Deadliest cartridge in history
- Thread starter tark
- Start date
- Status
How about about 32 million in the Taiping Rebellion? Some estimates run as high as 100 million. Yes a lot of those deaths were due to plague but if only half of that 100 million total came from musket fire, and they did use muskets, they could have driven the total way up. Then there was the conquests of of the Mongols? They killed about 40 million people. Their primary weapon was the bow but they also used firearms. They were the first to use them except for some early usage in China and our friend, Vietnam. But it was the Mongols that taught the world to kill with guns. Muslims picked up the practice after fighting the Mongols too. And they held an empire for about 600 years. They didn't use the gun as their primary weapon especially at first. But they did use it and they did kill a bunch of people. Then there's the Qing conquest. 25 million dead and yes they used muskets.
People tend to think in terms of western history since that's what we all studied in school. But the rest of the world wasn't sleeping all that time. In fact they were generally way ahead of us as far as their technology went. The musket has been around for a very long time and some big wars were fought using them along with other weapons. Determining how many were killed with what is a whole other story. But to dismiss with a single word, "baloney", is a big mistake.
That's what I expected and I don't disagree that the 6.5mm is a top contender but I think it would still lag behind .303, 8x57, and 7.62X54R due to longevity and more wide spread use.
Just like in the Napoleonic Wars, most deaths were from things other than muskets, namely artillery, and cold steel.
The thing is the tactics used in the musket era, and yes the Chinese use pretty much the same tactics as there were governed by the weapons at hand. Due to the short effective range of muzzle loaders, and assault over open ground would be an advance to within 75 to 100 yards, one volley, and a bayonet assault. A study of musket era combat shows that commanders that stopped to engage in musketry duals didn't accomplish much. Assaults on fortified objectives would be carried out by other means.
The number of small arms related deaths in the Chinese Civil War (1927-1950, with a brief interlude to beat off some Japanese) probably still outnumbers the number of small arms deaths during the rebellion.
Last edited:
CeeZee you made several very good points I would like to expand with additional information and analysis.
The Taiping Rebellion is an excellent and possibly the best example of a huge war fought almost entirely with small arms and melee weapons.
It would be difficult to name any one black powder and bullet paper cartridge for a muzzle loader as the most deadly because there were some many different kinds. As far as the Taiping Rebellion I would not be surprised if loose powder and bullet was used more extensively than paper cartridges by the Rebels.
I believe the Mongols killed far fewer people with bows and arrows than they did with other weapons. The greatest death tolls would be when destroying the populations of entire cities and that was done with mostly melee weapons after the walls were breached. Arrows are expensive to use for simple slaughter.
I whole heartedly agree that, in the West, education and understanding of non-western history and technology has been insufficient. No doubt cultural bigotry has much to do with this insufficiency. Some of the reason may also be that it makes it easier to dehumanize and inculcate belief in the inferiority of non-western peoples to make it much easier to justify conquering and exploiting them.
Last edited:
That would be a very close contest for greatest number of deaths from small arms because the total number of deaths from the Chinese Civil War of 1927-50 is considerably smaller.
I too think you can pretty much take any western military out of the equation.
We have rules.
Most of these other wars turn into some sort of ethnic cleansing.
Humans seem to have a penchant for this. Run over a place and kill everyone thats not like you.
And the libs want us to give up our guns, just when the world is getting hot again.
Not me....
Any way, I would vote for the 7.62x39. Its at the for front of most of the lets kill every one movements lately.
We have rules.
Most of these other wars turn into some sort of ethnic cleansing.
Humans seem to have a penchant for this. Run over a place and kill everyone thats not like you.
And the libs want us to give up our guns, just when the world is getting hot again.
Not me....
Any way, I would vote for the 7.62x39. Its at the for front of most of the lets kill every one movements lately.
Didn't I say that in my post? I also added that plague and famine were a big cause of death in that rebellion. I have 2 posts on the subject. Maybe you didn't see the first one.
Or it could be that we were taught our own history rather than the history of other parts of the world. It's true that most westerners don't know much about eastern history but not all of us were about conquering people. The European powers certainly were but the United States had very little experience in conquering eastern countries. We certainly conquered this continent and yes we dehumanized other peoples. That's something that is common to every culture so I'm not going to wring my hands over the fact that we did it too. What isn't common is to outgrow that tendency and I think western culture has done that more than any culture in history. So maybe we can give a little credit where it's due too. For example the Japanese were all taught that we were lazy and only interested in our luxuries. They were wrong. I don't think we were so wrong to think the Japanese from prior to WWII were a militaristic culture bent on domination of as much land as possible. I don't think they are alone in that. But AFAIK the only real colony the US had in the eastern hemisphere was the Philipines and we didn't exactly treat them like the Japanese treated their conquests i.e. the rape of Nanking.
Mostly I just don't want to get into a culture bashing fest. I responded because you acknowledged I made some valid points. Please try to build on that. We aren't alone in our sins. That seems to be missed by the modern western world. It was one thing to acknowledge our sins and try to make some retribution but to slam us as if we were the only conquerors in history that dehumanized the enemy is way over the top friend. I think you can acknowledge that can't you?
I'm not denying the west has it's sins. But so does everyone else and too many want to blame the plight of the entire world on us when in fact the west has done a great deal to make life better around the world. Our agricultural technology has fed billions for example. Our medicines save countless numbers. We are not the great bogey man of history.
How about we get past the stuff where people hurl insults at each other? Because those people are responsible for a good deal of suffering themselves. We should be able to acknowledge that with the leadership of the west slavery has almost been wiped off the face of the earth (unless you count communism which is a de facto form of slavery). We have our good points. We probably have more good points than any culture in history. Many, many cultures have sought to dominate since recorded history began. I'm sure there were more before that. Heck we wouldn't even have civilization without it really. Jesus said that kings had their role to play in the world even if they were corrupt and cruel. He did not want a rebellion against the Romans despite the fact they had done horrible things to His people. I think we might learn something from that teaching. Even the bad guys contribute to the greater good in spite of themselves at times.
OP
OP
Wow, its only been a day and three pages already! A couple of thoughts:
I considered the 7.92X57 as my first choice, a lot of soldiers were killed with it in two world wars, but the British had a somewhat larger colonial empire, and always seemed to be putting down rebellions, so that is why I went with the .303.
Someone mentioned the 7.62X54 as having been around the longest. I think the 8MM Lebel predates it by two of three years. The French don't get enough credit for some of their technological innovations. After all, THEY were the ones who invented smokeless powder. The 8MM Lebel was the first military smokeless round.
There is no doubt in my mind that the 7.62X39 will someday be at the top of the pile, if it isn't already.
I considered the 7.92X57 as my first choice, a lot of soldiers were killed with it in two world wars, but the British had a somewhat larger colonial empire, and always seemed to be putting down rebellions, so that is why I went with the .303.
Someone mentioned the 7.62X54 as having been around the longest. I think the 8MM Lebel predates it by two of three years. The French don't get enough credit for some of their technological innovations. After all, THEY were the ones who invented smokeless powder. The 8MM Lebel was the first military smokeless round.
There is no doubt in my mind that the 7.62X39 will someday be at the top of the pile, if it isn't already.
BobWright
Member
What about the US caliber .30 rounds that followed the M1906, the M1 ball and M2 AP?
These were used in WW I, WW II, and in Korea in the M1903 and M1 rifles, as well as the BAR and the machine guns. Also was used in aircraft machineguns as secondary armament.
Bob Wright
These were used in WW I, WW II, and in Korea in the M1903 and M1 rifles, as well as the BAR and the machine guns. Also was used in aircraft machineguns as secondary armament.
Bob Wright
Lycidas Janwor
Member
I'm guessing this too as the AK is everywhere and it's been involved in almost every conflict in the second half of the 20th and now the beginning of the 21st century.
7.92 X 57, the Germans were very good at killing enemy troops with machine guns in two world wars.
You're right about that but I don't think the numbers add up. Since the time the 7.62 x 39 round came into use there have only been a few relatively small wars. The biggest have been Korea and Vietnam. There were other places the 7.62 x 39 was used and many people died but really how many of them were killed with those bullets and how many were killed in a cheaper fashion? Can you name a conflict where you think a lot of people have been killed by the 7.62 x 39? And how many were killed by the AK in those wars? Add all the wars up since WWII and they don't come close to even the Pacific Theater casualties during WWII. That is unless you count the African War which was more about starvation than shooting.
There just haven't been any wars on the scale the world used to see since the 7.62 x 39 came into use. Yes many have died in Africa and the AK has been used there a lot but again most of those deaths are from deliberate starvation.
You might have something there but the question was about "enemy soldiers".
CeeZee,
I agree with much of what you wrote in Post #59.
I admit in my Post #56 I gave too much emphasis to Western cultural bigotry and not enough to the ethnocentrism that is an aspect of all cultures. I have no doubt if the countries the West colonized and exploited during the 17th-20th centuries had been technologically capable of reversing the situation making the Western Nations colonies they would have. I am extremely happy that did not happen because I believe the World would be a much more terrible place for all peoples to live in. Of course that happiness is due to my bias from being an infidel, round-eyed, hairy monkey man from the West.
I agree with much of what you wrote in Post #59.
I admit in my Post #56 I gave too much emphasis to Western cultural bigotry and not enough to the ethnocentrism that is an aspect of all cultures. I have no doubt if the countries the West colonized and exploited during the 17th-20th centuries had been technologically capable of reversing the situation making the Western Nations colonies they would have. I am extremely happy that did not happen because I believe the World would be a much more terrible place for all peoples to live in. Of course that happiness is due to my bias from being an infidel, round-eyed, hairy monkey man from the West.
Trunk Monkey
member
I think the same can be said for the .303, 7.62x54R, and 8x57 to the point of at least balancing the scales. The use of rifle ammunition as the primary killing tool just is not happening when the U.S. .30-06 variations became available. Most of the rifle and MG ammunition used in WWI and WWII was not U.S. .30 caliber ammunition. The more this topic is discussed the more I think it has to be one of the these three older pre-1900 military rounds: .303, 8x57, 7.62x54R.
Last edited:
Probably the record holder for most executions, although the 7.62 Nagant is a serious contender. Too many MGs shooting .303, 7.62x54R, and 8x57 decades before and after the creation of the Tokarev for a pistol cartridge to claim the title.
Stick around. It may happen yet. China is on a roll these days and they have a lot of bad memories of western ways from the 19th century. People tend to lump the US in with those imperial ways and I don't get that at all. For example you can go to the Wikipedia page on the Opium Wars and read that the Brits and the Americans were imperialists in China. Gee I must have missed that. The US did bomb one city in support of the Brits but that was a very small part of a big push by the Brits. The US has plenty to answer for but not that. So speaking as a, "round-eyed, hairy monkey man from the West," myself I tend to think we have enough to answer for without piling on stuff we didn't do. Too many "universities" teach that kind of drivel these days and it's a shame and a farce. Whatever happened to the facts? We were killing lots of native Americans when the Brits were selling opium in China. We were too busy to help out much over there.
Besides we really didn't intervene around the world like most western countries. It wasn't until we took the Philippines that we had a bona fide colony of any kind and we treated those people pretty well in comparison to a lot of imperial countries including east, west, African and whatever other civilization we might find. Shaka Zulu didn't take many prisoners for example when he was building his empire. We did send missionaries to China and made lots of friends too. Those people still like us but they live in Taiwan.
d2wing
Member
- Joined
- Nov 10, 2008
- Messages
- 6,434
If we are talking about wars between Nations, the great wars WW I and WWII are by far the greatest in casualties. Modern cartridges like 5.56 NATO and 7.62x39 have and are killing lot's people but the wars are small in comparison.
The 30-06 was used on more fronts and in both wars as well as the Korean War. So it would be a leading contender. Also the Japanese killed Millions in China so the Ariska mainly 6.5 is also a contender. The British .303 was used in many wars besides the big ones. Of Course the German 7 MM Mauser was used in both wars as was the Russian 7.62x54R. Both were used against several counties and uprisings. All of those have killed millions in the largest battles and wars in history. Since the Russian was in use the longest and is still in use around the world and was used by other countries like Finland, South American counties and China it is most likely in my opinion.
The 30-06 was used on more fronts and in both wars as well as the Korean War. So it would be a leading contender. Also the Japanese killed Millions in China so the Ariska mainly 6.5 is also a contender. The British .303 was used in many wars besides the big ones. Of Course the German 7 MM Mauser was used in both wars as was the Russian 7.62x54R. Both were used against several counties and uprisings. All of those have killed millions in the largest battles and wars in history. Since the Russian was in use the longest and is still in use around the world and was used by other countries like Finland, South American counties and China it is most likely in my opinion.
But the question posed is
When ethnically cleansing, the military is usually killing civilians. Not enemy soldiers. So, while I agree with you in your analysis, it is inapplicable to the question at hand.
Same point again.
morcey2
Member
Pretty tough question. No way of ever knowing but there are contenders. I only went with the .303 because it was used during the 19th century pretty extensively plus during both of the great wars and in Korea for that matter. The Brits sent about 100,000 troops to Korea where about 1.5 million soldiers on the other side were killed. How many of those were due to the .303 or the .30 caliber or whatever we just will never know. Plus the Aussies and the Canadians used the Lee Enfield in that war. This question just doesn't have an answer though. Again I think most people in Korea were killed by artillery although the Chinese used the rifle with the human wave pretty effectively. But Allied casualties pale in comparison to what the Chinese and the North Koreans suffered.
- Status
Similar threads
