Talk:Battle of Dinant

Battle
Was it really a battle?Keith-264 (talk) 20:17, 14 February 2015 (UTC)
 * I think the 15 August engagement was not the one in the narrative, which was fought from 22-23 August, according to Herwig.Keith-264 (talk) 21:14, 14 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Horne and Kramer have "Dinant, with 7,000 inhabitants, was the second largest town in Namur province and it constituted the strategic key to crossing the river. Already on 15 August, an advance German raid tried to secure the bridge but was repulsed by a French force defending the town." p. 42.Keith-264 (talk) 21:16, 14 February 2015 (UTC)
 * see Combat de Dinant.Keith-264 (talk) 21:43, 14 February 2015 (UTC)

Er... yes it was a battle... or a "raid" if you prefer, but it's generally called a battle in French  Your link doesn't work.Blaue Max (talk) 23:57, 14 February 2015 (UTC)
 * What problem ? (please keep the discussion here, not on my talkpage) Blaue Max (talk) 00:18, 15 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Your source is about 15 August but the battle resumed after a lull on 22 August and the town was captured on 23 August. That was when most of the atrocities were committed; it was a German victory which took two attempts. Notice that Herwig and Horne & Kramer are printed sources, which carry more weight.Keith-264 (talk) 00:25, 15 February 2015 (UTC)
 * see van der Essen here too. PS please don't blank your talk page, it's supposed to be a record.Keith-264 (talk) 00:38, 15 February 2015 (UTC)
 * This is not an article about the Massacre of Dinant or the movements of the 5th army. This is an article about the fightings in Dinant the 15 August. The massacre of Dinant is a subsequent event which occured in an undefended town. As I understand it, the whole allied army was retreating (Great Retreat), but it doesn't mean there was no individual victories on the front. (I do what I want with my personal pages) Blaue Max (talk) 00:42, 15 February 2015 (UTC)
 * The attack on 15 August was repulsed and the Germans attacked again on 22 August and the French retreated next day, the Germans didn't occupy a town left undefended after 15 August; the Germans had to fight for Dinant. 23 August: "Lindemann's 46th Infantry Brigade managed to penetrate Dinant, where it too was greeted with heavy fire from French reserves", this was the day when de Gaulle was wounded. "Late on 23 August, d'Elsa's XII Corps finally seized the smoking ruins of Dinant...." Herwig pp. 165-166 (PS If you keep blanking your talk page you'll get warned by the admins.) Keith-264 (talk) 01:42, 15 February 2015 (UTC)
 * The 15 August at 19pm, the French army moved to the north leaving only reserve troops in Dinant and de Gaulle was wounded on the 15 and not the 23, as indicated on the commemorative plaque.. I think you see the battle at a strategic level and I see it at a tactical level. The French article writes: "French tactical victory ; German strategical victory", I think it's a good consensus. (please leave my TP alone, mind your own) Blaue Max (talk) 09:22, 15 February 2015 (UTC)
 * When the main assault took place on Dinant and neighbouring villages,

the inhabitants were therefore seen to be just as much the enemy as the French. What ensued was no military panic (as at Louvain) but rather the systematic, premeditated elimination of presumed civilian resistance. Under cover of an artillery bombardment, which forced the inhabitants to shelter in their cellars, four German columns advanced into the city early on 23 August. The northernmost force came down into the industrial suburb of Leffe and the hamlet of Devant-Bouvignes (map 6 above). Two columns descended from the plateau into the centre of the town, one down the rue Saint-Jacques, the other down the steep lane that led to the Faubourg Saint-Nicolas and the Place d'Armes. The last column came along the road from Neufchateau into the southern suburb of Les Rivages. The French occupied the west bank of the Meuse for most of the day, firing at the exposed Germans as they entered the town and bombarding them with artillery. They blew up the bridge at Bouvignes in mid-afternoon.'h' Initially, they held both ends of the main Dinant bridge, and may even have had forward defences in the town centre. They repulsed an attack early in the day and only blew the bridge up during the afternoon.'"" By early evening, the .French had slipped away in the direction of the border.'"" But for most of the day, the Germans were rebuffed and subjected to intense fire from the west bank. Horne & Kramer p. 46


 * De Gaulle: 22 August p. 166 Herwig 2009.
 * User pagesKeith-264 (talk) 10:12, 15 February 2015 (UTC)


 * Mind you, it says 15 August here too.Keith-264 (talk) 10:18, 15 February 2015 (UTC)
 * The 23 August the French still occupied the left (west) bank which means they had previously left the citadel and most of the city which is on the right (east) bank, as they were strategically moving north (Dès le 15 août, à 9 heures, le général Joffre autorisait le général Lanrezac à préparer le mouvement vers le nord de deux Corps d'Armée, en plus du 1e C. A.; l'ordre de départ était lancé le soir même, à 19 heures.). Herwig is wrong about de Gaulle wounded on the 22, as he was wrong about Leman leading the operations, as he was buried alive some 300 km away from Dinant... I maintain: "French tactical victory ; German strategical victory". Blaue Max (talk) 10:38, 15 February 2015 (UTC)
 * I'm beginning to think that Herwig is mistaken too.


 * result – optional – this parameter may use one of several standard terms: "X victory", "Decisive X victory" or "Inconclusive". The choice of term should reflect what the sources say. In cases where the standard terms do not accurately describe the outcome, a link to the section of the article where the result is discussed in detail (such as "See the 'Aftermath' section") should be used instead of introducing non-standard terms like "marginal" or "tactical" or contradictory statements like "decisive tactical victory but strategic defeat". It is better to omit this parameter altogether than to engage in speculation about which side won or by how much.


 * The 51st Reserve Division continued the defence of Dinant after 15 August "Thus on 23 August, a single French division (the 51st Reserve) faced three German army corps along a 30-kilometre front on the Meuse; at Dinant French IR 273 confronted the entire the German XIIth Army Corps. As elsewhere, however, inferior numbers were no impediment to a fighting withdrawal that caused the Germans damage and delay. In Dinant, the French were aided by the terrain. The Meuse at this point runs between a steep escarpment to the east, and a west bank studded with hedges and woods. The town in 1914 consisted of a ribbon of streets winding nearly four kilometres along the eastern bank, but only a few hundred metres wide, with a high rock cliff behind it. This was pierced by three roads and one narrow path leading from the plateau beyond, and it was down these routes that any attack from the east had to come. The sparsely settled west bank offered good cover. The French had destroyed all the bridges across the Meuse on 22 August, except those at Bouvignes, Dinant, and Hastiere, which they had fortified at both ends, so it was here that the French defence concentrated." Horne & Kramer p. 43.Keith-264 (talk) 11:48, 15 February 2015 (UTC)

Charleroi
Would you consider treating the events at Dinant as part of the Battle of Charleroi? Keith-264 (talk) 12:21, 15 February 2015 (UTC)
 * I think that the historical importance of the battle of Dinant with its subsequent massacre and the geopolitical consequences attached to it (US involvement in the war) allows it to have an independent article.Blaue Max (talk) 13:04, 15 February 2015 (UTC)
 * I didn't mean a merger but a cross reference. Adding to the top of the page is all that's necessary. I've put  on the Charleroi page since the events at Dinant are mentioned in it. If you want to add the German atrocities you will have to include the fighting after 15 August too. Keith-264 (talk) 13:20, 15 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Ok for . Blaue Max (talk) 13:32, 15 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Done, apologies if it felt like I came barging into the article, sometimes they get parachuted in and left standing. If I find any more details to add, I'll put them here first to see what you think.Keith-264 (talk) 16:30, 15 February 2015 (UTC)

I'll take it that you're happy to include these passages and add them tomorrow if I don't hear from you. Regards, Keith-264 (talk) 11:11, 16 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Or perhaps not because the online sources have [part] of the engagement on 15 August.Keith-264 (talk) 13:40, 16 February 2015 (UTC)
 * I think I've got the narrative sorted out now, OK? Keith-264 (talk) 10:33, 17 February 2015 (UTC)
 * Moved the material to main page and integrated it with existing narrative. Keith-264 (talk) 19:33, 18 February 2015 (UTC)