Talk:Battle of Balaclava/Archive 1

British casualties
The Wiki-article about Balaklava puts British casualties at about 500 KIA in the Charge of the Light Brigade alone. Which numbers are correct?--3 Löwi 14:37, 13 September 2005 (UTC)

Key battle?
Can a battle that ends inconclusively be a key battle? Piet 09:22, 25 October 2005 (UTC)

It's key in that the first major Russian effort to break the siege was unsucessful, and furthermore b/c it dictated the rules of engagement for Russian cavalry for the rest of the war (ie, they were scared of the Brits). It was also key in the greater scheme of things b/c it highlighted (thrice) the skill of the individual British soldier/trooper and of the nco's and officers that were running those units. Also, the Thin Red Line incident was a sign of things to come when it showed that massed infantry with a decent rate of fire didn't need to be frightened of cavalry. MahbubAli88 02:12, 26 April 2006 (UTC)Mahbub

GAAAAAA
Considering that the Thin Red Line is the first action of the Battle of Balaklava, and is inextricably linked to the strategy and course of events that led to the cavalry actions later in the day, why isn't it included here? seperating the two was/is a stupid idea. furthermore, their seperation obscures the true course of events on 25 Oct (see section of B. of Balaclava where the article claims that the first russian attack was repulsed by the heavy brigade...WRONG!!) MahbubAli88 02:09, 26 April 2006 (UTC)Mahbub


 * Let me echo the above sentiments, especially the heading. There's no such thing as "The Battle of the Thin Red Line," (let alone one involving 25,000 Russians&mdash;!?)and to treat the subject matter like this is just plain negligent. The two need a merger, pronto. Albrecht 17:04, 17 September 2006 (UTC)


 * I concurr - in fact this article is inconsistant with the Charge of the Light Brigade article which has the red line/charge of the heavies/charge of the lights cronology. --88.96.3.206 11:44, 8 October 2006 (UTC)
 * I concur as well, relevant data needs to be merged into this article. Radagast83 20:12, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

Several comments.

Russian commander Liprandi had around 20,000 troops under his direction at Balaclava, mostly infantry. Most of these soldiers watched the battle from the heights without fighting.

Only several thousand Russians actually engaged in combat at Balaclava.

The “Thin Red Line” wasn’t the first action in the Battle of Balaclava; the battle started with a Russian cavalry attack on the Turkish redoubts above the field. The redoubts were overrun by the Russians, with the attack on the Highlanders following.

The repulse of the Russian cavalry occurred in two actions happening simultaneously: the “Thin Red Line” repulsed one contingent of Russians, while the British Heavy Brigade repulsed another contingent. Both groups of Russian cavalry then retreated to their main line, while the battle continued.

The famous attack of the Light Brigade came next, which of course was repulsed.

The action died down with the Russians pulling the captured Turkish cannon away, and with the redoubts occupied by neither side. The road leading to the redoubts however remained under Russian control, so they could claim to have captured some ground as a result of the fight.

Later that day, the captured Turkish cannon were paraded in Sevastopol as trophies, with the roaring cheers of the Russians audible as far away as the Allied camp. Clearly the Russians thought they had won.

The Allies, meanwhile, felt they had beaten the Russians, and were sore about the Light Brigade fiasco marring what might otherwise have been a clear-cut victory.

Was Balaclava even a serious attack by the Russians?

This is an open question. The supreme Russian commander, Menshikov, claimed that Balaclava was merely a probe against the British position in order to test its defenses, and that the main attack was intended to come later at Inkerman.

Only in the West is Balaclava regarded as a serious Russian attempt to break the siege of Sevastopol. Some Western historians believe Menshikov was trying to save face by claiming that the attack was just a probe.

The attack on Inkerman, which took place two weeks later, was clearly a major attempt by the Russians to win the war.

Thin Red Line Article

I think that the "Thin Red Line" article should remain independent of the main Battle of Balaclava, but that the campaignbox should be removed, so that the reader doesn’t mistake it for the main description of the battle itself.

The author should indicate that the “Thin Red Line” refers to only one famous segment of the battle, and he should link it to the main battle article.

It seems like the author's intention is to describe and celebrate the exploits of the Scottish Highlanders, as well as to delve into the literature it inspired. Maybe he could round out the article by telling us more about that regiment, its history, commanders, etc.?

Kenmore 08:24, 8 December 2006 (UTC)kenmore

Ummm....I didn't know where to put this so sorry if this is out of place, but in the article it says that the Russian force was "considerably larger." I suppose this is a matter of opinion but I always thought that significantly larger meant something like 30,000 to 20,000.

merge merge merge
i'm still mystified as to why there are, i believe, currently four articles that give a summary of the battle day: Battle of Balaklava, Charge of the Lt Brigade, Charge of the Hvy Brigade, and Thin Red Line. These all took place within the same general point and time in the space time continuim, are all important in relation to each other, and were all part of the same exchange between the Russian and Allied forces outside Sebastapol. Essentially, this would be like having a totally seperate article for the Charge of the Heavy Brigade/Scots Greys at Waterloo, or for the action at the corn field or sunken road at Antietam, or the mines at Messines. Frankly, i think all four should be merged into a single, well formatted article that offers the necessary distinction b/w the several engagements of the day, while providing all the coverage in one place. MahbubAli88 23:20, 7 January 2007 (UTC)MahbubAli88


 * But these elements are also very well known of themselves and the Charge of the Light Brigade is probably better known the battle of Balaclava as a whole so splitting off these individual engagements is a perfectly legitmate way of treating them. It allows the full detial of thes eincidents to be covered without bloating the B o B article itself - remember the recommended page size. GraemeLeggett 14:39, 19 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Considering the Balaclava article has barely crawled past stub size, your explanation does not hold water. Albrecht 14:47, 19 January 2007 (UTC)


 * I was thinking ahead to the size of the full article once the proposed merger had been completed and with the appropiate references and background to the overall battle included - why merge then only have to split again GraemeLeggett 16:44, 19 January 2007 (UTC)


 * I would agree that they should remain separate. Whilst I understand that merging them would give one focal point, they are well known by the titles of the separate actions and one consolidated article would be rather large and more difficult to navigate than with seperate linked articles. RobWalker 17:03, 01 February 2007 (UTC)


 * That'd be a great idiea, if anybody knew what the heck what the Charge of the Heavy Brigade was. It's not notable enough to warrant a separate article, but the battle that was the origin of the phrase "Thin Red Line" is notable enough to warrant a separate article. 152.23.196.162 06:22, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Iron Maiden
How come Iron Maiden get a mention for their artistic interpretation within the main article text but nothing is mentioned about Tennyson? Jim901 20:08, 16 January 2007 (UTC)


 * How about mentioning Manfred Mann's 5 4 3 2 1 then since that's a reference to the charge of the light brigade

Always onward rode the 600 (5-4-3-2-1) Down the valley on their horses they thundered (5-4-3-2-1) Ah but once they're down they really blundered (5-4-3-2-1) Uh huh, it was the Manfreds NinjaKid 12:40, 22 August 2007 (UTC)