7 Pike Squares That Dominated Warfare | Evolution of Warfare

2023 ж. 27 Қаң.
235 368 Рет қаралды

Пікірлер
  • Get the exclusive NordVPN Deal here: nordvpn.com/sandrhoman It's risk free with Nord's 30-day-money-back-guarantee!

    SandRhoman HistorySandRhoman History10 ай бұрын
    • @ARNI Julian v CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD CD rs feeds of

      TheSaxyYoutuberTheSaxyYoutuber9 ай бұрын
    • NordVPN is a scam. They got hacked and didn't even know it for a year or so

      M XM X9 ай бұрын
    • ​@Christian Dauz Likely to be older then the Arkadians but detailed history is rare to come by before 25th-26th centuries. Warrior societies are likely much older. Probably near as old as the cradle societies. Warrior nomads have basically always where a thing till the last 1/2 a millennia. The Mongols formed the 2nd largest empire as nomads. Only my nation of Britain made a larger empire as maritime force of commerce, colonialism, imperialism & conquest.

      ARNI JulianARNI Julian10 ай бұрын
    • @Christian Dauz Hittites roughly1600bc 1200bc & arkadian from the 24th BCto 22nd BC of memory had a warrior class. Scythian also had a warrior class if memory serves & even women in said society where commonly warriors out of necessity due to the harshness of the flat region & being surrounded on near all sides of land by adversaries. Spartan society was very odd as for every Spartan citizen /warrior was 1/2 a dozen slaves. Even in Rome only 10% to 20 % where slaves at any time for perspective of how unusual Spartan society was.

      ARNI JulianARNI Julian10 ай бұрын
    • @ARNI Julian First warrior class to come to mind. They wouldn't exist had the technologies of the 1600s existed during the Bronze Age

      Christian DauzChristian Dauz10 ай бұрын
  • I love how you connect the dots, many people go straight from phalanx to tercio to Gustavus, sometimes mentioning the Swiss, but skipping the Scottish and Dutch influence. Great video!

    Donbasos14Donbasos1410 ай бұрын
    • I don't want to be the acshually guy here but I think an often ignored point of the death of the pike and shot formation is the improvement of firearms when it comes to weight, it was impractical to affix bayonets to the earlier shot weapons because of how heavy and unwieldy it is. Once guns were made to be lighter, smaller, and more accurate, it became possible to affix a bayonet onto a rifle and for it to remain an actually usable melee weapon.

      John Isaac FelipeJohn Isaac Felipe9 ай бұрын
    • Also polearms are underrated. Movies make it like they break with one sword hit. Or if you get inside the tip you won. Getting stabbed by a quarter staff is jarring.

      Diana PennepackerDiana Pennepacker10 ай бұрын
    • I just checked; is is from 1576. And regarding "dry pikes" (unarmored pikemen) he says that you always put men armored in corselets in front and behind them, half in front half behind. And if theres an odd number, put one more in front than behind. Hes very specific in regards to the numbers, which is derived through square root, f.ex if you have 1200 pikemen and want to arrange a field square,then select the closest number 1152 (48w 52d) and use the 48 leftover pikemen where the sergeant sees fit.

      OXCOXC10 ай бұрын
    • @franz True, in Giovanni Dall'agocchie's treatise the instruction on how to set up infantry formations IS a pike formation, and doesnt even explain why the pike is used, its just considered obvious. He goes into some detail over how to place armored vs unarmored pike men (use a couple of rows of armored pikes in the front row, etc) This treatise is from ca 1570

      OXCOXC10 ай бұрын
    • The role of Scottish is quite overstimated. In Italy at the begging ot the 14th century we can find spears of 4 or 5 meters.

      franzfranz10 ай бұрын
  • Just a slight clarification. The Scottish schiltron was more oval shaped than circular, for the simple reason it would be very hard to maintain a perfect circle. What made it so effective at Bannockburn was that Robert the Bruce had trained the soldiers extensively, so they could move in all directions and still maintain formation. This meant that a previously, predominantly defensive formation that would stand its ground, could now advance and manoeuvre. This caught the English completely by surprise and enabled the Scots to drive the enemy back across the boggy ground and the Bannockburn itself, were many were trapped or drowned.

    Mike MunozMike Munoz10 ай бұрын
    • Training is the most important part of battle

      Lethal slaughterbandLethal slaughterband3 ай бұрын
  • A video exploring where eastern formations like janissaries, cossacks, haiduks, and streltsy fit in all of this would be very interesting.

    Kamil SzadkowskiKamil Szadkowski10 ай бұрын
    • @Ek 121 yes, they would send tatars horse archers to harass the enemy and force an attack. But in the end the bulk of any ottoman army were irregulars: a mob armed with any kind of firearm, whose only job was to waste the enemy's time while the siphays and janissaries did the heavy lifting.

      PhantomPhantom7 ай бұрын
    • @Phantom if I remember correctly, they would send light cavalry ahead to skirmish with the enemy and bait them into attacking.

      Ek 121Ek 1217 ай бұрын
    • @Genghis Khan680the ottoman order of battle was really convulted, it was basically "let's hope the enemy is stupid enough to charge our center, where we placed our cannons, trenches and palisades"

      PhantomPhantom8 ай бұрын
    • Don't explore the jannissaries, they're filthy, and you'll get demonetized if you do. These a-holes are just trying to trap you, and you'll lose you channel in the process if you follow their advice.

      Velstadt Von AusterlitzVelstadt Von Austerlitz10 ай бұрын
    • This. I especially want to know how the fuck janissaries fought. Them and streltsy have been some of the biggest military enigmas to me.

      Genghis Khan680Genghis Khan68010 ай бұрын
  • i really appreciate that you mention all your sources in the description. i wish more channels had this professionalism

    apo kosapo kos10 ай бұрын
    • So you don’t believe them or something

      Natalie KennedyNatalie Kennedy9 ай бұрын
    • Amen

      Robert HarperRobert Harper9 ай бұрын
    • I concur. This is a great practice

      François ProvencherFrançois Provencher9 ай бұрын
    • @Big Thoughts these morons will only listen to the sources if it fits their agenda, Crowder does not fit their leftie, communist agenda so I doubt they will.

      General S. PattonGeneral S. Patton10 ай бұрын
    • If you like that watch Louder with Crowder. All sources are listed

      Big ThoughtsBig Thoughts10 ай бұрын
  • This video is a summary jewel in terms of the evolution of the formation of pikes, although for my part I would have liked to see some example of real application of the Spanish Tercios, such as the Battle of Fleurus in 1622 (traditional use) or in the Battle of Jemmingen 1568 (flexible use with companies at their highest tactical level). Also regarding several comments that I have read that affirm about the tactical invincibility of the new formations with respect to the previous ones, I have to say that in practice it was not 100% true and it can be seen in Battles like Cerisoles of 1544 (where Swiss pikemen fighting for France defeated the Tercios in Italy) and at Nördlingen in 1634 (where the supposedly invincible Swedish Brigades were decisively defeated by the supposedly decadent Spanish Tercios of the Thirty Years' War), which shows that these formations well applied, could beat their respective updates; I do not say the same about the Dutch Battalions, since their unwillingness to fight in the open field leaves us short of examples of their total effectiveness against the Tercios.

    Isaac Raí CastilloIsaac Raí Castillo10 ай бұрын
  • Awesome video! I like how you looked on evolution of millitary combat through the ages, how new formations destroyed the old ones!

    SergoDobroSergoDobro10 ай бұрын
    • Thanks! If you allow me a little nit-picking: I would say it's a better to put it this way: how one formation improved upon the previous formation's strength or adapted the previous formation's tactics to new demands of the battlefield :P

      SandRhoman HistorySandRhoman History10 ай бұрын
  • The Byzantine thematic armies made considerable use of formations somewhere between a class Greek phalanx and that of Macedon. It's an interesting segue between the discipline of professional armies of antiquity and the feudal armies of later centuries

    Eliezer KarmeloniEliezer Karmeloni10 ай бұрын
    • This is a pretty interesting fact--thanks for sharing it. Are there any reasonably accessible sources on the subject? I have pretty good overall background knowledge.

      Malcolm NelsonMalcolm Nelson9 ай бұрын
    • Yeah they had quite complex form o infantry formations. I've seen some stuff where they had the majority of the infantry use spear and shield and the front rows use a long two handed spear when facing cavalry. It's hard to grasp sometimes (Meanvilon)

      heavy bolterheavy bolter10 ай бұрын
    • Also I'm really enjoying the artwork!

      Eliezer KarmeloniEliezer Karmeloni10 ай бұрын
  • When he said the Swiss formation wasnt invincible I wasn't expecting the vulnerability be: 'they got shot to death'. I feel like that's a weakness of most infantry formations

    Stein SchneiderStein Schneider10 ай бұрын
    • @Sealdeam sounds about right, yes!

      HeroesflorianHeroesflorian8 ай бұрын
    • @Heroesflorian I agree that any (human) process that can be measured in decades cannot be called sudden nor unexpected, I think is more correct to say that the changes brought about by the conflicts around that time, 1400s and early 1500s (the Hussite Wars, the final stage of the Hundred Years War, the Conquest of Constantinople, etc,) were so profund and broke away with so many practices that have been established for hundreds of years that once that wave caught up to them the Swiss went from one of the foremost military powers of the age to a place of fringe importance very quickly. Although is very important to mention that this was aided greatly by the internal divisions that the Reformation created internally for them, centuries of them presenting an united front against all comers were no more, so them dropping from the map does not mean they were made complete obsolete since they started pointing their pikes at each other also.

      SealdeamSealdeam8 ай бұрын
    • @Sealdeam I wouldn't say completely unexpected as 20y is still a long time in the life of any single person then or now, but I agree the decline was quick compared to the period of high effectiveness... and even when you notice that something is going wrong recently, coming up with a new system for battle isn't a quick or easy task.

      HeroesflorianHeroesflorian8 ай бұрын
    • The Swiss formations in also tended to be pretty light on guns, leaving them unable to respond in kind to heavy gunfire. They either had to find a way to flank the enemy or to just charge right into them.

      samiamrg7samiamrg79 ай бұрын
    • Got to consider the perspective of those times, their track record up to the Italian Wars was close to impeccable and it had been that way for the better part of two centuries, then in a couple of decades, from Cerignola onwards, the myth was shattered. If those changes seem quick and abrupt even for us, that have the advantage of hindsight, for the people back then were probably completely unexpected.

      SealdeamSealdeam10 ай бұрын
  • Interestingly enough, the legion practically came back in the modern world in the form of the brigade combat team.

    Napoléon I BonaparteNapoléon I Bonaparte10 ай бұрын
    • Other than being in the same approximate ballpark of total personnel, a BCT is nothing like a roman legion.

      NonsenseFabricatorNonsenseFabricator6 ай бұрын
    • picking hairs a bit but the BCT was more inspired by the German kampfgruppe or American late ww2 "combat commands". But in general yes, the Roman way is still the basis for so much in modern armies.

      nilloc93nilloc9310 ай бұрын
    • But unexpectedly, yet.

      Walangcha Hang YelingdenWalangcha Hang Yelingden10 ай бұрын
    • Good point Napoleon I Bonaparte

      Broken BridgeBroken Bridge10 ай бұрын
    • Well, my prof once said that most Roman things are timeless. He's probably right as they really do tend to come back (sometimes in the most unexpcted of ways, though).

      SandRhoman HistorySandRhoman History10 ай бұрын
  • Very informative and interesting! I like that you are so thorough with sources and accuracy. Especially at 5:57 I like how you just admit that we don't know what happened on the flanks of the battle. I'm pretty sure I've seen one or two of those animated battle-videos where the creator has just made something up to fill in the blanks, in order to present a "cohesive narrative" or whatever. But at 9:54 I'm not sure what. you mean? I thought it was known that Brian Cox taught Mel Gibson about classical greek and roman history, so he would have known about the phalanx before the battle of Stirling?

    juiuffophiguojuiuffophiguo10 ай бұрын
  • Well, the tercio's numbers were in theory. They never reached those numbers. There's a man working in Spain's archives,. I think specifically Simancas, and he did discover new interesting details about the Tercios. Do you want me to give you his Twitter account for a collaboration?

    By PyrosBy Pyros10 ай бұрын
    • I think this was published by Geoffrey Parker. Well, the strength we give is the ideal strength not the actual strenght. As far as I remember Parker did research in the quite a few Spanish archives and he said that their strenght decreased over time. But I'm not sure whether he was the guy who published it. By the time of the Thirty Years War, the Tercios were only around 1500 men but than again the Dutch Battalion started out as 800-900 men and decreased in number as well (about 500 man by the 1630ies, if memory serves). Also, I think we don't have good sources for the 1530 and 1540s, where it is most likely that the Tercios would have been as big as ~2500 men. So, you're right in pointing out the numbers are theoretical but the comparison to the Dutch and Swedish formations still holds, I think.

      SandRhoman HistorySandRhoman History10 ай бұрын
  • Love the video! One question about the Spanish Tercios though: Wasn't "Tercio" only the administrative name for the group of (ideally) 3,000 soldiers? I often hear people talk about "the tercio formation", but also a bastion formation since it resembles that kind of fort (bastion fort) on the battlefield with its gunners on the four corners and melee square at the middle. Which one of these is it? Huge fan, by the way!

    General PuffGeneral Puff8 ай бұрын
    • Spanish here,I would say it is more associated to an administrative name, but it had a historic warfare background . Tercio literally means "a third" in Spanish, 1/3 pike, 1/3 shoot, 1/3 swords or polearms. So naturally the formation would be called Tercio. But As time passed by it evolved to only pikes and shot but the name Tercio remained.

      Javi BertoloJavi Bertolo7 ай бұрын
  • Such a great channel, man. Thank you for all the amazing content you produce.

    AsphaleiosAsphaleios10 ай бұрын
    • Hey, thanks for the comment! It's always nice if we can deliver content that people seem to enjoy.

      SandRhoman HistorySandRhoman History10 ай бұрын
  • Best history channel!! Thank you for your work, keep it up!

    sarahhhsarahhh10 ай бұрын
    • Thanks :)

      SandRhoman HistorySandRhoman History10 ай бұрын
  • Informative AND entertaining! As a student of history, I appreciate these breakdowns.

    Big SargeBig Sarge10 ай бұрын
  • Also cheers for getting in the mix in comments! Lots of channels seem to phase out such audience engagement once they've got stuff cresting a million views, which is understandable for a variety of reasons, but sucks all the same. Having a realistic chance to ask questions helps get a bit of that symposium energy in a youtube video :D

    sdhflkjshdf skdhfskljdhfsdhflkjshdf skdhfskljdhf10 ай бұрын
  • I just found your channel. It is a great delight to know that this quality of storytelling, art, edition, voice, and overall effort is out there for us (the community) to enjoy. Thank you

    Samuel CamposSamuel Campos8 ай бұрын
  • This problem Pike formations especially if they are in a tight array is that it takes up too much manpower and limits the length of the battle line. For this reason I think the Roman system was better especially for nations that cannot field massive armies

    Gerard JagrooGerard Jagroo10 ай бұрын
  • Man I always ended up making early pike and shot (crossbowmen instead of muskets usually) formations in Age of Empires when I was 10 and thought I was a military genius, now I realize I was sorta on the right track

    Max HillMax Hill10 ай бұрын
  • I really appreciate this video outlining the similarities but also the differences between the Phalanx and later Pike and Shot age formation because when initially hearing about them I was often left with the question of why didn't anyone just do this sooner?

    hedgehog3180hedgehog318010 ай бұрын
  • Great video, but do you think you could please do a follow-up centered on the tactics of Colonial America from around 1600? Over the past few months, JYF Museums has released a series of videos on the weapons and tactics of pre-Revolution America, including a variant of the pike and shot formation that relied on mail armor, shields, swords, and pistols; I'd love to see if you could expand on that.

    terrorcop101terrorcop10110 ай бұрын
  • Awesome video, love your work. Would you consider a cross-over shout out for our fans?

    History DocumentaryHistory Documentary10 ай бұрын
  • The quality of the video and the historical accuracy is astounding! Great work!

    James StramerJames Stramer10 ай бұрын
  • "Dit is klote" 19:15, very dutch response, very proud. Wiser words have never been said.

    Sander GaasbeekSander Gaasbeek10 ай бұрын
    • @SandRhoman History Our language can only be described by the word: "knullig"

      Freek MulderFreek Mulder10 ай бұрын
    • This was brilliant and gave me a good laugh

      FritpostingFritposting10 ай бұрын
    • We're always happy when the Dutch crowd returns for some of our videos :P There's no other language in which everything sounds hilarious and serious at the same time.

      SandRhoman HistorySandRhoman History10 ай бұрын
  • There were good reasons for not mentioning it in a video that had to cover such a long period of history so this isn't a criticism, but there was an important transition between the classical Greek phalanx of the 5th century and the Macedonian pike-armed phalanx. In the early 4th century, an Athenian general named Iphicrates experimented with lengthening the spears of Athenian hoplites while also lightening their equipment. Although the sources of this period are a bit patchy, it seems that there were other examples of experimentation in the first half of the 4th century which were taken up and refined by Philip II. If you're interested in the details respond to this post and I'll give you some references. Or if you look up Iphicrates and dig around in the internet for a bit, you will probably find some information.

    Malcolm NelsonMalcolm Nelson5 ай бұрын
  • I really loved this video! One suggestion for an upcoming video: a Video about the lineformation in the 18th century and the transition to the column formation of Napoleon. This would be really interesting! Thanks for your content :)

    maxpunkbubmaxpunkbub10 ай бұрын
  • Cracking video, well presented. One small correction - the majority of the English force had already cross the Bannockburn the evening before the second day of the battle - they camped in the damp, boggy carse which helped ruin their morale. They weren't crossing the Bannockburn to join the fight during the day - only when they tried to escape

    CrichtonNo5CrichtonNo57 ай бұрын
  • It would actually be pretty interesting to learn about how new units/arms were adopted and dropped by different countries/armies. Like, what was the process? Did they do some statistics coming to the conclusion that Pikemen don't do it any more? Battles are pretty complex events, so measuring the performance of different types of arms objectively is difficult. So just trial&error?

    Alias AnybodyAlias Anybody10 ай бұрын
    • Guns

      Welerson CarvalhoWelerson Carvalho9 ай бұрын
    • I doubt there was anything as rigorous as statistical analysis of battles. Just studying the accounts and results of different battles going on all over Europe. Some things were straight-up trialand error like dropping short arms for more pikes, and then drop some pikes for more shot.

      samiamrg7samiamrg79 ай бұрын
  • Amazing content. Loved the part about the Ancient greeks as I just love that Era and I'm Dutch myself.

    53 Strat53 Strat10 ай бұрын
  • Excellent episode as always! In the Swiss section, the "forlorn hope" group described as "death squad", I think you meant "suicide squad" instead of "death" squad because they're made of criminals & undesirables with very dangerous missions. A Death Squad is a Search and Destroy or Assassination group.

    jerel salazarjerel salazar9 ай бұрын
  • Something that intrigues me about the pike and shot era is that formations often contained various troop types. This meant reforming during engagements, e.g. arquebusiers moving into a pike square as cavalry neared. Hundreds of men reforming must've been messy at the best of times, imagine them pushing and shoving each other, then trying to produce a solid line of pikes while under fire or under threat of a cavalry charge.

    Hector the well-endowedHector the well-endowed3 күн бұрын
  • An idea from this video, please can you do a video on how horse and pike 'competed' for primacy of the battlefield?

    MemoFromEssexMemoFromEssex10 ай бұрын
  • Brilliant video, it’s great to see a history which shows the development of tactics.

    Ryan HarrisRyan Harris10 ай бұрын
  • This is the best medieval history channel on youtube. The pictures really help bring to life what these military armies actually were like.. Organized and sophisticated for their time. They did not just run at each other like in movies.

    KelpKelp8 ай бұрын
  • A couple notes: 1. Tercio was not really the name of the tactical battle formation, but more of an organizational thing. I guess something in the sense of a Napoleonic "corp". (You can try your luck with automatically translated subtitles here: kzhead.info/sun/gZmuoNiDnppjlXk/bejne.html ). Juan Victor Carboneras and Alberto Calvo are Spanish historians specialized in the Tercios, their book about their origin debunk many myths about them (including overly nationalistic Spanish myths). 2. I've seen specialized historians say that, contrary to popular belief, the counter march was actually developed by the Spanish many years ahead of the Dutch using it, as early as 1522 at Bicocca itself. For instance: "In 1522 at Bicocca the Spanish infantry, led by Don Fernando Dávalos, Marquis of Pescara, routed the famous Swiss foot soldiers who attempted to storm their dug in positions. On Pescara’s instructions, row after row of arquebusiers discharged their weapons, then knelt down to reload while others came from behind to fire, submitting the enemy to an almost continuous and decisive barrage (Oman, 1937, pp. 178-85). It was one of the earliest instances of a manoeuvre known as the counter march, which Parker, who considers it a crucial element of the military revolution, calls a ‘Dutch discovery’ of 1594 (Parker, 1988, p. 19)." Or this bit by Eduardo Mesa Gallego in "Military innovations of the Spanish Monarchy during the XVI century: origins and developments" (p.541): "Despite it is believed that counter march was a Dutch development, the Spanish army had already invented it many years earlier. To perform it, several columns of arquebusiers or musketeers would fire a volley, with each marksman retreating to the end of the column after firing, while the entire next row would move forward to occupy the place of the retreating row and would restart the mechanism; this way a very high rate of fire was obtained, only limited by the heating of the weapon's barrel and by the amount of ammunition carried by the soldier. While Maurice made this tactic known in a letter dated in 1594, it its known that the Spanish used it at the Battle of Bicocca in 1522, 72 years earlier! And as stated by González de León in the cited article, Martín de Eguiluz, in his "Discurso y regla militar", edited in 1586, already explained who said manoeuvre was to be performed". (The cited article is Fernando GONZÁLEZ DE LEÓN, Spanish military power and the Military Revolution, in Geoff MORTIMER (ed.), Early Modern Military History, 1450-1815 , New York, 2004, pp.25-42.) (The Oman quote above seems to be: Charles OMAN, A History of the Art of War in the XVIth Century , London 1999, pp 178-185)

    · HigoChumbo ·· HigoChumbo ·10 ай бұрын
    • Hey, yeah it's quite likely that the Spanish used it earlier on than the Dutch. That's why we phrased it as "adapted and refined" and not "invented". The real innovation, however, was to pull it off with fewer man and in a more ordered manner. In general, we don't really know how the Tercios fought. Regarding Oman I think that he doesn't base his argument on a specific source but just theorizes how the Spanish fought at Bicocca (not 100 % sure though). I

      SandRhoman HistorySandRhoman History10 ай бұрын
  • Very nice video, would have also loved to see you mentioning advancements in gunpowder technology along the way to show how guns and cannons were getting stronger with time. This video makes it seem like they all used the exact same muskets and especially cannons.

    MeChupaUnHuevonMeChupaUnHuevon10 ай бұрын
  • Really loved this particular video essay. Please do more of these types of overviews!

    zaku IIzaku II10 ай бұрын
  • I Just discovered your channel and it became quickly my most favoured Source for Military History (and Contexts), especially for the time period of 15th C. - 18th C. (there's not much out there)! Very Good Work, thank you!

    Tom DreßlerTom Dreßler9 ай бұрын
  • Really insightful video, appriciate the research and time it took to put this up, cant wait for more!!

    bart stryszowskibart stryszowski6 ай бұрын
  • This video explains warfare from these times very nicely. Great job.

    Broken BridgeBroken Bridge10 ай бұрын
  • Pikes saw use as late as the 19th Century, interestingly enough. Usually used by reserve troops and to help defend fortifications when the enemy closed in to melee range.

    huntclan hunthuntclan hunt9 ай бұрын
  • very well made video with cool information! always wanted to learn about different battle formations throughout history

    Joshua ZhaoJoshua Zhao10 ай бұрын
  • Wow, connecting thousands of years of history through a common thread is really interesting

    Avery ShawAvery Shaw10 ай бұрын
  • absolutely loving the roman swords accurate to the period, it's exausting to see only the gladium!

    Paolo TaborelliPaolo Taborelli10 ай бұрын
  • The evolution was awesome to see in this video, great job!

    Gas MaskGas Mask10 ай бұрын
  • Absolutlly awesome video ! Really great work. Keep going like this. Channels like yours and PIKE and SHOT Channel deserve more subs and views. Have a Nice day

    Stanislav KalužinskýStanislav Kalužinský10 ай бұрын
  • You should also remember, the Schiltrom still managed to repulse multiple charges by the English. Had its cavalry been there to route the archers, like at bannockburn, it's very possible the Scots could have won.

    huntclan hunthuntclan hunt7 ай бұрын
  • I love pike & shot but there isn't much of it on youtube. Thanks for filling that niche sandrhoman

    Sterets JaajSterets Jaaj10 ай бұрын
  • Something mentioned but not emphasized in this video was the value of prepared positions in Pike and Shot warfare. Having even light fortifications where you could set up artillery and gunmen was enough make an attacker pay a heavy price for attempting to attack. Fortifications made the possibility of attack by cavalry too costly to consider, forcing the the use of infantry to assault the positions. Circumventing prepared enemy positions was an important tactic to consider, as shown when the Swiss defeated the Duke of Burgundy several times. Once by marching through difficult terrain to flank the Burgundian positions and once somewhat by luck catching the Burgundia positions under-manned, allowing the Swiss to overwhelm them much more easily.

    samiamrg7samiamrg79 ай бұрын
  • Hi there, just discovered your channel. I was wondering if you could take a look at the Pictish stone carving showing the Battle of Dun Nechtain, 685CE, and talk about the possible infantry formation shown there. It seems to show a spear or pike formation, which has sword armed infantry in the front rank of the formation, with the second rank carrying their shield on their arm or shoulder.

    macgonzomacgonzo6 ай бұрын
  • Castillon was the first battle won with gunpowder in Europe, 50 years before Cerignola!

    La HireLa Hire10 ай бұрын
  • A golden military history channel, perfect

    Léiner Ferdinán Alcívar ÁlvarezLéiner Ferdinán Alcívar Álvarez10 ай бұрын
  • Cool choice of topics lately.

    Clint MoorClint Moor10 ай бұрын
    • he always covers pike content ^^

      gabriel van hautengabriel van hauten10 ай бұрын
  • If you look at the soldiers formation in the tomb of the Qin Shi Huang, 1st Emperor of China, of the Qin dynasty. You will realize the Chinese also develop a phalanx formation during the waring states period.

    Yutaka GoYutaka Go9 ай бұрын
  • games such as Age Of Empires 2 with their various historical factions and tactics are perfect for pulling off these moves across time and cultures. I've used and seen several tactics such as the Macedonian phalanx with civilizations such as the Britons or Japanese. once you know the tactic and how to use it, if you pull it off right on time and place, it's a game changer. WW1 fire-and-move tactics, with Teutonic crossbowmen and trebuchets.... or, amphibious commando strikes with Greek swordsmen.... like... what!? crazy gambles at the time, but they paid off!

    NighthawkNighthawk10 ай бұрын
  • Great video. But the fact that you talked about Landsknechte and even the Forlorn Hope without touching on their use of Zweihänder/Schlachtschwert left me really, really blueballed.

    Scipionyx samScipionyx sam10 ай бұрын
  • Nice video !! The Goths too used phalanx (especialy the Ostrogoths) ;) And they could be the link between greek phalanx and spanish phalanx !

    M17tvM17tv9 ай бұрын
  • 12:47 fun fact: the battle of Bicocca was so one sided that in Spanish "bicoca" means something that is really cheap or easy to achieve.

    SuicidePlatypusSuicidePlatypus10 ай бұрын
  • To be exact, it's the bayonet that can be placed on the cannon that signalled the end of the pike&shot era. Precursor to those where bayonet that had to be placed in the canon, meaning you could not reload or shot while you had the bayonet equipped.

    Ktonian DKtonian D7 ай бұрын
  • Tercios 🇯🇪❤️ wish the Spanish had keep up with the evolution of the squadrons.

    DavidDavid10 ай бұрын
  • Or as they all ought to be called, block and stick warfare.

    John TitorJohn Titor10 ай бұрын
    • Stick and stone war Nowadays we have sticks that throws stones really fast

      AnadaereAnadaere10 ай бұрын
    • stick bois at war is the correct way to put it

      Clint MoorClint Moor10 ай бұрын
  • you should have talked about the Byzantine Phalanx too. Because Leo the VI's "Tactics" greatly influenced the formations of the 16th century.

    Geovani14Geovani1410 ай бұрын
    • @SandRhoman History I found where I downloaded it, but youtube deletes the comment when I send it. because of that look for this site "PDF coffee Tactica of Emperor Leo VI the Wise".

      Geovani14Geovani1410 ай бұрын
    • @SandRhoman History The wiki has a summary of the manual if you're interested: www.wikiwand.com/en/Tactica_of_Emperor_Leo_VI_the_Wise

      Geovani14Geovani1410 ай бұрын
    • @Marius Hunger Pikes and lances (kontaria) in the tenth century were approximately 4 meters long with an iron point (xipharion, aichme). One type of infantry spear, the menaulion, is described in detail; it was as thick as can fit in a man's palm, taken whole from young oak, cornel saplings, "or the so-called artzekidion" saplings. It was 1.9 to 3.1 meters in length with a 23-39cm head, for use by medium infantrymen (called menaulatoi after their weapon) against enemy kataphraktoi - an excellent example of a weapon and a type of specialized soldier developed for a specific tactical role.

      Geovani14Geovani1410 ай бұрын
    • ​@SandRhoman History You can find the English version on Amazon if you want to buy it. but if you don't want to buy it, it's going to be a little more complicated, I have a copy on my pc but I don't remember where I downloaded it from.

      Geovani14Geovani1410 ай бұрын
    • Byzantine pikes. Never heard of it, sound intriguing 🤔

      Marius HungerMarius Hunger10 ай бұрын
  • Excellent and informative video, as always. Hopefully I can make pike and shot tactics work in Warhammer.

    Nicholas WalshNicholas Walsh10 ай бұрын
    • @SandRhoman History I was more speaking of the tabletop but thanks for the mod suggestion. I'll check it out.

      Nicholas WalshNicholas Walsh10 ай бұрын
    • try the dogs of war mod. might not be out for wh III though!

      SandRhoman HistorySandRhoman History10 ай бұрын
  • It’d be interesting to learn where does all this information come from. What are the primary sources. How do we know such minuscule details about the battles from the ancient and medieval periods?

    CountalmaCountalma8 ай бұрын
  • Some additional notes on the German terminology: 11:00 Gewalthaufen as "crowd of force" is the nice translation. The crude modern understanding would be more like "pile of violence". 14:30 "Sold" is the German word for a soldier's wage. The word for "Söldner" for mercenary is directly derived from that and can be understood as someone who receives a soldier's pay. A "Doppelsöldner" therefore can be understood as someone who receives double the pay of an ordinary soldier.

    T33K3SS3LCH3NT33K3SS3LCH3N10 ай бұрын
  • Well done. The composition of the vid was exactly what I hoped for when I saw the title.

    notsmnotsm10 ай бұрын
  • There is ancient Pictish art in Scotland that looks like it may depict Schiltrons. If so, then the Scots were potentially using the schiltron as far back as the 7th or 8th century AD.

    huntclan hunthuntclan hunt9 ай бұрын
  • As a Greek it makes me think how big balls the Romans must have had in order to charge the Pike Phalanx.

    Aaren GravesAaren Graves8 ай бұрын
  • Imagine being on a battle field fighting hand to hand with thousands around you smh, must have been hectic

    Lyrikal StylesLyrikal Styles9 ай бұрын
  • The Picts may have also used a schiltron of their own according to a stone carving.

    Iron SoulIron Soul8 ай бұрын
  • 5:32 Rome was using the manipular system at the battle of Pydna so they shouldn’t be referred to as legions but instead maniples. Got the formation correct though. Great video 👏

    Jack HopkinsJack Hopkins9 ай бұрын
  • You just got yourself a subscriber. This is the kind of content that I watch your channel for.

    MaximusLukazMaximusLukaz10 ай бұрын
    • @SandRhoman History Awesome stuff man

      MaximusLukazMaximusLukaz10 ай бұрын
    • Thanks. Next up is a how to on medieval sieges. Hope that fits the expectation!

      SandRhoman HistorySandRhoman History10 ай бұрын
  • This channel is outstanding. One of the best. I love it!

    mjfleming319mjfleming3198 ай бұрын
  • Well, falanx is the natural battle order, which had other names like "wall", or "beam" etc. And it started much-much earlier, than Antient Greece! Bronze-age armies fought their battles with such orders. Some armies had split between people who carried very big shields and ones who carried spears. Others had same wall-style.

    Всеволод КасаткинВсеволод Касаткин7 ай бұрын
  • One of the best channels on yt. Thanks for making these videos

    Hendrik van Nassau-OuwerkerkHendrik van Nassau-Ouwerkerk10 ай бұрын
  • During the grecoroman wars the phalanx wasn't used properly as you showed in your video during the battle of Pydna. During Phillip's and Alexander's reign the job of the phalanx was to stay in order and pin the enemy and the decisive blow was always delivered by cav units. Macedonian armies(and generals) during the wars with the Romans were way less experienced and capable and far weaker in cav numbers making infantry the main unit of the army. Hence the bad results in battle. Thank you for the video by the way.

    John LucasJohn Lucas10 ай бұрын
  • Awesome video. I think you got the locations of Smyrna and Ephesus the wrong way round on the map though 😉

    TomdipTomdip10 ай бұрын
  • Zajebisty masz ten kanał i duzo o Polsce XVII wieku jeden z lepszych na YT

    Bartłomiej ZakrzewskiBartłomiej Zakrzewski9 ай бұрын
  • I know that initial Tercios were 1/3 of pikes, muskets, and swordsmen each, but where did the swordsmen stand in the tercio formation? Was it structured similarly to how this video says the landsknechts were formed, with pikes and other melee weapons alternating in lines?

    Graeme DochyloGraeme Dochylo10 ай бұрын
    • swordsmen would stay within the pikes and break out when push of pike occurred. after a while they stopped using swordsmen. but it was mostly to keep other pikes from overwhelming their own.

      Jesse MacaspacJesse Macaspac10 ай бұрын
  • Surprised you didn't mention sumerian/akkadian spear-bearers. the art looks rather phalanx like to me.

    george thompsongeorge thompson10 ай бұрын
  • I wonder how Romans switched their tiered frontline. In a tight formation you can't go in between the soldiers behind you...

    ediedi10 ай бұрын
    • Lindybiege had a video of Roman 3 rank formation. However, I too wish it were visualized in a video.

      Anthony O'erAnthony O'er10 ай бұрын
  • Always wondered how would macedonian phalangites fair against medieval pikes

    iClapU YTiClapU YT10 ай бұрын
  • As a scot it is really pleasing to see our formation in this video

    Hank DemarestHank Demarest18 күн бұрын
  • I forget the book in which I read it though if anyone has heard a similar story please let me know. The account was from the English Civil War and from what I remember the pikemen commanders from opposite sides corresponded before the battle that they would put on a show as they were the ones doing the dying, as in the aftermath of a route it was the footman that were most vulnerable and they didn't have horses like the cavalry nobles and wanted both sides of pikemen to have the strength to retreat in good order.

    Luke McCampbellLuke McCampbell10 ай бұрын
  • The Eastern Roman Empire also used pikes, it was a mainstay of their army

    **9 ай бұрын
  • If the dutch had an advantage on open field why didn't they exploit it? My understanding is that the great Spanish Tercio was still the best infantry until 1643.

    Marco FigueroaMarco Figueroa10 ай бұрын
    • Because the Dutch didn't have the same recources as the Habsburgs. A loss in the field was thus a greater danger for the Dutch. So why risk everything when you can get there through sieges. Also, field battles were often indecisive and didn't accomplish much in the Low Countries in the 17th century. you can see this too later in the Franco-Dutch War and the Nine Years War.

      Hendrik van Nassau-OuwerkerkHendrik van Nassau-Ouwerkerk10 ай бұрын
    • @Hendrik van Nassau-Ouwerkerk thanks for the information, didn't know at all, I was really convinced he was Dutch

      Hola BuenasHola Buenas10 ай бұрын
    • @Hola Buenas He is Swiss

      Hendrik van Nassau-OuwerkerkHendrik van Nassau-Ouwerkerk10 ай бұрын
    • El tipo es holandés, y si te fijas, su canal es bastante favorable y centrado en los holandeses. Tampoco me sorprende, y tampoco lo culpo.

      Hola BuenasHola Buenas10 ай бұрын
  • Interstingly I always assumed, that the musketeers at the sides of the Tecio also were kontermarching since they are way to deep for their width to make sense otherwise.

    TheWampamTheWampam10 ай бұрын
    • They most likely did! That's way we phrased it something like "the Dutch adapted and refined the counter march" (probably not the exact words we used!). It is assumed that the two so-called "garrisons" (to the side of the Tercio) used the counter march, but they were probably much much deeper than the 10 men of the Dutch Battalion. Keep in mind that we don't really know how exactly the Tercios fought. There's is much dispute about this and no evidence exists that is not in some way problematic. We especially don't know how the four smaller shot contingents (so called sleeves) operated. It's often assumed that they were deployed indepentently (for example to flank of enemies or do other tasks on the battlefield (small war for example) or that they stood in front of the pikes and retreated into the formation when it came to a melee engagement. They probably used the counter march as well. Also, a last note of caution: these things above are usually discussed most prominently in regards to the thirty years war which is already 100 years after the Tercios founding.

      SandRhoman HistorySandRhoman History10 ай бұрын
  • 1300 years using the same weapon amazing how the world has evoluated

    M.M LM.M L9 ай бұрын
  • Amazing video! great job!! Thank you

    Olivier Le GuenOlivier Le Guen10 ай бұрын
  • Excellent as usual. Thank you.

    mancroftmancroft10 ай бұрын
  • Great work as always.

    Walangcha Hang YelingdenWalangcha Hang Yelingden10 ай бұрын
  • I love that the last knight fights with his Landsknechts ^^

    DanielDaniel10 ай бұрын
  • Oof. So basically towards the end of pike and shot, it was not done to shoot at pikemen as they were only there to protect the musketeers from cavalry. And I suppose since the musketeers were eachothers threat, they would simply shoot at eachother. Which is funny because with the introduction of the bayonet, that was most of what warfare was, people with muskets shooting at eachother. Although of course cannons had a massive influence too. Dunno how effective cavalry was in this period.

    FaramundFaramund3 күн бұрын
  • Please do a video expanding on the life of a soldier. Did they kill each other or try to scare of each other. In swedish military we went through training to learn to kill. This was develoed in the back of 2nd world war when it was discovered that soldiers avoided confrontationand killing. Was this different t back in the days they might have developed techniques to overcome peasants instinct to not to kill surrendered enemies in formation combat.

    Bijan AjamlouBijan Ajamlou4 ай бұрын
  • Gewalthaufen has got to be one of the best names for anything in military history. I mean yeah, crowd of force *could* be a loose translation but I prefer the literal "pile/heap of violence". :D

    Tobias OmmerTobias Ommer10 ай бұрын
  • Square defensive formations are some of the sexier things of history, just like a good heavy cavalry charge

    Miguel Sánchez del VillarMiguel Sánchez del Villar10 ай бұрын
  • Hmm . . . Seems like every time these formations were defeated they were sent against guns in formidable positions with ramparts, trenches, protective fortifications, ditches, interposing rivers, canals, swamps or the like.

    Manfred ConnorManfred Connor7 ай бұрын
  • Your efforts to pronounce all the various language words and names correctly is very much appreciated. I actually laughed a bit when you pronounced "tercio" with the slight lisp. Very good work!

    Hugo Desrosiers-PlaisanceHugo Desrosiers-Plaisance10 ай бұрын
    • Glad you enjoyed it!

      SandRhoman HistorySandRhoman History10 ай бұрын
  • the pike is a type of spear and the spear was the king of historical weapons.

    Raph L Vlogs Raph L Vlogs 10 ай бұрын
KZhead