|
That's pretty cool. Thanks!
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2023 10:17
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 10, 2024 07:27 |
|
|
Ensign Expendable posted:Get several models in different scales and arrange them in a forced perspective diorama. Now there’s an idea! And if I botch the scale, I can claim it’s an interpretation of mistaken identification. Such as when destroyers are confused for cruisers.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2023 14:39
|
|
|
One of the most famous battlefield desecrations is Waterloo, where the big victory mound built after the battle meant totally resculpting the terrain. Wellington went back and was basically "these bozos have totally ruined my battlefield".
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2023 14:53
|
|
|
FPyat posted:Do historical battlefield parks struggle with things like erosion and plant growth altering the landscape? Are there different approaches to how preservation should handle these changes? The National Park Service has a grant program specifically to address this issue. American Battlefield Protection Program (ABPP) posted:Battlefield Restoration Grants support projects that restore “day-of-battle” conditions at nationally significant American Revolution, War of 1812, and Civil War battlefields and associated historic sites. The awards are made possible by the Land and Water Conservation Fund, which reinvests revenue from offshore oil and natural gas leasing to help strengthen conservation and recreation opportunities across the nation. These grants empower preservation partners to inspire wonder, understanding and empathy at the places that witnessed some of our nation’s most challenging events. In addition, the ABPP administers three other grants: Battlefield Land Acquisition, Preservation Planning, and Battlefield Interpretation grants. This financial assistance encourages and sustains community-driven stewardship of historic resources in Tribal, state, and local communities. I’ll also add to what others have already said and address your second question further. Battlefield preservation can find itself opposite wilderness conservation as it seeks to preserve a cultural landscape in spite of nature. It can also find itself opposite other forms of preservation when it seeks to preserve the battlefield over other history significant to the place. However, the standards, guidelines, and even regulations of the cultural preservation fields provide the framework for identifying what actions should occur amongst competing issues & perspectives. In the United States, you can find the majority of them through the National Park Service.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2023 15:19
|
|
|
I thought they did a good job at Culloden. They have a stretch of the area how it was back in the day, with the rest allowed to grow as a nature reserve. They mark out where all the units on both sides are lined up with a line of flags to show where it would extend. The visitor centre is a bit back from the battlefield and you get a good view of the area from the roof. Maps and signs everywhere of course. If you take a walk you get a good sense of what it would have been like for the Jacobite army to advance under fire.
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2023 15:25
|
|
MikeCrotch posted:One of the most famous battlefield desecrations is Waterloo, where the big victory mound built after the battle meant totally resculpting the terrain. Wellington went back and was basically "these bozos have totally ruined my battlefield". Ah the vapid idiot being shot memorial.
|
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2023 15:47
|
|
|
It's been twenty odd years, but isn't the lion statue on top aligned such that you get to meditate on its balls as you climb to the top?
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2023 17:00
|
|
|
Siivola posted:How would two pike squares engage? (Carefully! Do ho ho!) I sort of know how they're deployed and what they're there to do (protect the people with the guns), and I've seen Holben's drawing of the end result, but I have no idea how they went from one to the other. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4y6agtVxWi8
|
|
#
?
Nov 27, 2023 17:13
|
|
|
I doubt anyone ITT has ever asked themselves "I wonder how fancy Regia Marina warships were inside?" I also doubt that anyone here would be particularly surprised that the answer is "really loving fancy". Just look at the conference room in the thumbnail below. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TdUTEbvltZM&t=603s I like this channel as a supplement to Drachinifel. He's got a mild case of YouTube Voice, but I like his approach to ship reviews. He also does some very interesting shipwreck tours. What caught my eye at first was a series on the design philosophies of the Grand Fleet and the High Seas Fleet. That gets a lot less coverage than class histories with technical details; the whys are even more interesting.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2023 03:34
|
|
|
mllaneza posted:I doubt anyone ITT has ever asked themselves "I wonder how fancy Regia Marina warships were inside?" You're joking, right?
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2023 15:52
|
|
|
TooMuchAbstraction posted:Unfortunately no, this is one of those things that I dimly remember reading at some point somewhere. It is, I suppose, possible that I made it up, though I suspect it's more likely that I read it here or on the ACOUP blog. I can sort of see the logic but the argument seems to lean on some pretty heavy assumptions on how "the average soldier" feels about killing and dying. It seems to take our modern sedentary mindset and transplant it across eras, and that seems wrong to me. I genuinely do think that when historical people wrote about stuff like "chivalry" or "honour", they actually believed that, and consequently felt a real pressure to not be "cowards". The other half is more persuasive, but there's a huge grey area between "a brisk walk" and "everyone sprints full tilt at the enemy", and we've not even addressed what a chargeable distance is. Just the other day, Bret Devereaux argued on ACOUP that Roman legionaries would throw two pila and then advance to take advantage of any gaps made. Pilum range is maybe 30 metres. Can you briskly walk that distance before the enemy fixes their ranks? I dunno! Can soldiers run? Yeah, moderns do it all the time for health and because Sarge felt like it. They even drill running in formations, but actual formal drill is a fairly young practice. Hey Guns has argued that his dudes didn't drill in the 17th century and we know that people were super into it by 19th, so the development happens somewhere in between there. So could a bunch of dudes maintain a semblance of a line while running? It depends! Start close enough and there isn't enough space for people to dive out. This is why I was hoping for some juicy sources btw, "what does 'charging' actually mean, as a mode of movement" is too broad a question in general. Anyway, pilum range reminded me that I've heard that some old US military books included "whites of eyes are visible X far away" in a chapter on estimating distances. Anyone know what book that might have been?
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2023 18:06
|
|
|
Siivola posted:How would two pike squares engage? (Carefully! Do ho ho!) I sort of know how they're deployed and what they're there to do (protect the people with the guns), and I've seen Holben's drawing of the end result, but I have no idea how they went from one to the other. O hey! You reminded me that I actually asked Hey Guns about the "push of pike" a while back. It's not a source you can really cite, but he's a pretty dang good authority on it so here's the relevant part of that e-mail conversation : A Roguishly Handsome but Stupid Person posted:I was randomly thinking about pikes, as you do, and despite us talking about this 50,000 times I don't really know what happens when two pike squares form up. Like, I know lots of bits but I don't have a firm grasp of the process. I was trying to sketch it out mentally and this is the best I got : An Actual Expert With Knowledge and Stuff posted:1. They are not standing close together. Does that help at all?
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2023 18:36
|
|
|
Siivola posted:I can sort of see the logic but the argument seems to lean on some pretty heavy assumptions on how "the average soldier" feels about killing and dying. It seems to take our modern sedentary mindset and transplant it across eras, and that seems wrong to me. I genuinely do think that when historical people wrote about stuff like "chivalry" or "honour", they actually believed that, and consequently felt a real pressure to not be "cowards". If you look at the conversation about dueling a couple of pages back, it's pretty clear that an awful lot of historical people really did think that 'severe injury or death' is a better outcome than 'coward' in a lot of cases. Voluntarily going into a one-on-one duel where injury, deliberate maiming, or death is an almost certain consequence for at least one party was very widespread across different times, locations, and social classes. Almost no soldiers would want to just run straight into a spear, but that's different than not wanting to get to grips with the enemy.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2023 18:52
|
|
|
Xiahou Dun posted:O hey! You reminded me that I actually asked Hey Guns about the "push of pike" a while back. It's not a source you can really cite, but he's a pretty dang good authority on it so here's the relevant part of that e-mail conversation : It does, in a zoomed-out way. Thanks! But what I'm wondering is more like, in step 1.5 at what speed do the loosely packed groups of dudes advance? Do they march to a drumbeat until contact, or do they run in screaming, or do something clever that my Hollywood-addled brain can't picture?
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2023 19:02
|
|
|
Siivola posted:It does, in a zoomed-out way. Thanks! But what I'm wondering is more like, in step 1.5 at what speed do the loosely packed groups of dudes advance? Do they march to a drumbeat until contact, or do they run in screaming, or do something clever that my Hollywood-addled brain can't picture? Pikes don't generally charge. Almost everyone in the square is either carrying a 20' sharpened stick or a tube full of primitive explosives (with attendant lit matchcord), neither of which is a great thing to run with. This is a lot of drumbeat walking towards each other with quicker bits interspersed.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2023 19:09
|
|
|
Pantaloon Pontiff posted:If you look at the conversation about dueling a couple of pages back, it's pretty clear that an awful lot of historical people really did think that 'severe injury or death' is a better outcome than 'coward' in a lot of cases. Voluntarily going into a one-on-one duel where injury, deliberate maiming, or death is an almost certain consequence for at least one party was very widespread across different times, locations, and social classes. Almost no soldiers would want to just run straight into a spear, but that's different than not wanting to get to grips with the enemy. I think if I was going to extend that argument, I'd also say that all the historical sources that talk about proper warrior behaviour (honour, chivalry, etc.) wouldn't be doing so if there wasn't a concern that many people would behave as "cowards". Societal ideals on bravery are a lot easier to hold when some bastard isn't standing in front of you with a pointy stick he's trying to murder you with. In a duel, societal pressure can make you commit to the fight because people have their eyes on you specifically. If you act in a "cowardly " fashion, it will be obvious. In a general charge though, people might notice and remember if you cut and run. They might not notice if you accidentally-on-purpose stumble slightly so that you're not one of the first to make contact with the enemy. I was under the impression that we had decent sources for how charges worked for infantry and cavalry from at least the Napoleonic period forward? Presumably they'd be a decent indicator for how charges may have worked in prior eras of warfare. I'm hardly an expert though, so I could easily be mistaken.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2023 19:10
|
|
|
Xiahou Dun posted:Pikes don't generally charge. Almost everyone in the square is either carrying a 20' sharpened stick or a tube full of primitive explosives (with attendant lit matchcord), neither of which is a great thing to run with. So this kinda loops around to the other half of my post back there: Does "charging" necessarily imply "running"? Does this even make sense as a question?
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2023 19:25
|
|
|
I don't think you can run with a 20 ft pike held in front of you. What happened when two phalanxes had to fight each other head on?
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2023 19:27
|
|
|
zoux posted:I don't think you can run with a 20 ft pike held in front of you. What happened when two phalanxes had to fight each other head on? I've read Devereaux mention that because Greek citizen-soldiers weren't particularly well trained, phalanxes had difficulty maneuvering on the field. After they made contact, the formations allegedly drifted clockwise around one another because the dudes would try to angle around their counterparts' shields. There's a big ol' gap in the middle there, again.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2023 19:36
|
|
|
Siivola posted:I've read Devereaux mention that because Greek citizen-soldiers weren't particularly well trained, phalanxes had difficulty maneuvering on the field. After they made contact, the formations allegedly drifted clockwise around one another because the dudes would try to angle around their counterparts' shields. Yep, cavalry basically waiting around for this to happen so they can go ham
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2023 20:37
|
|
|
Fangz posted:Also I understand the portrayal of Josephine and Napoleon's relationship in the movie is terrible anyway There is always making a movie set in a historical war without showing battles as more than a three second backdrop, if you’re not interested in doing long battle scenes to even SPR authenticity Would this fly for Hollywood funding, idk
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2023 20:39
|
|
|
That clip I posted of the battle of Roicroi wasn't a gag, Hegel hisself said, as I recall, that it was fairly accurate. They just kind of scoot into each other: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4y6agtVxWi8&t=144s
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2023 20:39
|
|
|
Lemony posted:I think if I was going to extend that argument, I'd also say that all the historical sources that talk about proper warrior behaviour (honour, chivalry, etc.) wouldn't be doing so if there wasn't a concern that many people would behave as "cowards". Societal ideals on bravery are a lot easier to hold when some bastard isn't standing in front of you with a pointy stick he's trying to murder you with. In a duel, societal pressure can make you commit to the fight because people have their eyes on you specifically. If you act in a "cowardly " fashion, it will be obvious. In a general charge though, people might notice and remember if you cut and run. They might not notice if you accidentally-on-purpose stumble slightly so that you're not one of the first to make contact with the enemy. Oh, I see that the comment I was replying to was replying to a discussion of an 'everyone runs at the enemy' charge. I don't think those were actually anywhere near as common as movies would lead people to believe. If you're infantry charging in formation, your buddies beside you and the line of guys behind you certainly have their eyes on you, if you 'fake stumble' and mess up your formation then it's going to be hard for them not to notice. And these are either people from your home area or people you've campaigned with for a long time, so you care a lot about their opinion. Is there even much information on 'everyone run at the enemy' charges? They seem more like a desperation move than a military tactic.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2023 22:16
|
|
|
Siivola posted:So this kinda loops around to the other half of my post back there: Does "charging" necessarily imply "running"? It can, but I don't think it's axiomatic. Just for an example, this is a sketch by Edwin Forbes of Pickett's Charge. Forbes was an artist who saw multiple US Civil War battles firsthand; he was "embedded" with the Union Army. When he depicts the charge, no one is running. They're advancing, but walking, stopping to shoot, etc. 
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2023 22:31
|
|
|
I see how that is titled; was the Union soldier's reaction to Pickett's charge one of admiration or derision
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2023 22:58
|
|
|
I don't know. Maybe a bit of both?
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2023 23:01
|
|
|
I think there are specific types of shock charges that are more or less sprint charges, but they're the kind that gets specific names: Highland charge and Gustavan charge are the two that I understand as having a sprint component. In either case the tactic is to advance, sometimes to unload as much firepower as possible from up close to disrupt the enemy's ability to counter attack, before crashing into hand to hand, with the aim of shocking the targeted line out of formation. That these two are singled out as special kinds of charges strongly implies that a sprint into hand to hand is not the norm.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2023 23:25
|
|
|
zoux posted:I see how that is titled; was the Union soldier's reaction to Pickett's charge one of admiration or derision Brave, but doomed. There's a letter from Private David Coon that describes how the Rebels advanced through devastating artillery fire, but the survivors soon turned back after reaching the stone wall and realizing they were facing a mass of experienced Union troops. "At every jump our boys saluted them by firing their deadly volleys into them, piling them up in windrows. The artillery also sent the grape and canister into them with disdainful vengeance." There's an article that quotes a Major Osborne, who wrote that "the whole force of our artillery was brought to bear upon this column, and the havoc produced upon their ranks was truly inspiring." I don't know of any longer Union memoirs that describe Pickett's Charge in detail, but I'm sure they exist. At the 50th anniversary of the Battle of Gettysburg, the surviving Southerners reenacted Pickett's Charge. When they reached the stone wall, the Union soldiers hugged them. Chamale fucked around with this message at 23:56 on Nov 29, 2023 |
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2023 23:50
|
|
|
Foote gave an account of an artillery crew stopping to gape at the pause to dress the line, then gladly firing with renewed gusto at this easy target.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2023 00:20
|
|
|
Siivola posted:So this kinda loops around to the other half of my post back there: Does "charging" necessarily imply "running"? I guess it depends on what you mean by charge and what you mean by run. To follow up on the ACW example. A "charge" can be very loosely defined. The entirety of the July 3rd attack mentioned is called a charge even though the majority of the advance was carried out probably in common time which covers ~70 yards a minute until the final 150 yards or so where double quick was called Armistead which is not quite a run but increases the pace to ~150 yards a minute. At Franklin, double-quick was apparently called by a Confederate regiment right after receiving the first volley of small arms fire (which would typically be issued ~200 yards). This account describes it as a run and the attack disintegrated as it hit an abatis line. There are other examples but in general during an assault, if and when double quick was called it was usually the final dash within 200 yards or so and it was meant to carry the position if morale and unit cohesion held. Double-quick was also often used to move men into positions and plug gaps but it was recognized as strenuous and left men in poor condition to fight in sustained. At Chickamauga, Rosecrans met Thomas's increasingly urgent requests for men and ordered a brigade to essentially double quick to Thomas's position but not to exhaust the men in the process (presumably to slow down to a more reasonable pace if it became clear the men started to falter). In a more ancient setting (of which I am very suspicious of any accounts), Pharsalus saw Caesar's men advance upon Pompey's line and when Pompey's line did not reciprocate, apparently Caesar's men had enough sense to stop, redress their lines and gather their breath before proceeding again. There is a lot we don't know about ancient warfare given the sparse accounts left behind and many of those accounts are second-hand sources recorded decades or centuries after its occurrence. An analog I like think of as a reasonable fascilime of what ancient warfare might have looked like is modern-day riot police doing crowd control. A slow deliberate pace to close in on the mass of protesters with small groups breaking into a run to capture small groups of rioters before retreating back to safety of their own lines. I "pulse" theory of combat and riot cops seem to practice that type of movement a lot. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6KNECqbngcg&t=35s
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2023 00:58
|
|
|
Semi-related but the the video that comes up a lot, specifically with regards to riot police in comparison to ancient tactics (specifically Roman legion tactics), is this one of South Korean riot police training https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t4D-HUUTXvQ Almost certainly not exactly right of course, and probably a lot more complicated than anything you'd see on a battlefield, but interesting to think about. You can also see that they don't really "charge" - order and coordination are more important than speed, generally speaking.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2023 02:13
|
|
|
MikeC posted:An analog I like think of as a reasonable fascilime of what ancient warfare might have looked like is modern-day riot police doing crowd control. A slow deliberate pace to close in on the mass of protesters with small groups breaking into a run to capture small groups of rioters before retreating back to safety of their own lines. I "pulse" theory of combat and riot cops seem to practice that type of movement a lot. That reminds me of a video I think people here will like - it's a comparison of modern riot police armor with medieval armor. Jason, the presenter here, does a lot of videos reenacting medieval stuff (some milhist like armor and horseback riding, some social like food and day-to-day tools). https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x5drjdFuo7k
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2023 02:22
|
|
|
zoux posted:I don't think you can run with a 20 ft pike held in front of you. What happened when two phalanxes had to fight each other head on? Maybe not run but the Swiss made their name in part because of their speed operating on foot. Indeed, their first move in the pitched battles of the Burgudian and Italian Wars was often to charge the enemy cannon and turn them on their former operators. Although they switched form a mainly-halberd to mainly-pike force over the decades, this tactic remained a habit, so that in 1515 when they did the same thing again at the Battle of Marignano, the French immediately sent a force of cavalry over to repulse them from the artillery. Xiahou Dun posted:Pikes don't generally charge. Almost everyone in the square is either carrying a 20' sharpened stick or a tube full of primitive explosives (with attendant lit matchcord), neither of which is a great thing to run with. Charging with pikes was a common technique, though it sounds like what you're describing might be what I would consider charging. Here's what John Cruso says in his 1639 work, The Art of Warre quote:You must not give on so hastily, as that thereby the Battaillons be disordered; and on the other-side you are to use a marching pace un∣till you come within distance of a Pistoll-shot, but then to double your pace and to charge furiously, the Pikes being close serried, and the Muskets continually playing on the Flanks, having certain Targetteers in Front which may shelter the Battaillon, and disorder the enemies Pikes. This fits in with other descriptions I've read from the period, and could be what was done earlier. As an aside, i find it funny how pikes grow in size like a big fish story. I have never heard of actual 20' pikes in use, though I could believe it. The ones in the 17th century were typically around 16' in length, but Agostino Manciolino in his 1531 Opera Nova recommends a 12-14 foot pike. edit: One more detail is regarding the actual fencing with the pike. It can be held in multiple different positions, for which we have dozens of illustrations, and it appears to be somewhat situational. I think the best probably come from Paul Dolnstein, a landsknecht who fought for the king of Denmark:   
Rodrigo Diaz fucked around with this message at 04:07 on Nov 30, 2023 |
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2023 03:07
|
|
|
On a scale of pole vaulting pole to iron rod, how floppy is a very long pike
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2023 03:53
|
|
|
zoux posted:On a scale of pole vaulting pole to iron rod, how floppy is a very long pike Pikes are made of ash poles, so they'll feel more like an iron rod (or axe handle...) in the hand, but have a surprising amount of flex, in the form of shock absorption. You can wobble em around some but it's not like you can bend em in half like a fishing pole or pole vault pole. Uh, if 10 is max flex maybe a 3 to 3.5? Takes a lot to move them but they'll go a lot farther than you'd expect when they move.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2023 05:15
|
|
|
I think Hey Guns mentioned reenactors use thicker pikeshafts since an period accurate pike is springy enough that it could be dangerous if it caught on something and whipped someone. Edit: also a period accurate pike splintering could put someone in the hospital.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2023 06:35
|
|
|
Cessna posted:You're joking, right? I do sometimes underestimate my audience.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2023 07:03
|
|
|
Hell yeah thanks everybody, those are exactly the kinds of accounts of charges I was hoping for.TaurusTorus posted:I think Hey Guns mentioned reenactors use thicker pikeshafts since an period accurate pike is springy enough that it could be dangerous if it caught on something and whipped someone. Iirc he's also mentioned the shafts are so expensive and awkward that nobody wants to bring spares if they can avoid it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2023 07:39
|
|
|
Siivola posted:Hell yeah thanks everybody, those are exactly the kinds of accounts of charges I was hoping for. Yet such was the desire for loot that, when there was a house to ransack, they'd lay the pike down and jump on it to snap the shaft and make a short spear, even though the shafts were valuable even then.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2023 08:22
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 10, 2024 07:27 |
|
|
Nothing was more important than looting. Looting is the entire reason to be a soldier.
|
|
#
?
Nov 30, 2023 08:39
|
|
