141292 t1_izwlvxc wrote
Reply to comment by Karvier in My own English translation of the Manchu literary source about the Battle of Sarhv, a battle between a Chinese-Mongolian-Korean joint force and Manchus horde./Mini beye hergenleme Manju gisun suduri de Sarhv daini Ingri gisun ubaliyambure, Nikasi Monggoso Korise i cooha dainde Manju gurunbe afanuha. by Karvier
"the Chinese guns failed; this was perceived"
Is written somewhere above.
I know that gun shipments to china were often in disrepair "the devil soldier" highlighting the life of Frederick t ward mentions this alot.
Would be interested to know the culture around guns for this battle
(Sorry for phrasing sick and stoned)
Karvier OP t1_izwmd4s wrote
Well, apparently during this battle the guns of Chinese could not work properly for some reason, their artillery couldn’t even make any sounds. Perceived that, the Manchu khan decided to charge directly to the the Chinese line and they were wiped out very quickly and easily since they had neither functioning weapons nor armours.
HisKoR t1_izwoi8g wrote
Most likely rusted out muskets brought from some dinky storehouse with mishaped musket balls and poor quality gunpowder etc. Even well maintained muskets were notoriously inaccurate with soldiers firing over the heads of their enemies even during the American Civil War. So, I can imagine even worse issues with the Ming forces which were pretty much just cannon fodder by the 16th century. Doubt they had any proper musket training nor was combined arms a concept understood in China at the time.
Karvier OP t1_izwoopp wrote
I think these records about ill-equipped Chinese army could only be found in Manchu literary sources though. Contemporary Chinese and later Manchu sponsored Chinese literary sources have seemingly omitted these anecdotes.
HisKoR t1_izwpagl wrote
Impossible to know for sure but effective use of musketry by the Japanese made a huge impression on Korean and Ming soldiers during the Imjin Wars in Korea. Dedicated musketeer units were formed in both countries (although Ming most likely already possessed some musketeers even before the war), however Japanese muskets were works of art, well made by master sword blacksmiths and well appreciated. China and Korea tried to imitate the Japanese use of muskets but corruption ensured that most muskets were useless on the battlefield as they were not well maintained nor constantly practiced with. The worse thing for a soldier is to have an unreliable weapon.
Intranetusa t1_j0ctqku wrote
>Doubt they had any proper musket training nor was combined arms a concept understood in China at the time.
Combined arms was a concept understood at the time (Ming Dynasty in this 17th century battle) and had been used since the 400s BC (when crossbowmen were combined with archers, pikemen, halberdiers, etc in Warring States armies). The Ming Dynasty had pike formations that combined musketeers with pikemen and archers.
The 16th century Ming general Qi Jiguang even developed a quasi-pike formation called the Mandarin duck that combined shielded swordsmen + pikemen + ranged troops (muskets, archers, etc) + a guy with a weird polearm called the wolf's brush.
The problem here was not the lack of knowledge, but that government corruption and incompetence meant the soldiers were not properly equipped or trained to use combined arms combat correctly.
HisKoR t1_j0gkr56 wrote
>Combined arms was a concept understood at the time (Ming Dynasty in this 17th century battle) and had been used since the 400s BC (when crossbowmen were combined with archers, pikemen, halberdiers, etc in Warring States armies). The Ming Dynasty had pike formations that combined musketeers with pikemen and archers.
Military tactics and theory were not directly passed down throughout Chinese history. Many things related to mathematics, science, engineering, military strategy etc. were either rediscovered or reinvented hundreds of years later or not even known that the Chinese possessed such knowledge till the 20th century until studies by Sino Scholars. So just because there is an example from BC's, doesn't mean it was still actively analyzed in AD.
And the reason I said the Ming had no concept of combined arms was I meant they had no idea how to use musketeers and artillery with their infantry and cavalry. So firearms weren't very effective, which is why the Chinese never fully invested them in as opposed to the Japanese and Europeans who saw the huge advantage that firearms had and basically equipped their entire armies with. The Japanese actually used massed rotating volley fire combined with infantry and cavalry support to resist charges and push back against the enemy. The musketeers were used like how Napoleon used artillery and cavalry together. Break up the formation of the enemy with withering firepower and charge in with cavalry backed up by infantry. The Ming were defeated in almost every pitched battle against the Japanese in Korea and only pushed through due to the Japanese running out of supplies or retreating when in danger of being isolated by the Ming and Joseon forces. So yea, maybe some Chinese strategists were aware and implemented such tactics but clearly those ideas were not spread to the entire Ming military nor became uniform tactical theory across the country.
​
>The 16th century Ming general Qi Jiguang even developed a quasi-pike formation called the Mandarin duck that combined shielded swordsmen + pikemen + ranged troops (muskets, archers, etc) + a guy with a weird polearm called the wolf's brush.
You're talking about the polearm that was like a bamboo branch that basically shoved in the enemy's face right? I've heard of this too but I'm assuming it was that one general's tactic and no one else used it. And it seems he mostly used it against Japanese pirates and rebels in the South. No idea how it would have fared against the Manchus or actual Japanese military units.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments