    Posts
    2,626
    We're not here to recreate history 1:1. There is going to be a lot more stabby stabby in a video game after all.

  3. #53

    CSA Captain

    Bivoj's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2016
    Posts
    171
    Quote Originally Posted by TheRegulator View Post
    I do not base my "Fantasy" about bayonets on Hollywood movies... Its based on many years of studies in the Danish/Preussian war of 1864. Same type of warfare and tactics.
    Also i stated that the bayonet is to repensent all types of killing inside mele, that are not posible to put in the game. Stop pretending that melele was not used . . . Its absurd.
    In wars of unification (including the Prussian-Danish war), melee was extremely rare. The use of Prussian needle-gun, being breechloader with 3-4 times higher rate of fire than muzzle-loaders resulted in huge firepower dominance and Prussian doctrine was reflecting that - Prussians were using their firepower and avoiding bayonet charges. Their firepower was so dominant, that enemy charges (Austrian Stosstaktik) were broken far before reaching target. And when the charge against Prussian unit was successful (due to softening the target by artillery and skirmisher fire), the Prussians usually retreated before enemy reached them. Melee was very rare (town and city fighting is different story).

    So no - melee was not common in European theatres 18.-19. century. The warfare was about morale - as in North America.
    Last edited by Bivoj; 08-27-2017 at 06:15 PM.

  4. #54

    USA Captain

    TheRegulator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2017
    Location
    Denmark
    Posts
    204
    Quote Originally Posted by Bivoj View Post
    In wars of unification (including the Prussian-Danish war), melee was extremely rare. The use of Prussian needle-gun, being breechloader with 3-4 times higher rate of fire than muzzle-loaders resulted in huge firepower dominance and Prussian doctrine was reflecting that - Prussians were using their firepower and avoiding bayonet charges. Their firepower was so dominant, that enemy charges (Austrian Stosstaktik) were broken far before reaching target. And when the charge against Prussian unit was successful (due to softening the target by artillery and skirmisher fire), the Prussians usually retreated before enemy reached them. Melee was very rare (town and city fighting is different story).

    So no - melee was not common in European theatres 18.-19. century. The warfare was about morale - as in North America.

    I think the 10.000 preussian sturm pioners who charged the danish redoubts at Dybbøl with thier bayonet fixed, will laughf at you, if they had lived . . .
    Or the 8 Brigade who counter charged the preussians head on (4000 men with bayonets fixed) . .
    Or the Austrian troops at Sankelmark who charged the danes with thier bayonets fixed . . .
    Or the Preussians who charged the coast of Als . . .
    Or the Danish Company who charged a preussian Company, at Lundby.

    You have no idea what your talking about . . . Defently not. So let's just leave it, it will be my final comment.

    I simply have to add that the your so called "unification" is false . . . The area Down to the Ider river was Danish for centuries ! The perussian officers and Bismarck did a crime against our country in 1864. And thier bloddy trail of agressive wars continues until may 1945, where the nazi regime fall's to the Russians.
    Last edited by TheRegulator; 08-28-2017 at 01:24 PM.

  5. #55
    David Dire's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Location
    America
    Posts
    680
    Charging =/= Melee
    http://i.imgur.com/STUHVb8.png

  6. #56

    CSA Captain

    Bivoj's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2016
    Posts
    171
    Quote Originally Posted by TheRegulator View Post
    I think the 10.000 preussian sturm pioners who charged the danish redoubts at Dybbøl with thier bayonet fixed, will laughf at you, if they had lived . . .
    Or the 8 Brigade who counter charged the preussians head on (4000 men with bayonets fixed) . .
    Or the Austrian troops at Sankelmark who charged the danes with thier bayonets fixed . . .
    Or the Preussians who charged the coast of Als . . .
    Or the Danish Company who charged a preussian Company, at Lundeby.
    As David Dire wrote before - you have mentioned "charges". Charges were plentiful, but almost none of them resulted in melee. Prussian charge in late 19. century was advance (while reloading) and firing - famous feuertaktik. The enemy broke before the Prussians reached the contact, because Prussians were able to achieve higher rate of fire while moving against standing defenders with muzzleloaders breaking the enemy in the process.

    Different story is the clash of Austrians with their silly Stosstaktik (they were defeated badly 2 years later in Seven Weeks War because of that) and Danes at Sankelmark - some melee occurred there, but according to casualties on both sides, most of the battle was resulted by morale.
    See:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Sankelmark
    2 Austrian Brigades involved = circa 10.000 troops in 2 brigades and only 400 men killed or wounded. Danes had only 1 brigade involved and lost 200 killed or wounded, but more than 500 prisoners (the rest retreated).
    So, only circa 5% of dead and wounded (some of them fell due to artillery and rifle fire) = even in this battle, there was not that much melee. Vast majority of troops on both sides did not melee (as you mentioned - melee is brutal, leaving combatants of both sides mostly dead or wounded).

    Quote Originally Posted by TheRegulator View Post
    You have no idea what your talking about . . .
    I am afraid, that your the one influenced by Hollywood (or Danish TV series? maybe the one with eye-candy, but unreal "charges" ), rather than reader of quality history books.
    But maybe I am mistaken - I am eager to learn about the period even more. So, if you have any trusted source (history books, quotes from eye-witnesses etc.), send a link and what is stated in the source. I will be more than happy to learn something new and change my opinion.

    I am attaching a picture, where you can learn something about 18th century from Christopher Duffy - one of the best historian with focus on Germany/Austria in 18th century.

    Cold_steel.jpg

    Quote Originally Posted by TheRegulator View Post
    Defently not. So let's just leave it, it will be my final comment.
    Leaving discussion, because losing arguments? Your pity - you will live in myth. You had a chance to learn history here...

  7. #57

    USA Captain

    TheRegulator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2017
    Location
    Denmark
    Posts
    204
    BIVOT :

    The Danish Tv-series 1864 (In war Hearts bleed - International title on DVD) is a pice of uttely garbage. . . Its a disaster filled with so many historical errors you cant even Count them. Not even the dates are right. Its a joke and has NOTHING to do with the real events at all.
    You can continue trolling if you like . . . Only those who where there knows how it was, and its thier personal experince i build my knowledge on, not historicans who a 150 years later fiddel around with nummbers and thier own ideas . . .

    The numbers of death's is uncertain in those battels ! The preussians did not tell about thier losses in the war of 1864. They even made them look a lot less to avoid a uprising in the population.

    I have an exstensive Collection of original books and diaries from the war 1864. Not printed now a days, they are original books and dokuments from 1864, in german and danish written by those who participated. Ive studied this war for more than 20 years. I am currently producing a documentary movie about that war, and have been working on it for 6 years now. It will defently rock the common perception of the war . . . and maybe yours to. (There wil be an English and german version)

    Now keep an eye on the ball (W.C Fields) and back to the tread content - Mele !
    Last edited by TheRegulator; 08-28-2017 at 03:50 PM.

  8. #58

    USA Major

    VOLCUSGAMING's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Location
    Denmark
    Posts
    370
    (Sorry for being off topic.)

    Quote Originally Posted by TheRegulator View Post
    ...The Danish Tv-series 1864 (In war Hearts bleed - International title on DVD) is a piece of utter garbage. . . It's a disaster filled with so many historical errors you can't even Count them. Not even the dates are right. It's a joke and has NOTHING to do with the real events at all...
    It's still an interesting series to watch if you don't look at it from a too historical perspective but from an entertainment perspective.

    Quote Originally Posted by TheRegulator View Post
    I am currently producing a documentary movie about that war, and have been working on it for 6 years now. It will definitely rock the common perception of the war . . . and maybe yours too.
    Wow, that sounds very interesting. Give me a shout when it's out!






    Cpl. George Anthony
    Gunner


    Battery A, 1st New Jersey Light Artillery
    The German Volunteers


  9. #59

    CSA Captain

    Bivoj's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2016
    Posts
    171
    @TheRegulator
    I am not the one trolling here. At least, I am not misspelling your nickname... And, please, could you answer to what I am writing rather then distracting from topic? This kind of strategy in discussions is called strawman.
    To sum it up:
    1)
    I state: melee was rare (i.e. it happened, but it was rare) - that is the topic of this thread (so, you do not need to advice me to keep the topic, rather watch yourself)
    Your (inpolite) answer: charges happened
    Nobody is stating here, that charges did not happen. But charges usually did not result in melee. Could you answer that point? Ideally with some sources (I am not interested in your opinion, but solid sources).

    2)
    You did not answered my statements regarding Prussian doctrine. But it is not that important for ACW topic, since needlegun was not available in America (it just makes me curious, that such educated person as you pretend to be, do not know that).

    3)
    I described the insignificance of melee even in battle, where the melee is really recorded (i.e. that was the rare occurrence of melee) by quoting the casualties of Austrians and Danes.
    Your reply: Prussia was lying about casualties - what?!? Prussia was not involved in the battle at all!
    And if you have any records, that casualties in this particular battle are more significant and/or the combatants experienced massive melee involving most of the units, I will be more than happy to see the source and learn something new.

    Also, your statement, that ACW is similar to Wars of Unification is invalid. If nothing else, the two conflicts differ by the massive use of breechloaders by Prussia and Austrian Stosstaktik (both phenomena not valid for ACW).


    Quote Originally Posted by TheRegulator View Post
    The Danish Tv-series 1864 (In war Hearts bleed - International title on DVD) is a pice of uttely garbage. . . Its a disaster filled with so many historical errors you cant even Count them. Not even the dates are right. Its a joke and has NOTHING to do with the real events at all.
    At least something we both agree with Please, do not blame me for suspecting you from gaining "knowledge" from this series (and similar garbage) - your opinions are in contrary to most of history books I have read and I value and are consistent with this TV series (where "heroic" charges result in spectacular melee).


    Maybe you have great insight into this conflict (which differs from ACW a lot), maybe you really make a documentary about the 1864 war, but sorry - so far you are not answering like educated person. You are not stating proven facts, sources, arguments, but just flat opinions with offensive tone and blaming me, that I know nothing about the period (who is the troll here?).
    I do NOT mean it as an offence - please, keep it civil. I just want historical discussion, not flamewar. If you proof, that your statements are right and mine wrong - I will be happy to learn something and I will thank you.
    Last edited by Bivoj; 08-28-2017 at 06:53 PM.

  10. #60

    USA Captain

    TheRegulator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2017
    Location
    Denmark
    Posts
    204
    Quote Originally Posted by Bivoj View Post
    @TheRegulator
    And, please, could you answer to what I am writing rather then distracting from topic? .
    My answer is NO.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •