1864: Denmark - you will never walk alone

Redbeard

Banned
I do not agree that British support for Denmark would not give Prussia second thoughts. British support would give Denmark the chance to principally hold out for ever, but British support would require PoD's in itself.

Anything but a swift decisive victory would be very damaging to Bismarck's future career and reputation, and even the addition of a Swedish contingent of 15-20.000 will make Prussian operations very much more difficult and risky.

Regards

Steffen Redbeard
 
This is an interesting one. I really doubt a British army would have made that much difference but perhaps Prussia and A-H might have thought again about war if Britain had made it clear it would really support Denmark. They would know they could defeat the British on land but perhaps might have been worried about the threat of a Royal Naval blockade of their coasts and bombardment of their ports?
 
Redbeard said:
I do not agree that British support for Denmark would not give Prussia second thoughts. British support would give Denmark the chance to principally hold out for ever, but British support would require PoD's in itself.

Anything but a swift decisive victory would be very damaging to Bismarck's future career and reputation, and even the addition of a Swedish contingent of 15-20.000 will make Prussian operations very much more difficult and risky.

Regards

Steffen Redbeard

I disagree. How does a British army stop the Austro-Prussian army from overunning Jutland, especially as the Prussians would still have been the only ones with breech-loading rifles? The Danescertainly couldn't hold out forever-- especially as the A-P army would be able to flank the Dannewerk before either the Brits or the Swedes could arrive.

Incidentally, according to van Eyck, the UK Cabinet vote was only 8-6, so it wouldn't require a HUGE POD.
 
What arms would the swedes use? The swedish soldiers had to use arms that were modern in the US revolutionary war in 1770ths, the goverment simply couldnt afford to upgrade the army
 
I think the British and French also had modern rifles in 1864. They had used them during the Crimeean War.
 

Redbeard

Banned
bill_bruno said:
I disagree. How does a British army stop the Austro-Prussian army from overunning Jutland, especially as the Prussians would still have been the only ones with breech-loading rifles? The Danescertainly couldn't hold out forever-- especially as the A-P army would be able to flank the Dannewerk before either the Brits or the Swedes could arrive.

Incidentally, according to van Eyck, the UK Cabinet vote was only 8-6, so it wouldn't require a HUGE POD.

The Prussian army can indeed occupy Jutland, but so what? The main part of Denmark (incl. Copenhagen) is still far outside their reach and Germany is blockaded firm and tightly. And with the danish and British navies in control the German army in Jutland is always in danger of a flanking attack/raid into the east coast of Jutland. This was kind of SOP for the Danish army then, and would a way of warfare wellknown to the British. Having another army in N.Germany to aid the occupatiuon army in Jutland will have this become a very costly operation and seriously weaken the Prussian cover against especially France.

The the Prussian needle gun is IMHO overrated. Of much greater importance was their rifled artillery, which before the battle of Dybbøl/Düppel effectively battered the Danish position without the Danish smoothbore guns being able to respond. In a prolonged war with British support (money) the Danes would have been able to improve their equipment (repeating rifles were actually considered before the war but rejected as they were thought to waste ammo!).

The Dannevirke was given up early in the campaign, as heavy frost made it easy to outflank. The Danish Army therefore resorted to another proven tactic, that of taking up a postion on one of the numerous peninsulas on the eastcoast of Jutland. From here it could either strike in the flank of an advancing enemy or be evacuated to be landed somewhere else. At Dybbøl this sceme was "disturbed" by the Prussian rifled artillery, but still the army withdrew largely intact over the narrow Alssund to the island of Als. The Alssund was guarded by one of the most modern warships of the world (Rolf Krake), but through a combination of Prussian luck and Danish bad hair day/incompetence the Prussians succeded in crossing the Alssund unhindered and so routed the regrouping Danish Army. Had the Rolf Krake been where she ought to, the Prussian victory at Dybbøl had been largely a blow in the air, and the war had probably drawn out. This just to point to the war not being a given matter beforehand.

I diplomatic isloation the Danes had no realistic option to continue the war after the army had been defeated, but with UK behind there is no reason to stop.

Prussia is unlikely to be outright defeated, but Bismarck will not have the foundation for his OTL reputation and respect - that might be very important for later events.

Regards

Steffen Redbeard
 
Anglo-Swedish intervention not decisive.

Redbeard said:
The Prussian army can indeed occupy Jutland, but so what? The main part of Denmark (incl. Copenhagen) is still far outside their reach and Germany is blockaded firm and tightly. And with the danish and British navies in control the German army in Jutland is always in danger of a flanking attack/raid into the east coast of Jutland. This was kind of SOP for the Danish army then, and would a way of warfare wellknown to the British. Having another army in N.Germany to aid the occupatiuon army in Jutland will have this become a very costly operation and seriously weaken the Prussian cover against especially France.

The the Prussian needle gun is IMHO overrated. Of much greater importance was their rifled artillery, which before the battle of Dybbøl/Düppel effectively battered the Danish position without the Danish smoothbore guns being able to respond. In a prolonged war with British support (money) the Danes would have been able to improve their equipment (repeating rifles were actually considered before the war but rejected as they were thought to waste ammo!).

The Dannevirke was given up early in the campaign, as heavy frost made it easy to outflank. The Danish Army therefore resorted to another proven tactic, that of taking up a postion on one of the numerous peninsulas on the eastcoast of Jutland. From here it could either strike in the flank of an advancing enemy or be evacuated to be landed somewhere else. At Dybbøl this sceme was "disturbed" by the Prussian rifled artillery, but still the army withdrew largely intact over the narrow Alssund to the island of Als. The Alssund was guarded by one of the most modern warships of the world (Rolf Krake), but through a combination of Prussian luck and Danish bad hair day/incompetence the Prussians succeded in crossing the Alssund unhindered and so routed the regrouping Danish Army. Had the Rolf Krake been where she ought to, the Prussian victory at Dybbøl had been largely a blow in the air, and the war had probably drawn out. This just to point to the war not being a given matter beforehand.

I diplomatic isloation the Danes had no realistic option to continue the war after the army had been defeated, but with UK behind there is no reason to stop.

Prussia is unlikely to be outright defeated, but Bismarck will not have the foundation for his OTL reputation and respect - that might be very important for later events.

Regards

Steffen Redbeard

First, the Dryse rifle wasn't overrated. Just read G. Wawro's The Austro-Prussian War and the accounts of how the Prussian rifle fire constantly annihilated the Austrian attack columns.

Second, the retreat from the Dannewerk wasn't part of a cunning plan, the Danes realized that the position was flankable and retreated to the nearest fortress, Dybbol. The Danes took 5000 casualties out of a force of 11000 at that battle, that's hardly withdrawing intact. Finally, it's an open question as to whether the Rolf Krake could've fended off the Prussians for any considerable length of time given her wooden construction and in the face of Prussian shore batteries. Here, Anglo-Swedish intervention could've been more decisive but Jutland is hardly not the main part of Denmark and Denmark would've had no reason to fight with no prospect of regaining the duchies. How much economic damage would they have suffered with the farms of E. Jutland and Arhus (the second city of Denmark) in Prussian hands?

Finally, given Queen Victoria's favoritism towards the Prussians and the fact that Palmerston, at 80, was in the twilight of his career, Bismarck would've had more staying power than Britain.
 

Redbeard

Banned
bill_bruno said:
First, the Dryse rifle wasn't overrated. Just read G. Wawro's The Austro-Prussian War and the accounts of how the Prussian rifle fire constantly annihilated the Austrian attack columns.

Second, the retreat from the Dannewerk wasn't part of a cunning plan, the Danes realized that the position was flankable and retreated to the nearest fortress, Dybbol. The Danes took 5000 casualties out of a force of 11000 at that battle, that's hardly withdrawing intact. Finally, it's an open question as to whether the Rolf Krake could've fended off the Prussians for any considerable length of time given her wooden construction and in the face of Prussian shore batteries. Here, Anglo-Swedish intervention could've been more decisive but Jutland is hardly not the main part of Denmark and Denmark would've had no reason to fight with no prospect of regaining the duchies. How much economic damage would they have suffered with the farms of E. Jutland and Arhus (the second city of Denmark) in Prussian hands?

Finally, given Queen Victoria's favoritism towards the Prussians and the fact that Palmerston, at 80, was in the twilight of his career, Bismarck would've had more staying power than Britain.

Attack collumns tend to be anihilated when intact formations fire fire at them, breechloading rifles, muzzle loading rifles, muskets or whatever. The Dreyse had a very nasty habbit of misfiring after a number of shots, especially in rapid fire, as the point of the needle simply burned away. I'd say it's most serious advantage was it could easily be loaded while the shooter was lying down on the ground, but it was worse than the standard minie rifle in accuracy, range and reliability. It was a convenient excuse however among the defeated for their defeat.

When you comment my post, you have to read them more carefully. I didn't say anything about the retreat being part of a cunning plan. The commanding general (de Meza) from the start warned against taking up a position at Dannevirke, but was ordered to do so by the government. Finally he on own initiative ordered the Dannevirke position to be evacuated - and was sacked, but had saved the army, which had a total of 38.000.

Dybbøl wasn't a fortress, but a number of simple earth works.
The Prussians had first tried a storm them at 28th of March but failed, not at least due to good cooperation between army and navy forces (Rolf Krake). On 18th of April after a very intense bombardment (7900 shells in four hours) 10.000 Prussians stormed the remnants of the redoubts.

After the redoubts at Dybbøl had been stormed the 8th Brigade successfully counterattacked the Prussians and hereby made it possible to withdraw across Alssund and destroy the bridges. The force in the redoubts (3300 men) were almost completely anihilated, but the covering force of about 7000 men remained an intact force under command. That is why I wrote "largely intact" - again, read more carefully before getting polemic. The position at Dybbøl was again ordered by the government against the advice of the military leadership, who preferred to keep the army on the islands until better prepared operations in combination with the navy could be performed.

The Rolf Krake was built of iron and had a 4,5" main armour belt and already had taken 150 hits from Prussian coastal batteries in an earlier action without suffering significant damage (four wounded) . Her main armament was four 68 lb. smoothbore muzzleloaders in two Cole turrets. She could go 10,5 knots on steam. I actually meant it when I called her one of the most modern warships in 1864. Had she been in Alssund at the time of the crossing the Prussians would have needed ASB's to cross successfully.

I don't see how Palmerston's age or your other arguments are relevant for "staying power". The Prussians have a large part of their army committed, their northern provinces are economically seriously strained by the blockade, and their main ally Austria with limited motivation at best. In fact you might suspect her for enjoying Prussian trouble, as long as she can't be blamed for causing them.

The British on the other hand can limit their participation to a few RN squadrons operating in the North Sea and Western Baltic (which they did anyway) and some financial support to the Danes - most of which will come back in arms contracts from the Danes.

Had the Danish political leadership acted more wisely, not at least by listening to the military, I guess the war would have drawn into summer of 1864 and a peaceagreement much more favourable to Denmark.

Anyway it isn't difficult to find PoD's to have the 2nd S-H war turn into a major conflict. The simplest being PoDing Bismarck away and replacing him with German diplomacy on 20th century level.

Regards

Steffen Redbeard
 
Maybe if Schlesvig had joined Denmark after a plebiscite , rather than being incorporated into Denmark by the government , the British would have intervened , diplomatically , at least.
 
Problem is the Danish peoples wanted to keep the duchies, the wiser Danish heads knew it was impossible, an the Danish public only thought of 1850 as a victory over Germany that could be repeated. So in the end the issue should be settled by arms.
Bismarck had manouvred himself into a favorably diplomatic position.
The Prussian army was reorganized and reequipped with Dreyse rifles and rifled breech loading guns.
Yes the Danes would like to utilize their tactics of 1848-50 of hitting on the eastern Jutland coast, but the problem is, that Denmark only had one Rolf Krake, and yes Redbeard it was topnotch. But in the end the Prussians, had the war been prolonged, had crossed Lillebealt and taken Fyn and then the Danish position had been untenable.
Actually what use would Denmark have for RN, except patrolling the Channel and hinder more Austrian ships in entering the North Sea? Denmark did blokade the German ports through the war and had done so in 1848-50.
Denmark needed an ally with a large army, France following Britain in support of Denmark as Prussia had Russia on their side. Nap III would have been more than happy to support Denmark IN alliance with Britain.
Well the Swedes were lukewarm at both times of proposing an alliance, so really they shouldn't be counted on to support Denmark. But of course 15-20000 extra troops would matter, but as Prussia OTL fielded another 20000 above their initial contingent AND lots of artillery, they would have countered this too.

Well Redbeard you know of the Danish army having few rifled guns, and of course of the battery at Dübboel of 2 rifled 24 pounders that kept the Prussians occupied. If only the Danish artillery had consisted solely of rifled pieces! That would have made a difference. A second Rolf Krake in Lillebealt had been great help also.

Regards
Arctic Warrior
 
Rejoinder

Redbeard said:
Attack collumns tend to be anihilated when intact formations fire fire at them, breechloading rifles, muzzle loading rifles, muskets or whatever. The Dreyse had a very nasty habbit of misfiring after a number of shots, especially in rapid fire, as the point of the needle simply burned away. I'd say it's most serious advantage was it could easily be loaded while the shooter was lying down on the ground, but it was worse than the standard minie rifle in accuracy, range and reliability. It was a convenient excuse however among the defeated for their defeat.

The Dryse simply had a faster rate of fire, that is a decided advantage over an above the formation being intact.

Redbeard said:
When you comment my post, you have to read them more carefully. I didn't say anything about the retreat being part of a cunning plan. The commanding general (de Meza) from the start warned against taking up a position at Dannevirke, but was ordered to do so by the government. Finally he on own initiative ordered the Dannevirke position to be evacuated - and was sacked, but had saved the army, which had a total of 38.000.

Your statement was "The Danish Army therefore resorted to another proven tactic, that of taking up a postion on one of the numerous peninsulas on the eastcoast of Jutland. From here it could either strike in the flank of an advancing enemy or be evacuated to be landed somewhere else." a statement that implies a premeditated tactic. The retreat from the Dannewerk was a more desperate affair in which the Danes had to abandon many of their guns.

Redbeard said:
Dybbøl wasn't a fortress, but a number of simple earth works. The Prussians had first tried a storm them at 28th of March but failed, not at least due to good cooperation between army and navy forces (Rolf Krake). On 18th of April after a very intense bombardment (7900 shells in four hours) 10.000 Prussians stormed the remnants of the redoubts.

After the redoubts at Dybbøl had been stormed the 8th Brigade successfully counterattacked the Prussians and hereby made it possible to withdraw across Alssund and destroy the bridges. The force in the redoubts (3300 men) were almost completely anihilated, but the covering force of about 7000 men remained an intact force under command. That is why I wrote "largely intact" - again, read more carefully before getting polemic.

Losing a third of your force, and I think the casualties were higher, is not retreating largely intact, it is a thrashing.

Redbeard said:
The Rolf Krake was built of iron and had a 4,5" main armour belt and already had taken 150 hits from Prussian coastal batteries in an earlier action without suffering significant damage (four wounded) . Her main armament was four 68 lb. smoothbore muzzleloaders in two Cole turrets. She could go 10,5 knots on steam. I actually meant it when I called her one of the most modern warships in 1864. Had she been in Alssund at the time of the crossing the Prussians would have needed ASB's to cross successfully.

Not at all, the Prussians had 600 boats to cross a narrow sound. The Rolf Krake's guns were slow-firing muzzle loaders that couldn't possibly have taken them all out. Further, the Rolf Krake would've had to been close to point blank range against the Prussian shore guns. Even without penetration, those guns succeeded in disrupting the RKs fire mission against the Prussians at Egernsund. Ultimately, I don't think successfully defending Als would've made a huge difference with the Austro-Germans in possession of the whole Jutland peninsula.

Redbeard said:
I don't see how Palmerston's age or your other arguments are relevant for "staying power". The Prussians have a large part of their army committed, their northern provinces are economically seriously strained by the blockade, and their main ally Austria with limited motivation at best. In fact you might suspect her for enjoying Prussian trouble, as long as she can't be blamed for causing them.

The British on the other hand can limit their participation to a few RN squadrons operating in the North Sea and Western Baltic (which they did anyway) and some financial support to the Danes - most of which will come back in arms contracts from the Danes.

It's not a question of economic staying power but of political staying power. British intervention would've been Palmerston's policy and would've depending on his force of personality to sustain, especially since it was against the pro-Prussian inclinations of Queen Victoria. As Arctic Warrior correctly pointed out, the RN could hardly have blockaded Prussia more than the Danish Navy had done already.

Redbeard said:
Had the Danish political leadership acted more wisely, not at least by listening to the military, I guess the war would have drawn into summer of 1864 and a peaceagreement much more favourable to Denmark.

I don't see how, the only difference I can see is higher Austro-Prussian casualties, assuming either the Swedes or the British can actually land a force in time to help the Danes, and Prussia not taking Als. I don't see either affecting the ultimate outcome.
 
In order not to offend anybody, i.e. Britain, POD would have to be Denmark not bringing the November-constitution of 1863 into effect, thus not annexing Sleswig. War would follow at some time later because Bismarck wanted to settle the Duchies question with force, since the Danes overconfident of the victory of 1850 didn't agree to settle the question peacefully. The language issue could be the lever, as it had been part of the 1860-61 conflict. A had addressed the Federal Assembly in Germany in Danish which had been seen as a provocation by the Germans and was indeed meant to be, as germans from the Duchies had addressed the Danish National assembly in german.
Another lever would be the constant Danish attemt to write a new constitution satisfying everybody in Denmark and the Duchies and a Bismarck' impossible ultimatum to the Danish government.

In spite of Victoria's displeasure Palmerston might get his vote and bring Nap III into the fray, putting pressure on Prussia's Rhineland Province's. I'm just afraid that would only be slightly damaging to the Prussian efford in Denmark, as they would probably be able to field the OTL troops, but with less artillery, as each division brought with it the whole artillery of it's parent corps and less officers, as they would have to take their command to the Rhineland.
Austria would have to back up Prussia in order not to have it's position in Germany diminished.

So now we have Prussia, Austria and the German States with Russian backing on one side and Denmark, Britain, France and perhaps Italy, eager to cut a slice off Austria and maybe Sweden, if they aren't deterred by Russia on the other side.

So now what happens?
 

Redbeard

Banned
bill_bruno said:
The Dryse simply had a faster rate of fire, that is a decided advantage over an above the formation being intact.

Our dispute was about the Dreyse being overrated, I still stick to that.

bill_bruno said:
Your statement was "The Danish Army therefore resorted to another proven tactic, that of taking up a postion on one of the numerous peninsulas on the eastcoast of Jutland. From here it could either strike in the flank of an advancing enemy or be evacuated to be landed somewhere else." a statement that implies a premeditated tactic. The retreat from the Dannewerk was a more desperate affair in which the Danes had to abandon many of their guns.

Who said it wasn't desparate, but the tactic of taking up flanking postitons on the coast of Jutland still was a proven tactic.

bill_bruno said:
Losing a third of your force, and I think the casualties were higher, is not retreating largely intact, it is a thrashing.

Intact is not a matter of casualty rates but of your forces being functional and under command.

bill_bruno said:
Not at all, the Prussians had 600 boats to cross a narrow sound. The Rolf Krake's guns were slow-firing muzzle loaders that couldn't possibly have taken them all out. Further, the Rolf Krake would've had to been close to point blank range against the Prussian shore guns. Even without penetration, those guns succeeded in disrupting the RKs fire mission against the Prussians at Egernsund. Ultimately, I don't think successfully defending Als would've made a huge difference with the Austro-Germans in possession of the whole Jutland peninsula.

You use canister at such targets, and with very great effect. If captain aboard Rolf Krake I would have found great plassure in ramming the boats too. The OTL captain was blamed for interrupting the action at Egernsund, but probably he did so because he due to the low water couldn't get into effective firing range of the bridge he intended to destroy. The Prussian batteries at alssund can't expect to get closer than at Egernsund. Defending Als is not a question of throwing the Prussians out of Jutland, but of keeping a staging area for further operations and first of all of staying in the ring.

bill_bruno said:
It's not a question of economic staying power but of political staying power. British intervention would've been Palmerston's policy and would've depending on his force of personality to sustain, especially since it was against the pro-Prussian inclinations of Queen Victoria. As Arctic Warrior correctly pointed out, the RN could hardly have blockaded Prussia more than the Danish Navy had done already.

What Denmark mainly needed was diplomatic and financial support - and a wiser government. UK can certainly supply the two first. BTW it wasn't Victoria herself that was the leading pro-German, but her husband Prince Albert, and he after all wasn't the one running UK.

bill_bruno said:
I don't see how, the only difference I can see is higher Austro-Prussian casualties, assuming either the Swedes or the British can actually land a force in time to help the Danes, and Prussia not taking Als. I don't see either affecting the ultimate outcome.

The defeat at Als (incl. disagreement between military and gov.) was together with the isolated status the drop that had the cup flow over, and the government gave up (the PM even emmigrated to NZ). With a victory to cling on and foreign support there really is no reason to give up yet. Copenhagen and the islands (which had most of the population and wealth) was safe and the N.German cities were suffering.

Regards

Steffen Redbeard
 
Dreyse et al.

As to the effectiveness of the Dreyse, I offer the following from G. Wawro's The Austro-Prussian War, p. 34
"The Danish army of 1864 embodied a high percentage of German officers and NCOs -- career soldiers from the German Confederation -- yet most of its line infantry were untrained Danish peasant...However, each time Danish "storm columns" charged Prussian firing lines, they were driven off with heart-rending losses. In early 1864, a small action at a place called Lundby in Jutland furnished a textbook example of the futility of shock against well-handled rifles. At Lundby, 180 Danes encountered 124 Prussians on an open moor, formed in two company columns, fixed bayonets, and charged the Prussians, who deployed in line, waited till the Danes had closed to within 250 meters' range, then fired a salve. The Danes, weary from their long run, staggered, but came on. The Prussians fired a second salvo at 200 meters, a third at 150 meters. The Danes halted, fired a ragged volley, and retired in confusion. In a minute's time, they had lost three officers and eighty-five men, half their effectives.(emphasis added)

Second, with the UK and Swedish navies involved, I doubt that the Prussians would even try to land at Als, so there are only defeats for the Danes. As I understand it, the Jutland peninsula has about 1/2 the population and a sizable part of its agricultural production. What kind of economic strain do you think that will involve?

Finally, Prince Albert was the dominant influence in Victoria's life until his death in December 1861 (and even afterwards) and her eldest daughter was married to the Prussian Crown Prince (they had 3 children already). Essentially, Pam fulminates, the RN blockades a North Germany that the Danes had already been blockading and Pam eventually has trouble keeping the Cabinet behind him in a stalemate and in the face of royal opposition.
 

Redbeard

Banned
bill_bruno said:
As to the effectiveness of the Dreyse, I offer the following from G. Wawro's The Austro-Prussian War, p. 34
"The Danish army of 1864 embodied a high percentage of German officers and NCOs -- career soldiers from the German Confederation -- yet most of its line infantry were untrained Danish peasant...However, each time Danish "storm columns" charged Prussian firing lines, they were driven off with heart-rending losses. In early 1864, a small action at a place called Lundby in Jutland furnished a textbook example of the futility of shock against well-handled rifles. At Lundby, 180 Danes encountered 124 Prussians on an open moor, formed in two company columns, fixed bayonets, and charged the Prussians, who deployed in line, waited till the Danes had closed to within 250 meters' range, then fired a salve. The Danes, weary from their long run, staggered, but came on. The Prussians fired a second salvo at 200 meters, a third at 150 meters. The Danes halted, fired a ragged volley, and retired in confusion. In a minute's time, they had lost three officers and eighty-five men, half their effectives.(emphasis added)

Second, with the UK and Swedish navies involved, I doubt that the Prussians would even try to land at Als, so there are only defeats for the Danes. As I understand it, the Jutland peninsula has about 1/2 the population and a sizable part of its agricultural production. What kind of economic strain do you think that will involve?

Finally, Prince Albert was the dominant influence in Victoria's life until his death in December 1861 (and even afterwards) and her eldest daughter was married to the Prussian Crown Prince (they had 3 children already). Essentially, Pam fulminates, the RN blockades a North Germany that the Danes had already been blockading and Pam eventually has trouble keeping the Cabinet behind him in a stalemate and in the face of royal opposition.

G.Wawro reveal a very limited knowledge about the Danish army at the time. Before the 1840's a large part of the army was German, and had been so for centuries. The Danish Kings didn't trust the Danish nobility for officer jobs and imported both officers and civil servants from the German nobility. National regiments had been introduced in 1613, but there was widespread recruitment among German speaking well into 19th century (the landowners preferred not to give up labour to the army). In the early 1840's (1842 IIRC) general conscription among peasants was introduced, but they were quite well trained and performed well in the both S-H wars.

Concerning nationality a demand for Danish citizenship had been introduced already in late 18th century, but a lot of German speaking from Holstein served, especially in the units based in Holstein. In 1848-51 and in 1864
the German part of the army took the side of the insurgents, but there was no loyalty crisis whatsoever among the men and officers serving in the loyal Danish part of the army.

The skirmish at Lundby has been used many times as an example of the Dreyse's dreadful effect, but please remark that the charge took place over 600m on soft ground and against a Prussian line behind a stone wall. Such a charge would also have failed against Minierifles, probably even against muskets. In short this was also the lesson of the ACW, where armies largely armed with Minierifles shot each other to pieces. BTW I think charging from 600m into 30m and taking 50% losses shows quite a discipline (and stupid leadership), especially as this was the last action in a war long lost.

If both the Swedes and British take active part on Danish side I think they can live with the absense of a victory at Alssund. An intact Danish Army and absolute naval superiority will put Prussia in quite a peril and the occupation force at risk. Add a British-Swedish Expeditionary Force and it starts to get really funny. The operational problem is that the Prussians really can't occupy Jutland, but will have to keep the force concentrated in a central position, and not to far from loyal territory (Holstein), otherwise it risks being defeated in detail and/or cut off. And at that time, when the only railways in the area were short strips on Zealand and in Holstein, you could deploy and supply armies better over sea than over land. If the war draws out the Prussians are also likely to meet rising partisan activity, anti-German sentiments were very strong.

Albert indeed had great influence over Victoria, but Victoria wasn't an absolute Monarch - not in formal terms and certainly not in real terms. In fact she appeared to be wet clay in the hands of the PM's who had some basic understanding of how to deal with her. If/when the Prussians start to act desperately against the rising partisan movement in Jutland just watch the public outcry in Britain.

Regards

Steffen Redbeard
 

Redbeard

Banned
bill_bruno said:
As to the effectiveness of the Dreyse, I offer the following from G. Wawro's The Austro-Prussian War, p. 34
"The Danish army of 1864 embodied a high percentage of German officers and NCOs -- career soldiers from the German Confederation -- yet most of its line infantry were untrained Danish peasant...However, each time Danish "storm columns" charged Prussian firing lines, they were driven off with heart-rending losses. In early 1864, a small action at a place called Lundby in Jutland furnished a textbook example of the futility of shock against well-handled rifles. At Lundby, 180 Danes encountered 124 Prussians on an open moor, formed in two company columns, fixed bayonets, and charged the Prussians, who deployed in line, waited till the Danes had closed to within 250 meters' range, then fired a salve. The Danes, weary from their long run, staggered, but came on. The Prussians fired a second salvo at 200 meters, a third at 150 meters. The Danes halted, fired a ragged volley, and retired in confusion. In a minute's time, they had lost three officers and eighty-five men, half their effectives.(emphasis added)

Second, with the UK and Swedish navies involved, I doubt that the Prussians would even try to land at Als, so there are only defeats for the Danes. As I understand it, the Jutland peninsula has about 1/2 the population and a sizable part of its agricultural production. What kind of economic strain do you think that will involve?

Finally, Prince Albert was the dominant influence in Victoria's life until his death in December 1861 (and even afterwards) and her eldest daughter was married to the Prussian Crown Prince (they had 3 children already). Essentially, Pam fulminates, the RN blockades a North Germany that the Danes had already been blockading and Pam eventually has trouble keeping the Cabinet behind him in a stalemate and in the face of royal opposition.

G.Wawro reveal a very limited knowledge about the Danish army at the time. Before the 1840's a large part of the army was German, and had been so for centuries. The Danish Kings didn't trust the Danish nobility for officer jobs and imported both officers and civil servants from the German nobility. National regiments had been introduced in 1613, but there was widespread recruitment among German speaking well into 19th century (the landowners preferred not to give up labour to the army). In the early 1840's (1842 IIRC) general conscription among peasants was introduced, but they were quite well trained and performed well in the both S-H wars.

Concerning nationality a demand for Danish citizenship had been introduced already in late 18th century, but a lot of German speaking from Holstein served, especially in the units based in Holstein. In 1848-51 and in 1864
the German part of the army took the side of the insurgents, but there was no loyalty crisis whatsoever among the men and officers serving in the loyal Danish part of the army.

The skirmish at Lundby has been used many times as an example of the Dreyse's dreadful effect, but please remark that the charge took place over 600m on soft ground and against a Prussian line behind a stone wall. Such a charge would also have failed against Minierifles, probably even against muskets. In short this was also the lesson of the ACW, where armies largely armed with Minierifles shot each other to pieces. BTW I think charging from 600m into 30m and taking 50% losses shows quite a discipline (and stupid leadership), especially as this was the last action in a war long lost.

If both the Swedes and British take active part on Danish side I think they can live with the absense of a victory at Alssund. An intact Danish Army and absolute naval superiority will put Prussia in quite a peril and the occupation force at risk. Add a British-Swedish Expeditionary Force and it starts to get really funny. The operational problem is that the Prussians really can't occupy Jutland, but will have to keep the force concentrated in a central position, and not to far from loyal territory (Holstein), otherwise it risks being defeated in detail and/or cut off. And at that time, when the only railways in the area were short strips on Zealand and in Holstein, you could deploy and supply armies better over sea than over land. If the war draws out the Prussians are also likely to meet rising partisan activity, anti-German sentiments were very strong.

Albert indeed had great influence over Victoria, but Victoria wasn't an absolute Monarch - not in formal terms and certainly not in real terms. In fact she appeared to be wet clay in the hands of the PM's who had some basic understanding of how to deal with her. If/when the Prussians start to act desperately against the rising partisan movement in Jutland just watch the public outcry in Britain.

Regards

Steffen Redbeard
 
Such a charge might have failed, but not with those casualties. The Prussians themselves learned the same lesson at St. Privat and the Austrians learned it in 1866.

Second, where are the allies going to land in Jutland once the Austro-Prussians have garrisons in the ports (and don't forget, if Britain and Sweden come into the war, Prussia can simply send more troops, they have plenty).

Victoria was malleable for Disraeli but that doesn't mean she was for Palmerston. Remember that the latter had to deal with a Cabinet that was half against the war.
 
Top