Talk:Battle of Vučji Do

Untitled

Pax, I don't know why the red Montenegrin flag bothers you so much, but it was official until the proclamation of Kingdom of Montenegro in 1910, whether you like it or not. Sideshow Bob 16:22, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

? It doesn't. I just corrected it because the current flag was used, which was no such case. BTW, Bob, ya gotta read on history some more; the only official Montenegrin flag was "Red-Light Blue-Yellow" and it was adopted when the Montenegrin Constitution was, in 1905. However, the real flag that was used for most of the reign was the one with the Petrovic-Njegos coat-of-arms.

All other flags are just cloddin' around Military, naval, national, Church etc. used flags; for example a flag similar to that to which you reverted was Nikola's War flag, which was based on Danilo's chieftain standard. The flag mostly used before Nikola's time was Saint George's cross on a red background, but as I said, no flag was fully standardized before the Nikola and/or the constitution, the traditional [Serbian?] tricolor was the "most" used by that account).

I don't think that the War Flag should be put (over Nikola's flag); but then again its not the original War Flag, but the current Montenegrin state flag, rather (the ol' Battle Stag was slightly different). --PaxEquilibrium 20:01, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

Vučji do is in HERZEGOVINA, not Montenegro!!!!

Vucji do (coordinates 42° 56' 38" North, 18° 24' 28" East) is located in Republika Srpska, Bosnia-Herzegovina! Let's correct this

Realibility of this article ??

I dont understand. Judging by the damage inflicting on the flag, it appears that the Ottoman soldiers did not concern themselves with killing their enemy but took potshots at the flag only. And this is the age of muzzle-loaders, or at best paper cartridges, which means that you can not shoot that fast. I doubt that this was the case. No wonder than that they suffered so many casualties but that number (4000) seems incredibly high. What sources mention this? Where is the evidence? I, for one, would call the veracity of this article into question. It reminds me of John Keegan's "Bullfrog Effect" in the introduction of his famed "The Face of Battle." For those not familiar with this the Bullfrog Effect is essentially the reconstruction of the events solely or largely on the evidence of those whose reputations may gain or lose by the account they give such as wounded pride, self-esteem inflating whatever the author feels is at stake: manhood, bravery, vanity. Needless to say the Balkans, especially the highlands in the Balkans and specifically the Montenegrins and Serbs have much of this. Give me the evidence and I will be a beliver — Preceding unsigned comment added by Keyhall (talk • contribs) 20:01, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

Good luck with establishing the facts. The thing is, history is not like medicine. It relies on resources, and in the absence of better resources, it uses what it has. Certainly, some kind of archeological evidence, the comparison of the armed formations vis-a-vis similar nearby conflicts which have been better documented, examining the overall scale of operations conducted by corresponding military jurisdictions that were considered normal et cetera... However, nobody has done that. And even if somebody embarks on that path, there is no guarantee that an "independent" research will be independent. However, it is true that a *better* research is needed, and that better research is possible. Regarding the flag. Yeah, someone always has to carry the standard, and since rifles were less accurate than slingshots, it explains the bullet-ridden flag. It was nothing unusual — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.140.150.80 (talk) 19:44, 23 April 2020 (UTC)