Why Did Kings Stop Leading Troops into Battle? (Short Animated Documentary)
Vložit
- čas přidán 26. 07. 2020
- Kings always used to lead troops into battle and would often command them during it. But when did this change and why? To find out watch this short and simple animated documentary.
/ histmattersyt
Patreon: www.patreon.com/user?u=4973164
Merch: teespring.com/stores/history-...
A special thanks to all of these Patrons below, without whom the show wouldn't be possible:
João Santos
Nice Merge Prin Soare
Franco La Bruna
Can’t Think Of A Name
Kevin Phoenix
Micky Landen
Richard Wolfe
Jonas
sharpie660
Stefan Møller
Anon
Porkmeister
Philip Alexander
Wolf
David archaeologist
D. Mahlik
Ian Jensen
SirAlpaka
Dragan
Chris Fatta
Qi Xiao
Dexter_McAaron
Rod D. Martin
Ainar Garipov
Andrew Niedbala
Ryan Haber
John Garcia
Nathan Perlman
Andrew Patane
Paul McGee
Heytun
Christopher S Nelson
Bernardo Santos
Jane Sumpter
Christopher Godfrey
Erik Martin
Joooooshhhhh
Chris Dolan
Yick Chung
SkyEye
Shaun Pullin
Chris Hall
Tristan Kreller
Perry Gagne
James Bisonette Fan #1
Henry Rabung
Danny Ansteht
Magdalena Reinberg-Leibel
bas mensink
Alen
I’m Not In The Description
Noremac_Cameron
jdk
I’m not in the description either
Mark Ploegstra
Cap
Vilelmus_veliki
William Wold
Blake Dryad
Liam Gilleece
Sytze de Witte
Alteredcorgi
Luke Robinson
FF Nelly
Chach
Jeffrey Schneider
JAY ALAN ENDELMAN
Ciege Engine
Haydn Noble
Chrisaztec
Kinfe85
TooMuchWaterYouDie
HelloAgainThere
Josh Cornelius
MrPalomino
Colm Boyle
Alex Adorno
Warren Rudkin
Matthew Hogan
Piotr Wojnowski
Gabriel Lunde
Mohd
Björn Wittmann
Big Nick
Colin Steele
Nick Finan
Konstantin Bredyuk
Arthur Hosey Jr.
Dakota Brunell
Pierre Le Mouel
Richard Manklow
Steve Bonds
Jamal Omar
Donald Weaver
Cealen Hadwin
Seth Reeves
Christine Purvis
Argentinian soldier:
"I fear no man,but that.....thing.....
*looks at Queen Elizabeth rappelling down the rope from a helicopter*
it scares me"
nickys34 sir this is a Wendy's
I’m just laughing at the replies
@nickys34 what did you smoke and can I have some of it?
Soldado argentino:
"No le temo a ningún hombre, pero esa... cosa
*Mira a la Reina Isabel bajando con una cuerda de un helicóptero*
Me aterra"
I know for sure I would surrender inmediatly to his majesty
British soldier: Sir, we're overwhelmed. we need back up
British officer: Send in the Queen
0:09
*Queen's voice *
-Good evening.
One does not simply "send in the queen." She sends in herself
Why do I suddenly expect a Mel Brooks musical number here?! :D
@@jedironin380 WOW
Fine, I'll do it myself
"A king has many privileges, but safety in battle cannot be one of them" attributed to Alexander the Great.
Alexander led from the vanguard, even in ancient times that was almost unheard of. But that’s why he’s Alexander
@@monsieurcondottiero2685 A god among men.
This whole video can be summarized with - "Because they're pussies."
@Reinhard Von müsel Even though his empire dissolved after his death, the impact of him conquering pretty much all of civilization in the west at that point had profound consequences that would shape the future of humanity irrevocably.
His death may have left his empire shattered and fractured among his generals, but it still led to hellenic culture being spread across the med. and greek gods along with their ideas and cultures being spread across the middle east. Not to mention how for literally thousands of years after his death generals and kings would seek to emulate Alexander and revere him.
All of human history would be changed had he not achieved what he had done, and history as we know it would be unrecognizable as it is today.
@Reinhard Von müsel He is in many religious sects and is immortalized in religion, he chased down the persian king on his horse, and built an Kingdom bigger then rome and also built the 23rd biggest empire in the world. Also Ramses II's Kingdom is a small fraction of Alexander's Kingdom, and yet you call him overrated.
King Albert I of Belgium not only personally led his troops in battle during World War I, but he fought alongside them in the trenches.
Did he surrive?
@@falconeshield Infact, he did and died in a mountain accident in 1934.
@@falconeshield Yep. This guy is the absolute Chad of Belgium, he is so loved that even now and after his son surrender to the German, the Belgians love their royalty.
This guy dig trench for his soldier to rest a little. How badly do you want to fight for a king after seeing him in person in the trench with you, digging and fighting.
He used to says that before being king, he was a Belgian citizen, and it was his duty to show the exemple.
@@gameknightjek2640 how did he fit in those trenches then? Didn't his big balls cause trouble?
@@Azraenore He died in a climbing accident, so we believe the rock just couldn't stand the weigh of thoses balls
But yeah, personification fo gigachad
At the beggining of the war, the guy just go to the parlement in military uniform, break the door on his horse, and threaten to overtrowe the governement if they where thinking of surrendering.
Wich he did some month later, when they speaked about give up the little belgian land we where fighting on.
I've got so many thing on this guy, i got to do a work on him for my history degree, boy that was a fun work to do.
Imagine being a argentine soldier and getting shot by Queen Elizabeth.
Morten imagine being tea-bagged in your last moments of life by her.
It would have been an honour !
She has had firearms training.
@@ANobodyatall "It's . . . an . . . honor your majesty."
Id have paid good money to see that!
Queen Elisabeth rappelling down the rope had me on the floor laughing.
matschr1806 the very thought 😂😂😂
I could see her doing it though.
But that will be the COOLEST THING EVER if she really did it 🤣🤣🤣🤣
same ;)
Same
I mean to be fair the President of Chad died in battle yesterday so it can still happen
Wow, really?
@@maxthexpfarmer3957 he got shot down by terrorists during his expension of troops on the frontline
guess he wasn't a chad
@@endersonshaskaumali4541 Disagree. Getting KIA is the most chad way for a leader to die.
@@seatray_real That sounds like peak guerilla warfare tbh. Getting to kill the guy who has been ordering your demise must be quite the big catch for terrorists.
Since you mentioned that the practice declined after the Thirty Years' War, I would surmise that the death of Sweden's King Gustavus Adolphus during that war may have been a key factor.
Not to Sweden they had more kings fight and die after that like Charles xii
And a number of other princes involved in the German states. Though he's right professionalism of the general staff is what most impacts.
@@jarogniewtheconqueror2804 royalty takes a minute to not go out in a blaze of glory like their dad
After the Thirty Years War, and especially in the 18th century between the death of Louis XIV to the French Revolution, war among the Great Powers stopped being conflicts for the existential defense of the realm or of a dynasty, or striving to acquire such realms, and instead became little more than games between opposing monarchs and/or their ministers and favorites for reasons of gaining resources or trade advantages, or even for simple personal pique, with the dirty parts of the job being done by proxies ranging from generals to foot soldiers. No longer was a ruler expected to leave his comfortable palace when his subordinates could do the job better than he could.
@baraxor I feel like this is where abunch of individual sports start to take off, regardless of when they were invited chances are the nobles had more and more time to play
Polo
Tennis
Golf
Fencing
Probably archery just to keep it alive
Be honest here, you made this video just for the opportunity to animate Queen Elizabeth with war paints going down a rope firing a gun
Underrated comment
Well there are photos of her in war uniforms and firing with a big badass gun ..
Well she technically did serve in World War II, she's one remarkable lady.
@@thunderbird1921 she was definitely not very ladylike compared to the standard for royalty. She loved cars and served as a mechanic for the British army.
Worth it
Kings: *even though some of you may die that is a sacrifice I'm willing to make*
Is this suppose to be funny?
@@flushed5683 it's a Shrek reference, so yes.
Well technically he wasn’t a King.
@@flushed5683 you must be a riot at parties
@@ASillyHistoryBuff You shouldn't really talk back to the almighty God of Wii Sports, Matt himself.
There were so many battles in history where the monarch dying literally resulted in the entire army, despite previous advantages, being routed. Such as what happened to the armies of Ibrahim Lodhi and Imam Admad. Putting the ruler in grave danger also endangers the cause of the conflict - truly a game of chest where only the King piece determines victory.
There are examples where the opposite happened too like when Alexander the great was shot with an arrow while sidging a castle, his men believing he was dead stormed the castle and slaughtered everyone for vengeance
Chess?
It's better this way so the outcome can be decided without waiting for the last man standing. Just like the Greek often decided battles in a 1v1 to avoid further bloodshed.
What happened was leaders would rather lose 100% of their army than to die and save thousands
@@tgsachris Yeah definitely the case if the troops were of low quality. And the reason to fight is not clear. The leadership dies and no one to take over. The army don't know what to do and route. Alexander the great's troops were trained very well. They respected Alexander and he had very good generals that could take over in an instant.
@@madebybelle6965 That is a very good point, it takes a well trained, well disciplined, highly motivated army to fight on without their leader
The visual of Queen Elizabeth and Margaret Thatcher rolling into the Falklands army of two style is just too damn good.
Would they both be riding in tanks though?
Immortal Queen and Cyborg Prime Minister decent into combat.
Sounds like a manga. I would read that manga.
Except, if I remember correctly, they despised each other.
@@ckl9390 Queen won that battle. No one loves Thatcher.
For those wishing to see Queen Elizabeth II in camo in Falklands, remember she volunteered as a Mechanic and Driver during WW2.
That's only half of it. The Queen's father, King George VI, regularly practiced with Tommy guns and other weaponry. He was willing to fight alongside British forces if the Nazis landed on the isles and tried to take London.
@@thunderbird1921 damn. Long live the King indeed! Wouldn't that be a sight?
@@yochaiwyss3843 sad how he died 7 years after the war ended
@@thunderbird1921 Damn, he would’ve the baddest badass king of the 20th century.
Onebody like this comment anymore
Queen Elizabeth would have been getting a lot of kills increasing her kill streak
They’d never be able to kill her, since she’s immortal.
her kill streak would give her the nuke,
Wait... increasing? As in it gets bigger?
Hol up
Kill streak?
She just teleports onto the bow of an Argentine ship and annihilates everyone onboard
Shoutout to Brigadier General Theodore Roosevelt III, who died of a heart attack in Normandy in July 1944. Despite being the son of Teddy Roosevelt and a distant cousin of FDR, on top of having a bad leg and overall poor health, he refused to ride out the war in a staff position behind the lines. He basically harrangued his superiors into letting him go ashore in the first wave on D-Day. This ended up being very fortitous, as the first waves in his area, 'Omaha Beach,' ended up a mile from where they should have been. As a general ashore and seeing the situation with his own two eyes, he ordered the next waves diverted to reinforce the landing at the "wrong" location, which ended up saving the entire operation in that stretch of beach.
Wasn't it Utah Beach he landed at?
@@Fordo007 It was.
I think improved communication might also play a role. In classical and medieval times it was a lot harder to know what was going on in a war compared to the 17th and 18th century.
That was my thought. Not just that, but you get a better vantage point and potentially the ability to have a room of maps and charts to consult as well. Plus, a general isn't that much different from the sorts of nobility that would have also been leading armies into battle at the same time as the king was.
It's because people do not appreciate their leaders appear to a press conference with blood-soaked all over their clothes and a leg missing.
You'd be surprised.
Nice one, bastard.
Speak for youtself mate.
If they shed blood and got missing legs no one would have to go to war in the first place.
@@Veriox22 Yet this bastard became King of England. What have you done?
Fun fact: George Washington was the first and only (US) president to lead an army in a battle while president. (The whiskey rebellion)
@@andresrueda6677 they mean among US presidents
@Nicholas Skinner That was his point - Bolívar was an American president, as in a president of a country situated on the continent of America. ;)
People from Mexico southwards tend to be a bit annoyed about the use of "American" for only the USA. This was one of the more intelligent ways of pointing that out. :D
@@williammoon4497And the Gran Colombia was in America
@@varana Internationally speaking, American often refer to as someone or something from the United States of America.
@@williammoon4497 I know it
In WW1 king victor emmanuel the third of Italy often visited the trenches where the soldiers were in. He didn't fight in the battles but the soldiers in the trenches still respected him a lot for going there, to the point that they called him "the soldier king"
"Chad president dies from combat wounds" I'm about to end this man's whole career
I remember hearing about Idriss Déby upon his death back on April 20, 2021! This means that the last time a head of state led an army into battle would be the 2021 Northern Chad offensive, occurring centuries after most Western heads of states stopped fighting their wars!
Chad president... literally.
That Elizabeth II with the Camo on her face... Just beautiful.
I'd like to think that there is an alternative universe where that's exactly what happens.
Oh hey William
I’m simple man,When I saw that scene my fingers went to the like button.
KD 47.6
Are you proud of your descendant?
King Albert 1 of Belgium used to lead his soldiers in the First world war and fought in the trenches, his queen was a nurse.
Same thing with Kaiser Wilhelm's son. He led the german army at Verdun, although I'm not entirely sure if he fought in the trenches, but I do know he led the battle and was actually very honorable towards the French. He even presented a german ceremonial sword to a wounded French sergeant who defended one of the forts with all wounded men.
Czar Nicolas did the same thing, but that ended up blowing up in his face on both the frontlines and politically
King Albert is INCREDIBLY underrated, don't forget he literally cleaned up the Belgian royal family's image after his uncle Leopold II's scandalous reign.
@@kriegsmannighthawk1335 That's very interesting. Jordan's royal family is getting like that too (generations of military service). Not only is King Abdullah II an accomplished warrior, his daughter Princess Salma became a fighter pilot for the Jordanian Air Force this year.
@@TheMonkeygoneape I don't think the Tsar actually led them into battle or fought. He just took himself to the front to be closer to the battle when he was commanding. And even then he mostly listened to Rasputin
I remember hearing that the Belgian King fought along side his soldiers while trying to repel the German invasion during one of the world wars. I should look it up to find out more details.
King Albert I, an extremely popular King who was a good man
"Professional Rubber Stamp..."
The audaciousness.
The nerve.
Do it again, it slayed me
"the effective range of a musket was short, so leaders were pretty safe"
_Karl XII glares from his trench_
I thought he was killed by cannonball?
@@user-vz2fj4wq7d stray grapeshot
Could have been an assassination as well. Since there a lot of information pointing at a closer range shot.
@@88oscuro according to the autopsy it couldn't have been. The hole was so clean that it had to be a shot from very long range. Anything closer would've been a lot messier.
could he have been the last head of state to fall in battle?
Fun fact: king Albert of Belguim is know for being the soldier king becouse he was fighting in the front in ww1
@Jonathan Williams Really, thanks i didn't know that
@Wayne Hitchcock he was an underated monarch.he fought for his country even in bad times.His son was a coward.
@@The_Lidless_Eye Why do you say his son was a coward? did he run out when belgium was taken?
@@papuhdave9643 Yes.when he got back after WW2 the people said that the king left them to die or he's nothing like his father.his rule was short thou.reinging from 1933 when King Albert died in a mountain climb (people theorize that he was murderd). Leopold III (Albert's son and king then) was forced to give up his title as king in 1951 when King boudouin was 21.
Same for Victor Emmanuel the Third. Of course his reputation as soldier king was tarnished by being alive during WW2.
1:29 The Mongol warrior here is not just a Crash Course reference. The medieval Mongol armies did have frontline commanders. And in the 1930s Choibalsan (the ruler of Mongolia at the time) led troops against the Japanese at Khalkin Gol (along with Zhukov).
To be honest queen elizebeth would be good in battle shes immortal after all
not anymore
well this comment aged like milk
That would be Henry Kissinger
@@baha3alshamari152 Nope...
2:28 I like "Jesus mildly annoyed by his own crucification."
Crucifixion, not crucification
@@user-lp7sl6ff2d damn, when Napoleon corrects your English
@@spary5751 lmao
Jesus seems to be annoyed by everyone
Well, he IS Church of England, after all.
Another episode of “Things you didn’t think you wanted to know until now”.
And knew anyway if prompted?
I’ve always wanted queen Elizabeth to wreck somebody on a battlefield so I don’t know who you’re talking about
3:20 “Lizzie would have been great at it though” LMAO
Fun fact: before becoming Queen, Liz was a mechanic and drove a jeep for the military during WW2 (obviously not in combat situations). So as far fetched as it is that she'd be leading an army in battle, she probably got closer than most US presidents of the 20th century.
Technically George H.W. Bush was most involved in the war of all the US presidents of the 20th century
“And Queen Elizabeth wasn’t engaging in the Falklands”
*She just didn’t want to waste her time with that silly conflict*
Ywah, she could single handled the whole world
Immortal doesn’t mean invincible.
@@PugnaciousProductions mah man spittin fax
@@PugnaciousProductions She survived the asteroid 66 million years ago and the dinosaurs before, pretty sure she is invincible.
@@tornado1050 Yeah? And the T-Rex became the chicken by hiding in a cave.
Lets be honest Teddy Roosevelt would have got his hands dirty...
That’s the main reason why he never declared a war: he didn’t want to send the troops without going himself.
TimesNewLogan Teddy is my favorite President and when I think of him going into battle I just remember the spinning fury of Teddy’s head and his many arms carrying various objects.
he did get his hands dirty in the Spanish American war, he led a regiment from the front in a charge uphill whilst all the guys around him were getting shot
he did.
@@jonathanallison785 @octavian as president ya potatoes
Seriously i have wondered about this FOR YEARS!!!
Thank you for all your vids!
'... In a way that a professional rubber stamp could not' 🤣🤣🤣💀💀
*"Philip! I got one! I got an Argentinian!"*
Great, Liz! Don't get cocky
Why cant i love this comment it deserves more than a like
Well done Liz, we will get it stuffed and mount it up next to the boar head in the hunting lodge
@@knickglay
I see what you did there.
Lizzie coming out of the chopper all camo'd up was absolutely fucking glorious i love this channel
who tf calls the Queen “Lizzie”
@@jared305 Babe, literally everyone in an informal context. And she’s my Queen too, I live in a Commonwealth realm
@@jared305 Many did. Long may she rest. Until Anubis gets scared and she's reborn a yank
The humor in your illustrations are fantastic. Thanks for posting
“Kings no longer lead troops into battle.”
Jordan: I’m gonna pretend I didn’t hear that.
Historians:
who is James Bisonette?
Geographers:
Where is James Bisonette?
Phylosophers:
Why is James Bisonette?
James Bisonette mon:
How is James Bisonette?
*Philosophers: Pay me James Bisonette
But nobody asks how is James Bisonette
Me: how is James Bizanet?
communist boi my comrade do you let me put this in the comment?
communist boi you are a boss
0:09 ngl if I was an Argentinian soldier seeing an immortal old lady shooting at me with an assault rifle, I did surrender immediately.
You wouldn't, you'd want to kill her with your silver bullet and then get a selfie with her detached bloody head (literally bloody, I mean).
I'd do the same
@@LuisAldamiz deja de representarnos mal boludo
thats a battle rifle actually
"Immortal" rip
Hey! Good video. I never asked myself this question before. But I’m glad someone answered. 👍
"stopped after the invention of firearms"
Charles XII of Sweden: *laughs in never being hit in battle*
What about droid attacks on the wookies?
We do not have many ships to spare...
That wasn't recent "In a galaxy far far away and a long long time ago"
I find your lack of faith disturbing
It is critical we send an attack group there immediately
It is a system we can not afford to lose
Everyone's making jokes about James Bizanet
Meanwhile I'm just wondering what happened to PartyBoyCo
MI6 made him disappear at the orders of James Bizanet
everything's fine as long as James Bizanet and Rob Waterhouse are still with us
How about David Archaeologist
@@Ar-pz4cp Izzy?
@@aliensinnoh1 Izzy was mentioned, but PartyBoiCo was not
2:30 Jesus looks so bored just chillin on the cross, love the little details!
I love your channel keep up the great stuff
Seeing Elizabeth II in camo makes me wish she did fight in the conflict, that would've been a sight to see. She is immortal so nothing can stop here. And she has a powerful corgi army too
She served as a mechanic in the Second World War at a base in London. Picked up skills she can still use today... and is apparently a rather fast driver.
@@silenthunteruk So is prince phillip
UNLEASH THE CORGIS
If the opponent beheaded her with a sword then she would be killed. There can be only one!
You again
Topic: Why did kings stop leading their troops into battle?
Jordanian king: this is an insult!!!
@@eoghanwalsh7569 the current Jordanian king has flown sorties on targets in Syria after ISIS killed a Jordanian Pilot
King Abdullah II has won several medals for killing and capturing terrorists. However when he became King there were serveral things he had to stop doing like parachuting and rally driving (hence Jordan has lots of rallys) to protect the King's life. The military love him because he is one of them but he is not allowed to risk his life beyond being the King anyways.
@@zerg539 no, I was there at tge time. However it did turn even extremist Jordanians against ISIS so it was also a homegoal.
@@eoghanwalsh7569 Leading troops into battle isnt the same as being on the front line.
>stopped doing after becoming the King
Yes. This was a great episode!
This channel is honestly amazing
"And whilst rare Kings did get captured and killed."
"Whilst Rare"
CK2 seems to disagree on that.
If you play CK3, almost all wars end in capture of ruler or their heir
@@mortache I can't, I have a mac
Wierd its rare for me even when the enemy is outnumbred i only had 1 king who was captured and another king who was killed but thats just it
@@jeffthemercenary the king has to actually lead his troops for a chance of that happening. And if the battles are "slaughters" there's a much higher chance.
@@mortache yes most my king had trait strong or genius and other martial increasing trait (duelist, tactian, flanker etc)
Little did we know Queen Elizabeth actually single handily retook the Falklands.
Technically her corgis. That's why she keeps so many.
She would be the real life equivalent of Tanya Adams. :)
Hi Mr History Matters,
I really enjoy your videos and you're "Fun fact's and the Field of Daisies" is Absolutely Fabulous.
Keep up the Great Work!!!
I love your channel!
“Professional rubber stamp” is my new favorite monarch reference
"In mid-19 century the practice was pretty much dead" Napoleon III didn't get the memo
Prussia's kings didn't get the message either, at least for a number of decades. Frederick William III and I think Wilhelm I both lead armies directly into battle.
Neither did Stalin, Franco, Mussolini, Hitl, Fidel Castro, Peron, Hussein.... or maybe this video is just ignoring history
@@aldo_agazzi When did any of them lead armies into battle?
@@aldo_agazzi
I don’t remember Stalin going to the frontlines in any war
@@aldo_agazzi you just ignoring brain
Your channel is full of questions I never knew I wanted the answer to
Altough Napoleon loved the battlefield and leading his armies, when he took power in 1799 France had already suffered through 5 different coup detat in barely 10 years, so by staying with the armies and away from a siegeable palace in Paris he ensured that his reign couldn't be toppled, somewhat similar to what Cesar, Aurelian and Vespasian did during the Roman Empire
Napoleon was not a "King" of an established dynasty. He was a general first who seized power by a military coup and his title of "emperor" didn't change the fact that his regime was a military dictatorship.
@@gontrandjojo9747 Nothing wrong with that of course
@@gontrandjojo9747 Sidenote : a "dictator" who was loved by the population and remains in our French hearts forever.
@@microsoft8301 Nice spelling
@@gontrandjojo9747 Who asked
Napoleon being the only ruler to lead his military into battle during that time says a lot about him honestly lmao.
it's questionable how often this has actually happened though. Especially after he's been made emperor
He was literally a general before he made his way into monarchy while other monarchs were just born monarchs.
People are forgetting Cromwell ! Mind you Charles I led his own too and Ollie was only ruler after being a battlefield general. As you were !
The swedish King at the time (formerly a French General) also led his armies personally
Napoleon lead a desperate charge at the end of the battle of lipezig if I remember correctly
I was expecting Gustavus Adolphus of Sweden to be mentioned
Losing your head of state suddenly in the midle of a war isn´t good
something which the swedish should have learned with Carolux Rex also known as Charles the XII
Mighty eagle!
The Belgian king Albert still led the Belgian forces in Wo1. He had militairy training and was commander of the army. He was the last, or one of the last to ever do that.
Good video as always with this series. Actually, in at least the past 150 years or so, high-ranking officers (general and colonels) weren't at the front lines either. Famously, Douglas McArthur (who was a lot more popular with the newspapers than he was with his own troops) was often called "Dugout Doug" by his soldiers. It was not a compliment.
“Older men declare war. But it is youth that must fight and die.”
― Herbert Hoover
Kinda normal you can't send to battle people with 20 and 70 years old at the same time
@Wyatt Earp Said as if being antiwar was a bad thing.
@Wyatt Earp This guy goes on every channel and keeps spamming quotes that don't have any correlation to the video they commented on. At this point it's getting tiring.
You must be dying a lot in the Modern Warfare campaign lol.
I was thinking of that same quote during this episode! In olden days, the aforementioned "older men" declared and fought in their wars. Nowadays, you wouldn't expect a president or a monarch to fight in their wars. The last time in Europe may have been Napoleon. The last time in the United States was _certainly_ George Washington.
As a little curiosity the Battle of Solferino in the First Italian Independence War was the last battle where all Heads of State of the contenders where leading their respective armies. Napoleon III, Franz-Joseph I and Victor-Emmanuelle I.
A Swiss dude called Henri Dunant visited the aftermath of the battle of Solferino. Horrified by what he saw, he founded the Red Cross in response.
Volodymyr Zelensky is leading his armies in fighting Russia currently in the Russo-Ukrainian War
@@OffensiveMiddleFinger yes and no: president Zelensky is coordinating and daily inspecting the Ukrainian army *as the Head of State*, as far as I know he is not doubling down as professional military personnel the same way, say, Napoleon Bonaparte used to.
@@OffensiveMiddleFinger He's not and even if he was it has nothing to do with what I commented, do you even understand what I was talking about?
@@ilania95 lmao
I love the humor in this channel.
You forgot to mention the role advancements in technology played. The invention of the telepgraph, the phone, the radio and later, the internet, allowed rulers to command remotely without putting themselves at risk.
I bet James Bizonette would still lead troops into battle.
He'll flood the battlefield with money
Oh
The U.S. had Stan McChrystal at the very least, a four-star General who, according to members of his staff, joined soldiers on patrols in Afghanistan while he was the commander of U.S. forces there. He'd spent some time in the 7th Special Forces group and then the 75th Ranger Regiment before becoming a general officer, and some of my friends said they saw him running at the Army ten-miler in 2017 or 2016. Apparently, the guy Naruto-runs unironically (It's not a 1:1, but he does have a pretty unique running pattern)
that's not a king though
@@jesusizquierdo3831 nor president/prime minister
@@jesusizquierdo3831 never said it was
@@alvarorodtavares8339 never said it was
@@jesusizquierdo3831 He is a king in our hearts
I’m going to make the assumption that the reason why it stop could be attributed to one thing. Primitive Snipers. Having your leader fight alongside you is a great morale booster, having his head blown off from out of nowhere by a single gunman does the opposite.
Finally, someone not responding with the simplistic mindset of "Urh, durh, because old leaders were real men or something".
0:40 Brett Devereaux wrote a series on premodern generalship recently and one of his points was that "general on a hill behind the battle" only became a thing after the invention of the telescope, plus maybe some gunpowder related changes in how armies engaged. In ancient times you couldn't see anything from a hill behind the field and couldn't do much anyway, once the battle started many generals would choose where to send in reserves then run in with the last group of reserves themselves to a key spot for the morale/prestige boost. (Caesar and Alexander have quite different styles but both do this repeatedly)
I'm not even 30 seconds in and I already can't get the thought of Lizzy fast-roping into a hotzone on the Falklands out of my head 😆
British Soldiers: "For Queen and Country!"
Queen Elizabeth: "For me and Country!"
Edit: Holy...thanks for over 1k likes! My top comment ever! :D
🤣
While singing“God save me”
She’d probably say “Crown (or God) and County!”
@@ApocryphalDude I agree. That's what likely she would say, "For God, for liberty and Britain".
I was the person who made 1k
"The range of a musket was short and so leaders were still safe"
The number of people in Napoleon and Wellingtons retinues who were killed by cannonballs suggests otherwise. Likewise the front line isn't always neat and Napoleon got hit my musket once or twice as I recall.
Napoleon remarked on it himself, that in his era any general had to get within cannon range to amke the observations needed to to actually command.
@Turaglas @Shotgun Parley I believe Napoleon was only hit by a musketball once, and the bullet had lost all its power from the distance + ricochet by the time it hit him in the ankle. And yes, although the video was pointing out the efficacy of muskets rather than cannonball, in reality the danger is much worse considering them. So yes the muskets weren't much of a threat at that range but the amount of men who had their legs smashed by cannonballs on a daily basis, and some battles in which over 40,000 cannonballs were fired over the course of a day, would have given even Achilles pause.
Cannons =/= muskets
Not sure the point of this comment or why it got any likes minus contrarianism
Solid video.
Because after Solferino they weren't gonna risk their lives
Indeed
The Franco-Prussian War would like to have a word with you
What happened at that battle?
The Noob Gameplays - Músicas A battle during the Second Italian War of Independence. The Austrian Army was directly led by Emperor Franz Jospeh I and suffered a catastrophic defeat
@@thenoobgameplays It was the last major battle in world history where all the armies were under the personal command of their monarchs. Of course Napoleon III had another idea in Battle of Sedan (1870)...
Argentine soldier: what are you?
Queen Elisabeth: DEATH!
Great videos
I liked the summary of points at the end but I loved a cammied up QE2 fast roping into the Falklands! That should be a poster or on a History Matters coffee mug!
just another reason why napoleon bonaparte was such a legend
It's different. Napoleon Bonaparte was not a king leading his troops on the battlefield, but a general that staged a military coup to take power and become emperor.
In fact he was exactly this guy at 2:09 , he was given an army and after victories he used his army to overthrow the ruling government and take power (if the kings in the 18th and 19th centuries had nothing to fear from their generals because the regimes and law of successions were old and well established, it was not the case for a new and not well established regime like the French republic and it lasted 10 years before a general used his army to take power XD).
@@gontrandjojo9747 Bingo
Napoleon 3 went to battle and didn’t run away when things went bad, unlike some other Bonaparte
@@gontrandjojo9747 However, after taking power and becoming Consul, First Consul, Consul for life and Emperor, he did went to battle. He didn't head the Grande Armée when charging (Murat did that), but he was close enough to the action as to be wounded by a bullet once, and having horses killed under him.
The distinction made in the video is valid both ways: as Napoleon was an officer (artillery) before becoming a ruler, he had the professional training and experience other contemporary kings didn't have, and, once he became a monarch, he continued to go campaigning with his soldiers, who worshipped him.
That's why Napoleon was in Austerlitz, Jena, Moscow, and Waterloo, whereas the kings his enemies were in their palaces. Or fleeing from him.
I highly recommend you the excellent book Swords Around a Throne, by Col. John R. Elting. The best to know how worked the complex machinery of Napoleon's army.
@@gontrandjojo9747 Yeah but the French government at the time was a huge post revolution mess of nonsense. It's still nonsense to this day, but it was especially nonsense when Napoleon took over the institution.
"Well"
*shows a picture of a well*
I was like "what?" XD
@ History Matters I like the detail at @1:08 where two U.s.,. soldiers (Presumably Spanish-American war) have Krag Jorgensen rifles.
0:53: "well"
I can just imagine one day, a King is on his horse or something leading soldiers into battle, canons and artillery everywhere. Then out of nowhere he's like "wait a minute I'm the King! I don't have to do this shit!"
Wait a minute, it's almost as if I can be a cowardly fuck!
Wait a minute. I'M WHITE HAHA
Wait a minute, I can just have my scribes write that I was in battle and fought several people at once, and people will believe them centuries later 🤔
@@steelbear2063 What?
@@PhilosophiceRetardari watch boondocks
And here I thought it was mainly because even if the king / noble was captured, he wouldn't be killed but simply used for a huge ransom and land concessions. The video's points make much more practical sense! You learn something new every day :)
This was very cool to see
surprised you didn't shout out King Albert of Belgium, who was one of the last kings to lead his troops in large scale battle.
Can we just appreciate the humour this channel provides us. I hope it never changes, along with the narrator.
Nice idea: why did the Dutch have a trading port in Japan (i think Nagasaki?) when no other Europeans did?
It's because they didn't want to spread religion into Japan. They just wanted to trade.
wtf? the portuguese were the first to reach japan
The Maniac we know that, he said why did the Dutch ONLY
Not Nagasaki, I think it was during the isolation period and the Dutch showed that they would trade in science for goods
Because the Dutch didn't support a Christian rebellion while everybody else did
Another exception: Nicholas II of Russia took over the Russian Army in September of 1915. He physically went to the front to command his army. Fun Fact: He survived the war but ended up getting shot anyway.
I appreciate the bullet point summary at the end.
Having said that, many royal families (and some political ones) require (or highly encourage) some form of military service by their scions in their early years. It's not always plush duty either -- it can get down right dirty and dangerous.
Oh. This is the weakness of humanity. It's probably in our genes to rejoice that the leader, the ruler, takes a gun and is ready to shoot at foreigners. An increase in morale, and not only, is guaranteed.
Imagine a king that fights his own battles-Achilles
I knew somebody would put that on the comments
Most badass gay this side of the Peloponnesian War
Fun fact: in the Illiad Achilles was also a king and Agamemnon did plenty of his own fighting
1000th years old bitch elizabeth: *sweats nervously*
Copan 22 lol beat you to it
King Abdullah of Jordan recently led air attacks against Isis in person. So much respect for the guy
Stable video👍
"Treat your men as you would your own beloved sons. And they will follow you into the deepest valley."
--Sun Tzu
"If fighting is sure to result in victory then you must fight!"
-Sun Tzu (said that!)
Stalin treated his troops better than his son
You must be dying a lot in the Modern Warfare campaign lol
AS A TURN OF THE TIDE, IT IS OUR TURN TO RISE
@@Someonewithaspace "And I'd say he knows a little more about fighting than you do PAL! Because he invented it! And then he perfected it so that no living man can best him in the ring of honour!"
Wasn’t Harry (UK) in Afghanistan? I know he isn’t the King but he still is the grandson of Queen Elizabeth.
I'm pretty sure all members of the royal family (including the queen herself) have done some form of military service.
Princes doing military service is an extremely long standing tradition, especially the younger prince.
Yes but he is on the hill
@@calthepal312 The Queen was a mechanic during WWII IIRC
Leo Gremmer no he wasn’t, prince harry did two tours in Afghanistan as a helicopter co-pilot, that’s no where near the hill
Personally, I believe we should bring this practice back
Good video