Talk:The Thin Red Line (1854 battle)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	Russia Portal The Thin Red Line (1854 battle) is part of the WikiProject Russian history, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Russian history. If you would like to participate, you can visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the quality scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.

	This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.
Start	This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.
Additional information and associated task forces: This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-Class status: Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar: not checked Supporting materials: not checked To fill out this checklist, please add the following to the template call: <!-- B-Class-1. It is suitably referenced, and all major points have appropriate inline citations. --> |B-Class-1=yes/no <!-- B-Class-2. It reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain obvious omissions or inaccuracies. --> |B-Class-2=yes/no <!-- B-Class-3. It has a defined structure, including a lead section and one or more sections of content. --> |B-Class-3=yes/no <!-- B-Class-4. It is free from major grammatical errors. --> |B-Class-4=yes/no <!-- B-Class-5. It contains appropriate supporting materials, such as an infobox, images, or diagrams. --> |B-Class-5=yes/no This article is not currently associated with a task force. To tag it for one or more task forces, please add the task force codes from the template instructions to the template call.

[edit] 25,000????

This article says a Russian cavalry force of 25,000 attacked the British. That sounds a wee bit high considering that there were 25,000 Russians in total at the battle of Balaklava and I doubt they were all cavalry.

---

Response:

You are correct. About 20,000 Russians were present at Balaclava under Liprandi, but most of them were infantrymen stationed on the heights around the battlefield, and they didn't see any action.

Only several thousand Russians actually engaged in the fighting.

Note that it is an open question as to what Liprandi's intentions were: the Russians claim that Balaclava was merely a probing action, not an attempt at a decisive attack. Only in the West is it written that Balaclava was a serious attempt at capturing the Allied position.

Finally, it is wrong to regard the repulse of the Russian cavalry as having had a decisive outcome. After being roughed up by the British, the cavalrymen merely retreated to the safety of their own lines and the battle continued.

Regarding merging this article with the Battle of Balaclava:

Probably it would be better to let this article stand alone, but to eliminate the campaign box so that the reader doesn't mistake it as standing for the entirely of the Battle of Balaclava.

An paragraph could be added to the top explaining that this incident was part of the Battle of Balaclava, and a link to the main battle article should be included.

It sounds like the author's intention was to describe and celebrate the exploits of the 93rd Highlanders during the Crimean War. Perhaps he could round the article out by telling us more about this regiment, its history, and the history of Highlander infantrymen?

Certainly the 93rd Highlanders' performance at Balaclava is very famous, so that alone warrants an independent article about them.

Kenmore 08:04, 8 December 2006 (UTC)kenmore

[edit] No of Cavalry

The text says there were 2500 russian cavalry, the info box says 400. which is right? Epeeist smudge 14:43, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] citations

Currently the article says:

Campbell formed the 93rd into a line two deep — the "thin red line". Convention dictated that the line should be four deep, but the line had to be stretched.

Who says that a British line should be four deep (and not two), and who said it should be four deep to receive cavalry had squares been abandoned as a tactical formation by this time? I think these two sentences need citations (WP:PROVEIT). --Philip Baird Shearer (talk) 00:32, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Thirty years earlier at Waterloo, Wellington had famously used infantry squares to receive cavalry. What is less well known is that late in the battle he formed infantry lines four deep for the same purpose. So, these formations are not mutually exclusive. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.159.225.183 (talk) 16:33, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

I should have added to my comment above that the 93rd Highlanders had just been equipped with the new rifled muskets for the Crimea, so a line two deep was now adequate to receive cavalry (as events demonstrated). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.159.225.183 (talk) 17:06, 14 May 2008 (UTC)

The 1854 British army infantry manual instructs infantry to meet cavalry in square. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.11.1.18 (talk) 10:27, 30 May 2008 (UTC)