Chariots and Changing Warfare in the Bronze Age
Вставка
- Опубліковано 23 жов 2024
- Taking a look at the effect that changes in military technology of the Late Bronze Age might have caused the Bronze Age Collapse. Taking a lot of inspiration from Robert Drews' 1993 book on the subject. Enjoy!
Music: Bensound.com
Here's a good video on the Battle of Kadesh that i reference in the video: • Battle of Kadesh 1274 ...
I've been binging your content since the Rome enemy tier list. Great work
I honestly think you are the most underrated channel on YT. I can literally sit here for hours watching these, you are sooo good at making them!!
cheers! Glad you're enjoying them
Great content as always brother, could listen to you talk all day about any era lol keep it up
The compound bow was first invented in 1966, what you mean is the composite bow also called the horn bow or horse bow. The depiction of this bow was also the basis for what later became the letter “S” in the first alphabet which was created by the pastolar proto-Canaanites.
Interesting video, appreciate deep dives like this
Engaging, informative and just bloody enjoyable. Well done again. Can't wait to see the next installment.
The way you describe the chariot reminds me so much of the impact of armor and air power during the interwar years.
Im WW1 , countries with limited industrial capacity like Serbia or Belgium could be fairly tough to defeat , because armies were almost entirely infantry based.
But in WWII , those states that couldn't produce and field large armored and air forces were doomed from day one.
A relatively large and somewhat industrially developed country such as poland would have probably caused massive attrition to the german army had the war been fought with WW1 sustems.
It's not a coincidence that after WW2 , almost every country on earth requires one of the few great military powers to guarantee it's existence.
Giving you a preemptive comment and like until I can get home to watch. All hail the algorithm.
Did you get home?
@@hyraemousno
Agamemnom: bad father. . . Well, that's an understatement.
Yeah probably the worst dad in all of literature lol
Really good video, found your channel from your Roman Empire summary. Have been enjoying the videos ever since then. :)
Love this content. Love been on the ground floor before you get big
love the video !!!
thank you for the effort
Great presentation!
Robert Drews is an incredible author. I highly recommend The Coming of the Greeks. Though there is dated information, like newer and older chariot finds, it's still a really good all encompassing glimpse of small pieces of an incredibly large puzzle.
Yeah he’s a great writer
How common was chariot-friendly terrain? How common was it to encounter an enemy in a location that suited chariots? Or was warfare more ritualistic in the heyday of chariots with both sides agreeing to meet in at a suitable location?
It's kind of tricky to tell, because we have so few detailed battle accounts from the era. The best account we have is of the Battle of Kadesh, in which the two armies sort of stumble across each other (which suggests that warfare wasn't totally ritualistic).
Regarding the terrain, I think different chariot designs from different parts of the Near East show the impact of the environment. Egyptian chariots for example, were light and nimble which makes sense in the largely flat areas of Egypt and the levant. Hittite chariots on the other hand, were larger and more robust, and easier to use in the rough and hilly terrain of Anatolia. You can kind of see this trend in Assyrian art. During the early centuries of the Assyrian empire, chariots are portrayed as small and nimble, with two passengers. This was perfect for the relatively flat lands of norther Iraq and Syria. Later however, when they fight the Urartu and Elamite peoples, who lived in mountainous regions, Assyrian chariots become larger and hold four passengers, with big six ft tall studded wheels that I think were designed with rough terrain in mind.
Nestor: you welps should be fighting from your chariots, with bows and spears!
Young Achaean heroes: OK boomer
Actually, Achilles was a Prince just like Hector was. He was the son Peleus, King of Phthia. The only difference was that Hector obeyed Priam, his father and King, whereas Achilles obeyed Agamemnon, who was neither his father nor his King. There being no familial link between Achilles and Agamemnon, it was harder on Achilles to obey Agamemnon than it was for Hector to obey Priam.
Also, Hector would literally inherit Troy, so it was his birthright and possession. Achilles obeyed Agamemnon because Agamemnon had the most men and he had sworn an oath to serve, but when Agamemnon took his war bride he decided not to serve Agamemnon, causing the Achaean war machine to come to a stop.
Really enjoyable and informative. Chariots were 2 horse. Did you mean spare horses when saying 4?
Cheers
Thanks! You're right, most of our depictions of chariots from the time depict two horses, although four horses weren't uncommon.
great video thanks
Dunking on Troy. 10/10. Subbing in.
Liking the new wall ;)
Good video
I agree, it took time for the Iron Age to really become a thing, never happens over night, such as the Bronze Age collapse itself, took a bit of time for all the things to work together, cause and effect, to end it, such as this example, the Mycenean army mostly gone for a long period of time, if Homer is correct at least 10 years lol, and during that time the slaves, often written as Doweos or Dorios, saw opportunity to rise up, hince the Dorians arrive on the scene in history, this is just one possibility ( theory ) but probably has a lot of truth to it, more so than an invasion from the north, tho both could have happened, there is so much more to learn, always ! :)
“It’s not exactly agincourt”… 😆
4:20 story sounds like the plot to the first Iron Man movie... wait... IRON man? Hmm...
You just destroyed my junior high word history curriculum. Mr. O'Keefe will be very angry (it was 1978 so not sure if he is still with us).
My apologies to Mr O'Keefe if he's watching
I feel like this discounts the idea that the sea peoples were a symptom rather than a cause. At the same time it is recorded both famines, earthquakes and pluages hit the cultures all throughout the mediterranian collapsing trade and weakening the states. This could have sparked a migratory period similar to the fall of Rome causing the dark ages, similarly if the states were embrittled by famines they would have all lost a significant amount of resources. And thus the ability to raise chariots in significant number would dissapear due to cost. Only to be replaced by horses by the new states that would establish themselves.
Good Point! I go into more detail regarding the role of the Sea Peoples and other factors that contributed to the BAC in the accompanying vids
no need to even give Japan as a example. Same thing happened in Europe in the 19th century