BlueInMotion t1_j0m369k wrote on December 17, 2022 at 6:26 PM

Reply to comment by Archmagnance1 in Drought encouraged Attila's Huns to attack the Roman empire, tree rings suggest by ArtOak

To be honest, Prussia had a couple of trials before the Franco Prussian War (against Denmark and Austria Hungary), while the U.S. didn't. So it's not a (big?) surprise, they were ready for the French.

Archmagnance1 t1_j0m4wbm wrote on December 17, 2022 at 6:37 PM

The US was about 20 years behind in technology not just tactics. They didn't have to fight another major power so they didn't have to have development programs like the europeans did. Single loading bolt action rifles with paper cartridges were around for military use in continental europe since the 1850s, well before the US Civil War. They were needle rifles, with the primer right behind the bullet instead of the black powder, but much more advanced and allowed for more individual flexibility than the muzzle loaders before them. The Mauser model 1871 then came out in europe and saw adoption in the new german empire with metallic cartridges.

The next thing to come out of the US for military adoption was a conversion system for their old muzzle loaders until around 1890 IIRC.

BlueInMotion t1_j0m9xai wrote on December 17, 2022 at 7:12 PM

Your right, on the technical level. Europe with its never ending wars (only be intermitted by short truces) was well ahead of the U.S. in that regard. But on the tactical level Prussia, until it started its war series, wasn't known for ability to put up a fight (Yes, Frederic the so called Great, but during the Napoleonic wars its performance was rather lackluster).

So the German High Command had its time to learn how to mobilize, equip, march, motivate, supply and prepare an army for battle. And they had an established High Command. And they had an established military culture. The U.S. didn't have a large scale war in its history until then and I don't count the Mexican - American war large scale war.