Cavalry was a stupid idea
The Great Courses Plus free trial: ow.ly/fA12302OFSt
Riding a horse into battle is not a technique easy to adopt. The first man to suggest it may have been laughed at.
Support me on Patreon: / lindybeige
A long ramble by me. Possibly I should have done one video about Celtic/Roman four-pommelled saddles, and a separate one about how cavalry took a long time to develop.
I wasn't quite at my peak while making this one. I came back from abroad with a virus, and had spent the previous day coughing.
Buy the music - the music played at the end of my videos is now available here: lindybeige.bandcamp.com/track...
More weapons and armour videos here: • Weapons and armour
Lindybeige: a channel of archaeology, ancient and medieval warfare, rants, swing dance, travelogues, evolution, and whatever else occurs to me to make.
▼ Follow me...
Twitter: / lindybeige I may have some drivel to contribute to the Twittersphere, plus you get notice of uploads.
Facebook: / lindybeige (it's a 'page' and now seems to be working).
Google+: "google.com/+lindybeige"
website: www.LloydianAspects.co.uk
/ user "Lindybeige"
cavalry is a stupid name i prefer stallion battalion
Steed stampede
rey nietes nice
Horse full force
I prefer “A Mare Fanfare”.
I swear that’s the name of an album can’t remember the bands name though
Hannibal: "Yeah, you're right. Riding horses into battle is silly." Equip: Elephants
*Equips Elephants
Khmer: let add crossbows to those elephants
@@xhawkenx633 under rated
@@xhawkenx633 Funny how a smaller bolt can literally penetrate your armour better than a sawed off javelin
@@maxmuller8633?????
“Cavalry is stupid” This video was sponsored by Crassus INC.
😂😂
I see what you did there
LOL perfect
🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
If only ancient people had dirtbikes...
Lindybeige: “Cavalry is a stupid idea” Mongol Empire: “Am I a joke to you?”
Mongolian horse archers Sassanid cataphracts Parthian horse archers Russian cossacks Polish hussars Ottoman sipahi French cuirassiers Etc etc And these are only some of the notable ones For thousands of years all armies needed cavalry
Well they're effective mainly due to the archery not the Calvary lol
@@wynnwong4008 "Mobile archery" thanks to the horses A group of archers couldn't have destroyed an entire roman army with little effort but horse archers did. Also the cataphracts and the hussars were amazing. The heavy cavalry charge was absolutely devastating to the infantry and the hussars... Well they saved vienna
mongols did use infantry, you know.
@@WhiteWolfsp93 No shit Sherlock. Everyone had infantry. I’m not brain dead. It’s just that the Mongols are very well known for their use of horses.
Those are brave words for someone in lancing distance
RAINBOW_REALITY underrated comment man
brave words for someone riding towards my spear
@@lefoolish1989 underrated comment man
@Landsturmregiment underrated comment man
@@lefoolish1989 Brave words for someone who gets charged in by fully plated medieval tank.
but look at my horse... my horse is amazing
give it a lick?
That's a donkey.
+DarkWiiPlayer it tastes just like raisins
it tastes just like raisins!
+DarkWiiPlayer it tastes just like raisins
“Let’s invent something to get my old and frail mother-in-law on this unpredictable horse” said the optimistic Chinese man from 400A.D.
One has the feeling that said man was optimistic in more than one way. "While we're at it, why only limit it to horses? Why, with this invention why don't we get her to ride on an unpredictable bull instead? Or a tiger?"
When the troops run short of food it's very easy to convert cavalry to carvery.
Advanced logistics
4.6k persians, mongols , turks and poles disliked this
Sina Zarin also everyone that knows anything about history this fool is throwing up all over himself with stupidity cav was a game changer
juan zatarain did u even watch the video
@@thegreatrainman2336 Did you just read the title and base your opinion off of that?
@@thegreatrainman2336 Horses could easily be beaten back by a wall of spears. Formations made to scare horses and kill them. When muskets came, they took an already used formation to go against horses. Cav were not easy to use. Also looking after thousands of men and a few hundred horses is a hard task alone.
Persians, Mongols/Turkic nomadic horsemen, Winged Hussars, Christian crusader knights, Russian Cossacks, thats just a small list.
"Laughs in mongolian"
Hahahah...
Hahaha
😂😂😂
Laughs in turkic
MUAHAHAHAHA.COME ONNNNN!!!! YOUR BRITISH ASS IS ABOUT TO FEEL THE WRATH OF KHAN!
Me: Laughs because Horses are scared of the most bizarre things. Also Me: Sees a Spider and thinks I am gonna die.
Well, my horse, despite not giving a shit about anything normally, almost bucked me off Because of a moth
@@retrodarktrooper6372 people do that too
@@butterskywalker8785 Buck you off because of a moth? I have to ask in what sort of human interaction has this happened?
@@secretbaguette not like that,I mean almost dropping and killing the fucking child because a moth was in a wall at least 3 meters away from me type of stuff
@@butterskywalker8785 Oh
“Cavalry is a stupid idea” *Mongol throat singing stops...*
WAS not IS buddy
Title says: "Cavalry WAS a stupid idea" not IS
To summarise: Calvary was stupid when it began. Then it became effective. Then cars and tanks came along and it went back to useless.
you started well enough but it was massed artillery, mud and machine guns that put an end to horses. tanks and tracked vehicles (be it sleds, trains or trucks) took on the roles that 4 legged animals could not. Resupply infrastructure, spear-tip, scout and carrier of big guns.
Cyber Infotech Hail the Mark 1 AFV!
Cavalry
Don't tell the police that.
Really? Google WW2 Charge at Krojanty The Polish Calvary had Lances,yes,but the sword was replaced with pistols and Rifles and they were considered light mobile units similar to Jeeps with machine gun turrets Of course US Calvary vs Indians where they are shooting at each other on horses (not aiming for Horses which were "valuable spoils") is American History
i think MOST military tech was at one time considered pretty stupid. guns? ''here... hold this. it will explode, but if it holds together it should shoot this tiny bit out the end'' planes? ''its made of canvas, wood, and paper... hop in and fly it! safe?? oh heavens no... the opposite in fact'' everything is stupid until someone figures out how to make it ''not stupid'' and it gives them a massive advantage. then it's a game changer and they are brilliant
it was pretty stupid but man do i want passenger zeppelins to come back
PopTartNeko pretty sure we could get those to work safely now. i would love to take a trip on one
We actually cannot get them work, at least not safely. There are only two gases than can reliably lift a big passenger zeppelin that could transport people/cargo across large distances: Hydrogen and Helium. Hydrogen is cheap (you can get it by electrolysing water) but ridiculously flammable, while Helium is much more stable, but since the US kept its reserves artificially cheap and wasted them for decades, so it is slowly becoming scarce enough that filling zeppelins with the stuff would be a waste.
Well, and if we get some genius coming along making vacuum airships. JS. that would be the "Cheapest" by envelope filler. but I suspect the envelope itself would be space age expensive.
But when something is stupid in hindsight then you know it really is stupid.
Lindybeige: "Cavalry is a stupid idea." King Harlaus: "You wot mate?" Swadian knights go brrrrr
Calling cavalry stupid might actually get the Swadians to stop feasting.
Horses can't handle the epic mass of us butter lords
Dude what a beta. Sarranid Mamlukes are chad
Jeremus the Monk was knocked unconscious by Swadian Knight
Swadian and sarranid was using armored war horse, i think the calvary term in lindy mind was smiliar to khergit lancer (which obviously considered the worst melee cavalry, and the cheapest). Riding fast unarmored horse that was not good for anything except flanking manuver
"Tractor goes thundering past" As a rancher. That's a phrase I never thought I'd here in my life.
🤣 lol I mean, have you tried racing a tractor before?
*This Video is Sponsored by the Great Horses Plus*
You win :)
Made my day! :D
Wow amazingly done sir
Oh my god when I thought of that a minute ago I thought I was gonna be the only one lmao. I'm glad to see that I'm not
Touche
Cavalry is a stupid name. They should have called it "horse force".
bahahaha yes
genius
Umm cavalry is derived from the word caballus one of the latin words for horse, or mounted on a horse :D chevalier and cavalry mean "horseman"
"Stallion Battalion"
Croí Saor even better
At first I thought you'd lost it- cavalry was extremely useful for commanders, both tactically and as scouts. But then I decided to hear you out, and you are spot-on. It really is kind of amazing that horses were ever domesticated in the first place. The initial domestication must have taken nerves stronger than steel cable!
We'd already had experience with domesticating dogs, goats, cattle, pigs, and even llamas, all of which can be difficult and dangerous in their own ways. Heck, two of those actually want to eat us. I imagine horses were fairly easy to domesticate after that, just build paddocks around them, or somehow drive them in. Perhaps first it was to slaughter for meat or use for milk, but having them around we would have come up with new uses over time, and by then the horses would be more used to be around humans and being handled by them in some way. Cavalry is pretty nuts, but it probably started with using them for carrying loads, then riding for travel, then it would've been a natural outgrowth to hunt from horseback, and eventually ride them into battle as commanders, and finally the cavalry charge.
Roman General crassus invaded Pathia "Using calvery is a stupid idea," Ends up drinking melted gold
@Yeast Yeast he was killed during negotiations but as the story goes his the parthians poured melted gold down the throat of his dead corpse... May well be a myth... May just be the truth... Pouring melted gold down the throat has been a recorded method of execution for some civilisations
@@danhall6922 seems wastefull
Caesar also has the same experience getting harassed by Numidian cavalry out in the open during the civil war in North Africa. The different is Caesar is not Crassus.
@@michaekrynicki8330 Just wait for the body to decompose, retrieve the gold from the skeleton a year or two later
Title says: "Cavalry WAS a stupid idea" not IS
Mongols: "Hold my fermented horse milk."
Hold my Koumiss
Ahmet Akın Aydoğdu The mongols were actually just entirely horses disguised as humans.
@@triangulum8869 Wait, you weren't supposed to know that.
@@triangulum8869 I heard that centaurs are inspired by them because they are in a perfect accordance with horses so they are like a piece of horse
didnt use mongols primarily use horses for archers?
Still not as stupid as trying to knife fight from the top of a sandworm...
good sir, revoke that statement, i believe that knife fighting on the top of a sand worm is a very clever way of carrying out your legacy, you sir are incorrect and mistaking the bad-assery of fighting on the top of a sand worm with a knife in your hand with it not being as brilliant as Leonardo Da Vinci himself!
if you have a long as lance then i guess riding sandworms would be worth it.
mmmmmmm... Shai-Hulud.
"I have once been bareback riding, and boy do you have to grip with your thighs" What a quote
You ride horses bareback? You must be a Mangolian.
@@NLTops *Numidian
@@muhamadsayyidabidin3906 *it was a joke mixing his name and a nomadic equestrian culture. Go bother someone else.
Just watched that part, that’s what he said
When I ride bareback, I hold her thighs
Can we circle back to this “trousers glued on a bull” idea? I think we have some potential here.
I can tell you why the first horses were ridden, it was quite probably not done for any advantage like using them for work or travel or combat, I bet it was just some idiots having a hold my beer moment.
Bob Johnson thought the same, quite logical tbh
Not to mention riding a horse is pretty cool. Even if just for getting around, it looks imposing. It could have also begun as a sort of status symbol. A "Look, Im a great chieftain and I can maintain these beautiful beasts", sort of thing
hahahhaha Bob I never thought of it that way but oh man I just know you are right, this exactly how these things happen! "Hold my beer, watch this bro, I can totally jump on that thing and make it carry me around."
@Bob Johnson It all probably developed into a rodeo after that.
I'd suspect that riding horses was more of a thing that kids of nomad tribes started doing. Maybe parents put them on horseback with their baggage when they moved to new pastoral grounds and kids growing up with that might grow up to ride around on horseback. As horses grew bigger and probably with some experimentation in the sort of skirmish battlefields that would occur on the steppes and with knowledge of chariot warfare but without the economy to actually produce chariots, cavalry might have slowly evolved and then reached a point that it became efficient enough to produce an "oh shit"-moment when these tribes started raiding the civilized city states in the middle east.
Horses naturally run in groups, they form stampedes. That would make it much easier to convince a horse to do a cav charge. Peer pressure.
And when you are the typical combatant of a pre-industrial army (a farmer who only tagged along for loot), nothing is really going to convince you to stand your ground when facing something like that. First you falter, then you turn, you run, your buddies do the same and the fight is technically over.
+Mister Sharpe Isn't that the point?
Yes. He was reinforcing his point, not contradicting it...
Except that the horses would be much more likely to stampede away from the enemy, because they're not stupid.
next they'll all be smoking to try and fit in...
-"Cavalry was a stupid idea" -Alexander The Great: "now listen here little shit"
Not agree at all.Rome period,in fact in iron stage,lot of tools regarding to different usage were invented.Stand on ground small,middle and huge size catapult,mechanical powerful spring single and multiple shoots of box were invented and widely make use of them in warfare and that is why Rome empire had huge wide territories in middle east area.but in fact the most trouble zone in ancient time.Well it is and seem logical cavalry are easy triggered,however all horses wearing suitable light weight steel or heavy steel protective armor,all four legs equipped with scythe long at back and short in front while charging in formation or units,together with horse 4-6-8 wheels wagon with small and middle catapult installed in the deck,would be very dangerous and deadly and powerful weapons as modern days using of tanks and howitzers as formation units at all.Agree.😁😂😀
*the mongols are typing* *the takeda clan is typing* *polish huzzars are typing*
Is the takeda clan at all related to the pharmaceutical company?
@@Khorne_of_the_Hill samurai clan.
when you miss the point of the video
Are you commenting the title only?
"Cavalry WAS a stupid idea". WAS
To clarify: this video isn't saying that cavalry was ineffective throughout history; it obviously wasn't. It's about the numerous problems that needed to be solved by ancient cultures in order for cavalry to become effective.
As usual, the commenters are judging the video based on the title.
Muh not denying its effectiveness throughout history but its a dumb idea.
alot of people need to see this, lindy has made a interesting video and instead people write a comment without watching it, sad really
World's Future Leader They have watched the video. Quit being a stuck up fanboy.
GetTrumped lol yeah, but they still don't understand
I heard "this video was sponsored by Great Horses Plus"
So this was all horse propaganda
Courses are for horses. *xfiles.mid*
Osmorosvo hahahaha
The Barbarian Empires of the Steppes, from the Great Courses Plus, actually covers the topics discussed in this video.
Stop horse abuse now! Donate $9,99 a month to stop the abuse of the horse.
As someone with a degree in horses, your horse knowledge really impressed me. Spot on.
degree in horse
As someone who rode horses for more than 10 years actively I often been thinking about this. Like, I'm not the greatest rider out there, but I'm pretty comfortable on horseback even at high speeds, but that's without all the massive weight and gear required for combat. The idea of efficiently maneuvering the horse while at the same time trying to hit people with a weapon and not dying is just baffling to me. Obviously it can be done as proven by history, but the amount of skill it takes both from the people who need to breed and condition the horses as well as the guys doing the actual riding is massive. It does explain why (if my memory serves me correctly) adjusted for inflation the price of a single medieval knight's horse and equipment adjusted for inflation is more than the price of a large modern house.
That's why being a knight was a profession. They spent a lifetime in training and practice.
I remember the jousting competition history channel ran. As it turned out the people who did the best with it were the professional horse trainers. The people with the most riding experience and the people with the best understanding of horses
@Bold well knights in the most basic of terms were simply soldiers who rode horses. Their social standing really varied depending on time period and country. You’re thinking of lords (which all knights were generally lords or land owners but not all lords were knights) but primarily they were cavalry soldiers above all other things
The cavalry only survived into modern times because it was beneath the dignity of the landed gentry to walk into battle. The history of warfare shows that cavalry charges were rarely effective against a determined body of infantrymen, and that after one good charge the surviving horses were blown and unfit for further action. Even if they charged successfully, their momentum often carried them straight off the field and they were of no further use to their generals. It was a hopelessly inefficient form of warfare. The successful horsemen were those either used for reconnaissance or the bowmen or mounted infantry used for harassing actions. To quote Punch "The use of cavalry is to give tone to what would otherwise be a mere vulgar brawl".
You can see that Lindy is now biased, because he has a sponsor. It is well known, that "The Great Courses Plus" hates horses
maybe they don't want horses to be smart too?
You'd think they'd be in favour of horses considering the expression "horses for courses"
Normally dropping a sponsor in the middle of a video would be annoying to me, but for some reason, this method of sponsoring really fits Lindy.
+
Though, many years ago, Lloyd did say that cavalry was, for a long time, a ridiculously stupid idea compared to chariots. Maybe that's why they get along so well!
Thesis of the video: Cavalry was a laughable idea and something that would have appeared impossible to the cultures that adopted the method of warfare. This is not discrediting the efficiency of cavalry. This is not denying the impact that cavalry had in warfare. This is simply a statement about the initial thoughts that people would have when presented with the idea of cavalry. What people are (incorrectly) perceiving Lloyd to be saying: Cavalry's bad
+
For me it was a simple clickbait.
+Patrick Except that this is exactly what he IS saying, in the very first sentence: "Using horses in warfare as cavalry is a stupid idea and that is what I am going to talk about in this video." What are YOU perceiving that he is saying in that sentence?
tzenophile He wasn't saying cavalry was a bad tactic, he was saying the idea of riding around on a horse trying to kill people on foot was likely perceived to be stupid before it became a prevalent military technique. Nobody would know that cavalry would win many battles and that in shock tactics they were supreme when the idea first came along, so it must have just sounded absurd.
He is not using the word "was", he is using the word "is". He is being disingenuous, or, in other words, trolling.
In my opinion the reason stirrups became more popular than the roman saddle is that you can stand up in them. This not only means that your horse can gallop longer (due to a more even weight distribution than while sitting down), but also provided an advantage in combat as this allowed you to make your strikes more powerful by allowing you to put your whole weight behind it. Also it provided a defensive advantage as standing up made your upper body harder to reach.
What about shock cavalry before the romans were a power, like Persian or Thessalian, that Alexander the Great used???
I think he’s talking about how Calvary sucks for melee combat which is true.
@@Evili555 No. He explained how it _was_ a bad idea before clever innovations were made.
@@Bollibompa which is true
@@Evili555 Doesn’t answer the question. Alexander’s heavy cavalry rode their horses bareback but we’re still used to great effect in battle. I would imagine that saddles and stirrups made it a lot easier to fight on horseback, but it was never actually impossible even before they were invented.
"I have once been bareback riding, and so I can tell you that it's-- it's... _boy_ you have to grip with your thighs." -- Lindybeige, 2016.
glad i wasn't the only one who heard this xD
Talking about sex without a condom?
Not really that much unless your trotting
After gripping with your thighs every day for 14 years I'm sure they got the hang of it.
I read this as he said this
riding bareback....I like the sound of that.
You will have no thighs (not to mention the non-mentionables) after two hours...................don't ask it was a weird vacation.
+Monark Roy The joke went straight over your head
hmmm.. OR DID IT?
Don't pull a Lady Godiva, never pull a lady Godiva.
+octemberfury touché
I once went horseback riding, and the horse freaked the Fuck out because it saw a peacock
I was under the impression that standing up in the saddle was an important part of Calvary. Driving the power of your thrust into your legs rather than your lower back sound like a more powerful move to me.
This is the most sexual non-sexual comment that I have ever seen. I need to go deal with something......
If a dog is mans best friend then horses must be his greatest ally. The amount of work the horse has done for mankind over the millennia is phenomenal.
Yeah, well, there's a reason it's called "horsepower" and not "dogpower" ...
@@morganpetros9635 you say it like its common sense but horses are very overlooked in terms of their contribution to humanities history.
What about cows?
@@Bikeadelic only because they've been replaced by steam/internal combustion for 3 generations now but even in WW2 successful cavalry charges were performed, and horses were used to carry artillery and baggage carts just like they have been for millennia.
It's still animal slavery and ultimate animal abuse.
if horses where a terrible idea i cant wait for the elephant video
Fenrir World-Eater one war animal that that everyone can agree on, that was awful in battle was the rhinoceros
@@walterbell1529 The chicken was pretty bad as well
@@tyson6127 Wait till you try a banana
@@walterbell1529 please give me something to Google to research this
kzhead.info/sun/o9lxeqZrj4pqgoE/bejne.html
Thoughts as to why stirrups would replace 4 pommelled saddles: - Like you mentioned, stirrups are an aid to mounting/dismounting, which would be especially useful as larger horses were bred and put to use -There are benefits to having different saddle designs depending on what the rider is doing or wearing i.e long distance comfort or cavalry charges or hugely armoured buttocks. Stirrups help everyone stay in the saddle but change the seat to suit their needs -Being able to stand up is an enormous advantage. You can use different weapons, ride different terrain and JUMP your brave steed over obstacles that would otherwise be impossible -Stirrups also make controlling the horse with just your knees much more effective, freeing up your hands to smite your enemies more effectively. If pressure on your saddle with your thighs is what's keeping you on the horse, you're not going to be able to train a horse to be steered by your knees and therefore you're a slave to the reigns
4:02-4:13 11 straight seconds of Lloyd yelling about crisp packets.
Cavalry was a stupid idea. *THEN THE WINGED HUSSARS ARRIVED*
My great great etc. Grandfather was at Vienna in 1683 as a Winged Hussar. I reenact him with full armor and kopia. Europe's best Cavalry!
One day I'd love to meet someone who brags "My great-etc-great ancestor was a Polish brothel prostitute. I reenact him/her in traditional costume ..."
Raider Fox Goddamit I literally came here to comment that
Cataphrakts*
True Born Son of Liberty lol alone with people claiming on youtube to be sons of polish hussars/napoleonic war heroes/viking descendants you could reenact these events. Funniest thing: theyre all from america, where its the easiest to tell your son whatever you like because yiu fled your homecountry and any evidence
*Early cavarly was a stupid idea. Fixed. Your welcome.
You fixed nothing. STFU you pedantic douche. No one likes you.
*you're
+Nathan Brinkerhoff You're doing the Lord's work. Bless you sir.
Modern cavalry is a pretty retarded concept too, anything you could do on horseback you could do better on foot, other than running fast.
oBLACKIECHANoo No middle calavary was the worst.
It’s pretty crazy that Alexander the Great conquered “the world” without stirrups
With stirrups it's easier to lift yourself and lean forward while riding on horse, it helps during charge with a spear or a lance.
Early cavalry wasn't used to charge on a line of men but rather to chase already routed enemies.
For most of history cavalry’s main purpose was to pursue and cut down retreating enemy forces. Alexander used cavalry as shock troops and in pre-modern and modern era cavalry fought each other, but their main purpose was routing the enemy.
@@FlameDarkfire also covering light infantry/support units (slingers/javelinners/archers/ambushers/horse support units), dont forget about charging from backside or flanks, some types of cavalry even charged in front of heavy infantry (late knights, catafracts), only light support cavalry were supposed to pursue enemies. And EVERY type of cavalry was weak in meele combat against ANY infantry (cavalry had advantages only in charging and moving speed).
That the hell man! Cant believe I gave you a view for this!
It was also used to scout for the enemy pre-battle, harass them while they were moving to and setting up for battle, and to turn their flanks by using the horse's superior speed during the battle. The use of cavalry for warfare IS NOT stupid. Using cavalry INCORRECTLY in warfare is stupid.
Speed, scouting, harrassment, and ability to run down or outflank an enemy force at it's weakest. You wouldn't use cavalry to smash into the front of a prepared and determined enemy force, thats the job of another infantry unit, to pin that unit into place. You would strike a unit from an unprepared flank with cavalry, or to route a wavering or inexperience foe.
I understand this guy's arguments... but the Mongol's case is just stronger.
they used bows gve them two advantages, speed and range. AND that type of army was kinda new to everyone else, and if it were seen today it wouldve kinda looked like when Adolf invaded poland with tanks and modern tactics.
@@santiagocortez9554 It really wasn`t new. It was just forgotten by a lot of people, but the Hungarians (Ironically, the last european nation the mongols reached, and almost destroyed. ) used the exact same tactics centuries before and menaced most of europe before going native and adopting christianity and the european feudal system.
Orpheus Program I think the arguement is for the origin of cavalry, not when it was already established
@@_Muzolf Mary-worshippers aren't Christian.
@@barbatvs8959 Lol "Mary Worshippers" i suppose this is aimed at Catholics? So tell me, what religion should one convert to in the year 1000? You know, before protestants even existed? Oh, btw, Hungary has plenty of Protestants itself these days. If you only consider them "true christians". Of course this kind of exclusion of essentially what is the majority of christianity (Considering if you don't consider Catholics true christians, then i guess you would exlude Eastern Ortohox ones too, since they are closer to Catholicism as to protestants.) is rather dumb.
Years back, I served with the 3rd Armored Cavalry, of course the only horses we had were for parade use, and not for battle, they had been replaced by armor, tanks, armored personal carriers and armored command tracks. When I was a young boy living on our farm, I grew up riding bareback on one of our 3 horses, we had Barney, Lady and Babe, Barney was a Shetland/quarter horse cross, Lady was a huge work horse, and Lady was a younger quarter horse that could run like the wind. Barney was a very tame horse, he would do anything for we kids but hated adults. When dad or mom would approach Barney he would nip at them or turn and ready a kick, however we kids could climb all over him, ride him and if we would fall off, he would stop dead and stand there looking at us till we got back up and remounted. Lady was skittish, she would shy away from things like you mentioned, once she was galloping along with me on her back, down the dirt road that ran past our farm. For some reason she went down into the grassy ditch that was beside the road, when she got near the fence, a large post came along, she shyed away from that and threw me right over the fence onto the soft tall grass that was nice enough to break my fall and not my bones. Babe, being a HUGE horse like to prance. Now if you have ever ridden a horse you would know that a trot is a sort of rough near run, a prance is more of a marching by a horse, a sort of trotting walk if you will, and when riding bareback it just beat the hell out of your but, but when she went into a gallop, the way we kids loved to ride, her gate was so smooth you would think you were riding the rocking horse machine outside the grocery store. Lady's gallop was even smoother, Barney could gallop but only a short distance as he was a very old horse.
"Random Brit rambles about horses for 17 minutes and 45 seconds"
Random? This is the Beigeman you're talking about here! Show some respect lad!
Random?! This is LINDYBEIGE!!!
Minutes later... *AND THE WINGED HUSSARS ARRIVED!*
*Polish Christian songs intensifies*
Genghis Khan is laughing at the distance.
COMING DOWN THE MOUNTAIN SIDE!
The high ground intensifies
I literally came here to post this comment myself lol. Ottoman Empire btfo.
But cavalry wins me battles in Total War :
noo cretan and syrian archers do ;)
medieval 2 knight's to rear, goodbye noobs.
Dragoons are best. infantry+cavalry
cavalry is stupid I don't need them in my armies (10 seconds later) "this is a black day! our General has fallen my lord!" (5 more seconds later) "our men are running from the battlefield! a shameful dispray!"
+You'reThatMantis And than the enemy cavalry kills the rest. They were so useless like firearms useless.
I've heard that stirrups allow you to lean into a thrust more, and direct a pole-arm, lance or spear around. As well, being able to "stand" on them can help with articulation, just watch anybody on a bicycle. You could also cup or armor the stirrups and maybe even kick with them. Great show!
I grew up on a farm. Dad took in some horses for a fellow who lived in town but needed a place to keep his horses so they could ride on weekends. We were allowed to "exercise" the horses as much as we wanted (My 2 sisters and I) however they never left the saddles out on the place, so we rode them bare back. They did leave the halters and bridles out on the place so we had control of the horses, but we actually got quite good at riding bare back. The times when I got to ride a saddled horse were memorable, it was sort of like the difference of riding in the back of a deuce and a half truck or the front seat of a Jeep over the same stretch of desert.
THEN THE WINGED HUSSARS ARRIVED COMING DOWN THE MOUNTAIN SIDE THEN THE WINGED HUSSARS ARRIVED COME AND TURNED THE TIDE
Probably listened to that album about thirty times now.
Let it spread
i came here for this not disapointed
This is the best response to this stupid video. Way better then something about those god damn Mongolians, lol.
+Gebirgsjäger they did sort of. The real bullshit is that they took down all videos from youtube for copyright reasons
We Swedes had the stupidest idea, though - moose cavalry! Didn't quite work out, but the trials must have been both impressive and hilarious.
Mats Nylund sweden is still famous for bogus and illusioned decisions (e.g modern politics are a good example). Very sadly, as its a beautifull country.
And painful
didn't you guys also make cannons out of ice?
Mats Nylund thanks for that mental image.
I thought that was the Soviet army?
"The horses that get to breed are the ones men want" Mlp wierdos: CORRECT
Something to think about: In The Iliad the Trojans were referred to as being noted for "horse-tamers", but they are depicted as always riding into battle in chariots. Greek Mythological characters are also depicted riding chariots, including in the personification of Apollo transiting the sky every day in the form of the Sun. Ancient Greek references to actually riding on horseback were rare. One of the very few exceptions was Belleraphon, who actually rode on the back of a "winged horse" (Pegasus), which is depicted as a really extraordinary thing to do. In fact, riding horses was regarded by the Greeks as so far from normal that they mythologized Central Asian horse-archers as "Centaurs", i.e., supernatural beings who were "half-man-and-half-horse".
Why did they ever change Salt and Vinegar from Blue to Green, and Cheese and Onion from Green to Blue? Whats next? Yellow Ready Salted? It doesn't bear thinking about.
Bloody Walkers!
i guess because in italy cinegar is commonly deoucted as yellow or green, and there are instances of cheese and onions depicted as blue, but we're talking about the uk here so i dunno.
In China, Ready Salted/original flavour Lays (walkers) are yellow.
sourcream and onion has been blue, plain salted yellow, dill green, grill/bbq brown, cheese orange and vinegar teal/turqoise in Sweden for as long as I can remember XD
I dunno, yellow for Ready Salted makes sense to me. It's the neutral crisp flavour, so it gets the neutral crisp colour.
So many people have failed to comprehend the point of this video...
it's the bren vs mg42 all over again
The point is, Cavalry was a brilliant idea and essential to any strategic victory
yeah, the point is blah blah blah I'm smart, look at me everyone I'm smart. fuck this dumb shit. rocks were stupid to use as tools. should have invented tools
Half the world is less intelligent than the other half. Considering there is 140k views at the time of writing, I let the reader do the math.
+big “Neckass” jim Well that's what he is basically saying but it's more like :"stones are stupid they should have used their hands! ' because you have more control of it'?"
There is this thing on horseback riding where you lift yourself while the horse lifts it's back. It keeps you from bouncing all around the horse making much easier to control yourself and it's also easier on the horse. It also helps a lot if you want to aim a bow or a Lance precisely. Important things in cavalry. None of this can be achieved with a Celtic chair. That's why you use a stirrup.
I've done a bit of horse-combat (just a bit, I've never owned a horse), and I think stirrups are (marginally) more helpful than saddle-pommels, because they allow you to compensate for the vertical motion of the horse, using your legs like birds use their neck. This is SUUUUPER helpful for archery, but also makes aiming a spear or sword easier (you generally wouldn't do this with a couched lance, though)
Normally a fan of your work, but this one falls REALLY flat. Yes, undomesticated, untrained horses are a bad idea in battle. Which is why the cultures that utilized them trained them, raised them from birth, practiced with them every day, and invented devices to aid in these endeavors. The armies who had cavalry historically had a GREAT advantage over those who didn't.
The title was inaccurate, probably to get more clicks, but his point wasn't that cavalry was never useful, it's that it was not useful for most of human history, until stirrups and pommels were invented.
They didn't know what the outcome would be it just kind of happened. So original cavalry was a stupid idea.
It's like saying flying was a horrible idea... The first airplanes were quite bad and people died.
You should really watch a video from start to finish before commenting..
my friend Rome hadn't cavlary until make the gauls federats so the where fine and after that they didnt liked using cavlay much and thats the longest lasting empire in our world (if we dont count China as an empire)
Drinking milk from a cow was a stupid idea... until it wasn't. Humans couldn't always digest milk.
Who do you think was the brave man that tried to go grab a 1300-2000lb beast? Also, why don't we drink milk from any other animals? (Hardly anyone drinks goats milk, and I don't know of any other animal we drink milk from.)
+Mrjohnnymoo1 Uhh, lots and lots and lots of people drink goats milk. Ever heard of this place called "Not North America"?
Jaxon Duin I personally grew up with goats, and cannot stand goats milk, or cheese. I was saying is there any animals other than cows and goats that people drink milk from. Granted in the U.S people don't drink it, I acknowledged people still drink it :)
+Mrjohnnymoo1 The biggest reason for people not drinking goats milk (excluding south america) is due to its expensive nature. Goats dont produce much milk, and it is therefore in short supply. I personally love goat milk products
Evin M I don't think I have met a person in America that enjoy's goat products. Although, I don't know where you are.
7:54 I love how the camera tries to stabilise his movements.
I researched Roman cavalry for a PhD on the topic. In my opinion the key benefit of stirrups, perhaps even in addition to a four pommel saddle, was for the comfort of the rider. Basically they stop your legs aching if you are on horseback for a prolonged period.
Yes and no, at the same time, you made a few good points, but also made some faults. Let's start step by step: -Armed riders in Europe started around 800 BC with the East Hallstatt Culture, we have iconography like the beltplate of Vace, Slowenia, which shows mounted warriors, and we have the archaeological pendants like Kleinklein, Steiermark, Austria. Iconography, specially the early ones, are hard to believe or are just not enough detailed to get a good image, but when those illustrations, correspond to actual archaeological findings, it becomes clearer. And those guys rode their horses with no real saddles, at lest non with a wooden tree, like the celtic/roman saddles, so it was more like an riding pad, in best case. And it worked, when your riding skills were good. - Horses often get seen as skittish prey creatures, but modern ethology shows significant differences. An example is the gender. In a wild herd, the "leading mare" (leading behaviors is also a very complex topic, and don't work like a pyramid hierarchy as most people think in horses, but this is not relevant for this video) is responsable fr leading the herd to water, food an safety. The "leading stallion" is responsable to keep the herd together and protect the herd from predators, so that the "leading mare" can guide the herd members to a safe place. Do you have an idea how often wild stallions fight and defeat and sometimes (but rare) even kill attacking predators? So in average stallions are braver and more agressive as females, what also explains any kind of historical iconography that the artists and craftsmen showed clearly that the war horses used where stallions. Same for the written sources, at least in best case. So oft curse the people of the past searched and used horses (primarily stallions, but there a few archaeological exceptons, but very rare) who have the necessary braveness and agression. Today those character tread, became less important and it's hard to find such a horse today, because breeding changed, today most horses are working animals or companions in sport and hobby. But even today you find such old bloodlines with very distinctive character trades of the past time, like the Camargue ponies, old Spanish bloodlines, often used for bull fights or robust ponies, who are all less skittish than more modern breeds like the British pure blood. And of course in this very small percentage you find exceptional well conditioned individuals for that kind of job, same as with humans. If you ever meet Zogo, the Murgese stallion of Joram van Essen, and know the destrier of Mike Canfor, or meeting Aragon the old Spanish blood Gelding, who is trained at the moment, by an archaeologist (don't know the name of Aragon's owner, the FB channel don't mentions that) for experiments, you will understand what i mean. Those horses are incredible different from modern breeds, Arne Koets told me (who works with the owner of Aragon for example, that Aragon needed just 5 mins to desensitize from plate armor and being able to do all speeds, without any negative reaction or fear, what is totally different to what you would expect from a horse. So we can tell, that the horses used for combat, where a specific type of character and talent, specialy for the elite, who was usual mounted in most cultures. -Stirrup experiments and researches are done atm, but no result published atm, so more will follow, for example by Lisa Kyre from Germany. -As far as we can tell, horses even in the late medieval period, where not that large as we may think of. The average stays between 150 and 155cm with some exceptions. Similar sizes we can see in roman cavalierly or other periods for example, Sutton Hoo Burial mound 17, a around 8 year old stallion between 152cm of shoulder height. A well treated horse of that size, weight between 450 and 500 kg. Riders say that a horse can, wen well riden, carry a third of his body weight without any risk. So even for late XV century knights, with a full plate suit, which weights (field suit) around 25kg, plus the rider an tack (no full horse armor) you lay around 95 to 105 kg of additional weight. That's still far away from the critical third of the horses body weight. And we know, how well trained those horses of the XV century were. Similar is it with any kind of armor, no matter what period, the armors used for battle from horseback were never that heavy, of course not. With shield and a full coat of mail, with a closed helmet as Arne, André, Joram, and Milan wears for example, it is maybe 30kg of gear depending of the shield. So weight is not a critical factor. There's so much more to say about, but that would be to much, so just here the few most important points. Some references: facebook.com/RijClinicsArneKoets/ facebook.com/destrier.lucilinburhuc/ kzhead.infovideos Some Literature: C.Hornig. Das spätsächsische Gräberfeld von Rullstorf (Leihdorf 1993). M. Carver, Sutton Hoo, a seventh-century princely burial and its context (2005). M. Carver, Sutton Hoo, Burialground of Kings? Britishmuseum (2005). W. Gerbers, Auf dem Weg nach Wallhall. Das Pferd der Altsachsen, Begleiter durch Leben und Tod (Lohne 2004). M. Rech (Hrsg), Pferdeopfer-Reiterkrieger. Fahren und Reiten durch die Jahrtausende (Bremen 2006). A. Hyland, The medieval war horse, from Byzantium to the Crusades (New York 1990). H. Müller, Albrecht Dürer. Waffen und Rüstungen (Berlin 2002). j. Clark, Medieval horse and it's equipment, c,1150- 1450, Medieval find from excavations in London (London 2011) J.C Smith, Dürer. Arts & Ideas (vienna 2012).
Well played
GG WP
I didn’t read it but since you USED PROPER SOURCES Ima assume you’re good
Ahh yea well, thanks XD It's a topic, which just starts to get researched, so clearer results will follow hopefully soon. Sure good sources are important.
Bronko Brumby, you are a good man. Thank you
Strap spandaus to them. Instant victory.
a weapon to surpass metal gear
But what if the enemy armed themselves with crisp packets??
Carrots and sugar cubes.
and stick a few fire arrows up it's bumhole ears and nose, to fuel it's berserk rage
but pommels work only if you unsrew them, so you have to bring lots of swords
From the words of corb lund ''I want to be in the calvary If they send me off to war I want a good steed under me like my forefathers before I want a good mount when the bugle sounds"
To answe your question on why stirrups replaced pommeled saddles i would imagine has something to do with the effort of production. Pommeled saddles likely required far more stretching and working of the leather than just putting two foot rests on. Also as a bonus stirrups make it easier to mount and dismount
The real question is why did we not have cow cavalry?!
Cowalvy
Paddy Hugill hell, Bulls have their own handlebars. Stick a saddle and bridle on it, maybe something to extend its horns, and you're good to go.
Experiments were done by a group called CrazyForCows which tried to use steers as cavalry (a bull would be very difficult to train because of their aggresiveness) with specialty saddles and they found they could only coax them into moving 8 miles per hour. They also take more food than a horse. A horse typically will eat 20 pounds of hay per day, a cow will eat 24 pounds. If you were fielding an army of them, the 20% increased food requirements would be very difficult to manage indeed.
Paddy Hugill Cows are a meat&milk machine, they are too expensive.
Because for some reason mojang doesnt allow us to put saddles on cows in minecracft.More like mojang was a stupid idea am i right?..........haha.......kill me
Horses allowing people to ride them into battle was pretty stupid but horse unions were notoriously ineffective as every motion proposed was shot down with a thunderous nay. I'll get my coat.
I love your content lindy but I'm former Household Cavalry blues and royals my horses were trained to a high level the kings troop royal horse artillery would fire a salute my house would twitch at the initial salvo but then realise they were in hyde park and be more interested in the grass at there feet your point on saddles is correct love the work
The answer to your stirrup-question is most likely: archery. All cultures using succesful mounted archers tend to stand in the stirrups to compensate for the movement of the horse when aiming.
Ghengis Khan disagrees a bit Lindy.
Watch the damn video before commenting.
LMcAwesome lol you caught me. I got about 5 minutes in before typing that.
most ppls attention span doesnt go beyond 5 minutes, couple that with the title your going to get comments like this and rightly so
AKN Concept Wrongly so.
LMcAwesome hardly, use click bait at own peril
I think they rode horses (properly) before they fought with them.
yeah, that's too basic for him tp admit
i dont think you understand horses.
That's what he said in the video
I heared PHD mentioning saddles were used few thousands years before cristianity. which make sense because saddles were not so hard to build if you think about it
kzhead.info/sun/lMmQo52eqH6YmJs/bejne.html
I can't help but love lindybeige because he harnesses the childlike wonder and excitement of a 9 year old coupled with the expertise and intellect of a professor.
5.7K people didn't watch the video, and went by the title. :) Also, cheese and onion go fantastically together.
But they belong in a green packet. Putting them in a blue one, rather than the traditional salt and vinegar is just rude. And unnecessary. Like randomly changing the recipe of Coca Cola.
Nice try, but battle is a stupid idea too.
Battle and War is what has driven progress, the father of the computer was a WW2 decryption expert and engineer . . . it may be stupid, but it is necessary
+The Fractured But Whole I don't think you understood what he was saying.
+The Fractured But Whole Not necessarily, it speeds up the process but a majority of discoveries have been for war, not civilian use.
The Fractured But Whole I was thinking of the personal discomfort and hazards of battle. As for progress, the enigma machine is a pre war effort, like the Spitfire, the DC3, the hollow charge, the radar, etc.
Tom Harvey you may want to look into the subject . . . War is the mother of progress both military and civilian
'Cavalry is a stupid idea' you wanna tell that to the huns or the mongols?
Watch the video before you post stupid comments.
The huns usually rode to battle and dismounted for combat.
do you understand the passage of time... when where the huns around lol, 3000 BC?
The video hints about how early cavalry was not some brilliant idea because no one had established or known about better tactics and equipment for it. Saying, "lul, the huns and mongols made it work." is complete hind sight, especially since Lindy is talking about cavalry tactics PRIOR to the huns and mongols! xD For another bit of hind sight, Napoleon commented about how stupid of an idea it was to put a steam engine into a wooden ship.
Cavalry is a stupid idea accept for wait for it......the Mongols
Why stirrups? One reason is the use of the spear. Pre-stirrup pictorial evidence shows the spear held in both hands, post-stirrup it is shown in one hand, usually with a shield in the other. And stirrups enable a spear to be couched, rather than used overarm - though it's possible the saddle shape also contributed (I'm not up with that stuff)
My understanding is that the Huns and the Xiongnu (same ethnic group, different pronunciation of name?) were the first people to make great use of the stirrup and that it enabled them to employ mounted archers to great effect. Easier to shoot a bow from the saddle when you can stand in the stirrups, presumably. To be honest, I don't really know how we know this, though. I was waiting for Lloyd to mention that Alexander made great use of "shock cavalry" and was surprised that he didn't. Again, I don't know much about the topic, but my vague recollection is that while the main force of Alexander's armies were the heavy infantry,equipped with extremely long "sirisa" or thrusting spears, the cavalry played an important role in mopping up operations, and cutting down enemy forces as they retreated in disarray... Presumably Alexander's cavalry had neither the benefit of 4-pommelled saddles or stirrups...
Probably why chariots were used waay before they did the cavalry thing.
i think at first they just used roller blades...but you can only figth on pavement lol
I suppose it's like the dude who decided to have cheese or yogurt for the first time. It seemed nuts at the time, but eventually worked out.
Or fermented fish.
Or sucked on the underside of a cow
Or eating tomato
@@davesulphate4497 I'm sorry what
@ OsisiZZ milk dude, milk.
Stirrups could possibly be to facilitate standing while on horseback, giving mounted archers a way to dampen the movement through their knees and hips while taking aim?
The references to "cavalry" in Homer may have been references to dragoons. That is, soldiers who traveled on horseback but fought on foot. Swords, shields, and camping equipment were very heavy back then. Far too heavy for a man to carry on a long march. While cavalry needed especially aggressive horses to charge into battle, any old plow horse could carry your gear.
I want a 4 pommeled horse.
That's some serious firepower once you unscrew 'em.
that's a bit of an overkill don't you think?
easily beats a spandau
A 4 pommeled horse with spandaus for legs and brens for eyes.
But where is the katana?!
"Lindy, you idiot! I don't need to watch your video to know that you're wrong. Here's a list of everyone who used calvary in history so I can prove that I am an unsung genius and history expert." He's not arguing that the cavalry is ineffective, he's saying that the idea of riding a skiddish and unpredictable animal into battle is ridiculous. It's comparable to the grade-school jokes about the man who first discovered cows milk: it is a stupid idea to grab random saggy bits under an animal and drink the discharge, but it turned out okay.
Or more that certain inventions and selective breeding were required before horses were suitable for riding to battle.
Jason Fee Oh, absolutely. That would be a more correct explanation.
Yeah, but on the plus side, all of the comments from the pre-watching the video-armchair historians are beneficial to Lindy's video being seen in the first place (not that he needs that much help). Inflammatory isn't always bad on KZhead and I'm glad to hear his well-researched thoughts on the matter!
Clinegg I wonder how long it took them to work out which discharging dangly bits from a horse were the ones that turned out okay
well except that it worked.
I am not a history expert, but being able to pick the terrain of the battle seems a pretty big advantage. And to be able to keep the speed of the horse in use where chariots could not go feels like a huge advantage. As from what I remember, some of the first large (and I am going to say mounted instead of calvary) mounted units were often from cultures where riding was a way of life, and were mostly used archers. Scythians, Parthians, etc. I want to say this is where we see the first stirrups as well, as it allows the mounted archer to basically stand and brace their shot better. Though I may be wrong.
The stirrup allows the rider to gallop with their arse elevated above the saddle and allowing the knees to work as suspension. With the Celtic saddle, the faster the horse moves the more the rider is bounced up and down.
Amazing how many idiots are here in the comment section. Lindy is not saying using cavalry has been a stupid ideia in recent history (mongols, medieval,etc). He is talking about thousands of years ago, when horses were a very different animal to what they are today. In those early days when we domesticated them it sure looked like a stupid idea to ride one straight into a bulk of enemies.
anddd then its click bait.
yea like 1300s
He makes a great point. Butall through this video, I had the image of Yosemite Sam yelling, "Woah Horse!"
+Reasonably Sane medieval is relatively recent history compared to 5000 years ago or more when horses were first domesticated
***** no it didn't - check a history book it ended about 500-600 years or so ago and we're speaking in relative terms. We are closer to the Middle Ages than we are 5-6000 years ago when the horses were first domesticated and what lindy was talking about through most of the video.
3:28 trained horses dont get spooked as easily. cavalry horses were trained to crash into thing. ex shield walls
The title is mostly for clickbait but the point he's making is about wild horses. This is why it took a couple *thousand* years after domestication for horses to be used just for pulling chariots and even longer for horse-riding warriors to become prominent.
Bruh waaaat
Also while trained warhorses might be willing to charge into a shield wall, charging one into solid infantry is a good way to find yourself on a dead horse falling towards a line of hostile soldiers. Well disciplined infantry were incredibly difficult for cavalry to attack in most periods- the main tactic of cavalry is to charge at a formation hoping they'll either break and run or at least get disorganized enough to loosen up so cavalry can run through the middle of them, and if the infantry don't loosen they turn away at the last moment. What made them so powerful is that infantry needed to not only resist the urge to break and run in the face of a giant horse barreling at you, but also resist the urge to leave formation and chase after the enemy when they appeared to be running.
Watch the whole video mate
That maneuver with the horned saddle you described seems to only work when you are in good physical condition. Riding with a stirrup is maybe just easier to learn.
Hun: let's ride horses into battle! Roman: lets make little 3 pointed metal stars and stick our empty crisp packets on one of the points and scatter them in front of us. I think Roman crisp packets have been found at Doura Europa.
Slav bear cavalry were not impressed by this video.
Neither was American T-Rex cavalry.
Or Canadian Moose cavalry. (I do hope you read this in a strong Canadian accent)
TheOneLichemperor Or moose calvary Ayy.
Or Dutch Mosasaurus... submarines?
Or Finnish polar bear cav... ursalry.
"blue crisp packet! Should be salt and vinegar but is probably cheese and onion!" 😂😂
Madness!!
I have seen people mention that "horse force" and "stallion battalion " as better names for cavalry, and I totally agree. But how about Equus Wreckus?
This is a great video although it'd have been neat to hear a bit more about what sort of weapons a charioteer used- I know lances were popular among cavalry because charging with a weapon that can't reach past your horses' neck is a good way to kill your horse, so were chariots unable to charge and could only cut down infantry by sort of curving past them? I know charioteers sometimes used bows (sometimes with a driver driving and a second person shooting), but I'm really curious how one manages to stay standing on an early chariot while keeping both hands free for a bow...