Talk:Battle of Jutland

Introduction to the Outcome section

Seeing as the infobox links directly to the outcome section, I though it would be worth adding a couple of introductory sentences. Yhey state that both sides claimed victory and there is no clear consensus over who won. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Getztashida (talk • contribs) 17:05, 18 August 2020 (UTC)

Changing "Result" from "See Outcome section" to "Inconclusive; See Outcome section" or some variant

I would like to suggest adding the word "Inconclusive" in front of the existing listed result of the battle. Just giving people a hard redirect to an extended portion of the article is in my opinion not ideal, and may leave some who click on the article to just read the summary frustrated and/or unsatisfied. I would be in favor of either my previous suggestion, or a similar phrase, such as: "Inconclusive; Both sides claim victory" to either supplement or replace the existing "result". Something that gives the reader an idea of what happened, that doesn't just awkwardly redirect them to an article section, can definitely work as a "result". BUZZLIGHTYEAR99 (talk) 03:34, 25 January 2022 (UTC)

Admiralty Communiqué

Since an editor seems to be under the erroneous impression that "even the British initially reported this as a German victory", here's the Admiralty's initial statement of 2 June. Readers may judge for themselves.

On the afternoon of Wednesday, May 31, a naval engagement took place off the coast of Jutland.

The British ships on which the brunt of the fighting fell were the Battle Cruiser Fleet and some cruisers and light cruisers, supported by four fast battleships. Among these the losses were heavy.

The German Battle Fleet, aided by low visibility, avoided prolonged action with our main forces, and soon after these appeared on the scene the enemy returned to port, though not before receiving severe damage from our battleships. The battle-cruisers Queen Mary, Indefatigable, Invincible, and the cruisers Defence and Black Prince were sunk. The Warrior was disabled, and after being towed for some time had to be abandoned by her crew.

It is also known that the destroyers Tipperary, Turbulent, Fortune, Sparrowhawk, and Ardent were lost, and six others are not yet accounted for.

No British battleships or light cruisers were sunk.

The enemy's losses were serious.

At least one battle-cruiser was destroyed, and one severely damaged; one battleship reported sunk by our destroyers during a night attack; two light cruisers were disabled, and probably sunk.

The exact number of enemy destroyers disposed of during the action cannot be ascertained with any certainty, but it must have been large.

—Simon Harley (Talk). 10:30, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

References

The British public and press would have poured scorn over the material losses during the battle. The Admiralty with sombre acknowledgement is all that statement conveys, however. The idea that Britain would have declared a German Victory when in fact the Germans A) did not manage to achieve their goals, and B) did not manage to wane the supremacy of the Royal Navy, is easily dismissed - especially when one considers the role of war-time morale/propaganda. Jutland was a prime example of a nation at the top of its game being taught a lesson in complacency (see the radical changes to the then under construction HMS Hood was subjected to in the wake of the battle). Any such discussions regarding the shortcomings of British naval tactics would have been done behind closed doors, not in brash public announcements.--SinoDevonian (talk) 10:52, 20 March 2023 (UTC)

Gefechtskehrtwendung et al.

Hey @Spinney Hill: - does "battle about turn" mean anything less than "Windy Corner" to a reader who doesn't already know about Jutland? I submit at least "battle about turn" gives a clue about the subject of the contents of its section, whereas "Windy Corner" implies there was a bit of a breeze. Nevertheless, both are standard terms for their respective phases of the battle, much like "run to the south" and "run to the north". Parsecboy (talk) 17:53, 13 December 2024 (UTC)

Does it mean turn of the battle i.e change of fortunes? . Does it mean the turning round of the German fleet? Spinney Hill (talk) 00:16, 14 December 2024 (UTC)

I think "windy" as in "windy corner" means frightening. Similar to the phrase "get the wind up" Did a particular person use the composite German word- Scheer or one of the German captains or a German historian? Spinney Hill (talk) 00:23, 14 December 2024 (UTC)

It means the literal turning around of the German fleet - that's why the translation sucks. It seems to convey your first guess, which is wrong on more than one count.

Gefechtskehrtwendung is the word for the order to turn the fleet in unison (as opposed to turning in succession, which was standard practice in most fleets). It was practiced extensively in pre-war maneuvers. It's not a creation of any historian or any other individual.

I had a look at a few books on my shelf. Tarrant's Jutland: The German Perspective uses the term liberally, including this passage: "this simultaneous turn of sixteen points was known as the gefechstkehrtwendung (battle about-turn)." Campbell's Jutland: An Analysis of the Fighting doesn't use the German term, but refers to it as in this example: Scheer has been much criticised for this 'about turn'... Massie's Castles of Steel states, for example, "At 6:36 p.m., Scheer signaled, "Gefechtskehrtwendung nach Steuerbord" ("Battle about turn to starboard")... As you will note, the translation this article already provided and I used for the section header is the normal way historians translate it.

I've never seen the origin of the phrase "Windy Corner" explained - does it refer to Warspite's steering breakdown and subsequent battering? The loss of Warrior and Defence? Regardless, it's a standard term used to describe a phase of the battle, much like "Gefechtskehrtwendung" is (and in the same way that, for example, historians of the Battle of Gettysburg refer to The Wheatfield). Parsecboy (talk) 10:35, 14 December 2024 (UTC)

Many thanks for this explanation and the summary of the sources, none of which I have. I think all the sources I have will be much too general for this detailed examination of the battle but I will have a look and also a think about whether we can improve the article. I will put any ideas I have on this talk page. I won't suggest getting rid of the German.. I may not know too much German but from my knowledge of it and other languages I know that translation is an art and not a science. Sometimes a reordering of the words and even some paraphrasing works wonders. Campbell's angle sounds promising. I will be a few days before I can post again. "Windy" may have connotations of "lucky escapes. ".The article mentions that various ships crossed each other's paths and there were near collisions.Spinney Hill (talk) 23:13, 14 December 2024 (UTC)