jeroenrottgering

How exactly was warfare at the end of the 19th century. European military technology stood on the crossway between the old style (flags, drums & fifes, muskets, cannons etc) and the new style (machine guns, trenches, mass mobilization etc), but how was the short period in between. For example was the Franco-Prussian war still fought on the old way with man still standing in open fields or did already became a dirty war with man seeking cover and entrenching themselfs? Glorious uniforms still played a hugh part (red trousers, blue jackets, pickelhaubes etc), but what about the warfare itself? For example their are still paintings of glorious cavalry charges, but were these really still common or did they all result in massive slaughter. I think the best examples we can use are the Franco-Prussian war, the Austro-Prussian war and other wars between two European powers (roughly between 1870-1900).

irishcrusader95

image of fighting during the battle of Sedan, franco-prussian war. here you can see prussian lines drawn up and firing with many dead and wounded around. this type of warfare was still around at the time and it wasn't until 1884 that Hiram Maxim's new invention was introduced. breach loading weapons of better quality continued to be developed through this last half of the century and also artillery was further developed as these new rifles now had greater range then the canister fire range of canons so better use of howitzers began to develop with there range and accuracy increasing each time.
the franco prussian war was the last major war between two european powers until WW1 which by then no one had any real experience with the new inventions leading to old age tactics being used and the slaughter that followed.

Toomtabard

Warfare at the end of the 19th century meant a mixed bag of fate for indigenous African peoples battliing European Imperialism.
At the Battle of Adowa in the 1mid 1890's the Ethiopians/Abbysiinians beat and humilated a modern Italian Army and so postponed Italian conquest of Abbysinia/Ethopia until 1935 when aerial bombardment and poison gas made all the difference to victorious Mussolini's Fascist troops.
In the same 1890's decade the British -thanks to modern artillery and machine guns- inflicted massive bloody execution on the Mahdi and his technologically outclassed ''Fuzzy Wuzzy'' warriors at the Battle of Omdurman in the Sudan.

Salah

The Battle of Laing's Nek in 1881, in which Boer commandos defeated the British, is conspicuous for being the last battle in British history in which regimental flags were carried into battle.

Cedar Brown

In the opening stages of the war, the French troops fought almost exclusively from shallow trenches dug for protection. They'd crouch low in their slit trenches trying to shelter from Krupp shells. The Prussians would quickly approach the area of combat in a column no larger than a company. Often they'd be under sporadic fire from the long reaching chassepot rifles of the French veterens, most of whom were good shots. Then the Prussians would break into platoons and spread out before dashing forward close enough to bring their inferior rifles in range of the French. Then they'd fire from kneeling or prone. Sometimes using the bodies of their dead friends for cover. Eventually the French cannon and mitrailleuses would be dismounted by Krupp shells and the French positions outflanked. Then the French broke. That was the average battle.

It wasn't too glorious. The chassepot caused especially painful wounds. From descriptions it sounds like the chassepot was worse than the Martini-Henry for the carnage it caused. The Mitrailleuse would turn men into chunks of meat. The Germans murder Algerian and Moroccan soldiers they captured as a matter of habit. The Prussians would use lies and deceit to try to get as close to the French positions as possible before making a bayonet charge. Like pretending to surrender.

As the war continued the Prussians refined their use of their superior artillery. The French were blasted to dust at Sedan.

Later the French army was almost completely captured so the French had to rely on barely trained, badly equipped, often openly anti-government Garde Mobile reservists who made mass charges against the Bavarians outside of Orleans. It was like Crécy. Bloody, futile charge after bloody, futile charge. I can only assume that the fighting around Paris would have been much like Grant's siege of Petersburg during the American Civil War.


People didn't fight standing up because of how it made them felt. As soon as soldiers had guns that let them load and fire from a low crouch or prone they started fighting that way.

I'll admit that Ney standing upright on his horse, screaming at people redfaced while bullets zip around him and carry off parts of his uniform is badassed. But when you're talking about breechloading rifles you have to get close to the dirt.

At one particular battle the Prussians couldn't go prone because the field was flooded and the water would soak through their cartridges, which were paper. The took horrible casualties kneeling in front of Frenchmen with chassepot rifles.