🚩 Claim your SPECIAL OFFER for MagellanTV here: try.magellantv.com/historymarche. Start your free trial TODAY so you can watch “The Real Joan of Arc” and the rest of MagellanTV’s history collection: www.magellantv.com/video/the-real-joan-of-arc 🚩 Hundred Years War PLAYLIST czcams.com/play/PLWwyDn76LiH2HH6N3ajCl4Q1vRljNKn1k.html
Your video contain an enormous and blatant mistake. You make the usual english claim that ALL of France agreed to sign the treaty of Troyes, only to treacherously renege on it after Henry V's death. That's flatly untrue. The treaty of Troyes was never accepted by anyone beyond the territories which the english and burgundians already effectively controlled, and the true legitimate heir to the French throne, Charles VII, was still supported by all the unoccupied territories and continued to resist the invaders after 1420. In fact in 1421, a franco-scottish army crushed an english one led by Henry V's own brother, who was even killed in battle. And Henry V himself died of illness, not just by sheer luck, but because he was forced to wage a protracted winter siege against a FRENCH city, Meaux, which seriously deteriorated his health. Not exactly what you would expect in a pacified country.
Before I get pedantic I just want to say I enjoyed the video and learned about an engagement I had previously not heard of...now that I've said that, I'd like to push back on the implication (correct me if I'm wrong) made during the video that Agincourt was where the flank archery deployment was first pioneered. If I am not mistaken, Dupplin Moor, an obscure battle between a small English force of 1,500 and a Scottish host of 15,000 (!!), was where the English discovered the efficacy of positioning longbowmen en masse to the flanks of their men at arms. Dupplin Moor was a decisive English victory, and though aided by terrain, this is still quite an upset given the odds. From what I gather this battle and many others against the Scots allowed the English to develop the optimal use of their longbowmen against an opponent not as well equipped (though no less fierce) as the French. I will concede that I could be intentionally misinterpretting/misremembering things in order to show off the fact that I read a single Wikipedia article (an amazing feat no one doubts!). Agincourt may very well have been the first time these tactics were used against the French, and this is what the script-writer meant when it was said that this deployment was used given the success of Agincourt.
@@Valchrist1313 Also Poitiers 1356. So Verneuil would be at least the fourth. Basically, excepted at the last decades, England won most big battles in open field, but lost most sieges (far more sieges than big battles btw). Other smaller battles were more balanced between the parties.
Ah the old "Cavalry routs the enemy in front of them, stops to loot the enemy baggage, enemy reorganizes and succesfully counterattacks while the cavalry is distracted" routine. It's a genuine classic, goes all the way back to the Battle of Kadesh.
I view cavalry commanders/ generals who were able to *stop* their troopers doing this as a mark of singular ability. Being able to get your cavalry to stop a successful charge and charge again is basically a mark of prowess.
The Milanese heavy cavalry, by choosing to loot the English baggage train instead of turning to attack the rear of the English army, were the decisive factor in the English victory. The Milanese were mercenaries whose main objective was to survive the battle with as much loot as possible. What side won or lost was of secondary importance to them.
Not like they broke the entire flank of the english or something . They earned their pay . The fault lies with the french and scots mismanaging the attack on the center (despite heavily outnumbering the english) and also due to the skill of the english commander .
@@pp-wo1sd You are right in what you say. The French and Scots mismanaged their attack, and (not the Scots) eventually broke and ran. However, despite the errors of the French and Scots, the Milanese cavalry could have swung the battle the other way if only they had chosen to attack the rear of the English army instead of the riches of the baggage train. It is always a risk employing mercenaries because their primary motivation is money not “the cause”.
Using baggage as a lure for elite mercenaries .. what a masterful tactic ! French King should have commanded the Merc Knights himself or someone he trusted.
Indiscipline and looting were very common in armies of the day, before the advent of national standing professional armies with strict training and discipline.
I can imagine the depiction of this battle made by a milanese knight when he got back home to his wife: "Both these commanders were waiting, and we were getting bored of staying under the sun, so we headed for the prizes in the rear of the enemy's. Had to trample a few men with long sticks, but no real trouble. After we plundered we saw our employer's army get routed, so we headed northwest and found this lovely tavern and inn in a town a few miles further down the road - maybe we'll go there on vacation next year with the kids."
Historians were like "Meh, the English didn't have the additional handicap of shitting all over themselves with dysentery like in Agincourt so its a less impressive win" lol
Many other battles of the 100 year war were as dramatic and important as Agincourt and yet have been completely ignored. Strangely they are mostly French victories.
Shows that Agincourt victory are not just about the heavy rain before but a better quality army. The fact that the archers are regrouping then attacking in melee is very impressive.
You know what is completely ignored ? France many victories that ended up with them completely crushing the english. Yet people only remember agincourt and crecy
English always talking about Agincourt but forgetting Patay, Orleans, Castillon, etc. Funny how AngloSaxon propaganda works. Last one in 2003, "French cowards" for refusing to go in Irak.
What I'm getting from this is that the ultimate winners were the Milanese cavalry who, having routed the English right, buggered off with the loot from the English baggage train while the English were busy mullering the Scotch.
They didn’t muller the Scotch till after they had mullered the Scots. I would also imagine that the English probably buggered off with a lot more loot due to the actions, or lack of them, from the Milanese.
@@daviddavidk2352 lack of action? The Milanese cavalry routed the entire English right and attacked their 500 to 2000 or so reserves near the baggages. I'd say that's a fair amount
The French side suffered at least a 39% casualty rate. That's huge, especially considering the fact that the English side lacked cavalry. In this era of warfare, usually, when one side suffers such a large casualty rate, it is because the army has broken and fleeing soldiers are picked off by pursuing cavalry.
That took quite a bit of leadership and nerves of steel from the English to hold ranks against a French army almost double in strength with heavy Calvary, while fielding no Heavy Calvary of their own!
All soldiers in history had balls of steel, imagine hacking & slashing at each other until death. Add that if you go back even further, survivors of the losing team either became slaves or were killed if they were injured.
I mean heavy cavalry sounds dumb to me, Archers is the meta, they can just shoot from afar and has the best damage potential. . Not to mention some people with very long stick make Cavalry obsolete
@@theunknownfencer6336none of this is correct at all. It was well known at the time that archers were incredibly vulnerable to heavy cavalry charges, as seen here as well as later in the battles such as patay. It was also possible to charge home on pike formations fairly reliably if you knew what you were doing. The French gendarms were considered some of the best soldiers in Europe, even decades after the pike was wide spread. Even after the battle of Pavia, when they were defeated by the Spanish tercios, they remained incredibly effective for decades. Heavy horse cavalry remained effective well into the 19th, and even occasionally in the 20th century. It wasn’t until the invention of the tank when they finally became obsolete.
Not ironic at all. The consequences are, in fact, massively distinct. As Procole Cornwal points out above, the losses for French nobility as such were minimal here compared to Azincourt.
Thank you for adding the “ughhhhhh” death noise as Henry V faded away it really sank home the fact that he shit himself to death. Funny how they left that out of the Netflix movie.
The battle of Cravant was also quite magnificent, a 4000 Anglo-Burgundian host defeating an 8000+ Franco-Scottish. Arrows really did go woosh before canons went bang
True, but people should remember that most "battles" back then were sieges, and French were rather good at it. At Orleans 4 years after Verneuil, English lost a more crushing battle strategically, and the Earl of Salisbury, victor of Verneuil and Cravant, was killed. I believe Verneuil was the last great English Victory of the 100 years war. Thus I don't get why it's even less known than Patay, a French victory (and French victories were the norm after 1427).
Very well visualised and easy to understand. It is amazing how disciplined the English troops and commanders were, any average army would have broken with their flank broken. Interesting also that the capital of France gave the English such triumph after winning against France.
England had to keep discipline and keep good commanders in battle because they where usually outnumbered. Especially on the continent. Even Nevilles crossing against the Scots they where hugely outnumbered and still came out on top because of discipline And good commanders.
People tend to forget the discipline of the English men at arms due to the fame of the archers, but they were extremely well organised in most of the famous battles of The Hundred Years War. They fought on foot early on in their campaigns. At Poitiers only one man left formation and was killed. The Duke of Bedford rallied his men at arms after the Milanese cavalry attack and turned a near defeat into a very bloody victory. So many French knights were killed that their bodies filled a ravine up to five knights deep.
Remember that this wasn't nation states. Instead this was *kingdoms*. Many probably considered the English king the *rightfull* heir to the previous king given the treaty, while the French king was seen as a usurper keeping the war and suffering of the French people going.
@@Luredreier I think you're right. Today, we project our understanding of nation states onto a social context where allegiance to a feudal structure seems to have been the dominant loyalty. When you combine that with the realization that the upper tiers of the feudal hierarchy were obtained from a limited pool that tended to inseminate itself all over a geographical region, then the divisions melt away into a colour palette.
@@fgfgdgdfgdfgiidfgdfgdfgdfgdfgd I mean that logic can also be applied to the Battle of Agincourt where French incompetence played as much if not more of a role in the English victory than the English their competency.
This battle shows the professionalism and above all toughness of the English army. Any other force would've fled the field after the setbacks at the start of the battle, the fact they stood fast against overwhelming odds is a credit to the leadership of Bedford.
Most battles are about balls. I remember a story about my wife's uncle. He got knocked on his arse by a local bully but got up out of the gutter and gave the boastful bully a flogging.
The English had a lot of fighting experience. If they weren't fighting the French, they were fighting each other.... with the occasional battle against the Irish or Scots
Wow this is a shock. This is one of the most overlooked battle in history yet it was so big and significant. This has made my day.
Před rokem+5
Nah, the battles in Southern and Eastern Europe are much more overlooked than everything that happened between the French and the English. Surely there are equally interesting wars or battles in this same era, but due to the existing overexposure of the Hundred Years War, they are totally overlooked.
The great loss the scots suffered in this defeat ended being of great benefit for their king, in this battle a good deal of the men on which the power of the Albany branch of the Stewarts rested perished allowing King James to move against that powerful side of his family which had been for a long time a thorn on the side of the throne, the ruin of the Albany was complete with the execution of Duke Murdoch Stewart and all but one of his sons and with the seizure of their lands and titles which included several earldoms.
@@redtobertshateshandles probably they were seeing red this whole battle, Bedford was avenging his older brother, the Duke of Clarence, and they all were washing away the stain of the Battle of Bauge; just capturing and then ransoming back the scottish noblemen hardly had been a solution of any kind, Buchan had been captured and released at Cravant and again they find him here and Douglas had been a thorn on their side since the days of Richard II.
hi, there I just wanted to thank you for continuing to upload high-quality videos I go to school and know how hard it sometimes is to find reliable information. so thank you
Great video, very much looking forward to this new series! Fascinating time period, I'm familiar with some of the major battles and themes but will very much enjoy a deeper dive into lesser known battles and trends, thank you!
I loved your pronunciation. Very professional narration. As the Knights of Milan, they left because they did not find any great artwork to loot in the English camp. 🎨😂
A major theme in major battles during this period is the attackers widely overestimated their chances of winning. They seem to be deluded that knights were literal human tanks.
Why are the French so cowardly and stupid? They become arrogant by relying on their armor, but run away when the going gets tough. There are so many examples of this.
the arrogance of knights cost kingdoms and Europe itself many victories, they seemed to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory by thinking they were infallible.
Verneuil is a victory as decisive as Agincourt for the English. As it destroyed the Dauphin's only major field army that it took him years to replace and allowed the English in the years the followed to overrun and conquer the provinces of Anjou and Maine, extending their control of France to everything north of the Loire.
@@thibaultsardet7399 Five years to be accurate before the miracle of Orleans halted their run of straight success. As Although that and Maid's short career, was only a blip and real turning point did not occur until 1435.
Excellent video. please consider making a video or series about the Portuguese crisis of 1383/1385. It is a forgotten part of the 100 Years War, with the battle of Aljubarrota as a key moment, as well as the battles of Atoleiros, Siege of Lisbon, Trancoso and Valverde. And the enormous consequences of this crisis with the Luso-British alliance and the formation of the necessary conditions for the beginning of the age of discoveries by the Portuguese.
Really interesting video. I was previously unaware of the immediate post-Agincourt History; nor this battle. I very much look forward to upcoming videos which continue the story.
I will cover all battles of the HYW in no particular order and add them to the playlist. I also plan to re-do Poitiers since the information in my video is now outdated. Patay and Castillon are in production, and so is Siege of Rouen. Eventually we will have a playlist of videos that cover the entirety of the HYW timeline.
I was surprised how the tightly tied horses were used to protect the rear from a calvery attack. First time I have heard of such a tactic. It would have needed to be lightly guarded to avoid them being cut loose, & I assume to alert of a rear attact to organise the archer's response.
It would be great to know more about the Portuguese in English armies of the period. The Siege of Rouen is a good example. John of Gaunt's Iberian adventures would also be a great topic.
What I took from this is that the longbowmen were even more of a threat than I thought. Not only are the dominant missile troops, they can be trusted as an effective melee force. Even when out flanked I would have thought french infantry would be able to deal with them.
I really dont see this. The archers did basically nothing in this entire battle. It was lost because the Milanese ran off and the english were way more disciplined than the French. The deciding factor was the French getting flanked and buckling
I agree-What is easy to overlook is that the French "Infantry" Were dismounted men at arms, encased in plate armour, with limited mobility and very restricted vision the archers were extremely agile, fast moving light infantry, armed with knives, hatchets and whatever weapons they could salvage. they were a formidable enemy.
Is anyone else blown away by how this battle turned out? on one hand we have an army of mostly ranged units with a somewhat smaller amount of pure infantry (heavy?). Vs an army twice its size that also has a strong cavalry core. Like, that is wild that the French army lost this battle. If we tried this match up in some other time period 9 out of 10 times the archers would fail, but at this time and this place archers were a powerhouse. If the Gauls had met a Roman army that consisted of 10,000 Velite skirmishers and only 5,000 legionary soliders...well, the Gauls would wipe the floor with them. If Saladin had marched up to a Crusader army of similar numbers, he would of looked around at his generals, everyone would shrug their shoulders. Then they would go destroy the Crusader army. But somehow, the English make it work. Just wild.
Don't believe everything you read/see about history, numbers come from english claims and french claims are not the same. Obviously, anglo-word took the english version and run away with it. They underrated english numbers, and overrate french numbers, same with Azincourt.
@@baptistev9630 This is a good point, though my main idea was to focus on the general composition of the armies and less the exact numbers. Outside of mounted archers, you rarely see an army with this high a percentage of archers winning battles. All that to point out how novel this battle is and how odd that bowmen were able to be this effective. Some of that is due to the bowmen reforming after they are pushed back by the dismounted knights.
@thesnoopmeister Snoops France was decentralized at that time, and some vassals of France were even stronger than the french Kings. France wasn't an united entity at all. The Burgundians, one of strongest vassal and some others minors, sided with the English side.
Your documentries are superb. Well presented and well researched. Wish you happy new year and all the success in this year. The french and Scots and milanese troops fought bravely. The battle of Verneuil known as the second Agincourt.The battle resulted the English rule in France until france fought under Charles vii and Joan of arc and reclaim the lost lands while england busy with dealing a civil war. Anyway i ve surprised why the french and scots lost the battle after they come so close to the victory. Maybe it is the experience i think.
Can you guys do the siege of Vienna (1683). I've always been curious how you guys would visualize the largest cavalry charge led by John III Sobieski and the Polish Hussars
Brilliant documentary series. Wish you all happy new year and a successful year. The hundred years war one of the bloodiest conflicts in the world. The battle of Verneuil is considered as a second Agincourt. French and scots had a treaty called auld alliance since the time of edward longshanks. And this time milanese troops were also fighted along with french and scots. This battle consolidated the rule of English monarchs in france until they were driven back by the joint forces of Charles vii and Joan of arc combined . We always grateful to you to these brilliant documentaries and your dedication and hard work towards it. Looking forward to such great content like this in the future. Wish you all the very best in 2023.
It is interesting. There were so many family connections between the two, there are some genuine arguments there. Sadly both nations were far too set in their ways for such a situation to ever arise; the English and their fundamental desire for battlefield valour (whatever the outcome) and the French stubborn pride were set in stone.
If Constantinople didn't fall due to an English/French crusade (France always wanted to avenge Saint Louis), Italian sailors wouldn't have looked to Spain and Portugal for work and sailed to America. No USA. Crazy!
@HistoryMarche have you ever considered covering some of the north american theatre of the seven years War? I find it a fascinating and under-represented part of history. The battle of Monongahela and other attempts at taking fort Duquense by itself is a story worth telling.
🚩 Claim your SPECIAL OFFER for MagellanTV here: try.magellantv.com/historymarche. Start your free trial TODAY so you can watch “The Real Joan of Arc” and the rest of MagellanTV’s history collection: www.magellantv.com/video/the-real-joan-of-arc
🚩 Hundred Years War PLAYLIST czcams.com/play/PLWwyDn76LiH2HH6N3ajCl4Q1vRljNKn1k.html
Your video contain an enormous and blatant mistake. You make the usual english claim that ALL of France agreed to sign the treaty of Troyes, only to treacherously renege on it after Henry V's death. That's flatly untrue. The treaty of Troyes was never accepted by anyone beyond the territories which the english and burgundians already effectively controlled, and the true legitimate heir to the French throne, Charles VII, was still supported by all the unoccupied territories and continued to resist the invaders after 1420. In fact in 1421, a franco-scottish army crushed an english one led by Henry V's own brother, who was even killed in battle. And Henry V himself died of illness, not just by sheer luck, but because he was forced to wage a protracted winter siege against a FRENCH city, Meaux, which seriously deteriorated his health. Not exactly what you would expect in a pacified country.
There was already a first 'Agincourt', at Crecy. This would be the third.
Before I get pedantic I just want to say I enjoyed the video and learned about an engagement I had previously not heard of...now that I've said that, I'd like to push back on the implication (correct me if I'm wrong) made during the video that Agincourt was where the flank archery deployment was first pioneered.
If I am not mistaken, Dupplin Moor, an obscure battle between a small English force of 1,500 and a Scottish host of 15,000 (!!), was where the English discovered the efficacy of positioning longbowmen en masse to the flanks of their men at arms. Dupplin Moor was a decisive English victory, and though aided by terrain, this is still quite an upset given the odds. From what I gather this battle and many others against the Scots allowed the English to develop the optimal use of their longbowmen against an opponent not as well equipped (though no less fierce) as the French.
I will concede that I could be intentionally misinterpretting/misremembering things in order to show off the fact that I read a single Wikipedia article (an amazing feat no one doubts!). Agincourt may very well have been the first time these tactics were used against the French, and this is what the script-writer meant when it was said that this deployment was used given the success of Agincourt.
@@Valchrist1313 Also Poitiers 1356. So Verneuil would be at least the fourth.
Basically, excepted at the last decades, England won most big battles in open field, but lost most sieges (far more sieges than big battles btw). Other smaller battles were more balanced between the parties.
Ah the old "Cavalry routs the enemy in front of them, stops to loot the enemy baggage, enemy reorganizes and succesfully counterattacks while the cavalry is distracted" routine. It's a genuine classic, goes all the way back to the Battle of Kadesh.
Yeah the Eastern Roman empire lost to the Muslims because of this as well happened way too much
I view cavalry commanders/ generals who were able to *stop* their troopers doing this as a mark of singular ability. Being able to get your cavalry to stop a successful charge and charge again is basically a mark of prowess.
If you add in pursuing the enemy off the battlefield, without the baggage train element, then missing cavalry contributed to even more famous losses.
@@gerardjagroo Cromwell was a master at maintaining that discipline.
That may be squire but do thoust remembereth the battle of kebabistan in the olde Shippy?
The Milanese heavy cavalry, by choosing to loot the English baggage train instead of turning to attack the rear of the English army, were the decisive factor in the English victory. The Milanese were mercenaries whose main objective was to survive the battle with as much loot as possible. What side won or lost was of secondary importance to them.
Not like they broke the entire flank of the english or something . They earned their pay . The fault lies with the french and scots mismanaging the attack on the center (despite heavily outnumbering the english) and also due to the skill of the english commander .
@@pp-wo1sd You are right in what you say. The French and Scots mismanaged their attack, and (not the Scots) eventually broke and ran. However, despite the errors of the French and Scots, the Milanese cavalry could have swung the battle the other way if only they had chosen to attack the rear of the English army instead of the riches of the baggage train. It is always a risk employing mercenaries because their primary motivation is money not “the cause”.
My immediate thought was they saw this as a brilliant outcome for themselves
Using baggage as a lure for elite mercenaries .. what a masterful tactic ! French King should have commanded the Merc Knights himself or someone he trusted.
Indiscipline and looting were very common in armies of the day, before the advent of national standing professional armies with strict training and discipline.
I can imagine the depiction of this battle made by a milanese knight when he got back home to his wife: "Both these commanders were waiting, and we were getting bored of staying under the sun, so we headed for the prizes in the rear of the enemy's. Had to trample a few men with long sticks, but no real trouble. After we plundered we saw our employer's army get routed, so we headed northwest and found this lovely tavern and inn in a town a few miles further down the road - maybe we'll go there on vacation next year with the kids."
How wonderfully Italian of them!
😂😂😂😂😂
@@christianadams9114😂😂😂😂😂
This battle was just as dramatic and important as Agincourt, and yet has been completely ignored. Thank you for finally giving it some attention.
Historians were like "Meh, the English didn't have the additional handicap of shitting all over themselves with dysentery like in Agincourt so its a less impressive win" lol
Many other battles of the 100 year war were as dramatic and important as Agincourt and yet have been completely ignored. Strangely they are mostly French victories.
@@belis35 Unfortunately, none of them had Shakespeare write a play about them.
Shows that Agincourt victory are not just about the heavy rain before but a better quality army. The fact that the archers are regrouping then attacking in melee is very impressive.
You know what is completely ignored ? France many victories that ended up with them completely crushing the english. Yet people only remember agincourt and crecy
"What about Agincourt?"
"You already had it."
"We had one, yes. What about second Agincourt?"
English always talking about Agincourt but forgetting Patay, Orleans, Castillon, etc. Funny how AngloSaxon propaganda works.
Last one in 2003, "French cowards" for refusing to go in Irak.
what about two siege of helm's deep?
What I'm getting from this is that the ultimate winners were the Milanese cavalry who, having routed the English right, buggered off with the loot from the English baggage train while the English were busy mullering the Scotch.
They didn’t muller the Scotch till after they had mullered the Scots. I would also imagine that the English probably buggered off with a lot more loot due to the actions, or lack of them, from the Milanese.
An excellent summary, even if you have confused "Scots" and "Scotch"
@@daviddavidk2352 lack of action? The Milanese cavalry routed the entire English right and attacked their 500 to 2000 or so reserves near the baggages. I'd say that's a fair amount
Typical behaviour. From the Italians/Milanese. Take the money and...run.
The French side suffered at least a 39% casualty rate. That's huge, especially considering the fact that the English side lacked cavalry. In this era of warfare, usually, when one side suffers such a large casualty rate, it is because the army has broken and fleeing soldiers are picked off by pursuing cavalry.
Based on the annihilation of the right wing, the casualties would have been predominantly Scottish?
i believe much of it had to do with the encirclement of the Army of Scotland
That took quite a bit of leadership and nerves of steel from the English to hold ranks against a French army almost double in strength with heavy Calvary, while fielding no Heavy Calvary of their own!
Heavy Calvary and sorrowful Golgotha!
and losing your right flank during the first part of the engagement with enemy heavy cav behind your lines.
All soldiers in history had balls of steel, imagine hacking & slashing at each other until death.
Add that if you go back even further, survivors of the losing team either became slaves or were killed if they were injured.
I mean heavy cavalry sounds dumb to me, Archers is the meta, they can just shoot from afar and has the best damage potential.
.
Not to mention some people with very long stick make Cavalry obsolete
@@theunknownfencer6336none of this is correct at all. It was well known at the time that archers were incredibly vulnerable to heavy cavalry charges, as seen here as well as later in the battles such as patay. It was also possible to charge home on pike formations fairly reliably if you knew what you were doing. The French gendarms were considered some of the best soldiers in Europe, even decades after the pike was wide spread. Even after the battle of Pavia, when they were defeated by the Spanish tercios, they remained incredibly effective for decades.
Heavy horse cavalry remained effective well into the 19th, and even occasionally in the 20th century. It wasn’t until the invention of the tank when they finally became obsolete.
It's ironic that the first Agincourt gets so much glory while the second one is completely forgotten. Great video.
How is that ironic?
It’s because there was no hero King
Not ironic at all. The consequences are, in fact, massively distinct. As Procole Cornwal points out above, the losses for French nobility as such were minimal here compared to Azincourt.
I think that Shakespeare played a big part in popularising Agincourt.
@@kengamby2482---I think your right
Thank you for adding the “ughhhhhh” death noise as Henry V faded away it really sank home the fact that he shit himself to death. Funny how they left that out of the Netflix movie.
This guy's videos make me legitimately happy and satisfied. Like a new show that your always waiting for.
The battle of Cravant was also quite magnificent, a 4000 Anglo-Burgundian host defeating an 8000+ Franco-Scottish. Arrows really did go woosh before canons went bang
True, but people should remember that most "battles" back then were sieges, and French were rather good at it. At Orleans 4 years after Verneuil, English lost a more crushing battle strategically, and the Earl of Salisbury, victor of Verneuil and Cravant, was killed.
I believe Verneuil was the last great English Victory of the 100 years war. Thus I don't get why it's even less known than Patay, a French victory (and French victories were the norm after 1427).
Very well visualised and easy to understand. It is amazing how disciplined the English troops and commanders were, any average army would have broken with their flank broken.
Interesting also that the capital of France gave the English such triumph after winning against France.
the french were the french for a long time
England had to keep discipline and keep good commanders in battle because they where usually outnumbered. Especially on the continent. Even Nevilles crossing against the Scots they where hugely outnumbered and still came out on top because of discipline And good commanders.
People tend to forget the discipline of the English men at arms due to the fame of the archers, but they were extremely well organised in most of the famous battles of The Hundred Years War. They fought on foot early on in their campaigns. At Poitiers only one man left formation and was killed. The Duke of Bedford rallied his men at arms after the Milanese cavalry attack and turned a near defeat into a very bloody victory. So many French knights were killed that their bodies filled a ravine up to five knights deep.
Remember that this wasn't nation states.
Instead this was *kingdoms*.
Many probably considered the English king the *rightfull* heir to the previous king given the treaty, while the French king was seen as a usurper keeping the war and suffering of the French people going.
@@Luredreier I think you're right. Today, we project our understanding of nation states onto a social context where allegiance to a feudal structure seems to have been the dominant loyalty. When you combine that with the realization that the upper tiers of the feudal hierarchy were obtained from a limited pool that tended to inseminate itself all over a geographical region, then the divisions melt away into a colour palette.
I didn't know the outcome of this battle beforehand, so the conclusion came as a REAL surprise. Outstanding play from the English.
Though if the title is
Second Agincourt it should be slightly more obvious
its far more due to the mistake of the greedy knights than it was an outstanding play from the english
@@fgfgdgdfgdfgiidfgdfgdfgdfgdfgd English discipline played a big part but knightly arrogance and greed stole the victory
@@fgfgdgdfgdfgiidfgdfgdfgdfgdfgd I mean that logic can also be applied to the Battle of Agincourt where French incompetence played as much if not more of a role in the English victory than the English their competency.
Accursed be England
This battle shows the professionalism and above all toughness of the English army. Any other force would've fled the field after the setbacks at the start of the battle, the fact they stood fast against overwhelming odds is a credit to the leadership of Bedford.
Most battles are about balls. I remember a story about my wife's uncle. He got knocked on his arse by a local bully but got up out of the gutter and gave the boastful bully a flogging.
The English had a lot of fighting experience. If they weren't fighting the French, they were fighting each other.... with the occasional battle against the Irish or Scots
Bedford sounds like a badass
Oh he was. He and Henry V were a terrifying duo.
Lack of discipline and greed again are the worst enemies
Don't you just love it when your cavalry rushes in and your infantry takes another 2 hours to figure out they should advance...
My sweet God!
You actually did the battle of Verneuil!
My prayers have been answered indeed.
Thank you!
Wow this is a shock. This is one of the most overlooked battle in history yet it was so big and significant. This has made my day.
Nah, the battles in Southern and Eastern Europe are much more overlooked than everything that happened between the French and the English. Surely there are equally interesting wars or battles in this same era, but due to the existing overexposure of the Hundred Years War, they are totally overlooked.
@ Battle of Didgori is interesting
Both Baugé (1421) and Battle of La Brossinière (1423) are overlooked.
@@thibaultsardet7399 because the french and scots outnumbered the english so its only natural for them to win
@@QuintusFabiusMaximusVerr-vf9sb No, because this was not English victories.
The great loss the scots suffered in this defeat ended being of great benefit for their king, in this battle a good deal of the men on which the power of the Albany branch of the Stewarts rested perished allowing King James to move against that powerful side of his family which had been for a long time a thorn on the side of the throne, the ruin of the Albany was complete with the execution of Duke Murdoch Stewart and all but one of his sons and with the seizure of their lands and titles which included several earldoms.
Also, no doubt the English realised what pests the Scots were. Realised the need to clean up their own backyard.
@@redtobertshateshandles probably they were seeing red this whole battle, Bedford was avenging his older brother, the Duke of Clarence, and they all were washing away the stain of the Battle of Bauge; just capturing and then ransoming back the scottish noblemen hardly had been a solution of any kind, Buchan had been captured and released at Cravant and again they find him here and Douglas had been a thorn on their side since the days of Richard II.
I enjoy your videos. Thank you for doing them.
Excellent work as always HM!
another great video from your production...thank you!
hi, there I just wanted to thank you for continuing to upload high-quality videos I go to school and know how hard it sometimes is to find reliable information. so thank you
Excellent work, as per your high standard!
Great Vid! Love the info about those epic battles!
Another quality video - informative and entertaining!
Great video, very much looking forward to this new series! Fascinating time period, I'm familiar with some of the major battles and themes but will very much enjoy a deeper dive into lesser known battles and trends, thank you!
This was such an incredible video. Thank you for covering this battle!
I loved your pronunciation. Very professional narration. As the Knights of Milan, they left because they did not find any great artwork to loot in the English camp. 🎨😂
Isn't La Hire pronounces La Heer
Lol
Ah, the power of sarcasm ...
Milan is based
@@kokotaughs La ear, h is silent
I've heard of this battle! Thank you so much for making such an entertaining video about it!
A surprise to be sure, but a welcome one. Excellent work. Thank you for providing us with so much entertainment and information at the same time. ❤
Informative and exceptionally well presented. Thank you.
Happy New Year (and Wise Kings day) and congrats on another superb video! Can't wait for more history bonanza in 2023, good luck!
Happy new year!
A very informative & enjoyable presentation. Thank you.
Thank you for all your hard work and effort you put into these videos!
happy new years, can't wait for the rest of your content this year!
Happy new year!!
A major theme in major battles during this period is the attackers widely overestimated their chances of winning. They seem to be deluded that knights were literal human tanks.
Because they technically were...
They were human tanks but what good is a tank if it can't be bothered to make sure the battle is won before running off to plunder.
Why are the French so cowardly and stupid? They become arrogant by relying on their armor, but run away when the going gets tough. There are so many examples of this.
the arrogance of knights cost kingdoms and Europe itself many victories, they seemed to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory by thinking they were infallible.
Well, actual tanks are not that effective if not well supported. And knights were quite prone to unsupported attacks towards the enemy line.
Great video as always, thanks
Terrific video!🏹⚔❤
Verneuil is a victory as decisive as Agincourt for the English. As it destroyed the Dauphin's only major field army that it took him years to replace and allowed the English in the years the followed to overrun and conquer the provinces of Anjou and Maine, extending their control of France to everything north of the Loire.
Not for long.
@@thibaultsardet7399 Five years to be accurate before the miracle of Orleans halted their run of straight success. As Although that and Maid's short career, was only a blip and real turning point did not occur until 1435.
As always, I appreciate your content
Love this channel. I'd love a serie about the 80years war, very interesting events that could be covered.
Very enjoyable. I hadn’t heard about this battle before.
Excellent video. please consider making a video or series about the Portuguese crisis of 1383/1385. It is a forgotten part of the 100 Years War, with the battle of Aljubarrota as a key moment, as well as the battles of Atoleiros, Siege of Lisbon, Trancoso and Valverde. And the enormous consequences of this crisis with the Luso-British alliance and the formation of the necessary conditions for the beginning of the age of discoveries by the Portuguese.
Thanks for the video
Really interesting video. I was previously unaware of the immediate post-Agincourt History; nor this battle. I very much look forward to upcoming videos which continue the story.
I will cover all battles of the HYW in no particular order and add them to the playlist. I also plan to re-do Poitiers since the information in my video is now outdated. Patay and Castillon are in production, and so is Siege of Rouen. Eventually we will have a playlist of videos that cover the entirety of the HYW timeline.
Excellent Presentation
I was surprised how the tightly tied horses were used to protect the rear from a calvery attack. First time I have heard of such a tactic. It would have needed to be lightly guarded to avoid them being cut loose, & I assume to alert of a rear attact to organise the archer's response.
Was thinking the same. Seems strange tbh. You'd think they'd just punch a hole, scatter the horses and ride through
@@Atraa they probbably got -n movement points for being disarrayed when meeting the tied horses , dice roll was loaded 😂
@@Atraa one horse cant simply ride through another
@@jamiecullum5567 or a bunch of dead horses. You can always eat them for the evening meal.
I always thought they just dug trenches and placed wooden spikes to avoid rear charges. That’s pretty brilliant and way less time consuming.
following the channel for over a year now, deserves so much recognition !!
another educational video. Great work, really love them.
Amazing work
Excelente manera de recrear momentos dramáticos de la historia bélica. Que tengan un excelente 2023. Saludos desde Ecuador
Ola from Australia.
Excellent!
I was unaware of this very great battle. Thank you
Amazing video, thanks
It would be great to know more about the Portuguese in English armies of the period. The Siege of Rouen is a good example. John of Gaunt's Iberian adventures would also be a great topic.
Thanks!
Thank you so much for the support. Very kind of you.
Amazing video as always thank you @HistoryMarche
always enjoyable
And informative.
Thanks for the great video.
Never a disappointment. Love these shows
Well done as always
Thank you x
What I took from this is that the longbowmen were even more of a threat than I thought. Not only are the dominant missile troops, they can be trusted as an effective melee force. Even when out flanked I would have thought french infantry would be able to deal with them.
I really dont see this. The archers did basically nothing in this entire battle. It was lost because the Milanese ran off and the english were way more disciplined than the French. The deciding factor was the French getting flanked and buckling
I agree-What is easy to overlook is that the French "Infantry" Were dismounted men at arms, encased in plate armour, with limited mobility and very restricted vision the archers were extremely agile, fast moving light infantry, armed with knives, hatchets and whatever weapons they could salvage. they were a formidable enemy.
Love the hundred years war period 👌
Incredible video!
Appreciate the work
Learned something new!
That's always nice to see!
Is anyone else blown away by how this battle turned out? on one hand we have an army of mostly ranged units with a somewhat smaller amount of pure infantry (heavy?). Vs an army twice its size that also has a strong cavalry core. Like, that is wild that the French army lost this battle. If we tried this match up in some other time period 9 out of 10 times the archers would fail, but at this time and this place archers were a powerhouse.
If the Gauls had met a Roman army that consisted of 10,000 Velite skirmishers and only 5,000 legionary soliders...well, the Gauls would wipe the floor with them.
If Saladin had marched up to a Crusader army of similar numbers, he would of looked around at his generals, everyone would shrug their shoulders. Then they would go destroy the Crusader army.
But somehow, the English make it work. Just wild.
Don't believe everything you read/see about history, numbers come from english claims and french claims are not the same. Obviously, anglo-word took the english version and run away with it. They underrated english numbers, and overrate french numbers, same with Azincourt.
@@baptistev9630 This is a good point, though my main idea was to focus on the general composition of the armies and less the exact numbers.
Outside of mounted archers, you rarely see an army with this high a percentage of archers winning battles.
All that to point out how novel this battle is and how odd that bowmen were able to be this effective. Some of that is due to the bowmen reforming after they are pushed back by the dismounted knights.
France, with a population 4/5 times the size, suffered major setbacks after these defeats. If anything French losses are underestimated.
@thesnoopmeister Snoops France was decentralized at that time, and some vassals of France were even stronger than the french Kings. France wasn't an united entity at all. The Burgundians, one of strongest vassal and some others minors, sided with the English side.
Good episode thanks
Surely it's "Againcourt"? 😉
Nice one :)
😇
Your documentries are superb. Well presented and well researched. Wish you happy new year and all the success in this year. The french and Scots and milanese troops fought bravely. The battle of Verneuil known as the second Agincourt.The battle resulted the English rule in France until france fought under Charles vii and Joan of arc and reclaim the lost lands while england busy with dealing a civil war. Anyway i ve surprised why the french and scots lost the battle after they come so close to the victory. Maybe it is the experience i think.
As always great content.
Top quality as always.
Great video, well presented, as usual.
I always wonder what would have happened if Henry V had not died at such a young age.
He still would have lost and not be remembered as fondly as we remember him today
@@apostalote possibly. In a way I'm glad though. Can you imagine the French playing cricket???
@@dave1234aust England is much more a French colony than the opposite. That's why English is the most latinized germanic language of the world.
Battles like this are so frustrating due to lack of discipline
Excellent, thank you.
Your voice. I don't know how to describe it but it's soo good to listen.
it’s theme for the English to defeat armies larger than theirs
Then englands worst nightmare appeared:
A random peasant girl
Burned as a witch by her own people...
I'm really enjoying these
Very interesting and clearly explained - thanks.
Nice
Thank you very much for the well prepared video.
Can you guys do the siege of Vienna (1683). I've always been curious how you guys would visualize the largest cavalry charge led by John III Sobieski and the Polish Hussars
Thunderous attack ! 40.000 winged hussars saved the christianity in Europe, otherwise now, we could have said "Allahu Akbar"
Wonderful Info! Thank You!
Brilliant documentary series. Wish you all happy new year and a successful year. The hundred years war one of the bloodiest conflicts in the world. The battle of Verneuil is considered as a second Agincourt. French and scots had a treaty called auld alliance since the time of edward longshanks. And this time milanese troops were also fighted along with french and scots. This battle consolidated the rule of English monarchs in france until they were driven back by the joint forces of Charles vii and Joan of arc combined . We always grateful to you to these brilliant documentaries and your dedication and hard work towards it. Looking forward to such great content like this in the future. Wish you all the very best in 2023.
"Launches Medieval 2 to beat France as England"
Ah, the famous French Battle Cry: “RUN AWAYYY!” 🤣
Like the English at Dunkirk, The French and Belgians remembers that very well.
I know it was too te battle cry of British troops at Dunkirk...
Aye. France will never forgive Britain for coming back after running away, instead of capitulating.
And this is a comment to a history vid...the joys of ignorance...
Very good thanks.
Excellent video!
Bedford: “You fool, no man can kill me!”
Joan: “I am no man.
Oof
It would be interesting to speculate how different the world would be if England and France had been united as one kingdom.
With the fleets of Britain and the armies of France with intellectuals like Newton and Voltaire? They'd be the second Rome.
It is interesting. There were so many family connections between the two, there are some genuine arguments there. Sadly both nations were far too set in their ways for such a situation to ever arise; the English and their fundamental desire for battlefield valour (whatever the outcome) and the French stubborn pride were set in stone.
@@MrPicklerwoof I agree. Most likely the union of the crowns would have been much more tumultuous than what England and Scotland experienced.
If Constantinople didn't fall due to an English/French crusade (France always wanted to avenge Saint Louis), Italian sailors wouldn't have looked to Spain and Portugal for work and sailed to America. No USA. Crazy!
Great account ... Thank you.
great work
@HistoryMarche have you ever considered covering some of the north american theatre of the seven years War? I find it a fascinating and under-represented part of history. The battle of Monongahela and other attempts at taking fort Duquense by itself is a story worth telling.
Perhaps it's under represented, in your opinion, because the battles were little more than skirmishes compared to the European conflict.
A time and again lesson never learned, if you rout your enemies flank turn around and help finish them off.