This is one of the reasons I love Shad; he's probably the most gentlemanly and least toxic UA-camr on the site, and encourages such behaviour within his community. If only more UA-camrs were like that.
He also corrects himself when he's wrong, and doesn't really hold back, when he's wrong and he realizes it, he acknowledges it and admits it. Also, his shirts are basically wearable memes, but they're historical, or in this case very interesting.
I watch Simple History and I remember hearing them talking about how full plate metal limited mobility and was extremely heavy and I just thought “I hope Shad doesn’t watch this”
Most people tend to _SERIOUSLY_ undervalue the intelligence of our ancestors. If wearing full plate armor wasn't extremely effective, it would have died out quickly - literally, as the owners of said armor died as a result of wearing it~
First 6 minutes are spent trying diffuse inevitable butthurt and outrage. Sir Shad... Your attempts, though noble, are futile... this is the internet. Lol great video as always
And to thee, good sir, I do declare that you know not of the capacity of humanity, society, and change. The only constant is change. Thine internet is yet prepubescent, and we musn't allow it to stagnate as it dejuvenates, if you will. Thou would not condemn thine child to an adulthood of childishness, would you not? We all comprise the parentage of the internet, and we must join together to erect it as we would have it, and not allow it languish in lieu of such efforts. :) Translation: Saying the internet is just the way it is because that's its inevitable conclusion is ignoring the fact that the internet is an incredibly new technology, and still very much growing. Letting it grow without at least trying to trim the worst parts of it down to size is giving up when we don't have to. I understand those who choose to remain quiet for their own sanity, but I, for one, see value in speaking up, condemning idiocy, and trying to build, design, or grow systems that better deal with non-valuable or damaging content like toxicity.
W00dledude What you spoke is poetry of the modern day. And you make good points, you are the prime example of how people should behave on the internet.😁
"BUT WHAT ABOUT DRAGONS" hiding behind the "MACHICOOOOLATIONS" of "CASTLES", even the mightiest "SWORDS" couldn't beat them, the only solution would be the "POMMEL OF MASS DESTRUCTION", a "VERY INTERESTING" tought...
My god that's a VERY INTERESTING idea ! It is said that those katanas are even able to cut through time and create time warps that makes you able to see the future and predict your opponent's next attack !
Considering that bloodthirsty psychos target helpless people in horrible ways, that is some broken logic right there. Better a 100 battles where the soldiers fight their fights than one bout of bloodthirsty murder that involves murdering every civilian you can get your hands on.
@@nikobitan7294 The "better" in this case has less to do with any humanity of the situation than it does with efficiency. You raze the first couple of cities you take and stack the bodies like cordwood to display how ruthless and effective you are to build a reputation. Then for the rest of your career you don't have to exert anywhere near the resources fighting because when surrender is offered the defenders will gladly accept it. You promptly install a governor and are on your way to conquering the next patch of turf or settlement instead of getting bogged down with subjugating this one. And after a long career of relatively easy conquest you retire to New Caledonia and your unassuming squire inherits the mantle of the invincible general who breaks the will of cities with a single war cry.
@@ckl9390 Murdering and torturing innocent people because it makes your pillaging easier for you doesn't somehow make you not a bloodthirsty monster. I could murder anyone who doesn't give me all their stuff because that makes it easier for me to get what I want, but I'm not an abhorrent piece of shit.
"Such principles included a vow to[...]honor women, and never lie." Woman: "Excuse me Mr. Knight, does this dress make my butt look big?" Knight: "Oh God what the Hell do I do now!"
Another minor correction on their video, they showed an implied trebuchet completely demolishing half a wall with one shot. And while maybe with a very large trebuchet and a very bad wall this would be possible, it's definitely not the norm, and often not the goal as you'd like the castle intact for yourself.
Kingdom come Deliverance is out and I got to say everything is so realistic from armor swords and especily castles I wonder how realistic it realy is? if only there was a youtuber who reviews castles and stuf............
I've been waiting for this video ever since I saw Simple History's video. Thanks for correcting them in such a good manner Shad. That way they can learn from their mistakes and produce better content from this era, it's a win-win!
The weight distribution of an US marine carries more than the weight distribution of a knight of the 16th century. There's actually talks about injury in modern armed forces carrying too much.
ultraboy222 There was cases of men drowning during World War 2. Bulletproof vests haven't been equipped recently. Remember the modern age also covers WW2. However I heard that US military plans on decreasing the weight with robotics, or lighter materials. Look up exo suits. They've been successful.
The rifle I carried an m14 with scope and laser weighed around 15lbs ammo for myself so standard combat load of 7 20 round magazines plus 3 m9 Mags smoke, frag, star clusters plus cross loading ammo for the machine gun teams at least 200 rounds of 7.62 at least another 10-20lbs. plate carrier about 20lbs. Laser designator, radios, marking equipment for air strikes and CCA or helicopters probably 20lbs. Batteries for all of the gear for at least 72 hours sometimes a week or more at least 20lbs. 35lbs additional gear, food, water, supplies and camo for observation posts. So all together 120-130lbs on patrols, Air Assaults, OP ops ect. And I weighed at max 145lbs at 5’6” my second and third deployments. Before Assaulting an objective we would consolidate all rucks and thing would lighten considerably but on standard patrols through mountain or villages with a full ruck it’s a considerable amount of weight in an infantry platoon or a Combat Observation team.
I also love how you cite so many sources and make them accessible to us viewers. It is amazing to actually hear the title and author of a book than a quote where such information is missing. There is also the presence of that Utilitarian, which is a consequence based moral philosophy, argument that I found deeply satisfying to hear. I love your work Shad and I look forwards to all your projects. Add some machicolations to your castle first though if you haven't some how.
Very nice, Sir. You not only make very interesting videos, but are very respectful of the people you correct. And I must say I particularly liked the thing about the stirrups, when you say you once made the same mistake as the Simple History channel. That's not something one sees very often, whether on UA-cam or in the Academia in general. Keep up the excellent work. Really enjoy your channel. Thanks!
For crying out loud. Why does EVWRYONE say armor is heavy and limits mobility? Has modern pop culture really drawn up this image? (I was gonna talk about modern mitlary carrying the same weight but you covered that) armor is awesome, has little to no mobility restriction and because the weight of the armor is disputed all over the body you aren't worn down nearly as much as everyone thinks. Positive side note, love the upload shad* AGAIN SORRY WAS BINGING SKALL AND SHAD VIDS NO HATE
Because there are many kinds of plate armour ranging anywhere from half plate to jousting armour. And f.e. Jousting armour is really heavy and in facts limits mobility quite a lot. I hate, almost despise, people who take all the armour with metal plates and throw them into singular "plate armour" box and put the same stats on it.
I think you are barking up the wrong tree in blaming modern pop culture for this misconception. That is, except you count Cervantes (Don Quixote), Mark Twain (A Connecticut Yankee at Sir Arthur's court) and Sir Laurence Olivier (Henry V) as modern pop culture.
Mr.Vojtik Oh shut up man. When people say plate they mostly mean Gothic German armor or Italian white armor and other similar variants where mobility isn't that much affected. Think of those dark souls armor sets and you're pretty much set.
Well armor was amazing, it is now sort of useless unfortunately. But don't worry we'll come back to armor, different armor but it will be twice as cool (I hope)
“Do not judge, or you too will be judged. For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you." This is an amazing verse even if you don't believe because it is a very humbling statement. I have to remind myself now and again of this... it is so true.
7 років тому
Now if only we could get more than 0,001% of all christians to practise that idea....
5:26 That exact reason is why I found your channel and others. I write fantasy novels and it occured to me that I knew NOTHING about archery. So, I had a look at video games etc, but I still had a load of questions. 'How is the bow held?', 'what types of bows are there?' Some of the shapes of the bows seemed a bit weird to me based on my knowledge of physics. And it was important that I could convincingly describe a bow. None of my main characters were archers, but there was one part where a siege was going on, so I put archers up on the walls... Then hit a wall myself as I didn't know what the archers were actually doing. After further thought I realised that while my characters were dressed in clothing appropriate for their culture, armour? Armour existed in the fantasy world, but it was massively expensive. You knew a guy was important if he wore full armour. Well, further research helped me a bunch. I made a lot of changes, including changing a critical scene near the start of the book that was completly wrong for how anatomy + swordsmanship worked. Your channel alone helped a tonne:D So yeah, I got the wrong info, realised it was wrong, then found info that seemed more logical. (Learning physics helped)
Well I would say the type of bow and archer depended a lot based on time period and culture but you're writing fantasy so you can pretty much do whatever you want. Historically my favorite bow was the Persian bow, a lot of engineering went into that one.
+Jeff K Nah, I don't write like a typical fantasty writer, I like things to be based within realism. I don't know anything about the persian bow, I'll look into it:)
"We're all human, we're all infallible." -Shadiversity, 2018 EDIT: 5:45, you misspelled infallible :D (and so did I, when typing this comment. I spelled "infalliible." Oh, the irony xD)
If you're using a PC, look at the very right side of your comment. Notice those 3 dots right on top of each other? Click that. You'll be given two options: *Edit* and *Delete.* If you're using mobile, you can still find those 3 dots and edit your comment from there. :) ^ Obligatory Happy-to-Help smiley face. EDIT: Ironic that I'm having to edit this comment... Anyways, the 3 dots are right near the video suggestions.
In Agincourt a lot of factors determined the loss of the French knights The location, the condition of the terrain, the wrong strategy, the organisation of the english, the unprepared crossbowmen on the french side, the concentration of arrows in a tight space and many more. If it was an open battle the English would have been massacred. This is a great doc about the longbow ua-cam.com/video/QmaEiyZKd0U/v-deo.html
XplaneZ you're totally correct about other factors affecting the outcome of agincourt (mud, strategy ect). But the introduction of standing armies was huge, as in battles like the golden spurs the effectiveness of regular, sort of organised infantry was really shown by the Flemish side. And going back to agincourt, the impact of regular archery training as shadiversity mentioned was a huuuuuge factor :)
I've seen the thumbnails for Simple History videos before, but I've never watched any of them because I've always been scared off by their title. I don't want "simple" history. I want dense, complicated, nuanced history.
If that's the case--and I don't mean to intrude on Shad's space here--I would reccommend you check out my channel! I cover late roman/early byzantine/early medieval histroy in a ton of detail with an eye to what we don't know vs what we actually do. Eventually i'll add imperial japan to my topics...
Gareth Thompson Yep. I hate situations when someone tries to simplify a complicated topic, especially if it's a discussion and they have no arguments so they resort to making it dumber.
+Kenan Šabić To watch is to admit laziness already, so that's why it is not as dense and it is not valued as history but rather as educational entertainment so the channel can grow
Great response Shad. You may have made a video on it or touched upon the topic already, but if you haven't; could you make a video on the creation of standing armies and when exactly they came about. Sounds like it could be an interesting topic.
Thanks for the great video Shad and for pointing out that community tab which feels like something UA-cam should have implemented earlier considering the number of other bases for communities on social media. This may centralize content more towards UA-cam but is also pretty convenient so I look forwards to checking it out.
Great video but one minor correction or at least clarification. I wouldn't say that the knights became the commanders of later standing armies as much as they became member of the officer class; I'm pretty certain that members of the knighthood weren't automatically given high ranks and commands of large forces upon joining the military. In fact, I'd argue that many of them joined when young and starting at the bottom of the officer ranks and eventually winning their knighthood at a later point in their career, after distinguishing themselves in battle.
Styrrups allow for better balance when doing lateral movements, like swinging a sword, but as you say, it doesn't make a great difference when dealing with frontal forces.
I remember a comparison made by Barbara Tuchman in her excellent book A Distant Mirror, that chivalry depicted in Medieval literature was the like pornography: it did have a big kernel of truth, but was also heavily fantasized.
Very few people use medieval horse tack to do modern jousting. Be careful looking at modern equitation when drawing conclusions about medieval horsemanship :)
I completely agree with you. A channel like Simple History can get a few things wrong, but they do a lot more good than harm. When you summarize or simplify a subject, you are almost always going to present something less than perfectly accurate. But you will also make the subject matter much more accessible to people. I've heard of cases were physicists would get upset because someone didn't present something perfectly correct. And then when they explain it, you have no idea what they are talking about. So their explanation is completely useless. A less than perfect understanding of the subject is still far better than no understanding of it at all. As far as reply videos go. I probably wouldn't do them for exactly the reasons you stated. It's very difficult to do them in a positive way. I don't know if I would be up to the challenge. With that said. I think you do them extremely well. You approach it in a very positive and appropriately humble way. Not like some know it all trying make himself look better than other people. As you often state, the channels you make reply videos about are often very good channels. They simply got a few things wrong. And because it happens to be your area of expertise, you are going to point it out. In fact, your reply videos add something to the original video. I can enjoy their video and get a good broad understanding of the subject and then watch your reply video and the related videos you link to in order to better understand some of the finer points.
How very appropriate that a video about Knights started off with a meditation on how to virtuously & honorably engage in conflict! In that spirit, I present a quibble with a point you made toward the end about how it "costs a lot more money" to field an army of knights. I'd actually argue that knights cost no money at all - knights are an adaptation to the fall of the Western Empire, and the accompanying collapse (or at least dramatic shrinkage) of the cash-based economy. Instead of a central state that collects taxes, arms its soldiers, and pays them in cash, you now have landholders who derive income from their estate and fight at their own expense (or alternatively, belong to a Military Order that owns land that generates income that pays for your gear - though in that case you've sworn a Vow of Poverty and so you still ain't getting paid). Knights don't fight for you because you pay them money - knights fight for you because you provide them with a plot of land. The whole "knight means cash-free" thing is further driven home by the fact that fiefdoms aren't part of the cash economy, even to this very day - you could not, and cannot, buy or sell a feudal holding. Hence the trope of modern-day aristocrats who wind up broke because they inherited land that no longer produces income, but they are required to maintain and forbidden to sell. The whole "What makes a knight?" thing is a pretty interesting question. Personally, I think the whole "You own productive land and pay your rent & taxes in the form of killing" is essential - a mounted, armored lancer who's armed & paid by a state, you're not a knight. Say, for instance, Napoleon's Cuirassiers. Or even the similarly-equipped Cataphracts in the Eastern Roman Empire (at least before the 12th century and the rise of the Pronoiar system)
One thing I’ve been thinking about for a bit was the fairy video. You briefly mentioned sneak attacks. Goong on the topic of responces, I think you didn’t explore that enough, because it is great to think about like the Merfolk. Just think how small faries are. Just a little too big to fit through a keyhole. Imagine if a fairy became a mercenary. They would be absurdly powerful assassins or spys! A fairy flies over a castle wall, squeezes under a door or through a chimney and enters the king’s bedroom. Slip some poison down his throat or poison all the supplies and you have saved yourself a lot of money raising an army and attacking a castle. Ohoho, I get shivers when I think about how cool it would for a navel based on a fantasy campaign and Tinkerbelle is hired to vastly weaken a mighty citadel, mapping it out, poisoning balf the garrison in their sleep, stealing documents and so mich other cool stuff!
The reason people say normann knight or modern night is to distinguish from the classical knights. You cannot say that Terry Pratchett was not a knight, He was knighted by the Queen of England, however he was definitely not a classical knight. In fact he had nothing in common with them.
Man I love you. You are one of the UA-camrs that respect people and respond to fans or seam to actually care and understand. You are one of my favorite UA-camrs and I commonly refer to you when talking in my everyday life. History is my favorite topic because a great portion can be heavily debated over. Also who doesn’t like fantasy, romanticism, and debate? We share several things in common. I’ll conclude this because I have something preoccupying me.
I believe it is inevitable, despite how polite one may try to be while correcting others' mistakes, there seems to always be at least one person that will take your intentions in the wrong way and accuse of something that was never your intention. I suppose the best thing one can try to do is be a mature adult about it and try explain oneself as best as possible. Despite how frustrating it can get to be.
Stirrups are essential for horse archery, since you have to stand up off the horse in order for both accuracy and for bow string clearance while riding, hence why they were invented in the steppes where horse archery was king. I ride myself and have tried to just shoot a bow from a standing horse and found all sorts of issues with string clearance.
Excellent response Shad!! If you are looking for some extra reading material on knights or various medieval/late roman topics send me a message and I'll hook you up with book titles and paper titles (and links right to them, where available). As a note though, you're quite correct in stating that it wasn't the longbow or early firearms per say that did in the knight, rather the rise of state run militaries. Of course it's something of a simplification, but as a professional historian I want to give you a very strong bit of praise for not falling into the technological determinism trap. You're aware that there's more to it than that and it shows that you know your stuff. Well done!
I hope that someday, if I'm ever wrong about something, Shad is the one to correct me! Seriously, great video, very respectful, informative, and entertaining as well! Keep up the good work! (5:42 "We're all infallible." That should be the next t-shirt...)
This might be a bit much, but I would KILL for Shad to critique and review the weapons, vehicles, and armor from Warhammer 40k! We are the Knights Who say PURGE THE HERETICS!!
I think your brief comments on "doing/not doing" Reply videos - including your personal reactions to them - is an excellent addition to this Reply. It recalls the importance of courtesy, but also tenders the two sides of the issue. One thing concerns me: finding the right content. I do tend to watch diverse content within my areas of interest. But someone, just approaching "knights" (for example) could just watch the first offering and might not explore beyond. Then comes the sifting through what is available well enough to discern discrepancies in content. After that comes, head scratching as to "which one is right?" I hope my subscription (over a year) helps boost the more fact -based to the fore! Thank you Shad
Octopus is a perfectly fine Latin word, regardless of its Greek roots. Octopi is the Latin plural, and is no more or less "correct" than octopodes or octopuses. It really doesn't matter in the slightest which one you use, as long as you are consistent. The same goes for cataphracts/cataphractoi.
Want you to know Shad, that response video to the matpat video is what provoked me to start watching more good content and reading my own stuff and is what has gotten me into hema. hahaha
thats why i like this channel ... your just so honest Shad. That refreshing an inspiring to see! Keep up your amazing work :D PS Similar to what you pointed out in the introduction, i also dont like how smug i myself sound when talking about topic i care much - because it makes following my points difficult and underminess what validity i have. ... i also think that in part your videos helped me to see things from other perspectiv, so thanks.
Very politely and succinctly done sir. Your video has brought up a question for me. I picked up, somewhere, that the reason stirrups were so important to medieval heavy cavalry was not only that they gave you more stability and control of the horse, but also gave extra power to a lance thrust (as in jousting) by the rider being able to rise and turn his body into his thrust just before impact. Having some experience in martial arts, I know from experience that turning your hips into a strike at the last second can greatly increase both the speed of the blow and the amount of power the blow will create. Stirrups would certainly allow for this improvement in technique over a more static rider position. As these were experienced warriors, I would find it hard to believe they did not use some such technique that utilized this unique feature of the stirrup.
I'm glad you say that being wrong is better than not knowing at all, I love history but get almost scared go get more into it because I don't know how to know if something is right in a book or something.
You know how you always do great fun random topics? Have you thought about doing a few videos on a series exploring the fantasy settings in your world? Whenever you mention things from your world (like goblins not liking music) I am fascinated. Would love to see videos on it!!
Finally a practical approach to knights! I'm so tired of videos and books treating knights (and also samorais) like either saintly automatons or bloodthirsty monsters. They were an important part of medieval society, but human nonetheless.
When you got to the bit with the catapults I said to myself "Oh I know this one!" and then I realised that I knew that because you told me about it in the other video!
I always thought that chivalry was the rules given to a knight who followed a lord and the each lord would give their knights rules that were similar to other lord's rules or unique to them. Like one lord would say only eat ice cream on mondays while another would say only eat ice cream on the weekends. I believe the Metatron said that in one of his videos.
This video gave me a great idea for a series you could do. Take fictional characters and ask the question, could they be called a knight. And then direct the different aspects of said character in attempts to answer this question. Would be very fun and a great way to give people a better understanding of what could and couldn't be considered a knight.
Watching Shad's videos is like watching class presentations. He shares his research results and his thoughts, and we are all learning together. Reply videos are like class debates.
I love your approach to being a youtuber and absolutely adore your content, but something that i noticed watching this video is that when talking about knights you cover mainly the general English or French knight, which is fine and interesting, but I’d love to see maybe how it varied through Europe - e.g. how differently knights evolved in other countries, like Germany, or I personally am especially interested in this, Poland. I can’t seem to find much online content about the specifics of the birth of “Szlachta” or how the hell is it possible that nobility made up 20% of a state’s population
I disagree with your statement that it's better for a person to know the wrong thing than to know nothing. The basis for my disagreement is that it is much easier to teach a person who knows nothing than a person who thinks they know something. I forget who said it but there is a classic quote that addresses this issue, "It's much easier to lie to a person than to convince him that he's been lied to." That sums up the problem pretty well in my opinion.
The knight has become a symbol of medieval history and there is good and bad things about the knights as well as truth and misconceptions. That is why people like you Shad exist and that is to shine a light on those misconceptions and reveal truth and the truth can shock a lot of people.
If anyone ever pillaged and slaughtered it was mercenaries from the 16th and 17th centuries, during the 30 years Gustav II Adolf for instance figured that his army (Which at the time was about 70% mercenaries due to previous casualities and increased recruitment) would need to pay for itself. Now in a more civilized sense this meant exacting tolls and taxing the areas currently under their occupation, but there was no rule that they couldn't take by force what they could not procure otherwise. The problem with this is that once several armies have marched back and forth trough the area, the same towns villages etc. It was a lot harder to get anyone to pay anything because people were simply piss poor at this point, so the only course of action left was to let the mercenaries take whatever they wanted, now this usually pretty quickly meant that the more rich people would start paying a bit of extra so they could avoid this fate. Billeting was also a HUGE problem sometimes, and if you don't know what that is it is the practice of assigning soldiers to live in civilian households. In Finland (Then part of the Kingdom of Sweden) Billeting was one of the main causes for the peasant uprising which happened in the 16th century. As the soldiers would regularly demand excessive amounts of food and drink, horses and rides etc. And would regularily beat people up, sometimes to death, if they refused this. Later there were strict regulations for what the soldiers could ask for when billeted to a household, for instance, infantrymen could not ask for horses, one couldn't ask for excessive amounts of food or other supplies and such, but as we all know there was rarely anyone around to enforce these rules. Also the parlay part reminds me of mount and blade. You would walk up to the castle and request an audience with the leader, this is how the conversation went on just about every occasion: Me: Surrender! Your situation is hopeless! Castle commander: Ha! We will defend these walls until we die of old age! And then I slaughtered everyone in the keep, ah good times.
Hi Shad, I agree with the point made about standing professional armies being mainly responsible for the decline of the knight. However, it seems to me that overall the role of crossbow and especially gunpowder weapons is a little underestimated by you. I think it should be mentioned that training a crossbowman or a gunner was a far easier thing to do than training a longbowman. And for most factions in the late middle ages who unlike England hadn't that tradition of archery especially the easiness of usage paired with the effectiveness of gunpowder weapons clearly seems to have made a big difference when it comes to organizing armies.
Ha after this I kind of want to see you do an episode on how people would interact with other ities/countries and what they would say about eachother would be a good episode!
I am becoming skeptical of Simple History. I happened to watch their video on trebuchets yesterday and was appalled to find that they say that Warwolf was 300 feet tall! I left a comment on their video but no one else seems to have noticed the mistake. The height was taken from a line on the Wikipedia page on Warwolf which I have deleted. Simply put, there was no citation and there is no trebuchet in history that has ever been that tall. So essentially they are getting their info from Wikipedia and not stopping to double check things.
![Lp. Сердце Вселенной #60 РОЖДЕНИЕ ЛОЛОЛОШКИ [Финал] • Майнкрафт](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/YoR0pAV9FVQ/mqdefault.jpg)
This is one of the reasons I love Shad; he's probably the most gentlemanly and least toxic UA-camr on the site, and encourages such behaviour within his community. If only more UA-camrs were like that.
Thank you sir, that means a lot.
I dub thee: the least toxic youtuber.
He also corrects himself when he's wrong, and doesn't really hold back, when he's wrong and he realizes it, he acknowledges it and admits it. Also, his shirts are basically wearable memes, but they're historical, or in this case very interesting.
Also... machicolations.
What if someone made a castle with machicolations being one of the only things you could see of the castle?
I watch Simple History and I remember hearing them talking about how full plate metal limited mobility and was extremely heavy and I just thought “I hope Shad doesn’t watch this”
i think he did
Shad: "... I sense a disturbance in the force. Someone on the Internet said something wrong about a medieval topic..."
@@horzinesecurityagent1732 maybe... not sure though
Most people tend to _SERIOUSLY_ undervalue the intelligence of our ancestors. If wearing full plate armor wasn't extremely effective, it would have died out quickly - literally, as the owners of said armor died as a result of wearing it~
For some knights, the "code" of chivalry consisted of nothing more than saying, "Nih!" and demanding shrubberies.
PhilBagels I love how we still quote a movie on the daily that came out 43 years ago! 😁😁😁
what movie is that from?
Monty Python and the Holy Grail. The funniest film ever made
O_O I feel ashamed of myself for having forgotten that. I need to watch it again.
I wish I could share this comment on facebook
French knight would simply fart at the attackers general direction. The attackers have no chance against French taunt.
But what are they doing in England?!
Or more importantly, do they know the airspeed velocity of an unladen swallow?
hmm, African or European?
Callum Binns Its 1066 (or a bit later when the french took over the nobility)
@@FilmGuy7000 what’s your favorite color?
"We're all infallible" is some top tier irony
Agreed.
First 6 minutes are spent trying diffuse inevitable butthurt and outrage.
Sir Shad...
Your attempts, though noble, are futile... this is the internet.
Lol great video as always
It's not futile! Talking more about these problems WILL help! Toxicity is NOT inevitable, and we CAN do our part to fix it :)
W00dledude alas, thou know'st not thee ways of the Snowflakes of the Internet
And to thee, good sir, I do declare that you know not of the capacity of humanity, society, and change. The only constant is change. Thine internet is yet prepubescent, and we musn't allow it to stagnate as it dejuvenates, if you will. Thou would not condemn thine child to an adulthood of childishness, would you not? We all comprise the parentage of the internet, and we must join together to erect it as we would have it, and not allow it languish in lieu of such efforts. :)
Translation: Saying the internet is just the way it is because that's its inevitable conclusion is ignoring the fact that the internet is an incredibly new technology, and still very much growing. Letting it grow without at least trying to trim the worst parts of it down to size is giving up when we don't have to. I understand those who choose to remain quiet for their own sanity, but I, for one, see value in speaking up, condemning idiocy, and trying to build, design, or grow systems that better deal with non-valuable or damaging content like toxicity.
W00dledude What you spoke is poetry of the modern day. And you make good points, you are the prime example of how people should behave on the internet.😁
irrelavant13 thanks for the info.
"BUT WHAT ABOUT DRAGONS" hiding behind the "MACHICOOOOLATIONS" of "CASTLES", even the mightiest "SWORDS" couldn't beat them, the only solution would be the "POMMEL OF MASS DESTRUCTION", a "VERY INTERESTING" tought...
*PROPAH* CASTLES
Yeah ! But even the truest castle can't resist to the rightly ending of the pommel of mass destruction !!!! Mouahahahahahahaha !!!!!!!
Get a katana and cut right through the walls with nippon steel that's folded a million times, simple.
My god that's a VERY INTERESTING idea ! It is said that those katanas are even able to cut through time and create time warps that makes you able to see the future and predict your opponent's next attack !
when i saw that vid i already thought
"either Metatron or Shadiversity will make a response video over this..."
Why not both? Would be preferable.
The Blackbeard principle, "Acting like a bloodthirsty psycho once is worth 100 bloodless surrenders"
I don't know you have to ask Genghis khan .
It worked for the Dread Pirate Roberts, too.
Considering that bloodthirsty psychos target helpless people in horrible ways, that is some broken logic right there. Better a 100 battles where the soldiers fight their fights than one bout of bloodthirsty murder that involves murdering every civilian you can get your hands on.
@@nikobitan7294 The "better" in this case has less to do with any humanity of the situation than it does with efficiency. You raze the first couple of cities you take and stack the bodies like cordwood to display how ruthless and effective you are to build a reputation. Then for the rest of your career you don't have to exert anywhere near the resources fighting because when surrender is offered the defenders will gladly accept it. You promptly install a governor and are on your way to conquering the next patch of turf or settlement instead of getting bogged down with subjugating this one. And after a long career of relatively easy conquest you retire to New Caledonia and your unassuming squire inherits the mantle of the invincible general who breaks the will of cities with a single war cry.
@@ckl9390 Murdering and torturing innocent people because it makes your pillaging easier for you doesn't somehow make you not a bloodthirsty monster. I could murder anyone who doesn't give me all their stuff because that makes it easier for me to get what I want, but I'm not an abhorrent piece of shit.
"Such principles included a vow to[...]honor women, and never lie."
Woman: "Excuse me Mr. Knight, does this dress make my butt look big?"
Knight: "Oh God what the Hell do I do now!"
Another minor correction on their video, they showed an implied trebuchet completely demolishing half a wall with one shot. And while maybe with a very large trebuchet and a very bad wall this would be possible, it's definitely not the norm, and often not the goal as you'd like the castle intact for yourself.
And that's because CASTLES ARE AWESOME!!!!
Huntracony well, you don't want that wall if a single trebuchet shot can take it down.
Jabun The Wanderer, Good point :D
It wasn't the norm by far, but there was War Wolf.
Kingdom come Deliverance is out and I got to say everything is so realistic from armor swords and especily castles
I wonder how realistic it realy is?
if only there was a youtuber who reviews castles and stuf............
@@Nerazmus Too bad the actual game wasn’t great
The castles in KCD are realistic because they are modeled on the actual towns and castles for example Rattay is a real place in the Czech Republic.
@@lapis3345 O I thought it was pretty good
@@Koyomix86
The game play was pretty ok. Bit boring.
I've been waiting for this video ever since I saw Simple History's video. Thanks for correcting them in such a good manner Shad. That way they can learn from their mistakes and produce better content from this era, it's a win-win!
Knights are insignificant next to the power of MACHICOLATIONS!!!
Don't forget the dragons.
You, sir, truly have an honorable and intellegent view on reply videos. May the rest of the internet learn from your wisdom.
The weight distribution of an US marine carries more than the weight distribution of a knight of the 16th century. There's actually talks about injury in modern armed forces carrying too much.
ultraboy222 There was cases of men drowning during World War 2. Bulletproof vests haven't been equipped recently. Remember the modern age also covers WW2. However I heard that US military plans on decreasing the weight with robotics, or lighter materials. Look up exo suits. They've been successful.
The rifle I carried an m14 with scope and laser weighed around 15lbs ammo for myself so standard combat load of 7 20 round magazines plus 3 m9 Mags smoke, frag, star clusters plus cross loading ammo for the machine gun teams at least 200 rounds of 7.62 at least another 10-20lbs. plate carrier about 20lbs. Laser designator, radios, marking equipment for air strikes and CCA or helicopters probably 20lbs. Batteries for all of the gear for at least 72 hours sometimes a week or more at least 20lbs. 35lbs additional gear, food, water, supplies and camo for observation posts. So all together 120-130lbs on patrols, Air Assaults, OP ops ect. And I weighed at max 145lbs at 5’6” my second and third deployments. Before Assaulting an objective we would consolidate all rucks and thing would lighten considerably but on standard patrols through mountain or villages with a full ruck it’s a considerable amount of weight in an infantry platoon or a Combat Observation team.
Actual reply starts at 5:58. _Mostly_ caveats before that. Sorry Shad, i have ADD.
he speaks clearly enough that you can understand everything at 1.25 speed
it's what I do
I also love how you cite so many sources and make them accessible to us viewers. It is amazing to actually hear the title and author of a book than a quote where such information is missing. There is also the presence of that Utilitarian, which is a consequence based moral philosophy, argument that I found deeply satisfying to hear. I love your work Shad and I look forwards to all your projects. Add some machicolations to your castle first though if you haven't some how.
Very nice, Sir. You not only make very interesting videos, but are very respectful of the people you correct. And I must say I particularly liked the thing about the stirrups, when you say you once made the same mistake as the Simple History channel. That's not something one sees very often, whether on UA-cam or in the Academia in general. Keep up the excellent work. Really enjoy your channel. Thanks!
For crying out loud. Why does EVWRYONE say armor is heavy and limits mobility? Has modern pop culture really drawn up this image? (I was gonna talk about modern mitlary carrying the same weight but you covered that) armor is awesome, has little to no mobility restriction and because the weight of the armor is disputed all over the body you aren't worn down nearly as much as everyone thinks. Positive side note, love the upload shad*
AGAIN SORRY WAS BINGING SKALL AND SHAD VIDS NO HATE
Because there are many kinds of plate armour ranging anywhere from half plate to jousting armour.
And f.e. Jousting armour is really heavy and in facts limits mobility quite a lot.
I hate, almost despise, people who take all the armour with metal plates and throw them into singular "plate armour" box and put the same stats on it.
I think you are barking up the wrong tree in blaming modern pop culture for this misconception. That is, except you count Cervantes (Don Quixote), Mark Twain (A Connecticut Yankee at Sir Arthur's court) and Sir Laurence Olivier (Henry V) as modern pop culture.
Mr.Vojtik Oh shut up man. When people say plate they mostly mean Gothic German armor or Italian white armor and other similar variants where mobility isn't that much affected. Think of those dark souls armor sets and you're pretty much set.
probably because of video games and their pauldrons that weigh more than you do. that likely has had some effect on things.
Well armor was amazing, it is now sort of useless unfortunately. But don't worry we'll come back to armor, different armor but it will be twice as cool (I hope)
“Do not judge, or you too will be judged. For in the same way you judge others, you will be judged, and with the measure you use, it will be measured to you."
This is an amazing verse even if you don't believe because it is a very humbling statement. I have to remind myself now and again of this... it is so true.
Now if only we could get more than 0,001% of all christians to practise that idea....
It's extremely hard not to judge, though. Heck, some people get off on it.
@Blah b: Not judging themselves (while judging Christians) is about the only principle atheists follow 100% of the time.
+Nethan2000
You sure use the 'you too' fallacy religiously....
I can't help it. It's the only possible reply to the "double standards" fallacy.
The biggest problem with the Simple History video is that they fail to address DRAGONS!!!
5:26 That exact reason is why I found your channel and others. I write fantasy novels and it occured to me that I knew NOTHING about archery. So, I had a look at video games etc, but I still had a load of questions. 'How is the bow held?', 'what types of bows are there?' Some of the shapes of the bows seemed a bit weird to me based on my knowledge of physics. And it was important that I could convincingly describe a bow. None of my main characters were archers, but there was one part where a siege was going on, so I put archers up on the walls... Then hit a wall myself as I didn't know what the archers were actually doing. After further thought I realised that while my characters were dressed in clothing appropriate for their culture, armour? Armour existed in the fantasy world, but it was massively expensive. You knew a guy was important if he wore full armour. Well, further research helped me a bunch. I made a lot of changes, including changing a critical scene near the start of the book that was completly wrong for how anatomy + swordsmanship worked. Your channel alone helped a tonne:D
So yeah, I got the wrong info, realised it was wrong, then found info that seemed more logical. (Learning physics helped)
What will the book be called if you have a name yet?
Well I would say the type of bow and archer depended a lot based on time period and culture but you're writing fantasy so you can pretty much do whatever you want. Historically my favorite bow was the Persian bow, a lot of engineering went into that one.
+Jeff K Nah, I don't write like a typical fantasty writer, I like things to be based within realism.
I don't know anything about the persian bow, I'll look into it:)
+Kage Katze Its part of a series I'm working on :). The Tale of Beyond: Past the Five Gates
"We're all human, we're all infallible."
-Shadiversity, 2018
EDIT: 5:45, you misspelled infallible :D (and so did I, when typing this comment. I spelled "infalliible." Oh, the irony xD)
If you're using a PC, look at the very right side of your comment. Notice those 3 dots right on top of each other? Click that. You'll be given two options: *Edit* and *Delete.*
If you're using mobile, you can still find those 3 dots and edit your comment from there.
:)
^ Obligatory Happy-to-Help smiley face.
EDIT: Ironic that I'm having to edit this comment... Anyways, the 3 dots are right near the video suggestions.
But wouldn't be it Fallible and not infallible?
That's the joke.
So who do we see about getting Shad his own Knighthood?
I second this Idea but they must also give him a ceremonial sabre to boot
Stan Bartsch the queen of England.
he will be called the Shadaphract
In Agincourt a lot of factors determined the loss of the French knights The location, the condition of the terrain, the wrong strategy, the organisation of the english, the unprepared crossbowmen on the french side, the concentration of arrows in a tight space and many more. If it was an open battle the English would have been massacred. This is a great doc about the longbow
ua-cam.com/video/QmaEiyZKd0U/v-deo.html
XplaneZ you're totally correct about other factors affecting the outcome of agincourt (mud, strategy ect). But the introduction of standing armies was huge, as in battles like the golden spurs the effectiveness of regular, sort of organised infantry was really shown by the Flemish side. And going back to agincourt, the impact of regular archery training as shadiversity mentioned was a huuuuuge factor :)
How did shad from shadiversity become so nice and gentlemanly? Simple. Machiculations.
Sir white a lot the pagan preacher
It's because he's Mormon.
A.A.-ron I mean I guess that too but ima stick with my answer
But what about dragons?
No You are WRONG. It's...... MACHICOOOOLATIOOOOOONS
I've seen the thumbnails for Simple History videos before, but I've never watched any of them because I've always been scared off by their title. I don't want "simple" history. I want dense, complicated, nuanced history.
If that's the case--and I don't mean to intrude on Shad's space here--I would reccommend you check out my channel! I cover late roman/early byzantine/early medieval histroy in a ton of detail with an eye to what we don't know vs what we actually do. Eventually i'll add imperial japan to my topics...
Gareth Thompson Yep. I hate situations when someone tries to simplify a complicated topic, especially if it's a discussion and they have no arguments so they resort to making it dumber.
Then what are you doing on youtube!? Go read!
+Kenan Šabić To watch is to admit laziness already, so that's why it is not as dense and it is not valued as history but rather as educational entertainment so the channel can grow
JonatasAdoM Yep I know. Just don't like when someone tries to simplify something and it loses it's essence in the process.
Great response Shad. You may have made a video on it or touched upon the topic already, but if you haven't; could you make a video on the creation of standing armies and when exactly they came about. Sounds like it could be an interesting topic.
Thanks for the great video Shad and for pointing out that community tab which feels like something UA-cam should have implemented earlier considering the number of other bases for communities on social media. This may centralize content more towards UA-cam but is also pretty convenient so I look forwards to checking it out.
Another great video. I’m 14 in year 10 for my GCSE’s a chose history right away, I love it and I’m grateful you make such great videos.
When I was choosing my gcses we had to choose between history and geography. I will never understand why anyone would choose geography.
Great video but one minor correction or at least clarification. I wouldn't say that the knights became the commanders of later standing armies as much as they became member of the officer class; I'm pretty certain that members of the knighthood weren't automatically given high ranks and commands of large forces upon joining the military. In fact, I'd argue that many of them joined when young and starting at the bottom of the officer ranks and eventually winning their knighthood at a later point in their career, after distinguishing themselves in battle.
Awesome, one of my favorite UA-camrs released a great video on my birthday. Thank you Shad!
And this a gentleman worth Knighthood. Though he is disagreeing with Simple History he is being respectful trying to be helpful.
You've disagreed with Simple History.
Nobody liked that.
You were respectful and did not discredit the channel.
Everybody liked that.
Styrrups allow for better balance when doing lateral movements, like swinging a sword, but as you say, it doesn't make a great difference when dealing with frontal forces.
Carlos I how about horse archers, does the stirrups help in that area?
I remember a comparison made by Barbara Tuchman in her excellent book A Distant Mirror, that chivalry depicted in Medieval literature was the like pornography: it did have a big kernel of truth, but was also heavily fantasized.
Very few people use medieval horse tack to do modern jousting. Be careful looking at modern equitation when drawing conclusions about medieval horsemanship :)
I completely agree with you. A channel like Simple History can get a few things wrong, but they do a lot more good than harm. When you summarize or simplify a subject, you are almost always going to present something less than perfectly accurate. But you will also make the subject matter much more accessible to people. I've heard of cases were physicists would get upset because someone didn't present something perfectly correct. And then when they explain it, you have no idea what they are talking about. So their explanation is completely useless. A less than perfect understanding of the subject is still far better than no understanding of it at all.
As far as reply videos go. I probably wouldn't do them for exactly the reasons you stated. It's very difficult to do them in a positive way. I don't know if I would be up to the challenge. With that said. I think you do them extremely well. You approach it in a very positive and appropriately humble way. Not like some know it all trying make himself look better than other people. As you often state, the channels you make reply videos about are often very good channels. They simply got a few things wrong. And because it happens to be your area of expertise, you are going to point it out.
In fact, your reply videos add something to the original video. I can enjoy their video and get a good broad understanding of the subject and then watch your reply video and the related videos you link to in order to better understand some of the finer points.
Thanks heaps for saying so mate.
They simplfy it to make easier to understand
They make history easier to understand
Unlike books and documentaries, thats hard to learn
This is all very good, Shad, but what about the Dragons?
How very appropriate that a video about Knights started off with a meditation on how to virtuously & honorably engage in conflict!
In that spirit, I present a quibble with a point you made toward the end about how it "costs a lot more money" to field an army of knights. I'd actually argue that knights cost no money at all - knights are an adaptation to the fall of the Western Empire, and the accompanying collapse (or at least dramatic shrinkage) of the cash-based economy. Instead of a central state that collects taxes, arms its soldiers, and pays them in cash, you now have landholders who derive income from their estate and fight at their own expense (or alternatively, belong to a Military Order that owns land that generates income that pays for your gear - though in that case you've sworn a Vow of Poverty and so you still ain't getting paid). Knights don't fight for you because you pay them money - knights fight for you because you provide them with a plot of land.
The whole "knight means cash-free" thing is further driven home by the fact that fiefdoms aren't part of the cash economy, even to this very day - you could not, and cannot, buy or sell a feudal holding. Hence the trope of modern-day aristocrats who wind up broke because they inherited land that no longer produces income, but they are required to maintain and forbidden to sell.
The whole "What makes a knight?" thing is a pretty interesting question. Personally, I think the whole "You own productive land and pay your rent & taxes in the form of killing" is essential - a mounted, armored lancer who's armed & paid by a state, you're not a knight. Say, for instance, Napoleon's Cuirassiers. Or even the similarly-equipped Cataphracts in the Eastern Roman Empire (at least before the 12th century and the rise of the Pronoiar system)
One thing I’ve been thinking about for a bit was the fairy video. You briefly mentioned sneak attacks. Goong on the topic of responces, I think you didn’t explore that enough, because it is great to think about like the Merfolk. Just think how small faries are. Just a little too big to fit through a keyhole. Imagine if a fairy became a mercenary. They would be absurdly powerful assassins or spys! A fairy flies over a castle wall, squeezes under a door or through a chimney and enters the king’s bedroom. Slip some poison down his throat or poison all the supplies and you have saved yourself a lot of money raising an army and attacking a castle. Ohoho, I get shivers when I think about how cool it would for a navel based on a fantasy campaign and Tinkerbelle is hired to vastly weaken a mighty citadel, mapping it out, poisoning balf the garrison in their sleep, stealing documents and so mich other cool stuff!
TL:DR Tinkerbelle is deadlier than 100 men and we need a book about fairy assassins!
The nicest correction video I've ever watched. Good work.
The reason people say normann knight or modern night is to distinguish from the classical knights.
You cannot say that Terry Pratchett was not a knight, He was knighted by the Queen of England, however he was definitely not a classical knight. In fact he had nothing in common with them.
Oh, Twoflowerrrr
Man I love you. You are one of the UA-camrs that respect people and respond to fans or seam to actually care and understand. You are one of my favorite UA-camrs and I commonly refer to you when talking in my everyday life. History is my favorite topic because a great portion can be heavily debated over. Also who doesn’t like fantasy, romanticism, and debate? We share several things in common. I’ll conclude this because I have something preoccupying me.
It's kinda funny how Simple History first says the knights followed the chivalry code, and then says they loved killing and pillaging.
I believe it is inevitable, despite how polite one may try to be while correcting others' mistakes, there seems to always be at least one person that will take your intentions in the wrong way and accuse of something that was never your intention.
I suppose the best thing one can try to do is be a mature adult about it and try explain oneself as best as possible. Despite how frustrating it can get to be.
Stirrups are essential for horse archery, since you have to stand up off the horse in order for both accuracy and for bow string clearance while riding, hence why they were invented in the steppes where horse archery was king. I ride myself and have tried to just shoot a bow from a standing horse and found all sorts of issues with string clearance.
i believe he was referring to lance warfare over mounted archery
Excellent response Shad!! If you are looking for some extra reading material on knights or various medieval/late roman topics send me a message and I'll hook you up with book titles and paper titles (and links right to them, where available). As a note though, you're quite correct in stating that it wasn't the longbow or early firearms per say that did in the knight, rather the rise of state run militaries. Of course it's something of a simplification, but as a professional historian I want to give you a very strong bit of praise for not falling into the technological determinism trap. You're aware that there's more to it than that and it shows that you know your stuff. Well done!
Thanks heaps mate, really appreciate it.
I hope that someday, if I'm ever wrong about something, Shad is the one to correct me! Seriously, great video, very respectful, informative, and entertaining as well! Keep up the good work! (5:42 "We're all infallible." That should be the next t-shirt...)
This might be a bit much, but I would KILL for Shad to critique and review the weapons, vehicles, and armor from Warhammer 40k!
We are the Knights Who say PURGE THE HERETICS!!
Ryan Garza This might scratch your itch: ua-cam.com/video/4z17InwlREI/v-deo.html
I think your brief comments on "doing/not doing" Reply videos - including your personal reactions to them - is an excellent addition to this Reply. It recalls the importance of courtesy, but also tenders the two sides of the issue.
One thing concerns me: finding the right content. I do tend to watch diverse content within my areas of interest. But someone, just approaching "knights" (for example) could just watch the first offering and might not explore beyond. Then comes the sifting through what is available well enough to discern discrepancies in content. After that comes, head scratching as to "which one is right?" I hope my subscription (over a year) helps boost the more fact -based to the fore! Thank you Shad
The correct plural of cataphract is cataphractoi
I'm sure that helps you a lot with pronounciation lol
Wouldn't that be the Greek plural (with English spelling)? Every English dictionary I've seen lists the plural as "Cataphracts".
Octopus is a perfectly fine Latin word, regardless of its Greek roots. Octopi is the Latin plural, and is no more or less "correct" than octopodes or octopuses. It really doesn't matter in the slightest which one you use, as long as you are consistent. The same goes for cataphracts/cataphractoi.
Although I'm inclined to agree with you, basing your entire impression of someone on whether or not they say "octopodes" might be a wee bit thin.
What can I say, I'm an incredibly judgemental person :)
No dragons were hurt in this video
Thanks so much Shad, keep up the good work, :)
Want you to know Shad, that response video to the matpat video is what provoked me to start watching more good content and reading my own stuff and is what has gotten me into hema. hahaha
thats why i like this channel ... your just so honest Shad. That refreshing an inspiring to see!
Keep up your amazing work :D
PS
Similar to what you pointed out in the introduction, i also dont like how smug i myself sound when talking about topic i care much - because it makes following my points difficult and underminess what validity i have. ... i also think that in part your videos helped me to see things from other perspectiv, so thanks.
Sees original video to right under 5 minutes, looks back to Shad's video. "Dayum!"
Very politely and succinctly done sir. Your video has brought up a question for me. I picked up, somewhere, that the reason stirrups were so important to medieval heavy cavalry was not only that they gave you more stability and control of the horse, but also gave extra power to a lance thrust (as in jousting) by the rider being able to rise and turn his body into his thrust just before impact. Having some experience in martial arts, I know from experience that turning your hips into a strike at the last second can greatly increase both the speed of the blow and the amount of power the blow will create. Stirrups would certainly allow for this improvement in technique over a more static rider position. As these were experienced warriors, I would find it hard to believe they did not use some such technique that utilized this unique feature of the stirrup.
Amazing response Shad :) Love your videos, keep up the amazing job brother.
Thank you for your meek and mild manner. I've learned so much from your videos and your attitude is truly refreshing.
the minute i saw this simple history video i new i would be seeing this one later nicely and respectfully done shad good job
I'm glad you say that being wrong is better than not knowing at all, I love history but get almost scared go get more into it because I don't know how to know if something is right in a book or something.
You know how you always do great fun random topics? Have you thought about doing a few videos on a series exploring the fantasy settings in your world? Whenever you mention things from your world (like goblins not liking music) I am fascinated. Would love to see videos on it!!
Finally a practical approach to knights! I'm so tired of videos and books treating knights (and also samorais) like either saintly automatons or bloodthirsty monsters. They were an important part of medieval society, but human nonetheless.
Saying they were exterminating entire populations in order to terrify them into submission does not paint them as anything but bloodthirsty.
>1 or 2 things wrong
>20min video
Very interesting
5:42 How deliciously ironic, yet appropriate :)
(as you also note)
Thank you for covering this! Simple History is a great channel, but these issues bugged me. A lot, actually.
Yah know what I find very interesting? DRAGONS
Wow, you can buy a t-shirt of t-spring that says just that!
I know a whole year has passed but thank you both for doing gods work
I stopped watching the original video as soon as the plate armor weight comment was made. Once again, brilliant work Shad!
When you got to the bit with the catapults I said to myself "Oh I know this one!" and then I realised that I knew that because you told me about it in the other video!
Such an awesome video shad. Your great with these correction videos, keep up the good work!
Hello, could you make a video review of Theodosian's Wall of Constantinople in a defensiveness point of view in Medieval times?
I knew this video would happen .I foresaw it
I FORESAAW THISS!!!
-The scout:Tf2
That was exactly what I was thinking about
I'm surprised by how nice you are about this sort of thing, and how you share responses to you. I respect that.
I was waiting for this video!
I noticed there was a few things wrong when the video first came out.
I always thought that chivalry was the rules given to a knight who followed a lord and the each lord would give their knights rules that were similar to other lord's rules or unique to them. Like one lord would say only eat ice cream on mondays while another would say only eat ice cream on the weekends. I believe the Metatron said that in one of his videos.
This video gave me a great idea for a series you could do. Take fictional characters and ask the question, could they be called a knight. And then direct the different aspects of said character in attempts to answer this question. Would be very fun and a great way to give people a better understanding of what could and couldn't be considered a knight.
Watching Shad's videos is like watching class presentations. He shares his research results and his thoughts, and we are all learning together. Reply videos are like class debates.
i just watched it and was like, huh mabye shad will make a respo... ahh there it is
I love your approach to being a youtuber and absolutely adore your content, but something that i noticed watching this video is that when talking about knights you cover mainly the general English or French knight, which is fine and interesting, but I’d love to see maybe how it varied through Europe - e.g. how differently knights evolved in other countries, like Germany, or I personally am especially interested in this, Poland. I can’t seem to find much online content about the specifics of the birth of “Szlachta” or how the hell is it possible that nobility made up 20% of a state’s population
I was going to ask you to do a video on it my shad sense was tingling the whole video
Roman_Valdax you might wanna get that checked out
I disagree with your statement that it's better for a person to know the wrong thing than to know nothing. The basis for my disagreement is that it is much easier to teach a person who knows nothing than a person who thinks they know something. I forget who said it but there is a classic quote that addresses this issue, "It's much easier to lie to a person than to convince him that he's been lied to." That sums up the problem pretty well in my opinion.
this video is worth it already for Shad's words on "Replies"
Thanks for your humility Shad, But tbf MattPat had that backlash coming for a while.
He did. Honestly Shad did a great thing by calling him out on his BS
What did I miss?
J Girl apparently a lot.....lol
Geez Shad, just give the nerds their blood!
Kidding great response.
YES! BLOOD! BLOOD FOR THE BLOOD GOD! FLAMES FOR THE FLAME WARS!
I really love your channel, it's interesting, and I enjoy your content. I appreciate your videos because it makes school so much more bearable.
Very Interesting shirts? BUT WHAT ABOUT DRAGONS!!!!???
Great video Shad
That shirt sure is interesting.
The knight has become a symbol of medieval history and there is good and bad things about the knights as well as truth and misconceptions. That is why people like you Shad exist and that is to shine a light on those misconceptions and reveal truth and the truth can shock a lot of people.
If anyone ever pillaged and slaughtered it was mercenaries from the 16th and 17th centuries, during the 30 years Gustav II Adolf for instance figured that his army (Which at the time was about 70% mercenaries due to previous casualities and increased recruitment) would need to pay for itself. Now in a more civilized sense this meant exacting tolls and taxing the areas currently under their occupation, but there was no rule that they couldn't take by force what they could not procure otherwise.
The problem with this is that once several armies have marched back and forth trough the area, the same towns villages etc. It was a lot harder to get anyone to pay anything because people were simply piss poor at this point, so the only course of action left was to let the mercenaries take whatever they wanted, now this usually pretty quickly meant that the more rich people would start paying a bit of extra so they could avoid this fate.
Billeting was also a HUGE problem sometimes, and if you don't know what that is it is the practice of assigning soldiers to live in civilian households. In Finland (Then part of the Kingdom of Sweden) Billeting was one of the main causes for the peasant uprising which happened in the 16th century. As the soldiers would regularly demand excessive amounts of food and drink, horses and rides etc. And would regularily beat people up, sometimes to death, if they refused this. Later there were strict regulations for what the soldiers could ask for when billeted to a household, for instance, infantrymen could not ask for horses, one couldn't ask for excessive amounts of food or other supplies and such, but as we all know there was rarely anyone around to enforce these rules.
Also the parlay part reminds me of mount and blade. You would walk up to the castle and request an audience with the leader, this is how the conversation went on just about every occasion:
Me: Surrender! Your situation is hopeless!
Castle commander: Ha! We will defend these walls until we die of old age!
And then I slaughtered everyone in the keep, ah good times.
Hi Shad, I agree with the point made about standing professional armies being mainly responsible for the decline of the knight. However, it seems to me that overall the role of crossbow and especially gunpowder weapons is a little underestimated by you. I think it should be mentioned that training a crossbowman or a gunner was a far easier thing to do than training a longbowman. And for most factions in the late middle ages who unlike England hadn't that tradition of archery especially the easiness of usage paired with the effectiveness of gunpowder weapons clearly seems to have made a big difference when it comes to organizing armies.
"One or two things" In a 23 minute video. Seems right.
I like your reply videos
Greetings from Mexico
18:35 wasn't the crossbow invented some time around 500bc? Not the turn of the 15th century.
Ha after this I kind of want to see you do an episode on how people would interact with other ities/countries and what they would say about eachother would be a good episode!
I spat my coffee out because of your intro, well done, well done.
I am becoming skeptical of Simple History. I happened to watch their video on trebuchets yesterday and was appalled to find that they say that Warwolf was 300 feet tall! I left a comment on their video but no one else seems to have noticed the mistake. The height was taken from a line on the Wikipedia page on Warwolf which I have deleted. Simply put, there was no citation and there is no trebuchet in history that has ever been that tall. So essentially they are getting their info from Wikipedia and not stopping to double check things.
I enjoy your videos Shad!!! You Sir, are a true gentleman.
9:34 "cwetien de twoa"
I love hearing people pronounce French words with an English accent...