In this fascinating and provocative study, Miedema takes a new look at the role of the bayonet and shock tactics on the Western front during World War I. He challenges the conventional view of the bayonet as an obsolete weapons system and rekindles the controversial debate over technologies, old and new, on the field of battle.

DigiCat Publishing presents to you this special edition of "Bayonet Training Manual Used by the British Forces" by Anonymous. DigiCat Publishing considers every written word to be a legacy of humankind. Every DigiCat book has been carefully reproduced for republishing in a new modern format. The books are available in print, as well as ebooks. DigiCat hopes you will treat this work with the acknowledgment and passion it deserves as a classic of world literature.

A startling omission from the extensive literature on the Pacific events of World War II is an analysis of Allied psychological operations. In this work Allison B. Gilmore makes a strong case for the importance of psychological warfare (psywar) in this theater, countering the usual view of fanatical resistance by Japanese units. Gilmore marshals evidence that Japanese military indoctrination was not proof against demoralization and the survival instinct. The Pacific War was particularly brutal, racist on both sides, and often fought without regard to so-called civilized norms of warfare. Yet Gilmore offers her study as "the story of how psywar personnel attempted to convince Japanese and Americans alike that their assumptions about the other were misleading and counterproductive." To do so, she focuses on combat propaganda-activities conducted in support of military operations and intended to demoralize Japanese combatants-and examines the objectives of the psywar campaign. She outlines the process by which propaganda was created, evaluates the policies that guided that creation, and offers criteria for judging the relative success of these efforts. The work also examines the Imperial Army's training, the strengths and weaknesses of Japanese morale, and the Allies' attempts to exploit the Japanese military structure and ethos. Allison B. Gilmore is an assistant professor in the Department of History at The Ohio State University at Lima. This is her first book.

Although muskets delivered devastating projectiles at comparatively long ranges, their slow rate of fire left the soldier very vulnerable while reloading, and early muskets were useless for close-quarter fighting. Consequently, European infantry regiments of the 17th century were composed of both musketeers and pikemen, who protected the musketeers while loading but also formed the shock component for close-quarter combat. The development of the flintlock musket produced a much less cumbersome and faster-firing firearm. When a short knife was stuck into its muzzle, every soldier could be armed with a missile weapon as well as one that could be used for close combat. The only disadvantage was that the musket could not be loaded or fired while the plug bayonet was in place. The socket bayonet solved this problem and the musket/bayonet combination became the universal infantry weapon from c.1700 to c.1870. The advent of shorter rifled firearms saw the attachment of short swords to rifle barrels. Their longer blades still gave the infantryman the 'reach' that contemporaries believed he needed to fend off cavalry attacks. The perfection of the small-bore magazine rifle in the 1890s saw the bayonet lose its tactical importance, becoming smaller and more knife-like, a trend that continued in the world wars. When assault rifles predominated from the 1950s onwards, the bayonet became a weapon of last resort. Its potential usefulness continued to be recognized, but its blade was often combined with an item with some additional function, most notably a wire-cutter. Ultimately, for all its fearsome reputation as a visceral, close-quarter fighting weapon, the bayonet's greatest impact was actually as a psychological weapon. Featuring full-colour artwork as well as archive and close-up photographs, this is the absorbing story of the complementary weapon to every soldier's firearm from the army of Louis XIV to modern-day forces in all global theatres of conflict.

Although muskets delivered devastating projectiles at comparatively long ranges, their slow rate of fire left the soldier very vulnerable while reloading, and early muskets were useless for close-quarter fighting. Consequently, European infantry regiments of the 17th century were composed of both musketeers and pikemen, who protected the musketeers while loading but also formed the shock component for close-quarter combat. The development of the flintlock musket produced a much less cumbersome and faster-firing firearm. When a short knife was stuck into its muzzle, every soldier could be armed with a missile weapon as well as one that could be used for close combat. The only disadvantage was that the musket could not be loaded or fired while the plug bayonet was in place. The socket bayonet solved this problem and the musket/bayonet combination became the universal infantry weapon from c.1700 to c.1870. The advent of shorter rifled firearms saw the attachment of short swords to rifle barrels. Their longer blades still gave the infantryman the 'reach' that contemporaries believed he needed to fend off cavalry attacks. The perfection of the small-bore magazine rifle in the 1890s saw the bayonet lose its tactical importance, becoming smaller and more knife-like, a trend that continued in the world wars. When assault rifles predominated from the 1950s onwards, the bayonet became a weapon of last resort. Its potential usefulness continued to be recognized, but its blade was often combined with an item with some additional function, most notably a wire-cutter. Ultimately, for all its fearsome reputation as a visceral, close-quarter fighting weapon, the bayonet's greatest impact was actually as a psychological weapon. Featuring full-colour artwork as well as archive and close-up photographs, this is the absorbing story of the complementary weapon to every soldier's firearm from the army of Louis XIV to modern-day forces in all global theatres of conflict.

In this groundbreaking study of what motivated soldiers to enlist and fight in this nation's most bloody conflict, Joseph Allan Frank argues that politics was central to the development of the armies of the North and South: motivating soldiers, molding the organization, defining the qualifications of officers, shaping fighting styles, and framing the nature of relations between the army and society. This study relies on the letters and diaries of more than a thousand soldiers, with the author using social science categories for identifying politically aware soldiers and then defining and classifying the levels of political socialization.