e

bruh

I've got to stay, I love the trolling/clickbait in the title leading to many people making smarmy comments before watching the actual video :D

@@QuantumHistorian e

Akkad and Egypt would not be Europe, though.

Such is life in Medieval France

Unironically me

I'm up, babe. Thanks for waking me up.

Dont call me babe

But babe

Hey bro (massive nose) Leave her (Sterling) alone

Those negative traits are way to easy to get in TW. Anyway, not sure if CA is going to do anything other than Warhammer related in the future.

@@Dayvit78 yeah, WH has fucked Total War. And they arent as keen on modding now either so you cant expect too many massive changes.

They are in medieval total war 2

@@janlaan9602 yeah but its not exactly like that.

I wanted to contribute to the ad1212 mod, but it seemd cities are hardcoded to only allow a few buildings with limited possibility for work arounds.

That's what we call magical attacks.

Ask an Ukrainian, they know what it feels like.

You know that means. Its PTSD time baby.

Modern warfare is just as horrifying.

@@Gramatic69I feel like what this person described would be possible at pretty much any point in military history, not just the Middle Ages

This is fantastic, just one thing though. While composite bows were a thing in Europe since before the Roman Republic, they weren't widely used for many reasons; it was expensive to maintain and build and the aristocracy's martial tradition wasn't founded on bowmanship, thus it was nearly virtually a peasant's weapon, who opted for the cheaper option; the selfbows, like the English longbow. While cheaper and more durable, they were less effective in converting weight to power, thus professional archers with selfbows loosed arrows from unprecedented poundages, only to meet or slightly exceed the power of the eastern composite bows. This trait rendered a construction of tall bows to sustain high poundages, but they were unsuited for riding men due to this overwhelming stature, and so were wielded by footmen. So when it comes to French archers shooting their bows as horsemen, did they use composite bows or settle for more underpowered cousins of their footmen counterparts.

@@theZXDgames The evidence I'm aware of indicates that French, Burgundian, & English archers who shot from the saddle used yew longbows. That's certainly what Sir John Smythe advocated in his 1590s military manual: mounted archers with English-style bows shooting from horseback. Smythe also claimed that the English bow was better than the Turkish bow. In 1430s, the Burgundian Bertrandon de la Broquière traveled to the Ottoman Empire & compared Turkish bows with European ones. He thought latter more effective against armor, if only because of using more robust arrows. While Turkish bows are more efficient, historical Turkish military archers seem to have used quite light arrows. This meant they didn't deliver more kinetic than a yew bow of the same draw weight shooting heavier arrows, & could deliver less, depending on the details. I'd love to see evidence for 15th/16th-century European mounted archers shooting composite bows. It's possible, as composite bows do seem to appear in period artwork sometimes. Composite bows are better, but the power different between a Turkish-style bow & an English-style one isn't huge. & it takes a well-made & well-maintained composite bow to perform significantly better than a good yew warbow. Now, if that one test of a Manchu bow is accurate, Manchu-style bows deliver a lot more kinetic energy than yew bows when shooting heavy arrows. But I don't know of any evidence for such bows in 15th/16th-century Europe.

@@b.h.abbott-motley2427 I imagined longbows were too awkward or unwieldy to shoot on horseback, with shorter warbows being favored over it, or more adapted ones like the Yumi.

@@theZXDgames ​ Other bows are better suited for shooting on horseback & that's likely one reason why shooting from the saddle was never that popular in Western/Central Europe, but we have various depictions of yew bows being shot from horseback & some texts that specify this, like Smythe's. & people have tried to do it, & it certainly works even if the length of the bow restricts possible shooting angles.

So why he wasn't called Charles the Bolt?! :p

haha, I'll try and upvote this. Maybe people see this comment fist, so I don't have to answer so many hasty comments individually!

then dont claim it in the first sentence of the video? lmao

My stupid ass watching the whole video waiting for the Roman Legion to Appear

@@mondaysinsanity8193 Don't you know the format where you have a thesis and discuss it and at the end give a conclusion?

@@mondaysinsanity8193 then don't comment on a video before finishing watching it?

Do you mean the Pike&Shot published by Slitherine? This is a real gem of a game. There still are some people playing multiplayer to this day. Feel free to join.

@@kamilszadkowski8864 im gonna take a look

@@kamilszadkowski8864 indeed! There are also some pretty sweet free historical downloads made by the community. The late Odenathus in particular is known for his/her excellent historical scenarios! Highly recommend!

The guys tear gassing the Liverpool fans in Paris?

@@malarkey5323 CRS are regular police.

Vivé la France!

Not quite the same thing anymore, it's essentially a just police that becomes national guard in wartime.

Being swiss he propably learned it in school. His balto slavic pronouncations are quite off.

@Alaric WSG Aux gauchites

Can they not purge France from all the animals?

​@Alaric WSG non.

General: "Gentlemen, we have a situation. Heavily armed terrorists have taken a dozen hostages and are demanding a ransom" Knight: "Say no more. Saddle up, men. To arms!" *flips down visor*

I just heard of them! Glad I did

I’m so glad that I’m not the only one who thought of Medieval and Medieval II:Total War when I saw this video. 😊😊😊

That's interesting and something I never knew in America. we have something similar in the city. We have the police but all our rural areas out of city limits are managed by Sherrifs and deputies

Gendarme is the best

Spanish Tercio's and landsknecht dominate europe 2 centuries, and fight the jenissaries the other counterpart of the otoman empire whit the same power

@William Ewart Gladstone Lepanto and viena siege: im a joke to you?

@Nisr Masry88 𓅓𓁺𓄿𓁼𓃭𓎦𓏭 𓂝 battle of lepanto, but yeah polish winged hussars was a mighty force as well but that was in the final age of the tercios, during siege of viena

The term "Gendarmes" is used to describe military police in a couple of countries apart from France. Like Poland (Żandarmieria Wojskowa), Romania (Jandarmeria Română) and Serbia (Žandarmerija). I remember that Austria also used to call its MP "Bundesgendarmerie"

@@kamilszadkowski8864 Canada has Gendarme as a federal police that is supposed to stop arms and drug trafficking, but does not actually do anything. Cool isn't it? They wear red uniforms and have fancy horses, so I guess that completely justifies their existence.

@@kamilszadkowski8864 do these appellation come from French influence ?

@@cpp3221 Most likely, especially in Poland. France had a huge influence on European militaries in general, especially in the early XIX century due to Napoleon. The first Polish unit of mounted Gendarmes (military police) that I know of was created around that time period. It also served as heavy cavalry.

@@kamilszadkowski8864 thanks for your answer. Appreciate it

Cavalry Units were often used to put down unrest and maintain order in town’s villages and cities. I think that’s loosely the reason why.

@@seanmarkham6965 It seems to me that light cavalry or dragoons would be better suited for the role though. Heavy cavalry is expensive, slow to get ready, and overkill to deal with a mob.

I think it used to refer specifically to mounted police.

Carabinieri means a soldier armed with a carbine, not a cavalryman. In their earliest form they are known as dragoons. The heavy cavalry connection is more with the corazzieri (cuirassiers), their ceremonial mounted division

In Canada our national police force are the RCMP which stands for Royal Canadian Mounted Police and their colloquial name is mounties. Seems like mounted units are quite effective at intimidating crowds of people, especially when they charge, which makes them effective at internal suppression.

Love the é

Many things from centuries prior were not phased out until WW1, brutal awakening everyone had to receive and my words really don’t do much justice explaining here. Poor Italians charging those Austrians over and over lol.

@@cjclark2002 12 battles of the Isonzo River….

Different tactics and equipment. Gendarmes are super heavy armoured and normally armed cavalry while Winged Hussars are armoured normally and armed with special super long lances. The former are exposed to a pike formation during a charge the latter outreach them.

@@lars9925 how long were their lances? They must have been pretty insane to be able to outreach pikes?

@@seanmarkham6965 They were pretty insane and usually ranged from 4.5 to 6.2 metres.

It's worth noting however that till about 1570's the backbone of polish cavalry formations was made of heavy lancers (pl. Kopijnicy) similiar to french gendarmes of the era. They were replaced with lighter cavalry formations around the same time as the french gendarmes.

They were the first standing army. That gave Spain an advantage over other countries, and is perhaps the main reason why Spain turned into the mightiest empire of the world. The tercios were trained in Italy and the men trained togheter and their experience were maintained over time - unlike other countries armies which were dissolved as soon as a war was over. But the tercios learned from their combat experience and passed their knowledge on to new troops. Spain became a country for inspiration for other countries and many spanish words have become standard use in other armies.. I don't access to Jan Glete's book so I type from my own fallible memory now, but I think he said that the word spanish word regimiento from that time was copied by other countries and came into use all over Europe. So Spain became an empire that included America, Italy, the Benelux countries and Portugal thanks to royal marriages and exploration. Its army was super modern for its day. But the empire itself was a relic of the past. It was a feudal medieval Kingdom. All those small places were members of the Spanish empire but they paid nearly no taxes and the Spanish state had limited power over those areas. And the push for more centralization, more catholicism and more taxes angered the Netherlands who declared independence. Italy and Portugal did not want to pay taxes either. And the Spanish state did for a while let them get away with it. The Spanish army was good. Too good for Spains own good. The Spanish Kings stopped caring about longwinded and difficult diplomatic negotiations with other countries to get what they want. But instead did they take the faster and more easy solution to use the worlds most powerful army to ram through their will. And it first it did work well. But soon did all dreams and imperial ambitions and use of force become too much for Spain. They got involved in war after war. They fought against the Netherlands who sought independence. They fought against North African pirates. They fought against the muslim Ottomans. They sent their Spanish armada towards England. They involved themselves in the 30 years war and fought against Swedish and French troops. Portugal had enough of all wars that had costed them their colonies so they also started a war with Spain. And all those wars did cost money. But the decentralized Spanish state could not afford it - especially not since it only was Castile who paid taxes, while Italy, Belgium and Portugal did not. The Spanish state were in desperate times, and the many provinces finally agreed to paying a little taxes to the Spanish state - but only if they got more local independence. So the once strong and centralized Spanish state which had been ahead of the rest of the world did not become more decentralized and weak compared to other countries. Its economy was in decline while other countries were on the rise with more centralized and effiecent buraucracies. England, Netherlands, Sweden and France was on the rise. And Spain never really retook its once dominant role in Europe.

@@nattygsbord Ok, but I don't understand what the history of the first Marine Corps has to do with everything you've just said, but one thing has nothing to do with the other. In addition, you forget that the history of the Spanish Empire did not end with the fall of the Spanish Habsburgs, many of those problems that you say were solved with the arrival of the first Bourbon kings and although Spain ceased to be the first power, it did not stop forming part of the group of European powers (at least in the first 5 empires), until the Napoleonic Wars, which is when the decline is definitive, practically more than 1 century after everything you say. I know that this is already in question of the opinion and the historical appreciation that each one gives it, but it is not as dark as you paint it, but look at the influence that Spain had in conflicts such as the War of Austrian Succession, The War of Polish Succession and in the Independence of the 13 Colonies in North America; So I'm not as ignorant of the subject as you might think.

@ *"I don't understand what the history of the first Marine Corps"* I realize now that I did waste both your time and my time because I did not read properly. I thought you wondered about the tercio :P Sorry amigo. *"it is not as dark as you paint it"* That question is always up for debate. Like with almost all other empires. Its usually said that Spain declined in the 1650s. But it was however possible that the empire could have recovered. It still had much lands in America. And it cannot be denied that the Habsburgs had a lot of diplomatic power as well. But to me its more interesting if the empire could have taken another path while it was strong, could it have centralized itself and made all lands outside castile pay their fair share of taxes for military protection? Could the country have become a hub of manufacturing industry like England and the Netherlands? What would have happened if the country had been less eager to go to war and commit religious prosecution? To me it seems possible that Spain could have conquered half of Europe if it had taken another path. *"I'm not as ignorant of the subject as you might think"* I am not from the Spanish speaking world so my knowledge is probably limited compared to yours.

@@nattygsbord Okay, no problem friend, that's why I miss your comment, because that's not what mine was about. Well, speculation can exist with the subject of the Empire, but the reasons are more complex than they seem and the answers are almost elusive because it needs to be understood far beyond the historical perspectives from which each of us has studied or read. Although I am quite a fan of the history of my Spanish motherland, I have to admit that perhaps a possible reason for the path that was taken in terms of early industrialization in the Empire, was due to a large extent to the dependence on trade with its large territorial extensions, compared to Netherlands, France and England, which had to expand their internal manufacturing system to be able to compete and then get ready in the sense of international powers. The Count-Duke of Olivares in the government of Philip IV tried to make the reforms that the Empire needed to keep the path with the other European nations, but there came a cultural problem that Ibero-Americans have always had and that is resistance to change, which that ended with a discontent of the different kingdoms that made up the monarchy and that in the end ended up weakening Spain. Regarding the Dutch issue, it must be taken into account that in those times it was believed that the kingdom should have the same faith as its monarch and that is why, for example, Protestantism triumphed in Northern Europe when the nobles converted very quickly; with that I say that Philip II was within his rights to defend the religious integrity of his empire, the true origin of the Dutch error I do not give to him, but to his father Charles V, who being a Flemish, was not able to understand that those territories were going to be problematic for his son who had grown up on the peninsula unlike him, so the most successful thing should have been to leave the Netherlands as part of the Habsburg Austrian heritage, instead of the Spanish. The Portuguese case is actually different from what its historiography says, the Empire was one, but each one was in charge of keeping their part and it is true that the war was Spanish fault, but the weakness to defend the Portuguese territories was due to themselves, Spain supported the military efforts and even managed to recover several of its lost overseas territories, but the Portuguese positions were weakly protected and the only thing that kept them before was their pre-unification diplomacy, the separation of the kingdoms was due more To a conspiracy caused by the hunger for power of the family of the wife of the future monarch of Portugal, who was of Spanish noble origin and their independence weakened them more than helped them, it took them many years to gain strength again. In any case, the Empire resisted and maintained the integrity of a large part of its territory until the end of the War of Spanish Succession, where the territorial loss balanced the European balance, although it did not mean, as I said above, the end of Iberian power. I do not say this with the intention of extending the discussion or going against it, but to share what I know just like you did, perhaps it will help to understand things in a more global way, the truth is that no truth is absolute and no perspective is close to 100% of the total reality. No creas amigo, de seguro en muchas partes sabes más que yo, lo bueno es que con estas discusiones constructivas, uno aprende algo más del otro, saludos. =)

Yes, just watch this excellent video... Who cares who were the first standing army of Europe...

we don't really think that (as we point out later on in the video). Hence the inverted commas in the title. Generally speaking, this is highly controversial. However, most historians that dedicate their time to the Gendarmes name them as a contender of for either being the first standing army in Europe or in France. It's a matter of definition. Does "standing army" refer to a force that is permanently ready or is the vital criteria that the army is centrally controlled ir that it is structured similarly to a modern military? Well, one historian says one thing, another says another thing. our task is merely to point out the controversy and discuss it.

Roman legionaries: am I a joke to you?

The byzantines/Romans did this millenia earlier

Janissaries were neither a standing army neither a new thing on its own. They were slave/domestic soldiers, basically retainerd praetorians whose loyalty wasn't going to the Sultan, even less to the State, but to whose they basically chose to support. More often than not Sultans had to buy out the Janissary of the Porte as to be officially recognized. They were organized on the Ghulam system of the Persians or the Abbasid califate. Meanwhile the rest of Ottoman forces were based upon the Iqta system, which is roughly a variation of the feudal military system we know in Europe. Gendarmes were proper soldiers however, paid by the state on regular basis and regulated. They were not palace guards or praetorians.

@@imperator7828 they did mention the Romans in the video

Yeah this may be interesting, all I know is that they were influenced by Berber light cavalry and the name jinete comes from the Berber tribe zenata

They were pretty effective at Omdurman

You mean Blaise de Montluc?

Polish-Soviet War, too.

The date in the video only makes sense if he was truely talking about Sargon.

evolved into modern French "écorcher" / "écorcheur"

How did you pronounce Valois? If you pronounce it the English way just remember "oi" in French is pronounced as "wa"

@@Heisenberg882 like va lose. So very wrong

*Laughs in French of gendarmes from Marignan and Dreux*

That's a pulled bow, not a compound

@@battlez9577 the bows seem to have reflexed tips (siyahs) that point forward when it’s not drawn. Even at full draw, the tips point almost straight up and down, rather than back towards the archer, as a self bow. So these are definitely composite recurves (not compound, which uses pulleys and gears and is a decidedly modern design)

First in case of documentaries they sometimes get things wrong. And the others don't care. But why can't a zweihander/ two handed sword be used on horseback. It would really bring deadly.

​@@jihanessa4132 You made a good point, cos Actually some did carry them on horseback even polearms especially during the renaissance gunpowder weapons had traditions and tactics changed rapidly but thats my point, that without shields how would mounted or unmounted knights and men at arms cover against axe blows, warhammers, maces, flails, hails of arrows, crossbow bolts and even arquebusiers etc? As for documentaries you're right these days they are nothing compared to documentaries of decades ago.

@@stefanvella9807 I understand. I also think that old domentaries are better and you can't even find them

@@stefanvella9807 just imagine being a random jannisary and seeing crazy German and french cavalry wielding huge 2 metres swords and halberd to your face. Lol no wonder these defended vienna so well.

@@stefanvella9807 well I am pretty sure they had shields. They are still used today by riot police. It is essential.

This is the word.