How did Medieval Soldiers know FRIEND FROM FOE in BATTLE?
Vložit
- čas přidán 21. 03. 2024
- How did medieval soldiers identify friend from foe on the battlefield? Looking at heraldry, livery, badges, emblems, banners and tactics.
▼3 extra EXCLUSIVE videos each month on PATREON, which make this channel possible:
/ scholagladiatoria
▼Facebook & Twitter updates, info, memes and fun:
/ historicalfencing
/ scholagladiato1
▼Schola Gladiatoria HEMA - sword fighting classes in the UK:
www.swordfightinglondon.com
▼Matt Easton's website & Pinterest:
www.matt-easton.co.uk/
www.pinterest.co.uk/matt_east...
▼Easton Antique Arms - antique swords for sale:
www.antique-swords.co.uk/
#medieval #soldier #battles
For anyone asking why Matt is holding a sword in a video that isn't about swords. This is clearly an emotional support sword, just roll with it and any further questions on the subject might be seen as inconsiderate.
When you can either have a sword or not have a sword, the answer is obvious.
I hope his service sword license is in check. 😊
@@letmeeatcake7836 I feel that way about weapons in general.
Ooooh, I should try that. My Kriegsmesser is a bladed weapon, I may only carry it in public (according to Belgian law) with a valid reason.
"This is my emotional support sword, officer."
“Emotional support sword” snort, laughs.
Italian mercenary wars must have been a aneurism inducing nightmare.
Yes, they were. And that’s *before* you factor in the friendly fire.
We italians also color coded our pants(socks, to be more correct?)
They solved the problem by assuming their allies were now their enemies. And they were right!
@@SlurpeeBoy9999 Honestly I never realized that their turn-coating tradition actually goes that far.
Especially since you don't know if the ones running/switching sides/winning are the mercs you paid or not
- This is so confusing, Sire. We need a simple system to kno...
- No, we don't. That would make it easier for the enemy, too.
"I am more worried about my own side not knowing and charging us in the back."
Sounds like a quote from Blackadder
this is the issue. not being clear can be used strategically, and the clearer the divide, the easier it is to disguise oneself among the enemy team. i wish there was discussion about that in the video
Probably a big reason people ask this is the way battles are depicted in movies as chaotic melees rather than the cohesive units maintaining formation nearly all the time. I imagine if two units ever did devolve into a confused melee, the chance of death, getting hit by an enemy from behind, would be so high that nearly all men would break to run toward their own side almost immediately to regroup ("to me! to me!" shouts the commander). The group that could maintain or reform their line more quickly would like be able to push forward against the more disorganized opposing side and put them to rout.
Ugh. So many modern depiction of ancient battles are downright stupid.
Two side, lines of soldiers arrayed against each other in well--planned formations... who then run at each other shouting and wave their weapons about overhead as they turn into a mixed brawl within minutes of the start of hostilities.
Sure, the old Errol Flynn era movies got hokey at times, but at least they started with archery barrages, then infantry moving in keeping formation, and cavalry smashing weak points or looping around to the enemy's rear.
@@MonkeyJedi99yean but most audiences want the more hero type fighting not everyone is a nerd
@@calebmcallister4289 Then the characters should have a danged duel.
It would cut down on the budget for extras.
@@calebmcallister4289- It’s not at all what audiences want. It’s just much easier to film those ridiculous individual melees.
Keeping men in close-packed units would require a huge amount of training and choreography and would be a lot more dangerous. And I shudder to think how difficult it would be to add special effects to two formations clashing.
Movies also depict everyone wearing stuff that looked like they were found in a dumpster behind halloween store.
Shout out to the Battle of Barnet, where due to foggy conditions, the Earl of Warwicks men confused the star blazon of their allies for the sun blazon of their enemies, setting off a massive friendly fire accident which led to Warwick's defeat and death.
Wow
Well, tbf, the sun is literally a star, just a specific one.
Play Mount & Blade with the unit floaters turned off, and you can rapidly experience how difficult it is to quickly ascertain if an individual is friend or for even if everyone's wearing "team colors"
I’ve been playing like that since I got it
No! I have too many other games in my backlog!
... Goddamnit, not again...
@@Bubben246try the mods man they even got fantasy warhammer and GoT conversion
How i role ;). The amount of times ive couch lanced my own retainer during a massive chaotic battle, it's embarrassing to count xD
There was an incident after the battle of Aljubarrota, 1385, in wich a portuguese knight went lost when chasing down the castilians and joined a group of knights thinking they were portuguese. He only noticed they werent because they were escorting the castilian king himself, but he also saw the enemy knights didn't suspect him and so he tried to get close to the castilian king to take him prisoner.
Only at the last moment a enemy knight noticed the cross of the order of Christ half hidden under his mail veil.
The whole group cut him down.
He was out outnumbered yet he still tried to subdue the king, what a goat.
How would anyone know how he got there or what he thought given that he died?
@@Munrubenmuz every army has a list of names, and surely there were other witnesses who were also lost among the rout like this knight was
@@ZecaPinto1 Maybe. Or maybe it's a story.
@@Munrubenmuz yes. It could be a legend, although I think it is too real to be a legend. For example,,L about Aljubarrota there is the legend of the beast and Saint George, the miraculous vessel that gave water to all soldiers before the actual battle, and also the baker of Aljubarrota who killed 7 canstilians with her wooden baker spade and it's based upon a real character
Totally conjecture, but I think that war cries (i.e "St. George!" for the English) would play a significant role in letting people around you know you're a friendly.
Yes, I was going to say the same thing, it would have made sense particularly when visibility is low, with fog or darkness. "Warwick, Warwick!"
Yeah, they often seem to call out who they're fighting for in medieval accounts of battles.
couldnt the enemy just pretend then? Oh no Im losing, uhhh for st george?! right lads??!
@@henkhenkste6076 Yeah of course, fair enough strategy if you wanted to live a bit longer, same as swapping colours, but if my colours are obscured by mud or it's dark, and a bunch of my mates are running after me trying to impale me with sharp steel, I'd be screaming which side I was on, for sure.
@@henkhenkste6076 In the Brazil-Paraguay War, the Brazilian Army was very dominant (to a level that would be considered a war crime today), and they just made people pronounce a word that had a phoneme that was exclusive to Brazilian Portuguese in the region ("pão").
My wife's indentured.
She keeps them in a glass beside the bed.
Please, tell me more.
I'm stealing that joke.
@@tomsensible3999 You're welcome 😊
I have a similar joke about having the mind of a child.
@@Clowndoe 😅
"You can hear a lot of talk about heraldry and banners, but the truth is that in battle everything is covered in mud and grime, so I just cut down anybody whose horse's head is turned against me." - knight Black Zavish from Grabow from Sapkovsky's hussite trilogy "God's Warriors".
Underrated trilogy!
ty. i needed some fresh reading.
In the Hundred Years’ War, armor style was important. In the War of the Roses, well…”four of theirs, two of ours and one I wasn’t sure of”.
😱
Definitely want to hear more about livery. Also the systems from various periods mentioned of how a king or lord raises troops and outfits them
one point: the higher level the person, the less likely they will be "alone" in the battle
nobles have shield men, banner men, companions, etc...five to ten guys all in armor, like a tank brigade
True. And the King / General usually was surrounded by an entire small army of bodyguards.
This was still a problem at the begining og the US Civil War. Soldiers from various states on both sides wore grey and butternut colored uniforms. You weren't to sure which side they were on til they started shooting at you and that was to late.
it was a issue later in the war also.
by 1863 much of Lee's army where uniformed in imported wool, that was blue. The federal units in the east simply got use to this.
But when Longstreets corp was send west in late 1863, this did result in a number of cases of federal units not firing on them, because all rebs in the west wore gray and butternut.
This did in a few cases help them in Their attack during the battle of Chickamauga.
And Grant mention in his book that he during the "siege" of Chattanooga one day made an inspection of his pickets.
"Seeing a soldier in blue on this log, I rode up to him, commenced conversing with him, and asked whose corps he belonged to. He was very polite, and, touching his hat to me, said he belonged to General Longstreets corps."
I haven't found evidence of butternut before September of 1862
Wasn't it pretty easy since you know, one side had brothers and white dude fighting together while the other did not?
Didn’t the union soldiers use blue?
Never mind the American Civil War, it's a problem during the current Russia-Ukraine war. The shape of the helmets and overall cut and camo patterns of the uniforms are similar enough that friendly fire incidents in urban environments and especially wooded areas are a real concern.
I don't know if they still do it, but if you look at battlefield videos of Ukrainian soldiers in 2022-23, you will often notice that they have blue or yellow tape bands around the base of their helmets and on their arms. Those are ID bands. The bands slightly reduce the uniforms' camouflage effect, so the troops are slightly more visible to their Russian enemies, but the trade-off in reducing friendly fire incidents is considered worth it.
That's the mistake Lord Edmund made in Black Adder.
Oh no! It's Uncle Richard!
I imagine you get fairly good at recognising each other when you're marching, resting and overall being in the campaign. You know the people you're there with, if you stand in the wrong formation seeing your friends in another and people are poking you with polearms, you're probably in the wrong one.
You'll also probably have a good idea of where you are situated and where the enemy are, even in battle. Unless you do the movie tropes of blindly charging in running and loose all manner of cohesion. If you're marching towards your enemy and you see them, they will still be exactly where they were a few seconds ago in your vision.
The rather slow march towards a waiting enemy, with their pikes turned towards you. Or the impending impact of your cavalry force, mere moments away from crashing into the enemy flank...
Also the knight in my profile picture is wearing a tabard, so an appropriate video for it.
Yeah, basically if you need the individual color schemes to determines whether the person you want to stab is friend or foe, the battle as devolved into two mobs hacking at each other. When things are that disorganized, most of the time one side would be routing cus unit cohesion is absurdly important. Most people don’t want to die so if a die sees his units has fucking collapsed, he’ll run, then another guy.
In the Anabasis, by Xenophon before the Battle against his brother the Greek Mercenaries talk with Cyrus the Younger and set up watchword which might have been used to distinguish friend from foe. "Xenophon replied that the watchword was now passing along the line for the second time."
Anabasis 1. VIII. 16-21
I wonder how common it was for other militaries to use watchwords (military passwords). In this circumstance it would have been useful seeing as the Greeks were fighting Persians for the Persians.
He also mentions that they went into battle singing the traditional Paian (war song, battle-cry) which was both about unit cohesion and intimidating the enemy.
Very common
Alignment language...
@@SegalmedAnd Artaxerxes’s army was unusually quiet?
A “watch word” is one used for camp security. The term used for the battlefield was “field word”, and yes they were widely used into the 1700s.
They found a boar emblem badge at the site of the Battle of Bosworth, presumably worn by one of Richard's men who fell during the battle. Didn't they also sometimes pick an identifying mark to wear before a battle, like a sprig of a particular plant tied to their helmet? I've definitely heard that they did that a bit later on, but I don't know when that started. Later still, the tradition seems to have morphed into cockades- little ribbons people stuck to their hats to demonstrate their allegiance to a particular faction.
"Badges?! We don't need no stinking Badges!" (Blazing Saddles 1974)
Treasure of the Sierra Madre said it first
@@jamiemcerlain5897 I haven't heard of it. I'll have to check it out.
The baddies wear red and the good guys wear blue.. duuuh 🙄
Wait, are we the baddies?
Clash Royale politics
@@FluffPuffkotj Why skulls, though?
Mason vs agathans confirmed.
Alliance lies
Hi Matt, this video made me curious about some things: how many times have you seen cases of melee friendly fire described in accounts of medieval combat?
I'm sure it happened often in "fog of war" cases where a group of soldiers were not aware of the loyalties of another group of soldiers. I'm also curious about when the victorious army was running down the losing army - did they stay in formation? If not, would it have been possible that some chasing soldiers would accidentally get killed because they were believed to be part of the retreating army?
There is an interesting account in Rus' chronicles that after one battle between two coalitions of Rus' princes (in 1151) some foot soldiers from the victorious side encountered a wounded warrior and tried to kill him. The warrior said "I am the prince!", but that didn't stop them, because they thought that he was one of the enemy princes. But the armor of that warrior was quite good, so he survived long enough to say "I am your prince, (you idiots)!" and thus avoid death.
Spatial awareness and empathy(as in being able to recognize other people's emotional state) won't let you make such a mistake in melee range.
@@user-yy5xs6xj7r lmao, i wonder if he had them executed
In many Chinese accounts, people gets panic and chop each other when their camps are being overrun at night. It's a nightmare to distinguish friend or foe in such scenarios
Detailed, to the point and free. Gotta love this channel.
During the crusades, the french used the red cross on their clothes : during which the third crusade, Richard the Lionheart troops used whote cross to différenciation from Philippe Auguste troops, who were red crosses. Afterward, it changed and the english started to wear red crosses and the french white crosses. I've never seen anything about Saint Denis cross though, Saint Denis definitly has a flag but no cross, nor white attributes
During the crusades the enemies were identified by their skin color
I'm curious how an accidental friendly kill would have been handled, if it was even noticed during the heat of battle of course.
Or unaccidental too
It's somewhat more difficult to accidentally or "accidentally" hit someone with a melee weapon. Severe injuries take more force = wind-up, intent what have you than a firearm (A)D.
Just imagine a bunch of people working with hammers & axes & saws, it's easy to cause small injuries by accident, but serious accidents are rare. Power tools require an entirely different order of precautions.
@@Michael-jx9bhI don't believe that's what he meant by "accident". To me it was pretty clear that he meant someone confusing a friend with a foe by accident - and then sent him a deathblow.
@@Michael-jx9bh
*clonk! clonk! clonk*
-Stop, you idiot, it's me !
-Oh, sorry.
@@lukasr.5839 exactly, and if said person would be prosecuted, or maybe it's just a part of war and accepted without any consequences.
Yes we need more videos on this topic! Liveries and badges I find extremly interesting :))
Long story short: If you look forward and you see someones face - he's the enemy.
Well, better hope the guys in front of you in your formation don't look back at you...
In all seriousness that kind of works, if both sides don't do any maneuvering and only approach directly towards each other. If you have a group approaching from the flanks, it's kind of important to know if you're attack the right section of the battle.
Yes!
Either an enemy or a coward and they both are targets
@@andrewsock1608or flanking, or hit by artillery or cavalry, or repositioning…
@@Specter_1125 don’t forget they didn’t have radios
I liked how one guy put it. If you’re facing the same way I am you’re on my side. If you’re facing me you’re my enemy.
-Sir, we have captured Earl Matt Easton.
-Great ! He can tell me bedtime stories !
Ideally, most soldiers would know which side they were on well before any battle started.
Imagine you're a medieval man at arms. Your lord has led you off to war. There's a man walking toward you. How do you tell if you need to stab him or welcome him?
That's what Matt is talking about.
@@wesleyjarboe9571 Yep I thinkn that was a joke. it got a nice chuckle out of me lmao
@@gabrielegenota1480
You might be right. Most jokes go over my head. I've been told I don't have a sense of humor. I have sins of humor.
Are we French or English in this battle?
I don’t get it this, I’m slow can you emphasize more clearly
I've always wondered this bro!!!! Thanks so much man!!!!!!!
Can you please expand and make separate videos on each topic, sounds super interesting!
ChatGPT:
Heraldry and Coat of Arms: Nobles and knights often displayed their heraldic symbols on their shields, banners, and surcoats. These distinctive designs helped soldiers recognize their leaders and fellow countrymen on the battlefield.
Uniforms and Liveries: While uniforms weren't as standardized as they are in modern armies, soldiers from the same lord or kingdom might wear similar colors or symbols to identify themselves. However, this wasn't always consistent or reliable.
Battle Standards and Flags: Armies often carried large banners or flags into battle, displaying symbols or colors associated with their faction. These standards served as rallying points and helped soldiers identify their comrades amid the chaos of combat.
Shibboleths: In some cases, soldiers would use specific words or phrases as a form of password to distinguish friend from foe. Those who couldn't pronounce the shibboleth correctly would be identified as enemies.
Knowledge of Allies: Soldiers were typically trained and drilled alongside their comrades, developing a familiarity that helped them recognize each other in the heat of battle.
Communication: Shouting commands, signals, or passwords was another method used to distinguish between allies and enemies. This could involve verbal cues or specific signals agreed upon before the battle.
Despite these methods, the confusion of battle and the fast-paced nature of medieval warfare often led to instances of friendly fire and mistaken identity. Additionally, spies and infiltrators could sometimes deceive enemy forces by adopting their symbols or uniforms, further complicating matters.
There’s more to identify a human than just their badges on armour and what not. I guarantee that if you spend time in the field with people you will be able to identify them based on size/shape/the finer details on their armour, stylings and finishing, favourite weapons, favoured techniques, how they walk, how they run, what kind of horse they have the list goes on….
Amazing video though. Have to say this is a part of our history we have sadly lost.
This is one thing I was always so confused about. Movies and Tv have definitely changed my sphere of understanding of medieval battles for sure. for example, in the game of thrones episode “Battle of the Bastards” in season 6, both sides look basically the exact same besides some various parties, but when the battle starts, it is just what looks to be a free-for-all, especially how they frame the shots. Thank you for clearing this up!
I’m more interested in how they identified each other *before* heraldry existed. Heraldry only really officially became a thing in the 1200s. I think there was an era with “quasi-heraldry” in the 1100s but I’m not sure how true this is or to what extent it existed. I’d like to learn more about that.
Thanks. I was actually wondering this the other day.
Good guys are always blue, bad guys are always red
If that’s what you think it probably just means you’re from a ‘blue’ place🤓
@bigpurplepops you mean Stormwind? Darnassus? Ironforge? Gilneas?
Autobots have blue eyes and a red logo.
What if the armor is pink?
@@texasbeast239 A good sign that you can't trust them.
More about these topics please!
You should have mentioned that In the battle of grunwald the Polish king told his knights to wear a rope of straw around the waist to help distinguish the royal troops from the teutonic knights.
Also in the battle of Orsha, there is a great painting of it from the 16th cent. The Polish hetman(general) rode into battle without helmet so his troops can recognise him by his beard. You can actually see this detail into the painting.
Great video!
+scholagladiatoria *Thanks for the historian perspective.* Unlike nowadays, Medieval soldiers were experts at Identification Friend or Foe; badges were essentials.
please do delve deeper into heraldry is a fascinating subject!
Great analysis. Let's add that vast units/armies started in the XVII and XVIII centuries, with the birth of nations and industrial economies (that needed larger armies -not affordable by feudal territories based on agricultural production). That even induced a higher need for the identification of the units (not necessarily because of the melee - that in the Middle Ages were probably less spectacular and with fewer people than those depicted in movies*). We should add the increased standardization of weaponry, uniforms, and training (of course, that was already present since the Roman Republic and the empire, but now it is definitely more consistent than in medieval times). Thank you for your outstanding and utterly informed/informative videos.
*The costs to equip an army were indeed huge, certainly higher than to equip acting crews. And the chronicles are not always reliable regarding the numbers involved, even since the "De Bello Gallico."
Would love to see you cover hilarious cases in history in which people got confused and attacked each other or thought they are allies and so on and sat around joking with the other group only to find out its not or that they change loyalty like a week ago. That sort of thing.
Because we know it happened.
As a painter of miniatures and large armies this is a fascinating subject and new information and perspectives are always welcome. Are there recorded instances of attacking friendlies because of lack of recognition in the Medieval period as there were in the Napoleonic Era?? Talk about an overly complex detailed uniform systems that did not quite support recognition at musket ranges, especially among the light cavalry.
Thank you this was very educational I have wondered about this have a good day😊😊😊😊😊😊😊.
All these points are true, and this was certainly interesting. Yet, I also think it's worth remembering that modern soldiers, with often very similar green camouflage uniforms, still manage to distinguish their enemies.
This stands true (for well trained soldiers) even in high adrenaline snap decision situations. In SAS Who Dares Wins I remember an exercise where a person with a gun comes running out of a tunnel. The trainees (contestants) had to decide weather to shoot or not. Most of them made the judgment correctly, with only their relatively limited training.
I'll finish by saying this: I have a red Sazuki Swift. A neighbour also has a red Sazuki Swift. I can spot my car by one headlight and a wing-mirror from 500 yards up the road (I literally forget where I park every time I go out 😅). The point is, don't underestimate the power of the human mind to distinguish almost imperceptible details on a subconscious level; our brains are built for pattern recognition.
Really interesting topic, possible subjects, the notion and development of a 'uniform', regimental badges, , trooping the color and their origins,.
Large armies are composed of many armed bands. Which makes anyone within that group familiar with each other. During the chaos of battle, you would stick with your group no matter what. Breaking away from your group meant certain death. So the objective during combat was to break up the other group and drag individuals within your ranks so they could be easily kill, maimed, injured or captured..... Mostly killed, unless it was someone important worth the recompense.
The armed bands of men was what eventually became the smallest group organization of an army. Known today as squad, troop, or section.
Formation
Great video.
TLD: They shot the guys in the big group across from them until one side had enough and broke, then you would go after the ones that were running away... unless you were the ones running away, then you trip the guy next to you.
I liked in Graham turners new book where he referenced troops wearing their Lords livery... and then over the top of that the overall commander of the battle their Lord was posted too. I imagine on a bend or something.. so everyone in the large sized vanguard or rearward or whatever.. knows exactly who their allies are.
Good video 👍🏻
I also want to hear more about military bands in medieval, in many manuscripts we can see trumpeters, drummers and fife on battlefields that might act as signallers, but we never know if medieval have something similar to napoleonic musical signal systems.
I've heard that military bands as such were originally an Ottoman innovation that caught on elsewhere. I am sure there is more to it than that.
i absolutely loved this episode. ive never seen that painting of richard III before, could i get more info on it? also were those yorkish emblems contemporaneous to him? as well as that, was capwells armouring decision for the lost king influenced by that painting? i dont remember seeing it with your interview of him.
is that sword youre holding from your windlass line? the hilt is absolutely gorgeous and it might be a competitor against kingston arms type xiv in my mind...
It's an earlier time period, but one thing I've read regarding the medieval Romans is that their military manuals (Tactika and Strategikon) both state that entire units should have identical shields. I found that a rather distinctive contrast for the Roman forces compared to the systems (and varieties) seen with the shields and surcoats of Feudal Europe from the 11th-13th centuries.
Medieval Romans? Do you mean Byzantines?
I think it would be fun to mention that the French uniforms in WW1 was their classic napoleonesque blue/red/white uniform. But the brits and the Germans had upgraded to the beige or sand colored slightly camo uniforms.
The French obviously switched uniforms quite fast.
Painted helmet also where used for identification
During the Romans time shields was the primary tool to know friends from foe
As long as you are with your buddies and facing the correct direction, you are probably fine attacking anyone who approaches you from the front.
Livery coats please! St Denis sounds very interesting. The French St George! Must be worth a video. Its got me thinking, there is a village in Cornwall called St Dennis, this must be due to the Normans. If you can shed some more light into how we have been subtly influenced like that, that would be interesting content. My surname is Norman as another example.
I'd love to know more about Heladry, colours, sigils etc. Learning where that Game of Thrones trope comes from!
Wonderfully informative, answered many of my questions surrounding this topic. Just wondering what the source of the picture at 1.56 is?
This was an awesome video. Algorithm finally showing quality content.
At 4.04 that bloke with the sallet and no bevor - for a second I thought you'd brought RoboCop into the story!
I like how Game of Thrones was so well written that it serves as an example in a documentary context.
Old Norman , in our office , had been a commando captured at Dieppe after being shot in the leg. Beforehand in England, he’d been ordered to deliver whatever to a Canadian HQ at night . As he crunched up the gravel drive of the country house, he was challenged “Qui va La” and puzzled , not knowing French, he carried on. A shot rang out and fortunately missed.
It was Henry V who after Agincourt, made English the official language of England as opposed to French. My theory is that in the heat of battle faced by peasant archers, it made very good sense to identify yourself as on their side by speaking in English, the archers who probably only understood English !! Non ?
An issue that still arises on battlefields today. Particularly on niight ops. Though nowadays one would typically affix something like IR/Infrared reflectors to their uniform that lights up under night vision for example.
When two medieval armies showed up to battle in the same colors: "I'm not changing. You're changing"
I saw the Black Knight's armor and a modern reproduction of his armor when I was In Canterbury Cathedral when I was in England. His shield painting was divided into 4 parts, 2 having the British 3 golden on lions on a red backing and 2 having 3 golden French Flour de li on a blue backing. I expect people also knew who he was anyway because of his high position.
The men at arms also shouted out their maxims or their allegance in the battle, so there was clearly acoustic recognizing too, which was less ambivalent. French shouting: Montjoie, Saint-Denis! Hungarians shouting: Jézus! English probably shouting: St George! Turks: Allah Akbar! etc.
I read a novel set during 15th century Italian wars, where the commander was stressing the importance of using the correct battle cry. 'If you use the old one, you'll have people from both sides attacking you.'
Surely the style and design of armour and attire would play a part in distinguishing who is who.
For example, I've replaying Kingdom Come Deliverance again and I generally identify the cuman forces by their helmets...
Could you please do a video on mid level chain of command in medieval armies. Like who actually commanded a knights company of retainers since knights are supposed to be fighting together as cavalry
It depends on the nation as well. Most nations depended on heraldry. The colors every knight and soldier wore were basically the colors of the lord they served. Professional soldiers would know all the different colors of their kingdom. Also, fighting in organized ranks helps as well, so even if you are just a conscripted peasant you can just poke the guy on the otherside. In the Scottish Highlands warriors didn't wear much armor or the colors of their lord. Highlanders served under their chieftain and would wear the clan plant on their hats. Also, clansmen often fight in groups larger than a few hundred, so they know what everyone looked like. It is even easier when they are fighting other kingdoms because they had to just fight anyone wearing armor. Most highlanders couldn't afford armor. It got even easier to tell who is who when wearing of the kilt was custom. Even though many western highlanders wore a leine, which is basically a long shirt, that kinda looks like a kilt, but it is a shirt with baggy sleeves.
It would be a lot easier if they just had glowing circles floating above all their heads with their commander's flag pictured in the middle.
Super interesting!
The men you are facing forward.
This is so interesting!
Also: basically "flag football" but maybe more colours
it's interesting to me that people always complain about the fiction trope of a desperate last stand that devolves into chaotic random melees being won by reinforcements showing up or some magical intervention, when in reality, if your soldiers have broken formation and are fighting for their lives, they've basically already lost. It's honestly more realistic that some external force turns the tide than the idea that individual people's skill at fighting in a melee can eventually win a battle like that.
Tangential to this topic, I think it'd be interesting to see a video about false flag, or I suppose false surcoat incidences over this time period. Sort of a continuation of the theme. Thanks for the video Matt, some great new gems in there for me, a (very) amateur medievalist.
Sometimes in the Hundred Years' War, it was apparently just a dash of red or white paint on the front and sometimes back, to form the cross of St George or St Denis. Scots seem to have worn the cross of St Andrew, at least some of the time.
“I hope this is useful” is a great sentence to end with. 😂
Interesting, thx. I would have thought that the army commander gave out a color and all soldiers used a piece of cloth of that color binding it to the arm or something
We still do something similar in German "Studentenverbindung". We wear the colours of our Fraternity as a sash or a badge to be able to differentiate who's who at the first glance
The oldest one i know of is the city of Dijon, the guard embroidered the name of the city on there left shoulder
This problem existed even in 19th century. I am german, and for most time of history , Germany or better HRE and German Federation was not centralized, so even during innergerman war of 1866 , there was sometimes confusion about soldiers with different uniforms. So to solve this Problem, often armbinds, sashes or in german Feldbinden had been used for identification. Also signs had been painted or sewed on cloth. Or soldiers of one side attached a handfull of straw ( Stroh) or a very small branch ( Zweig) of oak or needle trees at their hat.
@scholagladiatoria I am curious when did the switch to uniforms happen? We know the period of the transition, but I am curious of the exact war regular uniforms first were used en-masse
I suppose with any decent plate armour there were tells from where it was produced, being such a difficult and expensive undertaking. At a point London produced large numbers of generic plate for retainers which was almost as good as individually contracted knight armour and would be easily identifiable on the field, for example. Perhaps during heraldic instruction people got to know from which regions armouring was produced, northwest France compared to Sweden, using different ores for example, as well as styles although style is probably cross influenced. For the common soldiery they're probably just told who is who by sergeants and field lieutenants, also how to think and if it's okay to take a piss. Sort of resembles today, really.
I would also add a point about battle cries being used
Thank you. Now the next time i go into battle i will be able to distinguish friend from foe.
Very useful as a video, but there are some things I still have doubts about.
One of these problems is how did they recognize whether a mercenary group was their ally or enemy?
Did the mercenaries use the same concept of seals as the lords' troops or did they have their own seal?
For example, in the first phase of the Hundred Years' War, thanks to the HRE, the English army also had the support of Swiss mercenaries on its side, but in the majority of cases these also wore a white cross on a red background (coat of arms of the confederation), as they did not to be confused with the French because of the colors they wore, or the Genoese crossbowmen who wore the red cross on a white background but who supported the French troops?
Lol i remember from Barbara Tuchman's novel A Distant Mirror that at the battle of Crecy or Agincourt the blind King of Bohemia took part...just imagine his squaires yelling: hit to the right Sire!! Hit on the left Sire!!😂
0:02 by the *cake* of course!
Bonjour de France. Beau travail le rosbif, félicitations. ;)
Salut, mon ami! Merci pour ca ;-)
I don’t know
I wanted to like this comment, but the user picture created a state of cognitive dissonance in my mind ( o.o)
They knew the men I there groups by sight and probably subtle things not written down. But that is also why banners and banner men were important. Commonsense as well if the y are coming toward you with sword drawn they either are an enemy or see you as one.
The handshake comes from medieval times. On a road a man would show his right hand towards a stranger coming towards him as a courtesy that he was not holding a weapon since most of the time men only fought with the right hand.
Imagine being colorblind and standing in the masses and don't knowing who to attack.
Or finding out, the local lord you are trying to fight with is using the same style as you, so you have to argue about clothing and that you thought of yours first.
Can you please make a video on The Wallace Collection A474?
What I want to know is: do we have any accounts of when the lines broke (maybe because of a cavalry charge or overwhelming arrows/bolts, or perhaps just a small group of skirmishers who needed to retreat) and one or more soldier got turned around and ended up running to enemy ranks believing it was their own lines? I'm imagining maybe someone gets knocked down or hit on the head, he is turned around and disoriented in the fall and tries to run to safety, only to find himself surrounded by enemies.
I feel like it must have happened at some point in time, but I don't suppose it was common. What would he even more fascinating is if someone tried to join up with opposing troops while ranks were being re-formed and they were just in closer proximity to them and wearing matching livery.
Great discussion.
Helmet style and weponry was the main way to differenciate ground troops from one side or the other. In Spain was quite easy expelling the moors. Just for the straight or curve sword carried by the soldier. A cross in the chest etc... Italian wars were a show 😂😂😂😂