Rise of the Knight: Western Europe's Most Dominant Warrior
Vložit
- čas přidán 18. 05. 2024
- / history_uncovered
Attacks and raids by foreign adversaries into the heartland of Western Europe led to the development of a new weapon system, the heavy cavalryman. Also, from these invasions, the implementation of a complex social organization led to the rise of the heavily armored Western knight. The knight became the most dominant weapon on medieval battlefields for centuries.
Music: [Stöðvar] by Alexander Nakarada (www.serpentsoundstudios.com)
Licensed under Creative Commons: By Attribution 4.0 License
creativecommons.org/licenses/b...
The cavalry swords during Charlemagne are better called arming swords since the longsword was a later, two-handed sword mainly used by plate armoured knights who didnt need shields anymore.
Haha fuck shields gimme a bigger blade
I REALLY don't think the sword would be the primary weapon of a medieval knight. It'd depend largely on period and region, but some kind of polearm, having swords relegated to the position of side-arm, would make more sense...
While I agree, the majority of knights carried swords and used them more often than not. The lance or spear was best used in shock cavalry charges and then discarded for closer fighting. While hammers and maces/flails were used it ultimately was the sword that was the mainstay of knights.
Charge with the spear, so that once the formation is broken, use the Sword to cut them
Swords are VERY useful on horseback, Lances are great for charges, but when you are fighting foot soilders at a standstill on a horse, then the weapon of choice will be a sword.
also drive by slashes with a sword is also something that would be very useful.
Hey, well written text! I enjoyed the video, but felt the images were not perfectly synchronized with the time periods. The chronology was kind of all over the place. You talk about Charlemagne, but you often use late medieval era knights as your examples. (Plate armor for the stirrup). I can tell your understanding of the topic is comprehensive, though, and yeah, finding the right chronological example is hard. Good luck! Watching whenever you upload!
"Usable" images of early medieval knights are nearly impossible to find or are non-existent. Believe me I tried. There are some that can be found online but they are copyrighted and I don't want to risk using images like that to get my channel in trouble.
I always strive to use images that depict the time period mentioned but sometimes I have to use a few that don't quite exactly fit. I really don't have a choice.
@@HistoryUncovered Yeah, it's quite frustrating. Sorry if I came off a bit offensive. Enjoying your work!
@@HistoryUncovered the 44 inch long sword did not yet come into play. that is much later. the peimary weapon was a lance, not the sword. the sword is a sidearm.
I enjoyed the video but have one comment about the primary weapon of the heavy cavalry. The primary weapon was the lance or spear while sword was typically a sidearm, especially the one-handed swords used until the proliferation of plate armour. The sword was more of a status symbol and worn for personal protection when one's primary weapon was no longer at hand.
The Lance was the weapon of choice for the charge, but during the melee, the sidearm (often the arming sword in question) would be more effective that the lance, as it served its purpose of breaking the enemy formation.
great image archives you have there
Excellent!
YESSSS! THANK GOD YESSSS!
BAYARD - The Knight Without Fear & Beyond Reproach !
He later even became Marshall of France & the most sought out warrior of Europe.
Caltrops.
Hocking.
Long pikes and discipline.
No guns?
What's hocking?
@@user_____M i think he's referring to bracing of the pikes.
It amazes me how people took so much time to invent stirrups. You'd think they'd be obvious. Something you can use to climb onto the horse by yourself and easily, and somewhere to put your feet on so that your legs don't cramp or fall asleep.
I don't know man, it's weird.
LOL, mate none of us is non-appreciative of the effort. Unfortunately, not only do you mention the Carolingiens and Mérovingiens along with a period during which Muslims or Mongols, not to mention major Vikingr Kingdom led invasions were not exactly a major problem (i.e. 700s-1000s ...)., partially because they weren't present in Europe yet or just didn't present a problem yet.
Beyond that and some other more specific problems other people mention in comms, thank you for a video that highlights what exactly the Western European Knight was and why it was such a successful force on the field !
Hm. Cataphracts were influential for roman heavy cavalry too. And i beleive it was in turn although, indirectly, influential for knights evetual development.
Glad I found your channel. I don’t sense the usual tinge of white guilt in your voice like many of the other history youtubers who will talk condescendingly about Julius Caesar’s morals for example. You’re uncucked, keep up the good work.
I like this comment and I agree
What? You can criticize his faults while still admiring his accomplishments. That’s called being impartial
"The usual tinge of white guilt in your voice"
Lol..
Agree. We have nothing to apologize for.
Ridding with sturips and a developed saddle will not increase the striking power of a sword or a lance without a plate curass with a lance stop. None of the horse's weight or power transfer to the strike, only your own. Your arm can only swing so hard and your hand can only grip a spear so tightly.
Half wrong. The stirrup gave the mounted warrior a standing platform so the hips and pelvis are free to add power to the sword stroke, or, for the spear or lance thrust. You are correct in saying that the horse's power can't be fully utilized without the lance stop when the initial charge is in play, but after the charge comes melee combat. That's when the stirrups have the advantage by stabilizing the warrior and allowing him to stand in the fight rather than be handicapped like a man in a wheelchair that is bucking and whirling around. Horse didn't just stand still. They were terrified and constantly would have been attempting to avoid all the sharp pokes and slashes being aimed at them.
the k used to be pronounced in knight so was the gh so it sounded like kuh-ni-huh- tuh
The gh used to be pronounced like the c in cute or the h in hue. The word stems from the o.s. word kneht, which evolved into cnecht and knicht in old German. The knicht evolved in German to the m.G. word Knecht, which means servant, or in some cases a slave.
In English it turned into knight, and with a shift in pronounciation all gh in English went silent.
Comparable to "though" and the German "doch" or "night" and "Nacht", etc...
This means, that knight, opposed the the German Ritter or the French chevalier, a knight is foremost someone who serves rather than one who rides. (Ofc, knight in England were the same as everywhere else, though they tend to be more inclined to fight on foot.)
That’s kind of a load of horse shit because germans called knights ritter, French called them chevaliers, polish called them rycerz. Nobody really used that word. Maybe English peasants.
"The heavily armoured Knight would stand the most dominant force for centuries. " except at bannockburn or Stirling Bridge...
Alright, Wallace.
Or in Switzerland!
Introduction of firearms ended the evolution of European Knights into something more like Samurai.
Chivalry is dead!
Nice video as always. ;)
Not much said about Sarmatians their army like Huns operate as cavalry and we're protoplast of European horse warriors
I can walk on water.
In my dreams.
Mount & Blade.... warband...
THE RISE OF THE DEUS VULTS
You are talking about 7 and 8th century but showing images from the 14th century! Wtf! This is misleading and destroys the whole immersion
Said it many times and I’ll say it again. When knights appeared Vikings disappeared.
Expect in Eastern Rome.
probably because the vikings converted into normans who often fought as knights in battle
A lot here is just either badly explained or chronologically mixed up man. The idea of "the knight" and "chivalry" only appears after/during the crusades.
Why everyone wants to be a Knight you don't event faithful to god!
@Imper 5 prove it
@Imper 5 no evidence to support you statement? Your comment is ignored
@Imper 5 said by the hypocrite who argue and throwing nonsense claims and can't give a proper evidence. Yeah, bro that is you. lol
@Imper 5 you could say the same thing about the clergy of that time.
@Imper 5 tell me how the Knights like El cid and the others is satanic of defending their homeland?
*I’m Batman*
The Knight was just an evolution of the tribal warrior, still primarily focused on individual prowess rather than organized force. All in all it was a downgrade to warfare as most things were after the collapse of the empire. That's the danger of having one large dominant empire, once it collapses there's nothing better to take it's place and civilization has to start over
Only the mongols defeated the knights easley......
I actually thought the same thing until recently. The early mongol victories against Eastern Europe actually had very few knights participating in the battle (as in double digits) and only a few of them died. In fact it was these mongol invasions that led to knights being more and more prominent in Hungarian, Polish, etc armies. This combined with the creation of more stone castles meant that the later mongol invasions led to catastrophic mongol defeats. This being said the mongols were amazing warriors and I highly respect them.
@@eagleofbrittany7231
You can do video about what you said.
When the mongols had lost in Europe?
yes @@temogen2 I can't do a video on it myself but i do have some sources.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Mongol_invasion_of_Hungary
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_Mongol_invasion_of_Poland
Btw im not trying to argue that the mongols didn't have victories against knights either but they certainly weren't easy.
@@eagleofbrittany7231 you got him real good lol
Nicholas Meyer I think it was massed crossbowmen who were protected by knights under good leadership that made the difference, as well as castles.