The Dutch 'Military Revolution' During The Eighty Years War | Early-Modern Warfare
Вставка
- Опубліковано 25 лис 2024
- The Dutch military reforms during the Eighty Years' War influenced the nature of European warfare strongly and lastingly. Facing the Spanish Army, the true military giant of the time, the Dutch were hard pressed to improve their own army with quick but decisive innovation.
The backbone of the Spanish Pike and Shot tactic was the so-called ‘Tercio’, a deep square formation consisting of pike men and shot infantry usually supplemented by cavalry and artillery. The basic idea was that the muskets and arquebuses shoot the enemies to pieces while the pikes provide sufficient protection from enemy cavalry attacks. But how did the Dutch counter this military goliath?
Recent historiography explains it as follows: During the Eighty Years’ War it became clear to Maurice of Nassau, prince of Orange, that he had to change his army significantly if he wanted to defend the newly formed Dutch federation. But during this period most armed conflicts actually weren't open field battles but sieges. As long as they were entrenched in or themselves sieging a fortress, the expert on this topic Olaf Van Nimwegen explains, the Dutch were well capable to go toe to toe with the Spanish. But it was crucial to have an effective force that could credibly challenge opponents in open field to prevent becoming the enemy’s puppet. The English officer John Bingham, who had served in the Dutch army, summarized this as follows: “he who is master of the field may spoyle the Enemies Country at his pleasure, he may march where he thinketh best” Thus, the Dutch were primarily concerned with ameliorating their capabilities in open field battles.
Patreon (thank you): / sandrhomanhistory
Paypal (thank you: paypal.me/SandRhomanhistory
We also have Twitter: / sandrhoman
#history #dutch #netherlands
Some of the music (this particular song is called the 'Landsknecht Music') was provided by MANIK dreams, a dear friend of mine. Check him out if you'd like to hear more.
• MANIK - Landsknechts M...
Twitter: / sandrhoman
Bibliography
Arndt, J., s.v. ‘Niederländischer Aufstand’, in: Enzyklopädie der Neuzeit.
Ayton, A., / Price, J. L., (Hrsg.), The Medieval Military Revolution. State, Society and Military Change in Medieval and Early Modern Europe, 199J. Black, A Military Revolution? Military Change and European Society 1550-1800, 1991.
Dierk, W., s.v. ‘Heeresreform’, in: Enzyklopädie der Neuzeit
Meumann, M., s.v. ‘Military Revolution’, in: Enzyklopädie der Neuzeit.
Parker G., The »Military Revolution«, 1560-1660 - a Myth?, in: Journal of Modern History 48.2, 1976, 196-214
Parker, G., Die militärische Revolution. Die Kriegskunst und der Aufstieg des Westens 1500-1800, 1990 (engl. 1988)
Parker, G., The Limits to Revolutions in Military Affairs: Maurice of Nassau, the Battle of Nieuwpoort (1600), and the Legacy, in The Journal of Military History, 71;2, 2007; S. 331 - 372.
Parker, G., From the House of Orange to the House of Bush. 400 years of Revolutions in Military Affairs, in: militaire Spectator, 172, IV (2003), p. 177-93.
Roberts, M.: The military revolution, 1560-1660. In: Clifford J. Rogers: The military revolution debate. Readings on the military transformation of early modern Europe. Westview Press, Boulder, Colo. 1995, S. 13-35.
Rogers, C.J. / Tallet F. (editors), European Warfare, 1350-1750, 2010.
Rogers, C. J., (Hrsg.), The Military Revolution Debate. Readings on the Military Transformation of Early Modern Europe, 1995
Van Nimwegen, O., The Dutch Army and the Military Revolutions, 1588-1688.
Attribution for the map used in this video goes to: By Nederlandse Leeuw - Own work, based on File:Tachtigjarigeoorlog-1585.png by Stuntelaar CC-BY-SA 3.0, CC BY-SA 3.0, commons.wikime... (via Wikimedia).
Some of the music (this particular song is called 'Landsknecht Music') was provided by MANIK dreams, a dear friend of mine. Check him out if you'd like to hear more. ua-cam.com/video/mrAB8HGJBoM/v-deo.html.
Very nice music, definitely will check it out.
ua-cam.com/video/G6HFokkbRzk/v-deo.html
Man i would like you to do the introduction of the bayonet.
SandRhoman History I really appreciate you doing early modern stuff. An underrepresented period in history, both militarily and otherwise. I’ve always found this period right between firearms domination and melee domination fascinating. You have lines of arquibusiers as well as pickmen, swordsmen, and greatswordsmen all wrapped up in one! It really is kind of the crossroads of military tech and I like the diversity and novelty of the tactics.
SandRhoman History you should provide a proper licence for the map you used from Wikimedia Commons. That one is not public domain but Creative Commons and you are required to mention the author(s) and licence. Thanks.
It's still mind-boggling for me as an American to try and comprehend the fact the dutch fought for 80 years to achieve independence. Our revolution was so short compared to it, it's hard to imagine holding out against one of the military juggernauts of the time for 80 years. Respect for these mad lads.
It is pretty awesome yeah, there are still cannonballs lodged in houses in several cities. They are monuments now. Never mind the naval battles, those were insane too. Beating the spanish armada using a lot of rowboats is just funny to me.
National foundational myth. Spain was not a juggernaut, just a very poor country that got lucky finding some silver mines, even though most of the revenue was used to defend the silver (ships and castles). The Dutch were the juggernaut with a very strong fleet (stronger than the Spanish) and with plenty of money to build fortresses (at that time the defender had the advantage as the new style of fortress favored the defender) and pay foreign mercenaries. Also, look at a map and see where the Netherlands and Spain are and how you can bring reinforcements there. The sea route is very dangerous as France and England are most years hostile and the Dutch navy is stronger. The land route can be cut off at any time by the number one European land power, France, as they did for good in 1634. What is surprising is that Spain lasted so long, if they did it was because the Catholic Netherlanders (nowadays Belgians) helped them. Of course, real history is not as romantic as the foundational myth of the Netherlands, but if they are happy about it, why not.
@@alvaromartinez8209 Although the history of the eighty years’ war has been romanticized in the past, I feel your comment could be a bit more nuanced. Spain was in fact a juggernaut in the 16th and 17th century. They held a gigantic empire that produced more than just “some silver.”
Spain’s biggest problem was not a lack of strength, it was that they were spread too thin. If the Spanish had been able to double down on taking down the Dutch Republic they would probably have managed. The problem was that the Spanish Empire was constantly fighting wars all over their territory. Just to name a vey examples: naval battles with the Ottoman Empire, continuous conflict with the English on sea, bickering with the Habsburgs in the Holy Roman Empire, revolts in Portugal against the Spanish, constant conflicts with France and the protestant nations all over Europe.
Just about every time Spain had its hands free to mount a committed attack the Dutch struggled to keep them out. The thing is that the Spanish never had the time to end the war before a more pressing matter demanded that they turned their attention elsewhere.
@@alvaromartinez8209 Spain dominated Europe for a century lmao
@@rayzas4885 if Spain was so dominant in Europe, why did it allow the Northern third to become Protestant and the South Eastern quarter to remain Turkish?
This is one topic most history-based channels rarely cover and I'm glad you're making it. Keep it up, my dude.
Wow, you’re still at every video I visit.
Tzeench got to you too, huh?
Yeah nobody cares about renaissances
@@florix7889 *Early modern age
@@florix7889 watch 80 year war from defragged history here on yt..
Very interesting to learn more about Dutch military tactics.
History Hustle hey, kijk jij ook naar dit kanaal?
Nice to see you here History hustle ,
Rule NEERLANDIA , NEERLANDIA rule the waves, 🌊 🇳🇱🦁⚔️🦁🇳🇱🌊
Dutch NEVER NEVER NEVER will be slaves !!! 💂🏻⚓️💂🏻
With the most high courtesy to our British 💂🏻🇬🇧⚔️📖⚓️🇬🇧💂🏻Cousins.🤣😁🤣
God Save the King !!!
Nieuwport is an interesting battle to me. Since the spanish tercios in flanders were probably the best soldiers in the world at that point. It was the major test for Maurice's reforms. You had a somewhat untested army relying on military reforms and breakthrough in approach to war facing off against the best the old way of fighting had to offer. The fighting was bloody and both sides got off worse than they thought they would.
the battle at nieuwpoort was a coincidence it wasnt planned
"Since the spanish tercios in flanders were probably the best soldiers in the world at that point."vs.
"the Army of Flanders also became infamous for successive mutinies and its ill-disciplined activity off the battlefield, including the Sack of Antwerp in 1576. " the best soldiers do not act like that...
Spain at that time got crazy amount of gold at its disposal and that is why it was so strong, it got nothing to do with any amazing formation.
How you can even compare this guys with Winged Hussars that were winning battles with numerical disadvantage 40 to 1?
In the Battle of Hodów most of the fight was not made on horses so you can't even use excuse that it is a cavalry not an infantry unit...
there was over a century of Winged Hussars domination on European battlefields and victories with armies that got a huge advantage on paper. Russians got its independence day not because of Napoleon or Adolf... they both failed at doing something that Winged Hussars did without much problem.
@@Bialy_1 those sacks and mutinies happened because that gold (silver, actually) you mention didn't make it to the troops. That bit about the numbers... en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/1582_Cagayan_battles
@@Bialy_1 sacking doesn't mean you can't fight.
A los españoles suempre se les pagaba en último lugar. Tras la toma d Haarlem en 1573, alos españoles se les adeudaban 30 meses d pagas. Los mercenarios si no cobraban, no combatían. Los españoles, aunque les debieran muchas pagas atrasadas, primero combatían y luego, se amotinaban; no al revés, como hacían los alemanes.
As a Belgian I'm still sad Flanders didn't end up being an integral part of the united provinces
As a Spaniard i’m glad we got rid of the sunk lands... Still don’t know what we were looking for there in a time when marihuana wasn’t legalised or even known
@@anxeletemccolin699 A lot of money came from the low countries. It was the most profitable region of the spanish empire. So i get why the spanish crown was prepared to fight for that
@@anxeletemccolin699 spain inherited the low countries. they only decided to defend what was rightfully theirs by succession of the crown. of course the dutch couldn't be mad about this (the alternative would be life under the french, which is even worse), even though there were some revolts occasionally. the 80 years war only happened when nationalism and religious fanaticism reached a climactic point.
Never understood why Belgians and Dutch are still separated. Religion isnt a topic anymore. They once were the seventeen provinces. Now the provices of Brabant and Limburg are divided, the Flemish lost a piece to Zeeland. Nice idea, the Low Countries from Luxemburg to Texel, with a reunited Limburg and Brabant. One negative point: they would become world champion football the next decades.
@@ajc.1012 i think basically the same reasons why the lithuanians dont want a union with poland. also the belgians would never accept an oranje-nassau as king of the belgians.
That moment when I need to make a historiographical paper on the Military revolution and you just gave me a lot of sources thanks man. Too bad the professors at Uni do not think highly of youtube historians otherwise I would definitely reference you
haha it's definitely cool to see that the vid helps!
i'd reference van nimwegen. he also wrote a shorter essay in one of clifford's books. that should provide a nice overview.
Well alot of people from the old school are thretend by "zee Internet", they also fear the lost of theire place in the Ivory tower. Just become a professor yourself and you can change things in the future.
UA-cam Classes are BETTER than any class presented by an overpaid Liberal Egg Head Hack at any University...Much, much cheaper too...The Democrats Ivory Tower is rotten to the core and is just another arm of the Marxists/Progressives assault on American History... Why do you think CNN and NPR love it when Mobs destroy Historic figures? Trump 2020.
@@harrykuheim6107 lol, the world doesnt revolve around your country. maybe if you had a better education system you wouldnt say such things, you know how cheap european universities are? i paid 0 euros for 4 years of education. and there are no marxists in the US, the "democrats" are center-right in European standards.
@@harrykuheim6107 Your name means :Home for Cows" Kuh - German cow. "Heim" German Home. My Name is Kraft = German Strength.
Regarding your comments about the Democrats They may be true. On the other hand this country has a Russian president and tax cheat. Now you have to weigh one against the other.
I love how people in the early modern era had the same knowledge we do today about the tactics and battle formations of antiquity.
I think we have a better understanding, through archaeology and more available texts and better understanding of the latin and greek originals.
But the Renaissance was called that, because of the rediscovery of the ancient texts after the fall of the Byzantine Empire.
@@rogerwilco2 No. The texts that survided the destruction made by the Europeans in the Fourth Crusade, when they sacked Constantinople. The texts that in many ocassions passed to Europe through the Muslims well before the fall of Constantinople.
I appreciate the academic bent to your videos, especially your emphasis on citing and quoting specific scholarly works and naming the authors so that we, as viewers, can follow-up on your research on our own if we want.
Military history as taught to me in England. The battles of Hastings, Agincourt, Waterloo. The Charge of the Light Brigade at Balaclava. The First World War, the Second World War. That’s it, nothing else matters. Thank god for u tube !
Not even the English Civil War?
@@stanislauskusumobagus5266 Very little ! When we came to our exams it was the Industrial Revolution which bored most people away from history forever more...
@@robplazzman6049 pretty understandable, i had the same issue in dutch history class.
That's far people then what we learn in America. All we learn about is the civil war, American revolution, world war 1, and world war 2.
In the Netherlands we get the same but we get learn alot about our history
This is an excellent channel, I'm subscribed!
As for the debate, I vote evolution rather than a revolution. Fire by rank was already invented at the Battle of Bicocca in 1522 (see my video). However Imperial tercios were so successful in the 16th century, that many commanders were of the opinion "if it's not broke, don't fix it". Therefore innovation in pike and musket tactics was simply put on hold. Same could be said for artillery tactics. The French used artillery very decisively at the Battle of Ravenna, however this innovation was also put on hold, as popular opinion of the day was that Spanish tercios were the only way to go.
Seconded! I believe a term used by Rodgers to describe this was 'Punctuated Equilibrium'. A series of smaller inventions and breakthroughs in different areas caused a momentary shift in practice until the rest of the world caught up. Combined, those developments amount to the evolution of warfare over a period of roughly 200 years, from the late middle ages to the 18th century.
@@oilslick7010 Yesss. And if there was a revolution it should be attributed to Gustavus Adolphus.
@@pikeshotBattles But that was my point: there is no single 'revolution' and Gustavus Adolphus was just one in a long line of people who made an adjustment. In this case: probably expanding on the experience with the 'Maurician' infantry tactics and developing it further. And after Gustavus there were other people who took it to the next level, and so on...
For me the only clear revolutionary military innovation of the 15-17th centuries that happened in a relatively short span of time was the art of the "trace italienne" in fortifications. The trace made overnight all other fortifications obsolete and made the defense superior to the offense. Thanks to the trace, weak armies (in quality and/or quantity) could hold large armies and wait until desertion and sickness would melt away the attacker. In the cases were the attacker won, it was often at a disproportionate cost in men and Treasure. Thanks to the Trace, wealthy but manpower-poor powers like Venice and the Dutch Republic were able inflict serious harm to their adversaries for a minimal cost in men.
Hey, nice to see you here. i enjoy your series on the Italian Wars quite a bit. Have been a sub of yours for quite some time :)
Pretty sure what Gonzalo Fernandez did with the spanish army was a military revolution itself. People forget who created the pikenshot system
Nothing is a revolution and no single person created anything, it's always evolution which is based on things which came before
Amaya Echeverría Yeah basically creating the pike and shot system. No achievements at all lol
@@JayzsMr
"Nothing is a revolution"
Here, comrade, you are wrong. Glory to worker's revolution!
"no single person created anything"
Now that statement is patently retarded, it's like you think inventors don't exist.
It was not. Swiss Pikemen formations were a direct antecedent of the Tercios, the Tercios didn't raise from nothing. Anyway, this video is about the Dutch, not the Spanish.
@alvi syahri Well, not exactly the tower, but I agree.
The proof that man is ingenious in waging war ... and the proof that your videos are, once again, informative, so well illustrated, ans so pleasant to look at!😍😍😍😍
youtube was missing a channel about this era of warfare. thank you for your work :)
*WILHELMUS INTENSIFIES*
🇳🇱🇱🇺
/watch?v=Xl5yRIfNuWQ - Beter volkslied, speel dit in Brussel en alle Nederlanden zijn weer verenigd!
This channel is truly unparalleled in its ability to analyze and objectively retell history:) love your work!
Another great video, proud to be a little part of it :-)!
Great content. You Baz and K&G are basically running an extensive world military history course. Excellent.
8:00 that was also used by the Tercios.
So, what? Have the Spaniards has to be protagonic in every video? This about the Dutch, not the Spanish.
@@herrero4270 I just gave extra information, don't be salty dude
@@herrero4270 Yes, if you're going to speak about 16th-17th military tactics in Europe … YES, you've to speak about Spain.
When you're going to speak about 16th-17th Dutch army, SPECIALLY.
I do not know what the problem is.
@@herrero4270 please don't cry
2:45 was also used against Swiss pikeman by Spanish "rodeleros", and they also were inspired by Roman tactics comparing Swiss formation as phalanx :P
I once read that the Dutch preferred small size mercenary units, because in case of a mutiny Dutch city militia could defeat a small size unit, but not a big one like a complete Tercio. To overcome big units in the field the ability to have these small size units work efficiently together needed to be developed. That the manipular system is the basis of the idea shows that principles remain constant and thus history tends to repeat itself as a series of idea and countermeasures.
Good comment
Mercenaries were a necessity back then, because the population was only about 1 million.
The 16th-17th centuries of warfare are a very interesting topic, also good video!
Always happy when UA-cam suggests video's like this one. My recent history video binge has really shifted the algorithm in my favour.
Great video, I learnt new things today.
I had the great fortune of visiting Het Rijksmuseum some time ago when there was an exhibit about the 80 years war. A notebook with the described tactics was on display at the museum, along with a huge collection of Dutch muskets.
I just wanna say this is the first video I watched from your channe, and you provide a lot of crucial information regarding tactics of this time period and I thank you for saving me hundreds of dollars in books
How is it possible that in your video about the Dutch military Revolution, the name "Simon Stevin" isn't mentioned even once.
Simon Stevin (1548-1620) born in Brugge, Flanders was a mathmatician, physicist, engineer and later a military engineer. He was the private teacher of prince Maurits of Orange.
His role is largely unknown (because you are probably not encouraged to write a book about this new revolutionary style of fighting, you helped to develop, and publish it) but not to mention him at all is a big mistake.
I only had to see that he was capable of deciding that Dutch was a better language than Greek or Latin when you want to explain something technical (so he used Dutch) and that he made up new Dutch words for it to explain things better (he made the better language even better), to know this guy had the potential to change the old ways into the new and the drive/arguments to make these changes happen.
I like to think prince Maurits (not a dumb person himself) saw that too.
I can't name examples but i'm willing to bet that almost every evolution or revolution or battle has some poor guy who made a lot of it possible but is never mentioned. like some smugglar or a blacksmith of some sorts
Your channel, sir, is very underrated
Thanks man, I really like your late medieval to early modern warfare history videos
i love theses vids. thanks for uploading
It’s good to see a UA-camr focus on mainly pike and shot and early firearms warfare
I really appreciate how you source and credit your items. Well done.
Is hier ook een abattoir?
found my new favorite military history channel.
Please talk more about heavy cavalry,
You constantly mentioned how cavalry used to rain supreme for the longest time yet never focus on any battles where they crushed the opposition.
In fact you only seem to focus on the cases where cavalry was beaten
not really important: -rain- --> reign
Look up Alexander the Great, the phalanx formation was his anvil, and the heavy cavalry the hammer which flanked and crushed the opponent, even with inferior numbers at times. Not sure what the battle's name is.
Grew up in Spain as a Dutch citizen, history about this period in school in Spain only made me love my tiny country more.
As a Dutchman, I have to agree with my spanish wife, however, that one of the finest pieces of art ever to be produced in Spain is the painting informally known as 'Las lanzas' ('the pikes') by Velázquez. The official name is 'La rendición de Breda' ('the surrender of Breda') and can be seen in the Prado museum in Madrid.
upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/4e/Vel%C3%A1zquez_-_de_Breda_o_Las_Lanzas_%28Museo_del_Prado%2C_1634-35%29.jpg
I love your videos bro! Keep up the good work
THANK YOU. Finally I have the name of the document. 'Ordre op de wapeninge van het voetvolk'. THANK YOU!
Being a pikeman in the 16th century would be awful. If the cavalry never charges you just stand there watching your comrades drop to arquebus and artillery fire.
And this is a great episode. This right here is why this channel rocks! It's not rehashing the already overdone topics. It's informative, properly annotated and well presented. This is good history.
As a pikeman i'd be happy not to be in melee and have a higher risk of becoming unalived.
Just got your videos through the youtube recommendations system and already completely love them
Tercios: *excist*
Dutch rebels: So anyways, I started blasting
/watch?v=Xl5yRIfNuWQ they hadn't radio yet, but they did have good music ^^
This was one of the best and well articulated info videos on early modern western military evolution. Bravo!
Perfect video on history. It's Your fist video that I've seen and I really appreciate how You include specific references. It's like reading a scientific paper with proper citations on the topic. Subscribed and hit the bell button after 2 minutes of this video. Great job.
So glad I bumped into this channel, high quality and entertaining
Lovely! I love those high quality scenes, a pleasure to the eye.
Also it needs just a few more years in underground archives and van Nimwegen is turning into the Gollum of history...
Spanish: I'm going to role play Alexander the Great's phalangites
Dutch: Then, I'm going to role play Camillus Furious's Manipular Legions
The Dutch actually created the 1st linear warfare in Europe, then the Swedes popularised it.
If I remembered correctly Qi Ji Guang from Ming Dynasty also had similar reforms like the ones initiated by Maurice of Nassau.
All this talk about Rome and Macedonia.....yes, the pikemen did resemble the Macedonian phalanx but at all times it was used offensively. But the idea behind the phalanx--most of the time--was to 'fix' the other side's infantry while the heavy cavalry did the real work of winning the battle. Such cavalry forces simply did not exist in the Spanish army.
@@julianmarsh1378 What are you talking about?
Cavalry didn't even play a big role in Ancient Greece or Rome for the simple fact: Horses where the size off a big pony. The first in modern eyes horse came from China after the massacre off a city (80.000ppl) because they didn't hand over in chinees words fathorses( please google it if you don't agree) Nor the Dutch or the Spanish used heavy cavalry.
Please be a good wannabe Historian and just shut up if you only now a part off the story and create whats lacking in your information.
@@newjones1754 What are YOU talking about? Unless you don't consider Macedonian armies to be "Ancient Greeks", you are worng. You should inform yourself carefully about the battles of Alexander and his use of cavalry as a decisisive weapon, in combination with the phalanx. And please be more educated and respect other's opinions Nobody wants authoritarian shiting over here.
@@herrero4270 Please tell me where I need to send a copy off my Master in Ancient. Med. civil to ? There is a big difference in the knowledge off the wannabee historians like yourself and professionals.
The problem with people like yourself they don't know how much they do not know.
In the Ancient world chariots where they only viable options. To call this type off limited warfare cavalry is an insult.
I'm not even gonna explain the difference and evolution off the cavalry in the Middle Ages. Our Horses reach around 2 meter now a days but, if we go back to our own day and age in the 11 century they didn't get bigger then 58-60 inch 147-152cm. This is maybe in your language that is understandable for you.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Horses_in_the_Middle_Ages
Maybe people have problems with my English or they way I'm to people but, I don't care.
Uneducated I'm not because my knowledge isn't just based on google or wikipedia and the final thing: Science doesn't care about your feelings so deal with it the fact that I have not even a little respect for people like yourself.
On what is your information based to call it wrong? Because you don't understand it and have limited knowledge? You are trapped in The Paradox off Socrates.
@@herrero4270 How much do you think a battle tells you if you didn't take the time to know there background and ability's. Please go study your battles like you suggested and stay an idiot.
Effective presentation !
Very understandable. THX
Keep making videos like this one !
The Dutch were a confederation not a federation. In fact it is the only confederstion to exist for an extensive period. The difference with a confederstion is that the power lays much more with the individual provinces instead of with the central government. This is also what lead to the frequent spats between provinces.
More early modern content please. I love it.
BRUUUUUUUUUH Your format is SO good.
Thanks bud :)
The Dutch system was more an evolution of the Tercio than a truly revolutionary system. Just as the Tercio was an evolution of the Swiss square and the Swedish system an improvement of the Dutch system.
Sounds like you're salty about events 400 years ago.
@@Matthijsklaassen not at all. In fact, the better Dutch formation was still inferior to a Spanish or Italian tercio in open field battle as the quality of soldiers was lower. In other words, the improvements brought by the Dutch were not enough to decide the war. Eventually the Dutch won of course as Spain was also busy fighting "minor" powers such as France, England or Turkey. The Americans also claim they beat England during their own revolution while minimizing the decisive role of France, Spain and Netherlands distracting the British forces and Treasury.
@@alvaromartinez8209 yup definetly salty
@@jonneelskamp349 not at all, that was centuries ago, I think some others are rather salty about 2010. In any case, for me a revolutionary innovation in military tactics as discussed here happens very seldom. The last one for me was the Blitzkrieg (or if you want to limit to a single combat arm, the stormtrooper tactics of 1918) as it was a radical change over previous methods and happened over a relatively period of time in a specific place. In the 16-17th centuries there were not truly revolutionary tactical innovations if my memory serves right except the "trace italienne" in fortifications. The Dutch tactics were a slight improvement, that helped make the Dutch army a competent field army but that was about it, they were not kicking butt left and right in field battles consistently as the Tercio had done or the Swedish army did later. The field battles were rare after the reform so it is difficult to gauge the effectiveness of the reforms. If it makes you happy, I gladly acknowledge the Dutch navy as the world's best in the late 16th- 17th century (with permission of the Flemish corsairs).
@ well, Catholic rule was not as bad, it just was not suited to the temperament of the Dutch. They rightly rebelled and that was it, I can understand the Spanish monarchy was too restrictive of their mercantile genius. The Portuguese also rebelled in 1640. However, other nations part the Spanish Crown (they were nations in their own right and enjoyed considerable autonomy) such as Sicily, Naples and Flanders had local rulers and Parliaments, voted their own taxes, kept their own language and the presence of Spanish troops was accepted with no problem. They also provided loyal and very effective fighting units to the Crown especially the Flemish corsairs, Sicilian galleys and Napolitan Tercios. Although the Northern Italians attribute the problems of today's Southern Italy to Spanish rule, it was not the case. Sicily and Naples were under Spanish rule intellectual and economic powerhouses, just a notch below the Low Countries/Milan/Venice and well above Spain that always remained backwards compared to Italy. That lasted until the unification of Italy. I am not saying Spanish rule made Sicily and Naples great, of course, what I am saying that the benign Spanish rule there provided peace and stability for the talent of those two nations to flourish. For some reason this did not work in Portugal and Netherlands, in the latter case due probably to the religious intolerance of the monarchy. Anyway, I wanted to make the point that Spanish rule was not as bad as some people think. Funnily enough, at some point (late 17th century) the Dutch started to help the Spanish in modern day Belgium, as they realized that the true danger for their hard-won independence was France which was always a centralization juggernaut. Today the very few Flemish speakers of the territories annexed by France (including Lille and Dunkirk) are very old, while the Spanish never tried to impose their language or customs in modern day Belgium. Same thing happened in French Catalonia or Basque country, in those two places French has taken over while in in Spain they enjoyed much more linguistic freedom most of the time.
At this point, I knew all this stuff, but just like to see how different folks animate and portray the informatino. Nice job again.
Cannot wait for Gustavus Adolphus. Literally my history crush. I mean, have you seen his mustache?
Wow amazing topic, i just discovered this amazing Chanel :v
Absolutely beautiful video!
I found your channel recently, really well done. Your english and german are good, nice animations and historically accurate. I like it here and shall subscribe, I'll be on a watch all videos marathon now.
Just found your channel, great content! Thank you very much for these lessons
Excellent video! I'm very excited for the one about Gustavus Adolphus and Breitenfeld!
Always informative, thank you.
I really enjoy the content and style of your videos. Keep it up!
i have traced my dutch family back to 1401 one of my realitives name was colonol wolter hegeman he was a very conspious soilder. "it is written that his name and the rumor of his arrivail on the battelfeild terriffed the enemy "at the battle of deventer he took the works and captured the bridge defended the bridge then destroyed it. he captured the town of anhalt and the castle hattem. he was a hero at the seige of bronkhorst he went after a deserter while chasing him the deserter turned and shot colonol hegeman in the chest he died on that spot in 1578. he would be my great great grand father about 9-10 times removed.
cool
i can also trace my family to new amsterdam now new york reverand adrian hegeman arrived in new amsterdam in 1652 he purchased 300 acres of land in flatbush making him the largest land owner, he purchased the land from peter stuyvasant. i have pictures of the oringnal deed with both singatures. he was the first burgemeester mayor of the five villages of brooklyn he.helped start the first dutch reformed church and school in flatbush . today the high school known as ermaus hall it was built on the site of the old dutch reformed church and school on the wall before you enter the front door there is a large dedication plaque that reads " on this site was the first public school of{ midwout} flatblush by the authority of the director and general council of the netherlands january 29th 1658 adrian hegemen teacher 1659-1671. and hegemen street runs thru brooklyn and flatbush.to this day.
@@johnhagerman8805 These traces don't really matter as you would have hundreds of thousands of ancestors in the same generation.
Love your videos! I work at a military museum, and I have your videos going on in the background as I work.
I always assumed that the Tercios ended at Rocroi and that Dutch had at an advantage in logistics, politics and overall strategy. Virtually everyone had a huge interest in Spain losing against the Dutch with the exception of Rome and Habsurg. Habsburg had Wallenstein doing the logistics and Tilly doing the field strategy, which almost decided the parallel Thirty Year’s War. As the video mentions Gustaph Adolphus II.: he indeed died in the saddle, as he was cocky and got caught by hostile cavalrymen. Let’s not forget Cromwells Ironsides as well. Battles during the English civil war were decided by the good and bad use of cavalry. Already in 1470 Duke Charles of Burgundy reformed his late medieval army after he had read Roman literature. But his armies got steamed over by Swiss, and those got destroyed in 1515 by the French who started to combine pitched infantry masses with artillery. It all comes back to logistics and available technology. The Dutch were leading in both wealth and tech- so they could afford to have an army like the one above. The evolution went hand in hand with the shift from feudal armies into a mix of royal national armies.
And the entire Dutch warmachine was powered by their overseas trading and conquests of enemy trading posts.
The Spanish had the most powerful land forces during that era but at sea they were struggling to protect their vast empire with the limited naval resources at their disposal.
It didn't help much that most Spanish ships were lumbering galleons that could only run before the wind and were more or less giant, armed transports. During Piet Hein's capture of the Spanish Treasurefleet near at Bay Matanzas, the Spanish admiral in command didn't even put up a fight.
After leading his fleet into the dead end that was the Bay of Matanzas, his feet were the first to land on the beach and he didn't stop running untill he had reached Havana, leaving his men to fend for themselves.
Piet Hein was in command of a very powerful naval squadron for which the Spanish colonial navy were no match. Their main countermeasure was to try and avoid Piet Hein's force altogether and Hein was fortunate to catch the Spanish as they sailed past Havana, catching up with them near the Bay of Matanzas.
@@AudieHolland Actually, a major part of the army funding came from weapons trading, and victuals (ammo, food and stuff). To the Spanish...
That is why the raid on Wesel was such a hoot.
It was a spanish supply post, which was taken by surprise (both sides were surprised it worked :) ).
Then we could sell the supplies once again to the Spanish :)
@@j.p.vanbolhuis8678 That goes without saying, Mr. Bolhuis. But try explaining that to foreigners who are unaware of Dutch trade customs etc.
This was probably one of the main reasons the war kept on going for 80 years. Too profitable for Holland to give it up while the actual fighting was done in Brabant and the Achterhoek.
But for comparison, the significance of Hein's raid, from Wikipedia:
"As a result, the money funded the Dutch army for eight months (and as a direct consequence, allowing it to capture the fortress 's-Hertogenbosch), and the shareholders enjoyed a cash dividend of 50% for that year."
The value of the plunder was about 12 million guilders in 1600s money.
It is funny that a lot of channels never cover this 80 year war, cause in the Netherlands it is heavily taught and serves as the first “democratic” revolution. Some things we had in our akte van verlatinghe, were word for word copied by the americans
wow, I just like how you pronounce those technique names. On spot!
Maurits and Frederick Hendrick of Orange had more insights then only the movements of their troops in battle. Feeding their army was done in a, for that time, unique way. Instead of sending foodrobbing bands in the region they were in, they organized food markets near the army stations. Farmers and merchants came out of free will at these markets and sold their merchandise there to the military AND WERE PAID FOR IT ! This was made possible by paying the hired soldiers in time. The quality and prices of the food products were monitored by special officers. Bad merchandize or bad conduct of merchants and customers were severely punished.
These rulings were very positive for the popularity of the Dutch army and for the economics of the population in the regions that had to deal with the suddenly incoming Dutch troops. The Spanish army had no such methods and made themselves with robbing and torturing most unpopular. Could not trust the population around them.
Great vid, thanks!
Dr. Emmet Brown is a historian too? What an universal genius!
Muskets are not as inaccurate as we think. They're about as accurate as a bow. You can consistently hit a human sized target at 100m with some training.
The reason they might be inaccurate in large battles might be because of the smoke of the previous shots.
@alvi syahri I'd say a war bow is probably more expensive than a gun. The biggest difference would be in the ammunition. Making quality arrows is very expensive and requires specialised craftsmen. On the other hand, musket balls are extremely easy to make in huge amounts, so is the powder.
Maybe in the 14th and15th centuries it may have been more difficult, but by the 16th century gunsmithing and making gunpowder was well known.
But a trained archer with a good bow and enough arrows is usually superior to a person with a gun one on one. Only in the 19th century and the widespread usage of quick reloading guns did bow become completely obsolete.
@@TanitAkavirius a more important thing, you almost hit the point in your own comment by stating this: 'a trained archer'
If war breaks out, the only trained archers are mercenaries, which aren't reliable for defense of a nation. They are scarce compared to the complete (male) population. You'd need long times to train an individual to use a bow proficiently, whereas a musket a child could operate if instructed correctly. So if production of the weapons and the ammo is not relevant, and training time is and the amount of people you then can use is too, musket will enable you to mount a much bigger defense from the same population compared to using bow for ranged attack.
You are a awesome youtuber. You teach me a lot what the warfare actually happen in EU4 period.
Everyone changed but the Tercios defeated them again and again (Dutch, English, Swedish, French..) in such great battles as Nördlingen. Tercios ruled the land over almost 150 years.
And then spain couldn't keep up anymore. In the years after the spanish army was outdated and if it was not for the dutch and english belgium would now be france
@@Raadpensionaris Belgium should have been Dutch. Maybe if you hadn't spent those years burning women at the stake with your crazy branch of protestantism, you'd have a larger country today.
@@DudeWatIsThis ??? Witch trials were not really a specific protestant thing ( en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Witch_trials_in_the_early_modern_period ). Besides: Calvinism is not a crazy branch of protestantism. Perhaps you should read somewhat more about these matters: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_religion_in_the_Netherlands
It's interesting to remember how inaccurate musket fire really is. I remember firing a reproduction musket at a target on a 3x3 sheet of cardboard at about fifty yards. After about fifty shots, only two or three actually kit the paper, never mind the actual target. Musket infantry formations were basically shotguns.
Yes, their early use was mainly to damage enemy morale. The thunderous blast that accompanied a volley was very unnerving to march against, and the knowledge that, unlike arrows, musketballs could easily penetrate practically any armor, mustve been a constant fear for soldiers.
@@omegastar19 no plate armor are resistant to musket fire at long range.
0:48 so that's what the country looked like be4 the land reclamation
Almost painful to look at, but yes.
In the south you can still clearly see allot of these large forts from west to east. There are even some who are towns, and they look amazing. I live quite close to several.
The Dutch should have deployed their fleet as mobile artillery on the canals 😂
Afaik theres a time when French cavalry captured a dutch fleet because it was frozen in ice lmao
Youd be a siting duck
@@TheSuperhoden Could a duck hide better than between ducks on the channel? ;)
@@noemiekramer7699 on what kinda drugs are you mate?
@@TheSuperhoden language
Nobunaga Oda was the first in history to invent continuous rifle volley during the battle of nagashino where they inflicted massive damage to the Takeda cavalry in which they never recovered from.
Gustavus II Adolphus adopted melee tactics for cavalry again, due to the performance of Polish Cavalry in the Polish Swedish War. Polish cavalry was far superior to its Swedish counterpart and Gustav wanted to copy its more direct tactics.
Well, it will be in the next episode.
The cannon of Gustavus were also revolutionary. Their barrels were composite and much lighter. The inner tube was of copper and they were reinforced with leather, raw hide. These moved about the battle field far quicker.
I wish we never had guns just swords like the old times
I wish we atleast never advanced technology , so it could have just been a handgonne , so we still had armor like mail, lamellar , brigandine and plate
And also still had swords and shields and crossbows and bows
Nice video showing that wars knowledge translate among nations through directing attacks or from learning past practice methods before in addition of field practice minds ( methods descoving ) of leaders or high officers
I love this! Thank you I am studying dutch history this made understanding warfare in that time easier. 🇳🇱 🇺🇸
America... So sad that they're brainwashed by the media all the time
Booster_Stranger True, but idc people do what they want. I just want my damn history.
@@23Revan84 Well, you gotta care since its america and the liberals would do anything to fuck you up. If you want your history, just study it kiddo.
Three things: 1) For spanish infantry pike was still important offensive weapon. 2) Dutch system to work need trained soldiers, Swedish infantry that fought in Polish-Swedish War tried fight in dutch style but gets smashed by polish cavalry in field. Protestant armies in first phase of thirty years war also tried this against catolic armies and failed. 3) By regularly paying soldiers, Maurice could create a disciplined and trained army that could use his reorm in the field.
Ah, i thought the reaction of the Spanish military to this new tactics would be covered! Still, great video!
Well, why should they be? Armies at that time have been playing around with formation so what the Spanish did to whoever, now the Dutch did to Spainish. The new Dutch formation still employed pike and musket except the Spainish would be outnumbered on fire power. The musket was still as inaccurate as before so we are not talking about Winchester Vs musket. This is more like 4231 against old 442 in football tactics that somehow you find yourself outnumber...
Though I haven't looked much into it, I'd guess that the Spanish adopted the Dutch tactics in turn.
@@AudieHolland Likewise, when someone invented Bayonet, I am sure everybody just copied it.
@@cyrilchui2811 Ah, hold on. I just did the research.
The Spanish reaction was that they lost the war.
@@AudieHolland The Spanish where at war with England, France and the Netherlands at the same time, the latter of which was undergoing an economic boom and military revolution, and they managed to keep the southern Netherlands, now Belgium. so "lost the war" is not quite how i would put it. Those territories had been "lost" for decades, Spain mostly fought to contain Protestantism in Germany, and France inside its borders and it succeed. After the Spanish Empire lost its hegemony, Europe had to contain with the much more violent and ruthless French Empire, which led to the Napoleonic wars and WW1 and WW2-
As explanation is needed. The diagram shows the first rank firing and the moving to the rear to reload. However, in order to reload, they need to stand still. The diagram shows them moving forward again before the reloading is complete.
you don't need to stand still to reload, this isn't a video game.
I think it's amazing how mythology it's integral part of military evolution. The roman army was without a doubt an efficient tool but the roman army conquered the roman empire mainly thanks to the ethos, economy and political system that was behind it. Certainly not simply because their tactics or equipment were that superior to their contemporaries.
Uhm... yes, yes they were...
@@OzjishKahn the roman army, in any period, lost repeatedly vs its enemies. The Romans were good at winning the wars, not necessarily the battles. They kept coming at you and were able to field army after army where other polities would have given up after the first upset.
@@OzjishKahn just to be clear I'm not saying that it was inferior, certainly it was an efficient and effective tool, but it's not enough to copy their tactics to win the wars, there was much much more than that behind roman victories and much of it had nothing to do with the battlefields.
@@OzjishKahn
The glorydays of the Roman military ussually had tens of thousands of professional soldiers agressively bearing down on a random tribe that fielded a few thousand militia and a few hundred trained warriors.
It's kind of like saying "We defeated the Bhutanese navy! Look at our glory!". Sure you could or did, it just doesn't mean as much as you'd think.
@@OzjishKahn Yeah you can't equipt your armies with competent commanders and equiptment without having a competent economy first.
I can attest to Machiavelli doing any writing on warfare, considering that I have a hardback copy of his book on the subject.
We Spaniards are proud of being the first faction that developed the "noob square" tactic sucessfully.
Eh... Think the Swiss figured that out first.
@@TheChiconspiracy it was the greek phalanx , then the romans. cant you see it was just a silly comment? , whats the need to take it serious? (and awnser back wrong). so lame
@@Danielperezguitar Brain fart, I meant the Swiss, though yes, arguably the Romans (especially in the "Byzantine" era) Were using something very similar.
@@TheChiconspiracy The square comes from a Crusader formation used in both the Levant and the Reconquista. A square of combined arms is very good against light cavalry, archers and skirmishers.
The Tercios are an evolution of that, replacing arrows with gunpowder and using heavy pikes instead of lighter weapons. It evolved to beat the French heavy cavalry, which required weapons that could punch through the armour and take down their much larger horses.
the egyptians learned to draw squares thousands of years ago so technically they invented the tercio
this is your best work yet
Why was it not practical to let the first row shoot while the other rows reload the muskets and handing them back to the first row when they shot? These back and forth maneuvers to get the first row out of the way seems so impractical and time-consuming.
You know not a bad idea.
@@hectorvega621 I know right? But when I, as a strategical noob, get this idea, there must be a catch why Nassau didn't pick it. ^^
Too complicated in the heat of battle, imaging hunderts of men giving each other their weapons, confusion and lots of dropped weapons would be the result.
Dropping your weapon is not a good idea
@@JayzsMr but reloading your own musket in the heat of the battle isn't confusing?
Oh, I remember something. Archeologists found hundreds of rifles in the battlefields of the U.S Civil War. Some where found with more than one bullet loaded, loaded two times or had the cotten first and gunpowder last and such mistakes.
So there is evidence, that soldiers were confused when loading. They thought they shot their rifle or closed their eyes before the shot and did not notice.
It all comes down to discipline. I see your point, but there needs to be something else too. Modern machine guns have a loader too. So why not a musketeer?
@@StonedWidowOnDoom no doubt there was confusion but weapon switching would have just added to the confusion and steps
Its a shame that entertainment doesnt focus on the late medival era more. Its always the tiping point of how war is fought the most interesting. You get to see how rapidly the meta can change. The diversity of tactics is very interesting because the new way of warfare isnt set in stone yet.
You always refer to the Spanish army but it would be more accurate to say "The Imperial Army" since the King was king of many different and diverse territories, although the main one was Spain.
The Spaniards in the Imperial Army were only between 7 and 15 percent. Besides the Spaniards, the main regions that made up the imperial armies that took part in the war in Flanders were Walloons (the local Catholic soldiers), Germans and Italians. To a much lesser extent, there were also Burgundians (now France), English Catholics (the man who tried to blow up Parliament, Guy Fawkes, fought in Flanders with Spain), Scots, Irish, Swiss, Hungarians, Portuguese and Albanians.
You're right. I'm worried it would be confusing though. I might still do as you suggest and put a little annotation on screen.
actually it would also be incorrect to call it the imperial army because language changes and very few people associate the empire with the spanish. Just like once a "machine" was once used to refer to a car, over time machine changed its meaning and no longer refers to specifically a car. Same thing with Spaniards vs Empire
something similar is with "Muslim". It no longer means a religion, but moreso a geographical area and certain culture/behaviour/etc
remember, language is simply meant to communicate ideas. Its the english snobs who try to say "no this is incorrect because look 100 years ago we used to say it this way"
Good comment. Especially in the beginning the Spanish Tercios were the most feared ones, and rightly so. I recently read an eyewitness account of fighting in Holland in 1574 between Tercios and local ultra-calvinists from the Leiden area, aligned with Zeelandic calvinist "Watergeuzen". That was not pretty. The cruelty was mindblowing, making ISIS look as a bunch of amateurs. The North Italian and Bavarian troops were more afraid of the locals then the other way around. The situation was not to their liking at all so they retreated as soon as possible out of the swamps to dryer land.
Excellent video, very detailed information.Thank you.
"The biggest mistake any military commander could make, is to fight the Dutch" ~ Gandhi, Bismarck, Napoleon, Zhukov, Philip, everybody
A. Hitler: "Hold my beer"
Didn't Napoleon annex the Netherlands and put his brother on its throne?
@@gioojisba2758 French lies
@@conflictsexplained9276 K
@@gioojisba2758 It's a joke
Classic and unique content...
Awesome🔥
You are criminally undersubbed, sir. I think there is some shadowbanning or throttling going on when i watch your videos (only found you two nights ago by looking up battle of marathon, but when i watch yours vids yt on recommends the other bigger channels, i have to go through your account or click one of the videos you show at end of video. Even after i subbed to you it only showed me a few of your vids on desktop, still none on mobile and now I barely see on desktop and i still havent watched many of your videos... I think YT/Susan Wocjeski realized you are obviously Dovahhatty...
Back in history when the nobles or aristocrats did not like certain topics to be discussed or made known to the public they would simply burn the books, demolish the stone engravings and kill the messengers. Now its a simple as deleting a vid for "violating our community guidelines" while there are videos of ISIS beheadings still on YT with millions of views😂😂
@@russiansmoke3435 I think YT/Google proves (as Susan admitted during interview on 60 Minutes) the best way to censor is by overloading the media as opposed to deleting/book burning. Instead of censoring OP, you leave their videos up, but make it so that nobody can see OP's content, even when new, and to push the various others. This way OP doesn't know he's being censored, people don't unite against the censorship, and we forget OP. It's more Brave New World, and less 1984 or Farenheit 451.
Lmao. It's ok buddy, we all have great small channels we like, don't convince you into feeling like you're being persecuted for it.
This kind of video is less popular because it's not discussing the juicy popular battles with wars of antiquity, Napleonic wars and Japanese sengoku period.
@@elsasslotharingen7507 NNNNNNNNOOOOOOOO how can I construct group mentality and a sense of superiority without a persecution complex????
I hope you read this as I would like to know your opinion, one interesting thing is that I found is what happened in Brazil at the Battle of Guararapes in 1648 and 1649 I couldn't find any dutch accounts of the battles only a German contemporary source that gave a body count, but I have access to the portuguese-brazilian officers reports of battles and could translate them to you. Anyway, the interesting part is that it happened after the dutch military reforms, the brazilian reports seem to indicate the dutch army was composed entirely of muskets and pikemen, yet they suffered two crushing defeats at the hands of the numerically inferior Brazilian-portuguese army.
At the first battle at one point it's stated that the brazilian portuguese army advanced towards the dutch and endured two volleys of musket and artillery fire before unloading in a single volley at very close range, which supposedly brought great disorganization to their lines and then the Brazilian-portugueses charged with SWORDS and were able to infiltrate the pikemen's lined and bring a lot of destruction to them.
It's interesting because the dutch seem to have used everything their reformers got right, musket fire, pike lines, abandoning the use of swords etc and yet the Brazilian-portugueses were able to defeat their numerically superior force with a massed volley and a sword charge that actually broke the pikes.
On the second battle of Guararapes the portuguese-brazilian of 2650 entered combat with 5000 dutch professionals in 1649.
Once again, the contemporary reports say:
At first 800 Brazilian-portugueses fought 6 dutch squadrons with 2 cannons, the brazilians had no artillery. They exchanged musket fire for about 25 minutes, the portuguese-brazilian troops tried to cut their formation in a manuevre but that was repelled, once again the portuguese-brazilians charged with swords and once again they beat the dutch pikemen, "in spite of the brave resistance of the dutch pikemen". At all the other fronts the Battle was won and the cavalry performed it's traditional chasing job.
In both instances the dutch pike formations were broken by significantly numerically inferior sword wielding infantry. Maybe abandoning all other melee weapons was absolutely superior as everyone assumes, but I don't know I'm just an idiot with an idea and would love to hear your insights.
Good information but I am surprise that many of the tactics you describe where already use by the tercios except with the idea of reducing the size of the units to cover more regions. The tercios also used the action of firing and then retreat to the back.
Also you talk about the advantages of the Sweden tactics but at the end they where defeated by the tercios... go figure
It is good to see that men thinking about the roman empire is a timeless thing.
“Dutch women? More like butch women!”
-The Spanish, probably
This is exactly what I want but can't seem to find anywhere!! Keep it up your videos are great and I desperately wait for the Swedish innovations to pike and shot.
At 6:20, the video mentions the checkered order for these Dutch soldiers fighting Spanish Tercios, but in the Tercio video, it was mentioned that the Tercios deployed in a checkered formation for the same reason. Was there anything additional to this here? It seems like regarding refreshing tired troops, both factions had identical tactics.
Smaller groups ofcourse help with the speed of filling the weak spot routing units create. Which is very important in formations with less melee soldiers. Which helps with the ultimate goal of getting more guns in without giving to much away giving too much away in defence against shock troops
It’s very funny especially considering that most if not all successful Dutch military was mercenaries
And yet, the tercios adapted and still dominated the battlefield against the swedes and the dutch, almost into the early XVIII.
Except they didn't? The Swedish won the 30 years war and the tercios were steamrolled at Rocroi
@@gioojisba2758 Battle of Nördlingen (1634) was won by the spanish tercios
@@rodrigogimenez-ricolaguna4913 Rocroi was in 1643....
@@gioojisba2758 Well keep in mind that the Defeat in Rocroi was due to the retreat of the cavalry and not the Tercios and yet the captain of the french was one of the greatest generals of the XVIIth century, also remember that the Spanish were in multiple fronts the defeat in the 30 years war and the 80 years was mostly to over extended armies and low manpower at the end it was impossible for the Spanish to recover from those wars and just ending these 2 wars it would start another one, The Franco-Spanish war in which the Tercios show how even with the newly tactics adopted from the swedes they could defeat the french army at Valenciannes or Tuttinglen.
@@Cholimao the Spanish ought to have won the 30 years war, they had their armies combined with the HRE like it was under Charles V
Dutch military history video: exists
*Angry Spanish noises*