{"title":"再说一遍战术和武器","authors":"J. Sowa","doi":"10.21638/spbu19.2021.212","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Mark W. Shearwood’s study is devoted to the use of plug bayonets in the English army in the second half of the 17th and early 18th centuries. The author has shown that the plug bayonet was a more universal weapon than the socket bayonet. He rightly emphasizes in the conclusions of his work that when studying the history of military weaponry, especially in the pre-industrial period, specific dates for weaponry changes in particular armies and units cannot be provided. The conclusion is right that the plug bayonet was not supposed to replace pikes completely as was originally assumed by the then commanders; initially, the bayonets were used to equip troops of dragoons and grenadiers, i. e. the soldiers that did not have pikes on their equipment before. This study on the rearmament of individual armies is of interest to historians dealing with Central and Eastern Europe. It is connected with the important question of the continuity in the field of weapons between the West and Central and Eastern Europe at the turn of the 17th and 18th centuries. It seems that on the basis of the preserved source base it is not possible to jump at any conclusions concerning the use of the plug bayonet going further than those presented by the author.","PeriodicalId":41089,"journal":{"name":"Studia Slavica et Balcanica Petropolitana","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2021-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"One more time about tactics and weaponry\",\"authors\":\"J. Sowa\",\"doi\":\"10.21638/spbu19.2021.212\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Mark W. Shearwood’s study is devoted to the use of plug bayonets in the English army in the second half of the 17th and early 18th centuries. The author has shown that the plug bayonet was a more universal weapon than the socket bayonet. He rightly emphasizes in the conclusions of his work that when studying the history of military weaponry, especially in the pre-industrial period, specific dates for weaponry changes in particular armies and units cannot be provided. The conclusion is right that the plug bayonet was not supposed to replace pikes completely as was originally assumed by the then commanders; initially, the bayonets were used to equip troops of dragoons and grenadiers, i. e. the soldiers that did not have pikes on their equipment before. This study on the rearmament of individual armies is of interest to historians dealing with Central and Eastern Europe. It is connected with the important question of the continuity in the field of weapons between the West and Central and Eastern Europe at the turn of the 17th and 18th centuries. It seems that on the basis of the preserved source base it is not possible to jump at any conclusions concerning the use of the plug bayonet going further than those presented by the author.\",\"PeriodicalId\":41089,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Studia Slavica et Balcanica Petropolitana\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Studia Slavica et Balcanica Petropolitana\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.21638/spbu19.2021.212\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"HISTORY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Studia Slavica et Balcanica Petropolitana","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21638/spbu19.2021.212","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"HISTORY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
马克·w·希尔伍德(Mark W. Shearwood)的研究致力于17世纪下半叶和18世纪初英国军队中塞子刺刀的使用。作者已经证明,插头刺刀是一种比插座刺刀更普遍的武器。他在其著作的结论中正确地强调,在研究军事武器的历史时,特别是在前工业时期,无法提供特定军队和部队武器变化的具体日期。结论是正确的,即堵头刺刀并没有像当时的指挥官最初设想的那样完全取代长枪;最初,刺刀被用于装备龙骑兵和掷弹兵,即以前没有装备长矛的士兵。这项关于单兵重整军备的研究对研究中欧和东欧的历史学家很有兴趣。它与17和18世纪之交西欧与中欧和东欧在武器领域的连续性这一重要问题有关。根据保存下来的原始资料,似乎不可能得出比作者提出的结论更深入的关于塞子卡口使用的任何结论。
Mark W. Shearwood’s study is devoted to the use of plug bayonets in the English army in the second half of the 17th and early 18th centuries. The author has shown that the plug bayonet was a more universal weapon than the socket bayonet. He rightly emphasizes in the conclusions of his work that when studying the history of military weaponry, especially in the pre-industrial period, specific dates for weaponry changes in particular armies and units cannot be provided. The conclusion is right that the plug bayonet was not supposed to replace pikes completely as was originally assumed by the then commanders; initially, the bayonets were used to equip troops of dragoons and grenadiers, i. e. the soldiers that did not have pikes on their equipment before. This study on the rearmament of individual armies is of interest to historians dealing with Central and Eastern Europe. It is connected with the important question of the continuity in the field of weapons between the West and Central and Eastern Europe at the turn of the 17th and 18th centuries. It seems that on the basis of the preserved source base it is not possible to jump at any conclusions concerning the use of the plug bayonet going further than those presented by the author.