Wow, was never expecting a response, but seriously, it's good stuff, I noticed some of your stuff earlier, and it's awesome that you can do a range of different topics relating to history.
This was great. I would love to see more like it. I would also love to see videos on famous Roman, or Greek battles. I know you're a big fan of the Romans :)
Thank you so much for doing this. My 18th Great-grandfather died for Henry V in this battle. Dafydd Gam ap Llewelyn on 25 Oct 1415; Azincourt, Departement du Pas-de-Calais, Nord-Pas-de-Calais, France
Random Actually, that's a common misconception. The technique you described will open a portal through that very mirror. But being wrong about Agincourt will just summon him right to you and make him slice you open with a tulwar.
First clearing up the mistakes of our friend MatPat, and now this. I realise your channel is awesome, and you have earned yourself a new subscriber. Would love more talk about battles.
A great history lesson. I have heard this battle referenced a lot like you said, but I never found a convenient time or motivation to study it. Thankfully you were able to cover it with your trusty daily uploads.
John Keegan has stated in one of his books that one of the reasons why the French lost so heavily was the fact that the French Knights wanted to cross swords with their English counterparts, and so ignored the English Archers. They (the archers) in turn essentially dropped their bows when the French got to close, pulled their knives, and used the vision and breathing openings in the French armor to kill the French knights.
Metatron, I love your channel, and admire the hard work and enthusiasm you invest in it. You always come up with interesting topics to talk about, and I am never bored by any of them. Now, as a special request, I would like to ask you to make a video about the 1582 Cagayan Battles, please. It's an interesting clash between the East and the West, in which 40 Spanish soldiers, supposedly, defeated 1000 Wokou pirates (including ronin). You are an expert on Japanese martial history, and the topic isn't really spoken of by most of the other channels that mainly talk about historical martial arts. It is a great opportunity to discuss a historical event in which katanas were used against European swords.
Man this was perfectly timed with the comment section in Gnoggins video. People were throwing this battle at me saying that full plate was not as effective as I was saying. I disagreed. Perfect timing. Also yes I'd love more analysis on historical battles. Love it.
I didnt know "badass" meant charging knights stuck in the mud under their dead hoses because you shot them and killing them while they couldnt properly fight back And the archers never really left their positions,while would they if they can shoot arrows?
Maurklyn Lyswark of Franklys First off, badass can mean whatever you want it to mean...The English winning while outnumbered...badass...unarmored archers charging into a massive group of French men at arms...badass Second, the archers did leave their positions, they joined the melee with the men at arms and knights...some accounts even state they were quite effective...unarmored, quick, not affected by the mud as badly as the French
Maurklyn Lyswark of Franklys You've obviously never read up on this battle "lad" and when the word is a subjective feeling of awe then yes it can apply to whatever situation you fit it to unarmored is the best way to describe the archers in comparison to the other militants...they would have been wearing a gambeson and perhaps a helmet, not much more They charged into the group of men at arms that formed in front of the line of wooden stakes...they did not charge as in an initial offensive charge you idiot Go actually read up on this shit you arrogant bastard
It's quite ironic that you tell me I never read up on the battle and a few lines later say something I basicly said:they never left their positions. Saying they were unarmored because they had lesser quality armor is as accurate as saying a person with a pistol is unarmed because he faces someone with an assault rifle.Both are weapons that kills,and both plate and gambeson are a "cloth" that protects you from blows that would otherwise slice your guts. Then,if the French infantry was stuck around the wooden stake in front of the English line,and the archers,out of ammo,joined the heavy English infantry (mainly foot English knights and sergents)because they were in front of them when the French infantry got closer,that means they never left their position by advancing toward the enemy line. I just love the way you start insulting me and declare that you know more things than me just because I told you something which is not a copy paste of your thoughts I have my idea on who is the arrogant one right now. (btw you lost your credibility with all your salt laddie)
Lindy Beige releases a video about the Punic Wars today, and now I see your video about the battle of AginCourt... almost too much excitement for one day. XD
Interesting video. I wonder if you are aware of another battle. One which happened elsewhere and was kind of a replay from Agincourt. This is the battle of Aljubarrota fought in Portugal between Portuguese forces with English support and Castillian forces with French knights in support. Much like Agincourt, the battle was defined by the landscape, fought between 2 small rivers and woods to force the knights through a narrow front. Unlike Agincourt, Aljubarrota was fully planned and the ground was prepared with traps and stuff like that. So it was even more deadly. The English longbow were similarly placed on the wings. The French cavalry had a disastrous 1st charge followed by 1 or 2 waves of infantry. It ended with much of the invading army running away in disarray and many soldiers being wounded on their backs. It was reported as a massacre in Castille. The French will seldom speak about it or the losses sustained there. Portugal and England came out of this battle as allies setting maybe the oldest standing alliance still in place today.
Metatron, your channel is awesome. I had been searching for a channel like this for a very long time. The information you provide is authentic and the way you present the information is admirable. I have always been passionate about history and specially about Antiquity and Medieval Europe. You present the topics in such an in depth manner, but also with a lucidity, which is in itself commendable. If you can shed some light on the Emperors, Caligula and Nero and the sacking of Rome by the Ostrogoths and several other Barbarian invasions that lead to the fall of the Western Roman Empire, that would be awesome. Thank you Metatron/Rafaello. Gaius
Anndgrim You mean, am I not interested in the battles where the English lost? Not as much, I like the idea of the whole "archer victory" thing, it presents an image of the arrogant French knights being out-smarted by the English who had a better defensive position. I just like archery in general when it comes to warfare, I also enjoy the Genghis Khan stuff
there is something way more deep than just Archers being "intelligent" lad during the 3 major battles won by England,they used basicly the same tactic:a "fortified" hill from where you just rain arrows. Now there is one little thing I would love to ask you: -You are a medieval Duke in command of a cavalry flank.The opposite side shoots volleys after volleys at you.You cant go back because it would leave the rest of the army exposed,and you cant stay in position because your own missile force is less effective and/or outnumbered.What is you only solution? I do think it's a full force charge,a tactic that works if you are quick enough.Why would I point that?Because it does work indeed,or otherwise Knights would never had dominated the battlefield from the late 11th century to ~the middle of the 15th century. "But the archers still won those battles didnt they?" you might ask me.Welp indeed 3 English armies mainly made of archers won Crécy,Poitiers and Azincourt.Except that those archers used the terrain at their advantage (each of them features a hill and/or a narrow gap) But they were mainly made of archers,that means they had infantry that fought with the other army and defeated it. It's easy to say that you outsmarted an enemy simply because they cant go back.I think it's a natural reaction for a commander to use the only solution he has in store for his unit (in that case cavalry) using the power of this same unit (in that case,the power of a charge).As a conclusion I will give you an exemple of a battle won by cavalry against archers in the Hundred Years War:the battle of Patay (1429) where a vanguard of the French army (with around 1000 men) used the power of their unit (they were basicly all mounted) and charged into the English army,killing around 6000 archers.They outsmarted the English,because they charged while the Archers could not properly respond,as they were out of position
I would love to see more medieval battles covered. Not just medieval, but any in general. It would also be neat if you showed a picture or two of the place and point where armies were and how they maneuvered through the battlefield. I understand that would be more time consuming, but it would greatly add to the immersion.
Hey Metatron! I am a Portuguese native speaker (Brazil) and I am also an English teacher. If you want to learn or practice your Portuguese, just talk to me, okay? I would be more than happy to help, of course for free - in retribution to all the knowledge and fun I've got from your videos! Abraços!
Very complete research. I have been shooting medieval crossbows and bows for quite a while now and I know that the longer shaft and the fetching of the medieval arrow has an accuracy advantage over the crossbow...
I already read about that battle, but very interesting to hear something more about the strategic factors. More videos about important battles would be awsome !
Love English history. I had my DNA tested through Ancestry, and pretty much is a mix of every people that has ever called these islands home. Not surprising, but still fascinating.
Very good video. Thank you. It would be great if you could speak about some of the "de bello gallico" battles and some from the Italian Wars" of 1494-1559, maybe with focus on Giovanni dalle Bande Nere!
teufeldritch actually he did not there is no truth to it think if you think your brother in law killed your son's why would you send your daughter to him
This was just great, I would love to see a series of Important Battles. From Marathon, to Rome, to the Middle ages, and why not? modern times. Keep up the good stuff Metatron.
A very well-done video. All I ever hear of Agincourt is the longbow and the mud. Never knew of the mass numbers of captured French, or Henry V's face wound.
I would love to see more videos about historic battles. Or anything, really. You could aimlessly ramble at the camera for 3 hours and I'd still watch it :P
raff please do more of these. be good if you did them in the original languages as well. I don't mind reading subtitles, I love here what people would have spoken like
I agree with your point about heat treated armour being pretty much invulnerable to, well, everything. This certainly seems to be an important factor for the success of the Milanese cavalry at Verneuil. The sheer amount and quality of steel armour they wore, and seemingly their horses were clad in, allowed them to break clean through the English line despite going headfirst into the "arrow storm". Of course, being mercenaries the went and raided the English baggage train and gained more wealth than the French were ever going to pay them, giving John of Bedford time to regroup his knights and men-at-arms and defeat the French in a brutal and grueling melee.
England waged a war to take the french throne and not only it didn't get the french throne but it also lost all it's territories in France (Normandy and Aquitaine) during the course of the war. How is that supposed to be a victory ? France won the war, that's not even debatable.
No the French won the war, this battle was part of the hundred years war. In the end the French won, after the Battle of Castillon in 1453. Officially the two nations remained at war for about 20 more years, but the English couldn't fight because of unrest in the country (neither could France to be fair). In fact shortly after the War of the Roses broke out (in 1455 circa). The English were successful under Henry V rule, from around 1415 (Battle of Agincourt) to 1430. After 1430, Joan d'Arc appeared and ignited the French revival, that ultimately brought France to victory.
Mr. Metatron, please make one for the 100 years war. It's only fair to the Frenchies after showcasing a battle won by the English. Also fantastic job making distinctions. I learned a lot, and this is consistent with what I've seen lately about plate armor.
An extremelly really good video, well documented, on a famous but poorly know event. It's not common to find a video speaking about the tactical success of king Henry V. Toutes mes félicitations, ô grand samouraï napolitain! Azincourt - the british pronouncement is nearly illegal here in France - was curiously beneficial in the long term to the french, particulary in terme of evolution of military doctrine (without leaving heavy cavalry, we are french after all!). It can be interesting to compare the battle of Azincourt to an other crucial battles of the late 100 year war: Patay and Formigny, which illustrate perfectly the defaults of the english doctrine: lack of mobility and initiative, fragility of longbowmen in hand-to-hand combat (and long formation of new archers), and paradoxically, inability to adapt to new tactics (artillery, war of siege, logic of campagne, ...).
Yes, the Hundred Years Wars are far more interesting when examined from an overall strategical and logistical point of view. How the English essentially "broke" european medieval warfare by going full mongol (everyone on horses, waste the countryside), forcing France to adapt by making more fortifications and holing up in castles. Indenture leading to a systematic use of mercenaries by both parties, wich eventually plagued the countryside with brigands. And how all of these elements led to the development of the different french counter-strategies (DuGuesclin "guerilla" warfare and later on the complete transformation and reorganisation of the french military by Charles VII). It's a great example for how economics, context and weaponry affect and change tactics and strategies.
Unqualified side note: I'm at 0:55 and hit the like button just because the intro is absolutely awesome! (And: I absolutely appreciate history lectures by Metatron :) )
I'd love to see an episode of the battle of Towton, it's a relatively little known battle for how important it was, as well as being relevant to the whole arrows vs armour discussion that is going on in the community at the moment.
That's so weird i made a video to do with the longbow and i mentioned the Battle Of Agincourt and then you make a video on it what a coincidence any way nice video metatron :)
I first learned about the Battle of Agincourt from a novel called Out of the Dark, by David Weber. In it, a group of aliens observe the battle, and are so disgusted by the brutality of both the battle and the slaughter of prisoners that their superiors decide to conquer Earth in order to subjugate the beastly humans. I highly recommend it if you enjoy military hard sci-fi, although it should be noted that it almost completely takes place in modern day, not in Medieval times.
great video!! there is something that I don't particulary understand about cavalry charges in general. once the charge hits the enemy line, wouldn't their lances go through the enemy's bodies and break or get lost? would the cavalry then go back to get another lance and charge again? at the moment of the impact, does the rider's horse also impact on the enemy soldiers? could you please do a video explaining the details of the impact of such a charge?
n1. Knights had swords, maces and squires for a reason, and n2. Yes, it did impact on the enemy infantry, but only if the charge was carried out properly, which means maintaining very close ranks and cohesion so as to not give the horse the chance to back away.
Alessandro Navone Also I have a question is a cavalry charge effective enough to cleave through multiple ranks of enemies like the Rohans charge in Lotr or only a few ranks?
Aaron bc There are various historical accounts of cavalry expressly beinh used to do just that. The key is to ride in a V shaped formation. Rather than spread out the impact over a large area, you concentrate it in a tight area so you can push through.
z0quetee To break ones lance in a cavalry charge was actually quite honourable, so yes that did happen quite allot, particularly with Cav on Cav engagements.
I do like the idea of a historical series, but I want to mention that Agincourt was a complete wipe for the French, with estimated losses of only about 100 English to some 12,000 or more French (depending on your sources). While they couldn't penetrate the plate armor, which is why the French cavalry were so bold as to charge into a swamp, the infantry undoubtedly would have been riddled with arrows during the advance, meaning the cavalry were completely unsupported and were easy pickings for the infantry once they finally made it through the swamp.
Matt also mentioned in his video that Jean le Maingre (Boucicaut), the Marshal of France was leading the French vanguard's charge, so he probably got head-on everything the English archers had to offer, and he didn't die, he was captured and died in captivity 6 years later, implying he wasn't wounded, or at least, not seriously. He was, of course, France's foremost champion, an epitome of chivalry of the age, so he probably wore the best available armor, which goes perfectly well what you mentioned, that good quality armor of the time was more or less impervious to even nearly point-blank longbow-fire.
Great video as usual. I am interested in war of the roses videos, as well as 100 years war videos. However, being of English decent, I have reas stuff on a number of these battles. I think something more close to home for you would be interesting, as there was a pretty solid time of termoil between Italian city states that I know little to nothing about, and do not see a lot about.
ciao =) innanzitutto, vorrei farti i complimenti per la qualità dei video,nonostante l'alto rate nel pubblicarli, inoltre, vorrei chiederti se ci fosse la possibilità in futuro di un video riguardante la yari, mi sto incuriosendo riguardo le armi orientali principalmente grazie ai tuoi video, ti saluto e grazie per l'attenzione
Hey Metatron, can you make a video discussing how heavy cavalry isn't the end-all weapon in Medieval warfare? I've been reading a bit on the subject, and I found this cool little excerpt: The knightly class viewed missile weapons with some disdain, but the battles of Crecy and Agincourt during the Hundred Years’ War (1337-1453) displayed the fallacy of heavy cavalry operating independently of accompanying infantry forces especially against opponents equipped with missile weapons. While the English used the longbow to great effect with their combined formations of heavy cavalry and light infantry, the Swiss turned to ancient infantry formations to provide the answer in countering heavy cavalry forces. The Swiss did not possess extensive land holdings or access to heavy warhorses and the costly armor associated with heavy cavalry. Due to the rugged terrain and their limited resources, the Swiss naturally favored fighting on foot rather than the mounted combat system so prevalent throughout much of Medieval Europe. Renaissance historian and philosopher Niccolò Machiavelli commented in his Art of War, “From this it arises that, since they were on foot and wished to defend themselves from an enemy who was on horseback, they had to search the ancient orders again and find arms that might defend them against the fury of the horse.” In many aspects, the Swiss militia system mirrored the hoplite warfare of the ancient Greek militias. Each Swiss citizen underwent compulsory military training and had to provide their armor and weapons. Unlike their mounted opponents, the Swiss only wore a breastplate and steel cap for armor. This offered the Swiss two distinct advantages, the reduced cost of outfitting forces and an unencumbered force that moved quicker than its heavily armored opponents did. By keeping the cost to outfit forces reduced, the Swiss ensured maximum participation from their citizenry and the lightened loads allowed Swiss soldiers to muster and march quickly to defend their territory. ...The Swiss initially used a formation similar to a Greek phalanx and armed their forces with a pole arm called a halberd. This eight foot long weapon consisted of a hardwood shaft and a tip that combined an axe, spear tip, and hook into one murderously effective weapon. The halberd allowed Swiss militiamen to pull opponents from their horse, thrust with the spear into unprotected areas, and deliver a chopping blow with the axe head. The Swiss drilled their formations to quickly transit from a marching column into a battle square as the situation dictated. The relative simplicity of the formation allowed the Swiss to follow the man to their front and the first four ranks to level their halberds while the remaining ranks kept their weapons upraised to quickly fill in gaps.
I think you did a good job covering one facet of the battle, but there was so much more going on. For one thing, even when the French knights, men-at-arms, and soldiers got past the hail of arrows, they overwhelmingly lost to the superior formations and tactics of the English infantry. The English infantry always gets short shrift when this battle is discussed.
Hello Metatron, very good video as usual. I liked how you don't forget to mention that these french knights didn't have what we call full plate today. At the time I think only dukes could afford full plate and Italian mercenaries perhaps. I remember that a lot of "knights" in agincourt were in fact Italian mercenaries because they were the only ones with armor able to withstand longbows. Theses mercenaries introduced the full plate to France (full plate is an Italian technology if I'm not wrong). Would you do a video on battle of Castillon perhaps?
I remember watching a program about the battle where they said that the mud was a big issue not just for walking through but also for the suction effect on the armour. So basically once the guy went down he couldn't get up again. Then he became an easy target for suffocating, drowning or the archers knives. Also crowd control was a problem for the French as the were basically funneled down into a choke point. The result of this was that they were so overcrowded that they interfered with each other's ability to fight.
Hi Metatron! One more great video. How do you think, can you make video about role of infantry in the middle ages in the future? There are many opinions abouth that and I think many of your subscribers would like to hear yours. Especially now, when you talked about Agincourt.
Your French pronunciation is impressive and the level of history in this video is impressive. Agincourt was a obvious English victory and French defeat . But the scale of French disaster is in the details. French casualties were either as low as 4000 or as high as 10000 with a figure of about 6000 commonly accepted. The French were broken and the English gained prestige( and much needed morale)
Ther e is a saying about how it's the side that makes fewer mistakes that win the battle. I saw somewhere on the Agincourt battle that French nobility disregarded completly their commender in chief's battle plan, relegating their crosbow unit to the rear where they had no impact. The plan was to 'soften' the Englishmen (who were hungry and sick if I'm not mistaken) with long range exchange and then have the rest of the army swoop in to finish them. However, in typical French bluster the tactically sound plan was thrown to the oubliettes and mistakes pilled up until the French were defeated... It was a battle the French shouldn't have lost if they had respected the tactical mores of the time. That's why it's so famous.
Hello Metatron I really like your content, keep up the good work! One question I have for you is do you know about goju ryu and if do know about of have actually trained it what do you think of it as a martial art?
Would definitely want to see a video on the Battle of Poitiers at least, for some reason I always found it more interesting than either Crécy or Agincourt. The Battle of Nájera could need some love as well though even if it technically was fought in spain.
![The Battle of Agincourt | Unravelling a Most Famous Victory | Hundred Years War [Episode 14]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/vnpcd-HX5FE/mqdefault.jpg)
Metatron: "It`s friday..."
Me: No it`s not.
Metatron: "...twentyfifth of October 1415..."
Me: Ooooh...
Every day is Friday when you bring your flask to work.
They should've bought some horse armor DLC.
algi check Xbox live. overpriced af
XD
With the regular uploads, I'm finding this channel more and more enjoyable, and informative.
I'm glad you are mate ^^
Wow, was never expecting a response, but seriously, it's good stuff, I noticed some of your stuff earlier, and it's awesome that you can do a range of different topics relating to history.
This was great. I would love to see more like it. I would also love to see videos on famous Roman, or Greek battles. I know you're a big fan of the Romans :)
I support this!
julesmaester Same. I think it's a mixture of my lack of knowledge on then, and how far back they are in history from us in the modern day.
He'd have to learn Latin :D
Matt F, I'm almost sure that he already know
Nπr geledutén, nun spremod u gяut aotskala, o eoяs der xasename.
Thank you so much for doing this. My 18th Great-grandfather died for Henry V in this battle.
Dafydd Gam ap Llewelyn on 25 Oct 1415; Azincourt, Departement du Pas-de-Calais, Nord-Pas-de-Calais, France
Metatron is probably the most entertaining person on youtube
Thank you for saying so ^^
that is how you summon Matt Easton
How?
exsactly :D :D
Oh, he'll be all over this video if he doesn't like it :D You don't get between Matt and Agincourt.
I thought it was by looking at a mirror and saying "Context" three times.
Random Actually, that's a common misconception. The technique you described will open a portal through that very mirror. But being wrong about Agincourt will just summon him right to you and make him slice you open with a tulwar.
the 100 years war is something id love to see a series about. cant get enough!
You're too close to the camera.
Are you sure you aren't too close to your monitor?
Akm72
I just want to see all part of the fore head
Next video will just be his eyes staring penetratingly right down into your soul.
Aaron Seet I would be okay with that :)
Or not close enough!!!
seriously.... who keeps disliking these videos? I think you are doing great Raff, keep up the good work!
First clearing up the mistakes of our friend MatPat, and now this. I realise your channel is awesome, and you have earned yourself a new subscriber. Would love more talk about battles.
one of the greatest medieval battles, fantastic job Sir Metatron
Really love listening to the a bit lengthy videos like this in the background when doing boring tasks.
A great history lesson. I have heard this battle referenced a lot like you said, but I never found a convenient time or motivation to study it. Thankfully you were able to cover it with your trusty daily uploads.
John Keegan has stated in one of his books that one of the reasons why the French lost so heavily was the fact that the French Knights wanted to cross swords with their English counterparts, and so ignored the English Archers. They (the archers) in turn essentially dropped their bows when the French got to close, pulled their knives, and used the vision and breathing openings in the French armor to kill the French knights.
Metatron, I love your channel, and admire the hard work and enthusiasm you invest in it. You always come up with interesting topics to talk about, and I am never bored by any of them. Now, as a special request, I would like to ask you to make a video about the 1582 Cagayan Battles, please. It's an interesting clash between the East and the West, in which 40 Spanish soldiers, supposedly, defeated 1000 Wokou pirates (including ronin). You are an expert on Japanese martial history, and the topic isn't really spoken of by most of the other channels that mainly talk about historical martial arts. It is a great opportunity to discuss a historical event in which katanas were used against European swords.
Man this was perfectly timed with the comment section in Gnoggins video. People were throwing this battle at me saying that full plate was not as effective as I was saying. I disagreed. Perfect timing.
Also yes I'd love more analysis on historical battles. Love it.
English longbowmen were badass. After they stunned the armored knights in the mud, they charged in with knives.
I didnt know "badass" meant charging knights stuck in the mud under their dead hoses because you shot them and killing them while they couldnt properly fight back
And the archers never really left their positions,while would they if they can shoot arrows?
Maurklyn Lyswark of Franklys First off, badass can mean whatever you want it to mean...The English winning while outnumbered...badass...unarmored archers charging into a massive group of French men at arms...badass
Second, the archers did leave their positions, they joined the melee with the men at arms and knights...some accounts even state they were quite effective...unarmored, quick, not affected by the mud as badly as the French
Maurklyn Lyswark of Franklys You've obviously never read up on this battle "lad" and when the word is a subjective feeling of awe then yes it can apply to whatever situation you fit it to
unarmored is the best way to describe the archers in comparison to the other militants...they would have been wearing a gambeson and perhaps a helmet, not much more
They charged into the group of men at arms that formed in front of the line of wooden stakes...they did not charge as in an initial offensive charge you idiot
Go actually read up on this shit you arrogant bastard
It's quite ironic that you tell me I never read up on the battle and a few lines later say something I basicly said:they never left their positions.
Saying they were unarmored because they had lesser quality armor is as accurate as saying a person with a pistol is unarmed because he faces someone with an assault rifle.Both are weapons that kills,and both plate and gambeson are a "cloth" that protects you from blows that would otherwise slice your guts.
Then,if the French infantry was stuck around the wooden stake in front of the English line,and the archers,out of ammo,joined the heavy English infantry (mainly foot English knights and sergents)because they were in front of them when the French infantry got closer,that means they never left their position by advancing toward the enemy line.
I just love the way you start insulting me and declare that you know more things than me just because I told you something which is not a copy paste of your thoughts
I have my idea on who is the arrogant one right now. (btw you lost your credibility with all your salt laddie)
Simon Sundy lol do your reasearch pls english longbowmen are actually pretty well armored as they are expensive assests to the king
Lindy Beige releases a video about the Punic Wars today, and now I see your video about the battle of AginCourt... almost too much excitement for one day. XD
The video length is the same as the year the Hundred Years War started. Was this on purpose, Raff?
haha
Eldgrim it's also one of the Dank Numbers...
it's 1 sec shorter in mine.
Interesting video. I wonder if you are aware of another battle. One which happened elsewhere and was kind of a replay from Agincourt. This is the battle of Aljubarrota fought in Portugal between Portuguese forces with English support and Castillian forces with French knights in support. Much like Agincourt, the battle was defined by the landscape, fought between 2 small rivers and woods to force the knights through a narrow front. Unlike Agincourt, Aljubarrota was fully planned and the ground was prepared with traps and stuff like that. So it was even more deadly. The English longbow were similarly placed on the wings. The French cavalry had a disastrous 1st charge followed by 1 or 2 waves of infantry. It ended with much of the invading army running away in disarray and many soldiers being wounded on their backs. It was reported as a massacre in Castille. The French will seldom speak about it or the losses sustained there. Portugal and England came out of this battle as allies setting maybe the oldest standing alliance still in place today.
You need to do more of these Battle videos that'll be just another topic for your channel that I know I'm not the only one who would enjoy watching
Metatron, your channel is awesome. I had been searching for a channel like this for a very long time. The information you provide is authentic and the way you present the information is admirable. I have always been passionate about history and specially about Antiquity and Medieval Europe. You present the topics in such an in depth manner, but also with a lucidity, which is in itself commendable.
If you can shed some light on the Emperors, Caligula and Nero and the sacking of Rome by the Ostrogoths and several other Barbarian invasions that lead to the fall of the Western Roman Empire, that would be awesome.
Thank you Metatron/Rafaello.
Gaius
It's awesome that you made a video on this battle, this one and the battle of Crecy are the two medieval battles that interested me the most
Not interested in any of the defeats?
Anndgrim You mean, am I not interested in the battles where the English lost? Not as much, I like the idea of the whole "archer victory" thing, it presents an image of the arrogant French knights being out-smarted by the English who had a better defensive position. I just like archery in general when it comes to warfare, I also enjoy the Genghis Khan stuff
there is something way more deep than just Archers being "intelligent" lad
during the 3 major battles won by England,they used basicly the same tactic:a "fortified" hill from where you just rain arrows.
Now there is one little thing I would love to ask you:
-You are a medieval Duke in command of a cavalry flank.The opposite side shoots volleys after volleys at you.You cant go back because it would leave the rest of the army exposed,and you cant stay in position because your own missile force is less effective and/or outnumbered.What is you only solution?
I do think it's a full force charge,a tactic that works if you are quick enough.Why would I point that?Because it does work indeed,or otherwise Knights would never had dominated the battlefield from the late 11th century to ~the middle of the 15th century.
"But the archers still won those battles didnt they?" you might ask me.Welp indeed 3 English armies mainly made of archers won Crécy,Poitiers and Azincourt.Except that those archers used the terrain at their advantage (each of them features a hill and/or a narrow gap) But they were mainly made of archers,that means they had infantry that fought with the other army and defeated it.
It's easy to say that you outsmarted an enemy simply because they cant go back.I think it's a natural reaction for a commander to use the only solution he has in store for his unit (in that case cavalry) using the power of this same unit (in that case,the power of a charge).As a conclusion I will give you an exemple of a battle won by cavalry against archers in the Hundred Years War:the battle of Patay (1429) where a vanguard of the French army (with around 1000 men) used the power of their unit (they were basicly all mounted) and charged into the English army,killing around 6000 archers.They outsmarted the English,because they charged while the Archers could not properly respond,as they were out of position
I would love to see more medieval battles covered. Not just medieval, but any in general. It would also be neat if you showed a picture or two of the place and point where armies were and how they maneuvered through the battlefield. I understand that would be more time consuming, but it would greatly add to the immersion.
Hey Metatron! I am a Portuguese native speaker (Brazil) and I am also an English teacher. If you want to learn or practice your Portuguese, just talk to me, okay? I would be more than happy to help, of course for free - in retribution to all the knowledge and fun I've got from your videos! Abraços!
Very complete research. I have been shooting medieval crossbows and bows for quite a while now and I know that the longer shaft and the fetching of the medieval arrow has an accuracy advantage over the crossbow...
I already read about that battle, but very interesting to hear something more about the strategic factors. More videos about important battles would be awsome !
a full serie on important battles? That's a great idea!
I have been waiting for you to do this video thank Talos for this.
Please do more of these it would be great to watch as well as informing too.
Love English history.
I had my DNA tested through Ancestry, and pretty much is a mix of every people that has ever called these islands home. Not surprising, but still fascinating.
The video made some great points that I hadn't considered, my opinion on the battle was wrong. Thanks Metatron.
You should make more videos about important battles in the 100 years war or any other historical/medieval battles at that, they are great!
I like the message of this. Training and tactics, i.e. education and planning, were the decisive elements. Change is rarer than it seems, noble ones!
Very good video. Thank you. It would be great if you could speak about some of the "de bello gallico" battles and some from the Italian Wars" of 1494-1559, maybe with focus on Giovanni dalle Bande Nere!
"War of Roses are red
Strangled nephews are blue
He waited 500 years
Under a carpark for you!"
teufeldritch actually he did not there is no truth to it think if you think your brother in law killed your son's why would you send your daughter to him
Re-read the limerick.
Richard was framed ! :)
This was just great, I would love to see a series of Important Battles. From Marathon, to Rome, to the Middle ages, and why not? modern times. Keep up the good stuff Metatron.
Je suis français et j'approuve cette vidéo.
Great work!
A very well-done video. All I ever hear of Agincourt is the longbow and the mud. Never knew of the mass numbers of captured French, or Henry V's face wound.
Ooooh baby, this has been a long time coming...
I would love to see more videos about historic battles.
Or anything, really. You could aimlessly ramble at the camera for 3 hours and I'd still watch it :P
Yes please! I love these historical videos that you make. Please make more of them if you are able
Great video. I would enjoy much more of this content.
Damn you're not bad at french.
(Greetings from France ^^)
Tes trop gentil! Haha
Excellent ! That would be nice if you dedicate one day of your weekly uploads to decisive battles of the world
this was fantastic. hope you do more of these!
Just read about it, fantastic battle and a fantastic video as always.
Yes please do more of these!
I really liked this idea. I'll be looking forward to more battlefield breakdowns! :)
raff please do more of these. be good if you did them in the original languages as well. I don't mind reading subtitles, I love here what people would have spoken like
I agree with your point about heat treated armour being pretty much invulnerable to, well, everything. This certainly seems to be an important factor for the success of the Milanese cavalry at Verneuil. The sheer amount and quality of steel armour they wore, and seemingly their horses were clad in, allowed them to break clean through the English line despite going headfirst into the "arrow storm". Of course, being mercenaries the went and raided the English baggage train and gained more wealth than the French were ever going to pay them, giving John of Bedford time to regroup his knights and men-at-arms and defeat the French in a brutal and grueling melee.
Remember that the french won the war!
No one ever talks about the battle of Castillon, maybe because the english were so bad during that one that you really can't comment on it.
No they didn't, the English won the war. The French won another war that was a few decades later.
England waged a war to take the french throne and not only it didn't get the french throne but it also lost all it's territories in France (Normandy and Aquitaine) during the course of the war. How is that supposed to be a victory ? France won the war, that's not even debatable.
No the French won the war, this battle was part of the hundred years war. In the end the French won, after the Battle of Castillon in 1453. Officially the two nations remained at war for about 20 more years, but the English couldn't fight because of unrest in the country (neither could France to be fair). In fact shortly after the War of the Roses broke out (in 1455 circa). The English were successful under Henry V rule, from around 1415 (Battle of Agincourt) to 1430. After 1430, Joan d'Arc appeared and ignited the French revival, that ultimately brought France to victory.
The name of the Hundred Years war is misleading. It wasn't a single war, but a series of wars.
Yes please, make a series about famous battles!
I really enjoyed this video, it would be very nice too see more of thes.
Metaton Can you do a video about Chinese wepons
also can you make a video about editing videos I am a UA-camr who needs help with editing.
oh yeah and my ancestors served under the Chinese emperor.
I agree; he should do other Asian countries like China, Korea, Thailand, etc, as he promised.
I'd love it if someone did a documentary about Vietnam's Trung sisters.
Book Knight Don't forget the Mongolians, they are kind of important to asian history
Amazing video. Pls do more of these!
Thank you , good presentation
Mr. Metatron, please make one for the 100 years war. It's only fair to the Frenchies after showcasing a battle won by the English. Also fantastic job making distinctions. I learned a lot, and this is consistent with what I've seen lately about plate armor.
An extremelly really good video, well documented, on a famous but poorly know event. It's not common to find a video speaking about the tactical success of king Henry V. Toutes mes félicitations, ô grand samouraï napolitain!
Azincourt - the british pronouncement is nearly illegal here in France - was curiously beneficial in the long term to the french, particulary in terme of evolution of military doctrine (without leaving heavy cavalry, we are french after all!). It can be interesting to compare the battle of Azincourt to an other crucial battles of the late 100 year war: Patay and Formigny, which illustrate perfectly the defaults of the english doctrine: lack of mobility and initiative, fragility of longbowmen in hand-to-hand combat (and long formation of new archers), and paradoxically, inability to adapt to new tactics (artillery, war of siege, logic of campagne, ...).
Jenkouille, n'est-il pas sicilien ?
Yes, the Hundred Years Wars are far more interesting when examined from an overall strategical and logistical point of view. How the English essentially "broke" european medieval warfare by going full mongol (everyone on horses, waste the countryside), forcing France to adapt by making more fortifications and holing up in castles. Indenture leading to a systematic use of mercenaries by both parties, wich eventually plagued the countryside with brigands. And how all of these elements led to the development of the different french counter-strategies (DuGuesclin "guerilla" warfare and later on the complete transformation and reorganisation of the french military by Charles VII).
It's a great example for how economics, context and weaponry affect and change tactics and strategies.
Unqualified side note: I'm at 0:55 and hit the like button just because the intro is absolutely awesome! (And: I absolutely appreciate history lectures by Metatron :) )
Meta... you certainly have an amazing ability with languages, a polyglot of the highest order, indeed !
I'd love to see an episode of the battle of Towton, it's a relatively little known battle for how important it was, as well as being relevant to the whole arrows vs armour discussion that is going on in the community at the moment.
Metatron, please talk about the Circle of Malta! and emblematic and inspiring war!
That's so weird i made a video to do with the longbow and i mentioned the Battle Of Agincourt and then you make a video on it what a coincidence any way nice video metatron :)
would you mind doing a video on tibetan weapons and armour or tactics?
themonkeywarrior111 yes please!
That would be interesting as I don't have a clue about it.
Yeah some more contend about the war of roses would be realy great. As always great vid Mr Metatron / Raff keep it up bro
I first learned about the Battle of Agincourt from a novel called Out of the Dark, by David Weber. In it, a group of aliens observe the battle, and are so disgusted by the brutality of both the battle and the slaughter of prisoners that their superiors decide to conquer Earth in order to subjugate the beastly humans. I highly recommend it if you enjoy military hard sci-fi, although it should be noted that it almost completely takes place in modern day, not in Medieval times.
great video!!
there is something that I don't particulary understand about cavalry charges in general. once the charge hits the enemy line, wouldn't their lances go through the enemy's bodies and break or get lost? would the cavalry then go back to get another lance and charge again? at the moment of the impact, does the rider's horse also impact on the enemy soldiers?
could you please do a video explaining the details of the impact of such a charge?
n1. Knights had swords, maces and squires for a reason, and n2. Yes, it did impact on the enemy infantry, but only if the charge was carried out properly, which means maintaining very close ranks and cohesion so as to not give the horse the chance to back away.
Alessandro Navone Also I have a question is a cavalry charge effective enough to cleave through multiple ranks of enemies like the Rohans charge in Lotr or only a few ranks?
a few before they get bogged down but if they the enemy start to flee they can run men down all day.
Aaron bc There are various historical accounts of cavalry expressly beinh used to do just that.
The key is to ride in a V shaped formation. Rather than spread out the impact over a large area, you concentrate it in a tight area so you can push through.
z0quetee To break ones lance in a cavalry charge was actually quite honourable, so yes that did happen quite allot, particularly with Cav on Cav engagements.
Great beginning to a new series I hope!
I do like the idea of a historical series, but I want to mention that Agincourt was a complete wipe for the French, with estimated losses of only about 100 English to some 12,000 or more French (depending on your sources). While they couldn't penetrate the plate armor, which is why the French cavalry were so bold as to charge into a swamp, the infantry undoubtedly would have been riddled with arrows during the advance, meaning the cavalry were completely unsupported and were easy pickings for the infantry once they finally made it through the swamp.
Matt also mentioned in his video that Jean le Maingre (Boucicaut), the Marshal of France was leading the French vanguard's charge, so he probably got head-on everything the English archers had to offer, and he didn't die, he was captured and died in captivity 6 years later, implying he wasn't wounded, or at least, not seriously.
He was, of course, France's foremost champion, an epitome of chivalry of the age, so he probably wore the best available armor, which goes perfectly well what you mentioned, that good quality armor of the time was more or less impervious to even nearly point-blank longbow-fire.
Cool video. How about a series about the battles of the Renaissance in Italy?
I love your videos, Metatron. I'd love to see one on the War of the Roses...
full series of the battles please.
This occurred 602 years ago on this day.. Incredible!!!
Great video as usual. I am interested in war of the roses videos, as well as 100 years war videos. However, being of English decent, I have reas stuff on a number of these battles. I think something more close to home for you would be interesting, as there was a pretty solid time of termoil between Italian city states that I know little to nothing about, and do not see a lot about.
ciao =) innanzitutto, vorrei farti i complimenti per la qualità dei video,nonostante l'alto rate nel pubblicarli, inoltre, vorrei chiederti se ci fosse la possibilità in futuro di un video riguardante la yari, mi sto incuriosendo riguardo le armi orientali principalmente grazie ai tuoi video, ti saluto e grazie per l'attenzione
Christ, I love how active your channel is! Haha
I'm glad you do, but you can call me Metatron ;) ahahah JK!
Thank you, I have been saying these points for years. ... well most of them (in regards to battle of agincourt)
Waow, tu parles vraiment bien français :) I'm very impressed ! Also, really nice video :)
Hey Metatron, can you make a video discussing how heavy cavalry isn't the end-all weapon in Medieval warfare? I've been reading a bit on the subject, and I found this cool little excerpt:
The knightly class viewed missile weapons with some disdain, but the battles of Crecy and Agincourt during the Hundred Years’ War (1337-1453) displayed the fallacy of heavy cavalry operating independently of accompanying infantry forces especially against opponents equipped with missile weapons.
While the English used the longbow to great effect with their combined formations of heavy cavalry and light infantry, the Swiss turned to ancient infantry formations to provide the answer in countering heavy cavalry forces.
The Swiss did not possess extensive land holdings or access to heavy warhorses and the costly armor associated with heavy cavalry.
Due to the rugged terrain and their limited resources, the Swiss naturally favored fighting on foot rather than the mounted combat system so prevalent throughout much of Medieval Europe.
Renaissance historian and philosopher Niccolò Machiavelli commented in his Art of War, “From this it arises that, since they were on foot and wished to defend themselves from an enemy who was on horseback, they had to search the ancient orders again and find arms that might defend them against the fury of the horse.”
In many aspects, the Swiss militia system mirrored the hoplite warfare of the ancient Greek militias. Each Swiss citizen underwent compulsory military training and had to provide their armor and weapons.
Unlike their mounted opponents, the Swiss only wore a breastplate and steel cap for armor. This offered the Swiss two distinct advantages, the reduced cost of outfitting forces and an unencumbered force that moved quicker than its heavily armored opponents did. By keeping the cost to outfit forces reduced, the Swiss ensured maximum participation from their citizenry and the lightened loads allowed Swiss soldiers to muster and march quickly to defend their territory.
...The Swiss initially used a formation similar to a Greek phalanx and armed their forces with a pole arm called a halberd. This eight foot long weapon consisted of a hardwood shaft and a tip that combined an axe, spear tip, and hook into one murderously effective weapon.
The halberd allowed Swiss militiamen to pull opponents from their horse, thrust with the spear into unprotected areas, and deliver a chopping blow with the axe head. The Swiss drilled their formations to quickly transit from a marching column into a battle square as the situation dictated. The relative simplicity of the formation allowed the Swiss to follow the man to their front and the first four ranks to level their halberds while the remaining ranks kept their weapons upraised to quickly fill in gaps.
I would enjoying seeing more of these videos, perhaps in more detail if it is available from historical sources.
Finally some common sense and practical reality about Agincourt 👏👏👏👏👏
Hearing about horses made me cry 😭
Shoot, this was great! Much better than the video I did on the battle of Stirling bridge. :)
more history on the 100 year war, and the war of the roses would be wonderful, thanks
I think you did a good job covering one facet of the battle, but there was so much more going on. For one thing, even when the French knights, men-at-arms, and soldiers got past the hail of arrows, they overwhelmingly lost to the superior formations and tactics of the English infantry. The English infantry always gets short shrift when this battle is discussed.
Hello Metatron, very good video as usual. I liked how you don't forget to mention that these french knights didn't have what we call full plate today. At the time I think only dukes could afford full plate and Italian mercenaries perhaps. I remember that a lot of "knights" in agincourt were in fact Italian mercenaries because they were the only ones with armor able to withstand longbows. Theses mercenaries introduced the full plate to France (full plate is an Italian technology if I'm not wrong).
Would you do a video on battle of Castillon perhaps?
I remember watching a program about the battle where they said that the mud was a big issue not just for walking through but also for the suction effect on the armour. So basically once the guy went down he couldn't get up again. Then he became an easy target for suffocating, drowning or the archers knives.
Also crowd control was a problem for the French as the were basically funneled down into a choke point. The result of this was that they were so overcrowded that they interfered with each other's ability to fight.
excellent..yes more please
Hi Metatron! One more great video. How do you think, can you make video about role of infantry in the middle ages in the future? There are many opinions abouth that and I think many of your subscribers would like to hear yours. Especially now, when you talked about Agincourt.
Your French pronunciation is impressive and the level of history in this video is impressive. Agincourt was a obvious English victory and French defeat . But the scale of French disaster is in the details. French casualties were either as low as 4000 or as high as 10000 with a figure of about 6000 commonly accepted. The French were broken and the English gained prestige( and much needed morale)
Ther e is a saying about how it's the side that makes fewer mistakes that win the battle. I saw somewhere on the Agincourt battle that French nobility disregarded completly their commender in chief's battle plan, relegating their crosbow unit to the rear where they had no impact.
The plan was to 'soften' the Englishmen (who were hungry and sick if I'm not mistaken) with long range exchange and then have the rest of the army swoop in to finish them.
However, in typical French bluster the tactically sound plan was thrown to the oubliettes and mistakes pilled up until the French were defeated...
It was a battle the French shouldn't have lost if they had respected the tactical mores of the time. That's why it's so famous.
Great video! By the way, your neck posture has improved alot by tucking your chin
More about the major battles? Yes.
Metatron, could you do a video on the 1453 conquest of Constantinople? This was very well done.
1:14 Fort accent mais excellent Français !
Good video overall, you gained a suscriber !
Hello Metatron
I really like your content, keep up the good work!
One question I have for you is do you know about goju ryu and if do know about of have actually trained it what do you think of it as a martial art?
Would definitely want to see a video on the Battle of Poitiers at least, for some reason I always found it more interesting than either Crécy or Agincourt.
The Battle of Nájera could need some love as well though even if it technically was fought in spain.