@@balkanmadnessmadeinaustria5837 Welche Leute mögen sich schon an der Grenze? Ich habe an der polnischen und niederländischen Grenze gelebt und kann definitiv sagen, dass sich die Leute da ebenfalls nicht mögen. Und ich kann mir gut vorstellen, dass es an der tschechischen, französischen, österreichischen etc Grenze nicht anders sein wird.
The Germans are using Zündnadelgewehr a breach loading and rifled barrel increasing reload speed and accuracy as standard infantry weapon adding the fact German military spending is quite a hefty amount .
This Danish movie is pretty + good honest What people dont realize the Danish Army was actually slightly bigger than Prussia's at the time and on top of this Denmark had a real Navy, which Prussia mostly lacked. At the time Denmark was considered one of the preeminent military powers of Northern Europe. And they (thought) they had England as an ally and so that it would all be a cakewalk. So they recklessly provoked a war with Pussia by breaking the Schleswig treaty ( which stipulated they could not abuse the german population of that province and forced them to not speak german etc) and sent provocative missives to the Prussia King. But the Prussians had made quite a few improvements to the firepower of thier Army and the effectiveness of theirs leadership, so they were quite confident and did not mind a Danish attack at all since they ere eager to use their expensive military to improve their standing in Europe and among the german states. Also, as the Prussians expected, England abandoned the Danes, since they were the ones who broke the treaty and on top of that the Austrians sent generous help to the Prussians. The Danish movie is quite honest about all these things. Ultimately the war was decided by Prussian artillery which was quite superior and so more than made up that Denmark's military was slightly larger. Prussian and Austrian "Special Forces" (for the time) the Deaths head Hussars also contributed out of proportion to their numbers. On top of that the Prussians had the better generalship and staffs and so in the end it was a crushing defeat for the Danes. Denmark would never again be considered a powerful country in Europe.
Very interesting, thank you for the information. You seem to know a lot about this topic. Did you read any book on the topic and if yes are there some you can recommend?
That's true. The invention of the prussian needle gun or in german Zündnadelgewehr also contributed a lot to the effectiveness of prussia's military. As you can see the danish soldiers still load their weapons from the front. Meaning the have to put in the powder and musketball in and ram that down with a stick. The prussian weapons were loaded from the back, with a ,,needle" close to the modern bullets. They contained the bullet, the propellant charge, aswell as the ignition element. This made it possible to fire several rounds in the time the enemy could fire only one and had to reload. A secret the prussians tried to keep for as long as possible.
@@djlol7541 I did a "Abitur" in Europe (a special kind of high end prep school) and learned a lot there. This is where I learned my French and german languages. But sometimes you find info just by constant looking for example I just found out a couple days ago that after the loss of Schleswig Holstein (which was 40% of the Danish economy and population even if most folks were indeed German) the Danish King wrote a letter to the Prussian King asking to have Denmark annexed into the German Reich in return for being an autonomous Kingdom in the Empire and get Schleswig-Holstein back to Denmark this way even if within the borders of he german Empire. There is actually a youtube video on it. Bismark was opposed and it never went off the ground. ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-z1yoBCqjTIc.html
They had larger numbers. They mobilized only one corps for this war against the whole danisch army (other german nations like austria also fought) They had much more guns and newer ones The prussians at this time were the only nation wich had good working breech loader guns with patrons. The danish army (and later the austrians in the brotherwar) only had muzzle loading guns. So they could fire 3-4times faster than the danish soldier. So the last charge of the prussians was not nessessary. The could kill the danish easily in this position because of the much faster rate of fire. I ask me, how the danish politicans/crown could be so stupid to force the german union in to war. I know they hoped for england. But they have not asked the british befor playing such a risk game. And as always the civilians and soldiers have to pay the bill for that supidness of their leaders.
That was because Ranks like General was given based on ranking and family of Nobility. Napoleon was one of the people cucked by that as he was from a poor noble family from Italy. He moved up the ranks as soon as the Nobility and Royalty was thrown in the bin, when he became the First Consul he reformed it based on skill.
What is also total the ridiculous exaggerations regarding Prussia's strength! Because these downright ridiculous exaggerations regarding Prussia's strength are simply absurd. Who was defeated here? Oh the great power ... Denmark. Wow! Really an impressive victory. Ridiculous to glorify Prussia for it. In fact, Prussia survived in the 18th and 19th centuries only by luck and not by the strength of the Prussian army. In the 7th Years' War Prussia was defeated and could only survive by the grace of Russia. In the war against Napoleon Prussia was also defeated and was only able to remain independent through the strength of the real great powers Great Britain and Russia. The fact that Prussia was a dwarf was also made clear by this war in the video, because the Prussians needed the support of Austria to defeat this dwarf. Denmark was like Prussia a dwarf. Therefore both states had small armies. Denmark had a troop strength in this war of 38,000 soldiers with approx. 100 guns and Prussia had a troop strength of 35,000 soldiers with approx. 100 guns. During the war the Prussian army was reinforced by Austria with 64 cannons and 20,000 soldiers. In February 3, 1864 4,538 Austrian soldiers for example, have in the Battle of Königshügel defeated 1,000 Danish soldiers. For comparison, the struggle of real great powers! In the Crimean War of 1856 armies of more than half a million fought against each other. Namely on the Russian side 889,000 against 235,568 Turks, 309,268 French, 107,864 British and 21,000 Italians. By the way, the Prussian dwarf won the war because he was better prepared for this war. Because the Danish army had only a peacetime strength of 7,500 soldiers. The combat value of the Danish troops was low. Due to the poor peace strength, there was a lack of well-trained officers and non-commissioned officers. The infantry was equipped with muzzle-loading rifle and the artillery was being converted to rifled breech loader. The artillerymen weren't yet adequately trained with the new cannons. The Danish fleet was actually quite powerful compared to the army and clearly superior to the Prussian fleet. But the fleets played no significant role, because the war was decided on land. The Prussian troops on the other hand were already fully equipped with modern Dreyse needle-gun, and the refitting of the artillery was much more advanced than that of the Danish army. Nevertheless, Prussia was also a dwarf in comparison to the great powers of the time.
Dryese needle gun, a few mass produced breech-loading rifle in existence at that time. Other breech-loader also exist, like the Norwegians kammerlader rifle. The Swedes using it, the Norwegians using it, so it's interesting why the danes doesn't adopt this rifle and instead using more widely used caplock rifled musket.
@@muhamadsayyidabidin3906 Rear loading rifles were expensive. Simple as that. Prussia and Sweden had them because they were both wealthy and had been investing in the military for a while. Though it is wrong that they had "way more modern" weapons. The Danes did use "rifled muskets" eg front loading rifles. While having a significantly lower fire rate they did have the advantage of vastly superior range over the Needle gun.
@@XMysticHerox Not a particularly important advantage. The vast majority of Danish conscripts - little trained in markmanship - could scarcely take advantage of the long range advantage of the rifled musket. It took a true expert marksman to calculate range and wind drift to make hits with those looping trajectories. The advantage of the Dreyse - a high rate of fire and being able to shoot and reload easily from prone - was far more applicable.
@@HaNsWiDjAjA You don´t need marksman level aim to hit something when you have a whole company firing at 60000 enemies. But yes the Dreyse was superior. Just saying that it was not "way more modern" as OP claimed. Nor were the Danes using obsolete smoothbore muskets as I assume many people believe.
These downright ridiculous exaggerations regarding Prussia's strength are simply absurd. Who was defeated here? Oh the great power ... Denmark. Wow! Really an impressive victory. Ridiculous to glorify Prussia for it. In fact, Prussia survived in the 18th and 19th centuries only by luck and not by the strength of the Prussian army. In the 7th Years' War Prussia was defeated and could only survive by the grace of Russia. In the war against Napoleon Prussia was also defeated and was only able to remain independent through the strength of the real great powers Great Britain and Russia. The fact that Prussia was a dwarf was also made clear by this war in the video, because the Prussians needed the support of Austria to defeat this dwarf. Denmark was like Prussia a dwarf. Therefore both states had small armies. Denmark had a troop strength in this war of 38,000 soldiers with approx. 100 guns and Prussia had a troop strength of 35,000 soldiers with approx. 100 guns. During the war the Prussian army was reinforced by Austria with 64 cannons and 20,000 soldiers. In February 3, 1864 4,538 Austrian soldiers for example, have in the Battle of Königshügel defeated 1,000 Danish soldiers. For comparison, the struggle of real great powers! In the Crimean War of 1856 armies of more than half a million fought against each other. Namely on the Russian side 889,000 against 235,568 Turks, 309,268 French, 107,864 British and 21,000 Italians. By the way, the Prussian dwarf won the war because he was better prepared for this war. Because the Danish army had only a peacetime strength of 7,500 soldiers. The combat value of the Danish troops was low. Due to the poor peace strength, there was a lack of well-trained officers and non-commissioned officers. The infantry was equipped with muzzle-loading rifle and the artillery was being converted to rifled breech loader. The artillerymen weren't yet adequately trained with the new cannons. The Danish fleet was actually quite powerful compared to the army and clearly superior to the Prussian fleet. But the fleets played no significant role, because the war was decided on land. The Prussian troops on the other hand were already fully equipped with modern Dreyse needle-gun, and the refitting of the artillery was much more advanced than that of the Danish army. Nevertheless, Prussia was also a dwarf in comparison to the great powers of the time.
@@Young_Nationalist never mention "a nations whole army destroyed" to a polish nationalist, especially never mention "a nations whole army destroyed within 2 weeks" to a polish nationalist
The Prussian war with Denmark was Bismarck's first step in unifying Germany under Prussia. It was also a chance for the Prussian Army to test its new Army with a real war, like the German Army in 1939 invading Poland to test its new Blitzkrieg doctrine.
Who else thinks that a game set in this war whould be cool. I mean imagine you and your squad giving each other cover while reloading while 20 or so players behind your lines fire artillery at the Frontline meanwhile the Chad squad attempts a Bajonett charge at the enemy forces and decimate them.
@@teeth716 yeah but I mean one set in this phase were mele gun fights are equal in terms of importance. For exampel in cod, bf and even things like enlisted, mele and Bajonett charges, take downs with the stock of your m1871 needle gun whould are a rarity while in such a game it whould be a necessity. Some games may play in that Era but I want a battlefield/post scriptum/enlisted style game set in the between 1820 and 1890
It’s a shame we English speaking places don’t get too exposed to continental movies like this, they often are a lot better then the usual Hollywood flicks, not to meantion Hollywood wouldn’t touch this anyway
@@codieomeallain6635 it is a famous saying by voltaire, the french writer and philosopher, who is seen as the most important figure in the enlightenment movement.
Funny part, a lot of the troops and most of the casulties were Austrians, ( mostly from a brillant, but foolish frontal attack) not Preussian ( 2200 casulties Preussian and Austrians) and the danish ( 5600 casulties ) had nearly three time as much casulties, in the movies are no Austrians and the costly attack at all.
These downright ridiculous exaggerations regarding Prussia's strength is also funny. Who was defeated here? Oh the great power ... Denmark. Wow! Really an impressive victory. Ridiculous to glorify Prussia for it. In fact, Prussia survived in the 18th and 19th centuries only by luck and not by the strength of the Prussian army. In the 7th Years' War Prussia was defeated and could only survive by the grace of Russia. In the war against Napoleon Prussia was also defeated and was only able to remain independent through the strength of the real great powers Great Britain and Russia. The fact that Prussia was a dwarf was also made clear by this war in the video, because the Prussians needed the support of Austria to defeat this dwarf. Denmark was like Prussia a dwarf. Therefore both states had small armies. Denmark had a troop strength in this war of 38,000 soldiers with approx. 100 guns and Prussia had a troop strength of 35,000 soldiers with approx. 100 guns. During the war the Prussian army was reinforced by Austria with 64 cannons and 20,000 soldiers. In February 3, 1864 4,538 Austrian soldiers for example, have in the Battle of Königshügel defeated 1,000 Danish soldiers. For comparison, the struggle of real great powers! In the Crimean War of 1856 armies of more than half a million fought against each other. Namely on the Russian side 889,000 against 235,568 Turks, 309,268 French, 107,864 British and 21,000 Italians. By the way, the Prussian dwarf won the war because he was better prepared for this war. Because the Danish army had only a peacetime strength of 7,500 soldiers. The combat value of the Danish troops was low. Due to the poor peace strength, there was a lack of well-trained officers and non-commissioned officers. The infantry was equipped with muzzle-loading rifle and the artillery was being converted to rifled breech loader. The artillerymen weren't yet adequately trained with the new cannons. The Danish fleet was actually quite powerful compared to the army and clearly superior to the Prussian fleet. But the fleets played no significant role, because the war was decided on land. The Prussian troops on the other hand were already fully equipped with modern Dreyse needle-gun, and the refitting of the artillery was much more advanced than that of the Danish army. Nevertheless, Prussia was also a dwarf in comparison to the great powers of the time.
this was intentional, Bismarck coaxed Austria into the war and then used the Austrians as cannon fodder knowing full well he was going to turn and attack Austria as soon as he was done with the Danes. They got played.
@@elmascapo6588 The term "franco prussian war" is wrong, because there was no such war. That was a war of various allied German dwarf states against France and not just a war of the Prussian dwarf state against France! More precisely... in 1870/1 were the allies of the Prussians too Kingdom of Saxony, Grand Duchy of Baden, Kingdom of Bavaria, Kingdom of Württemberg, Grand Duchy of Hesse. Only together were these dwarves strong enough to risk a war against the great power France! That's why this war is also called in German "Deutsch-Französischer Krieg" which does mean German-Prussian War! By the way, what's that supposed to mean? 7 days war? I guess you mean the Seven Years' War! Prussia actually lost this war.The fact that Prussia was not destroyed in the Seven Years' War is called as I mentioned before the Miracle of the House of Brandenburg. Brandenburg stands for Prussias. Prussia lost the war against Russian Empire under Elizabeth of Russia and was dependent on the grace of the winner! Prussia's luck was the death of Tsarina Elizabeth. Emperor of Russia then became Peter III. He swiftly reversed Elizabeth's war policy and negotiated peace with Prussia, with an armistice and a treaty of peace and friendship. (Peter's decision angered some in the Russian military, and he was overthrown and killed.) So Prussia survived only because of the grace of the Russian empire. A major power does not survive because of the mercy of others! As a result, Prussia was not a major power! A major power doesn't survive by luck! A great power does not survive through miracles! A great power is not a dwarf teritorially either, like Prussia it was. Because at that time a great power conquered and ruled large areas. In fact, one have to look for the tiny Prussian territory with a magnifying glass on the world map. Prussia was able to expand its territory to include the relatively small areas of Poland and the relatively small Silesia. But Prussia did not conquer this small area increases. Prussia has successfully conquered no areas because Peter III actually gave as present Silesia after Prussia was defeated. It was a present because the Russians had the power to take Silesia away from the Prussians. Even the small part of Poland that was given as present to Prussia by the Russians. After that Prussia was still a dwarf on the map in comparison to the real great powers. Calling this part of Poland a gift is justified because Russia had just annexed Ottomans Crimea. If the Russians hadn't the conflict with the Ottomans at the time, the Russians would have annexed all of Poland! Austria could not have prevented this and the dwarf Prussia could not have prevented it anyway! But the Russians wanted to prevent a conflict with Prussia and Austria at the same time and so the Russians left relatively small areas of Poland to Prussia and Austria. So despite these territorial gains, Prussia was not a great power compared to the real great powers of that time. One still had to look for the Prussian state territory with a magnifying glass on the world map.
You mean dividing up the class between sides and then have them fight each other with live ammo? Students that survive such a traumatic event would have a new appreciation for history.
The Danes did not stand a chance against the Prussian firepower. Their weapons were antiquated, muzzle-load rifles, whereas the Prussian troops were armed with newest, highly accurate, breech loaded rifles. The Austrian troops suffered the same fate in the following year when encountering advanced Prussian's weapon technologies.
@@zurgesmiecal if the Vietnamese had fought like the North Koreans or the Chinese, the result would've been far far different. Unfortunately, they learned from seeing a million Chinese infantry and several hundred thousand Koreans turned to ash by superior battlefield technology.
What’s interesting is, Denmark at the time was nothing like the Denmark we think of today. Back then Denmark was considered one of the most preeminent military powers in Europe. They thought it’d be a cakewalk going toe to toe with the Prussians. The Danish also had the backing of Britain, more guns than the Prussians, and a navy. But when they broke the Schleswig treaty, Britain backed out since the Danish broke the treaty, not the Prussians. The Prussians had a smaller army, they had fewer guns, and didn’t have a navy, like some of the other German states, they focused on making the best of what they had. So they equipped their men with Dreyse needle rifles. Which fired faster then the Danish muzzleloading percussion cap muskets. At the end of the day what really won the war was the artillery and guns. The Prussians had far superior artillery and generals who knew how to use it, although less of it, and the many advantages of the needle rifle helped too.
It's actually really imposing thinking about being on the side that has rifles that can fire two, maaaaaybe three rounds per minute, while on the other side, you're watching guys fire six to ten rounds a minute and cutting down your lines like nothing
Wrong. The Dreyse rifle was introduced following their defeat in the 1848-war, in that prussia was forced to give in to incredible danish demands (backed by great britain). Gladly Bismarck learned and then the moron danish started the show and got a§§whipped. In opposition to this movie the danish sucked and sucked and sucked all the time.
These peoples should never have fought each other. I am both Danish and German and I would not stand on one of these two fronts to shoot at the man in front of me
After the defeat the danish king even proposed to join the north-german confederation. Politics especially the outlook of upsetting England made Bismarck decline respectfully. Yet it shows, that it was as close to a civil war as it gets.
N. B. the prussian army was equipped with a BREECH loading rifle, the danes with a muzzle loading one, imagine what kind of firepower they could achieve, from a safe position, nevertless!
Nope, the difference wasn´t THAT big. The danish - in opposition to this fantasy BS fought the whole time behind walls - just like the confeds in the last 1,5 years in the civil war. And the chasepot-rifle of the french, 6 years later was VASTLY superior to the Dreyse-Zündnadelgewehr.
@@steffenjonda8283 Yes, I knew about chassepots' superiority in 1870's war, Germans' superiority was mostly due to their leadership, superior artillery and excellent logistic, plus France had big internal troubles, they fought at the end also a bloody civil war with Paris ' La Communne.
Right, but they learned so well the lesson that first kicked Napoleon's a** at Leipzig (with allies), then litterally shredded Napoleon's the 3rd's army in a SINGLE battle, ending the 2nd Empire.
France had a chance when Germany was split in thousand pieces. As soon as Germany united, France fucked up. And never stood a chance again against a united Germany-Austria.
@@Savoyard73 You don’t really think that France alone would have stood a chance. 😂Germany had the biggest and most modern army in the world. Whole Europe with all their colonies and the USA fought them, and they only lost because of socialist traitors which capitulated.
@@moritzl4024 "Whole Europe" = France and GB in the middle of the war. And yes you had the best army of the world but if i was you would be ashamed to say that because my country loosed the war.
@@nextchapter9883 Denmark is Germanic, as is Sweden, Norway, Iceland, England and half of France. Danish speak a Germanic language and English is a Germanic language.
even IF you are napoleon, you better leave them alone, or they kick your butt later on ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-2xbtcRhOMPU.html 🤣
@@str1k3ss47 What are you talking about ? He is right. Napoleon had a chance against hundreds of tiny German States. But as soon Germany united, he was fucked. They kicked his ass in Leipzig like no one was ever kicked before in history. And again with the British in Waterloo…
@@str1k3ss47 Yeah. With Thousands of Allied German troops from the Rhine confederation. As soon as they turned against him in the battle of Leipzig, he was fucked. If the german states would have stand united from the beginning, Napoleon never would have stepped on german ground. But Napoleon was smart. He always did everything to prevent german unification. Divide et impera. The irony is, that he himself united Germany in the end…
Schleswig Holstein is German, and it always has been German. I really like Denmark and Danish culture, but Schleswig Holstein belongs to Germany. Lesson learned.
@@MrPeperoni79 I'm not treading on over against German Soil. The ground I tread and walk on is my own at home. Perhaps I misunderstood you, but when you say, ''don't tread on me'', are you speaking for Prussia?
@@nordicfischer6751 Haha, sorry, that is a misunderstanding. "Don't tread on me" I borrowed to explain the attitude of the Prussians in the video, e.g. " Don't f*** with the prussians". No political statement in whatsoever direction intended.
It's kinda sad to see how similar the language in military terms is with those of their respective opponents. They might have had a pint in friendlier times.
Line formation were still widely used until the mass deployment of repeating rifles. Because when you only have a single shot gun, you want to maximize the firepower and one way to do it is by volley fire. Volley fire work best in line formation (I mean, battleship battle line is essentially a line formation with the same principle).
Because at this time you didn't win battles by killing most of the enemy, you won by having better discipline and morale and then fleeing. Hence why battles with Hundreds of thousands of soldiers only have 5-10k casualties
@@farkaasdaniel1993 it still happen to this day tho. There's a research on ww1/ww2 statistics, and they concluded that when you inflict 5% casualties on the enemy (for example, 50 out of 1000), the effectiveness of enemy would drop to 50%. And when you inflict 10% casualties on the enem, the effectiveness of enemy would drop approaching zero. This is why most battle rarely decimated an entire army, because enemy would started to rout when they lost 10% of their original forces. And during this rout is where the actual slaughter begin (a lot of enemy dies while fleeing instead of actually fighting).
@@shaydowsith348 General Blücher was Prussian and and not Russia. At the battle of Waterloo Napoleon was winning against british forces. It was the prussian army that arrived and turned the battle.
@@shaydowsith348 No, prussia. The russians came to late to the show, the same with the austrians. But i agree, both Austria and Russia alone had slaugthered the Nappy-crap that was quite succsessfull at Waterloo up to the moment the prussians teared his left wing apart and won the already LOST battle for Wellington.
I once had a Amish Friend that told me the Amish do not wear mustaches, beards YES, mustaches, NO. The reason was because of what the Prussians did to Amish Communities still living in Silesia, and other parts of the Prussian Empire. It seems that Frederick The Great was a Staunch Lutheran and looked upon the Amish as a threat to Lutheranism. He thought they were backward, Clannish, Cloistered, and mis led. He had his soldiers, and almost all Prussian Officers and NCO's had big mustaches, to burn down Amish Farms and round them up and put them in prisons. William Penn, A Quaker, invited them to come to Pensylvannia and thus they have become a part of the American Experience.
The movie is pretty good. What people dont realize the Danish military was actually slightly bigger than Prussia at the time and they (thought) they had England as an ally and that it would be a cakewalk. So they recklessly provoked a war with Pussia by breaking the Schleswig treaty ( which stipulated they could not abuse the german population of that province and forced them to not speak german etc) and sent provocative missives to the Prussia King. But England abandoned them since they were the ones who broke the treaty and the Prussians got the Austrians as allies too. The Danish movie is quite honest about all these things.
My blood is Prussian since 1701 and has been Brandenburgian before. And I don't like brother's being headshoted. My deepest respect and sorry for everybody killed in European brother wars. The time will come, when we need each other. Long life Prussia (in my heart), long life Danmark!
@@snugglecity3500 WW1 the French Army was near collapse and Russia had pulled out, allowing all the eastern front troops to come west. Germany probably would have fought to a standstill if not for US troops carrying the Argonne Offensive. WW2 Britain would never have won in North Africa, or invaded France, or fought their way into Germany. Hell, Britain suffered near critical manpower shortages after Normandy. And the US carried the Pacific Naval War almost single handedly. So yeah, we were a big help. We didn't win the wars alone, but you can't say the US wasn't significant.
@@Matt_J98 They were only fighting one front by the time we arrived in WW1 and cartied the final offensive of the war, which would not have happened if we didn't arrive since Britain didn't have the manpower after Somme and Kaiserschlact, and France didn't have the morale.
@@huntclanhunt9697 trying to claim ww1 would be like australia trying to claim the pacific and russia won the war in europe. The US was the main power in the pacific.
"Niemca ogień praży Pękają granaty Wielkopolski los się waży Więc wszyscy na straży Hej za broń Krwawy bój się toczy Już wróg się poddaje Wielkopolska ze swych mroczy Wolna zmartwychwstaje Hej za broń Dzielni Poznańczanie Pokazali światu Jak Prusaka się wypędza Boso do Heimatu Hej za broń"
