Total War Saga: Troy is free on the Epic store if you claim it in the first 24 hours of launch on August 13th www.epicgames.com/store/en-US/product/a-total-war-saga-troy/home??sub_id=sega_games
this the 2nd Trojan war video I see today I know this looks like a a conspiracy theory but does it have something to do with the recent tensions between Greece & Turkey
@@hadtrio6629 Ancient Anatolians were not turks, turks were migrants from (surprise surprise!!!) Turkmentistan that arrived some centuries later after the fall of Rome. Ancient anatolians have literally nothing in common with turks.
@@arturoroldan4839 I know that but this subject feels a bit in line with Greek nationalism and there was no Turkmenistan at the time they came from Eurasia
About the utility of chariots as "battle taxi" there is a revealing passage in the Iliad where Aenea questions the renowed archer Pandarus (an ally of the Trojans) why he wasn't targeting Diomedes that was salughtering the Trojan first line. Pandarus answered that he hit Diomedes from afar, with no effect, and complained that, having left his chariots and horses home when he departed for Troy, fearing for them to starve in a siege, he couldn't get close to fight him, and so he felt to be useless. In a warfare based on personal duels between heavily armoured and perfectly armed heroes (while infantrymen just had a shield and a one-anded spear, or a mace), not having a chariot was a huge disadvantage. You had to run, in a heavy armor, to reach your target, only to see him carried somewere else, and without possibility to escape if things got bad. An hero with a chariot instead could dictate the time of the battle, since he could decide to fight when, and where, he thought to have an advantage.
Unless you think the heroic tales are fictional as well, and there was no reason to have individual heroes skirmishing ahead of the main body of hoplites except for dramatic effect in storytelling. The average skirmisher in the greek city-states is a bloke with light armour and javelins or slings. He can just outrun the heavy infantry if necessary, and is expected to do so. He is of a lower social standing than the hoplite with a more expensive kit.
@@SusCalvin Based on archeological evidence and the accounts of the Illiad, they were very different and much less armored than the classical Greeks. Linen greaves, linen or leather chest armor, a conical bronze helmet, a short sword or spear and a leather shield. The heroes had actual bronze armor and greaves. Check out Salimbeti's books.
@Neutron Alchemist but didn't Homer also tell of Achilles chasing Hector around the city 7 times on foot? So why would in that story then the lack of a chariot have been important? Also as Homer wrote long after the times where chariots were used his accounts are highly dubious at best and completely fantastical at worst.
@F.W. Because what you say is incorrect. Nobody invaded from the north as both archeology and genetic studies show. Furthermore the landscape of Greece is very mountainous and chariots are useless for warfare let alone no evidence of north-to-south chariot spread. Greece since at least Minoan times heavily interacted with the Near East which makes it the most logical scenario for the origin of the chariot in Greece, possibly along with the Greek language (Greek is closer to Armenian than to NW European languages).
@@Deepak_Dhakad Technically both Mesopotamians and Iranians (Persians-Aryans). Depictions of chariots, especially in warfare date to 3000 bce in their areas. Depictions of spoked wheels are even older in those areas, dating to Chalcolithic.
But i find confusing, how convey old names iin mordern context. P e how to talk about normandy before the gift to the Norman rolo... Talk about Bretagne before the britons come. How to talk about flanders before flandria :) (iets ab example)
Chariots in that era of history: Fast vehicles used for transportation and perhaps some shock tactics when terrain permits Chariots in Total War Troy: THE STEAMROLLERS OF ARES
Are you the keymaster? Also, that came later when Persians and later Saharan tribes and Britons started getting into scythe chariots where the crew would just bail and let the thing crash into the enemy line, hoping it broke them up.
I think kings and generals has a series about the rise and fall of some of the muslim caliphates and there was alot of dueling before battles. Hope thats the right series, but generally it seemed to happen more in the east
Seems kinda risky for a King/Leader to agree to a champion v champion duel ALA Troy the movie. "Boaaagriusss"...."Achilleees". If it was decided that the outcome of the champions duel decided the outcome of the battle, I mean. You would have to be supremely confident in the ability of your champion. Now if the champions just wanted some 1v1 fun before the free for all melee of battle then that's different 😄 You can imagine certain courageous individuals who may want to enhance their own reputation walking out from the lines and challenging an opponent to face him in a duel. I imagine that would be highly motivating for the men if your guy wins.
@@-andyk-3069 The structure of just about every army prior to the Romans (and most afterwards until the late medieval) was a king, prince, or other warlord-type leader, with a small group of bodyguards or personal retainers, but the bulk of the rank and file was drawn from the state's agricultural and urban workforce (with military training if they were lucky). It makes perfect sense to have a duel of champions in the context of wars which were about border squabbles and cattle raiding rather than outright conquest. Getting all your farmers killed is a good way to wreck your economy, while a single leader can be more easily replaced. Although Homer isn't always reliable, he frequently suggests chariots acting as ambulances to haul wounded leaders away, thus improving the odds of personal survival in a duel.
@@seanbissett-powell5916 Very informative my man and i completely agree. When I say it's a risk i mean like how they portray a champion duel such as in Troy. Where the winner basically takes control of the other Kings army. For a King that's risky. Especially if your army is bigger/better trained/veterans it would make sense to go ahead with the battle. But like you say it wouldve depended entirely on what the situation was, what the stakes were, the type of army you have, professional army or common folk ✌️
I question that the disassembly was for anything other than water transport. Otherwise to me it’s like bringing a truck to haul your motorcycle around.
@@walker1812 what about for reducing the wear and tear on compoants. There made from wood parts that can be fix on the move but maybe they couldn't produce parts at the same tolarnces or quality that could be made in their cities. The modern military doesn't drive tanks to the battlefield. Their delivered on trailers to reduce maintenance cost.
The Britons and native Caledonii still used chariots in their army against the Romans all the way up to 84 AD. Until they noticed that mounted cavalry was superior in almost every aspect.
Most evidence suggests they mostly actually used them as transports rather then as "cavalry" The typical "chariot" seems to have been a large platform with no sides ideal for carrying a group of men who could quickly jump in/out.
Makes sense when you consider that mobility and not war fighting is the goal of the technology. You want to get rid of as much junk as possible and still have the usability. A saddle with stirrups is a much simpler piece of technology than an entire chariot that required two people to use effectively.
Reading the Illiad, we get the impression that armies lined up the infantry in a long battleline, with commanders in their chariots making token duels. The main chariot force was however set aside for the decisive moment of the skirmish, when somewhere in the battleline an advantage had been gained - most frequently on the flank. Then the chariots would "taxi" their warrior aces to the spot where a decision was within reach. In so case the part getting the worst of it would hurry back to the defended base, i.e. city or fortified camp. Skirmish won or lost - rarely lasting more than half an hour and seldom more than one skirmish a day.
@@Number1Irishlad He said, from reading the Illiad. I also remember reading it on the Illiad, wwwway back in 1985. It was pointed out to me at the time, that though the description seemed strange, it matched Caesar's account of chariot usage by the Briton's, in Bellum Gallicum... all be it, over a thousand years later.
@@mombaassa well then i wonder if they were really used that way, or if homer was writing about them in ways he had heard from his understanding of chariots at his point in time
@@Number1Irishlad More the latter, but his understanding of it would have come from a Mycenean source. It's hard for me to explain, in less than 3 of 4 pages, how oral poetry using formulae was constructed. The important point is, Homer would have been drawing on thousands of memorise blocks of poetry (some as small as two words, others as big as several paragraphs) to fit the rhythm and metre of his composition. Some of those blocks/formulae, would have been composed several hundred years before Homer was born. As such, they come from poets who were alive, shortly after the events in the story occurred. So it is, that Homer (verified by archaeology) is sometimes accurate about things that he had no knowledge or understanding of.
There is a revealing passage in the Iliad where Aenea questions the renowed archer Pandarus (an ally of the Trojans) why he wasn't targeting Diomedes that was salughtering the Trojan first line. Pandarus answered that he hit Diomedes from afar, with no effect, and complained that, having left his chariots and horses home when he departed for Troy, fearing for them to starve in a siege, he couldn't get close to fight him, and so he felt to be useless. In a warfare based on personal duels between heavily armoured and perfectly armed heroes (while infantrymen just had a shield and a one-anded spear, or a mace), not having a chariot was a huge disadvantage. You had to run, in a heavy armor, to reach your target, only to see him carried somewere else, and without possibility to escape if things got bad.
@Richard Hale Epic Games Store. Because Troy: Total War doesn't look like a good game - not even the publisher has much confidence in it. Hence they are giving it away for free.
I cannot believe why you omitted that the Proto-Indo-Europeans were the first domesticators of horses and inventors of the chariot before the peoples you mentioned who inherited the technology from them.
Imagine your a lowly infantryman crammed into the tight formation of initiates from your unit. Your marching forward & over the next birm you spot 50+ enemy war chariots racing your direction. You watch your men fire off arrows, toss javelins at the charging marauders. Only a few meet their target & the rest of the charioteers crash into your ranks. You see the sickle blades attached to the wheels chopping through squads of guys leaving men with no legs & arms. Huge nasty open wounds, entrails flying about & men yelling for their mothers. You can only watch in terror as a large scythed chariot barrels through your close squad. You look to you your unguarded meaty legs & gulp as you see the massive blades envelope you. You wake up a few moments later to realize your missing both your legs. You pick one up off the ground but the other is stuck to the chariot that’s still wreaking havoc close by. A loose arrow strikes you in the stomach. The world fades to black.
Except horses, especially chariots didn't simply charge at formations where they would've ran headlong into spears. It was probably closer to the Numidian and other skirmish cavalry that were used for harassing flanks and running down fleeing or scattered enemies.
Bah, poncy posh boys with there fancy chariots. Only any good for running back to their city to hide behind its walls. They dare not stand against resolute men ! Shoulder to shoulder with spear point and shield wall let them charge about and waste their energy. Listen to your captains, and when they come in range loose arrows and volley javelins, aim for the horses and when the screaming animals and those dead in their traces sow panic and confusion on those once proud now imobile fearful fools, go forward and slaughter them, cut them down strip their lifeless bodies of their armour and weapons. Remember, although the chariot riders may be vainglorious fools, the horses are not. No horse will charge a spear wall.
@conan263 It's actually pretty good, if you take it for what it is, a game about Homers Illiad. Historicly it's perhaps a bit lacking. But then again, it's a Saga series.
I downloaded their platform once, and it was one of the most sketchy downloads I've ever done. They probably Just want suckers to download it- they make enough money off kids who play fortnight with their parent's credit cards right?
It's a competitive market of course they're going to try a different tactic to bring people to their platform. I've downloaded a few games on Epic and it's been fine. Good luck to them.
I recall seeing an old anthropology documentary showing isolated primitive New Guinea tribes facing off against each other in a ritual combat. The leaders and warriors strutted around in front waving their short spears and clubs and mocking & threatening the opposite warriors and their tribe, while their people danced and hooted derision behind them. Sometimes arrows would fly, mostly harmlessly, and sometimes warriors would feint an attack. It was mostly all for show, but there were occasions when the warriors did engage in hand-to-hand combat. On rare occasions, several combats would get going at the same time and someone actually got themselves killed. The tribes would then separate to nurse their grudges until the next time. In the early-mid Bronze Age, it seems likely to me that just such ritual chariot combat scenes took place between cities or towns in no-man's-land territory. Most of the common people, having few actual weapons, would stay back and make a lot of noise, but the aristocrats & maybe even royalty with chariots would parade out front, daring the others to attack. They would engage the chariots of the enemy in a ritualized one-to-one matter, almost like jousting. Only the nobles had the horses and the chariots for such "honourable" activity (and they did not want to arm the peasants anyway). So there may actually have been one-on-on chariot battles on the rough ground of Hellas because a large space was not needed. This would answer a great many questions about how chariot warfare was done in Greece.
Its almost like they are being sponsored by the same company who is releasing a certain title for free on Epic Game store today! ;) Prepare for most of the major history/startegy gaming channels to release content about the Trojan War in the next few days.
9:40 This raises two questions: 1. How long did it take to assemble the chariots and then organize the chariots into coherent formations? 2. If the answer to the above was a significant amount of time, then could an opposing army have pre-empted chariot assembly by rushing base?
When caesar "invaded" Britain the natives used similar tactics as Homer describes in Troj. Chariots carrying small groups of warriors would stop close to the enemy. The warriors would charge at the enemy, and the chariot would wait, ready to take off at a moment's notice if the fighting turned badly.
7:50 but that's only a drawback if you're fighting on foot. But he's not. He's in a chariot so doesn't have to worry about fatigue or restricted movement.
All of your videos seem so in depth, it's rare to find a channel that covers things like armaments or daily life instead of just the generic political/military history. 👍👍
@@raan2deep Those people spread through central asia during the middle ages, whereas the yamnaya come from what's modern ukraine. The people with the most yamnaya descent are Norwegians at half
There is a theors that Homerus misunderstood how a chariot was used. As he lived centuries after chariots disappeared, he could only assume past warriors used chariots as horses were used by his time. By Homerus' age horses were strong enough to support the weight of a rider but as saddles, stirrups etc were not yet invented, fighting on horseback was inefficient; so by that age nobles used to travel on horseback but fought the battle on foot. Homerus supposed chariots worked like the same, although real bronze age people could have used chariots for actual fighting.
Fascinating information, and the video's animation is really well done. If you haven't done so already, it would be interesting to see a video about the Sarmatian heavy cavalry. They used a type of horse that was larger than other horses of the time, a type known as the Nisean. They were the ancestors of modern day Akhal Teke horses. It would be an interesting topic to cover since some Sarmatian cavalry (light or heavy) units wound up serving in the Roman army and posted to places like Britain and North Africa.
I am really glad I discovered your channel few days ago. Your videos are so insightful, well documented and beautifully made! I was very positively surprised by the high quality content of the topics chosen and how well you explain them, but I was also very surprised by the beautiful art that really helps understand graphical aspects that would otherwise be difficult to imagine. Excellent work and keep it up! One happy subscriber
As far as Chariots simply carrying a warrior around the battlefield, that sounds somewhat similar to descriptions I have heard of how the Britons used their chariots. They would sometimes act as skirmishing units and other times disembark warriors to fight on foot before re-embarking to run elsewhere.
Can you do Bronze Age life? Maybe something on clothing or what they ate? Or like justice from the time period. Everyday stuff from the Bronze Age is so cool to me.
I know that i'm a few weeks late to this, but that was just an amazing video. Truly smashing! Very well put together, and on an often overlooked topic of military history.
I'm pretty sure chariot warfare spread in the opposite direction, considering they were an Indo-european invention, which spread along with their expansions throughout the second millennium. This includes the migrations/formations of the Mycenaean and Hittite peoples as well as the iranic peoples
@Pichkalu Pappita no, first chariots are from the Sintashta culture, which were fully genetically European, who then formed the Andronovo population which then invaded india
Me(Reading the title,after getting the game for free on Epic yesterday): hmmm, there must be some coincidence here.. Video: this video is sponsored by.... Me: ohhh, why didn't i see that coming.
Glad you brought this video out, I was subscribed to you and noticed somehow I must’ve unsubscribed by mistake somewhere down the line! :O Blasphemy , have re subscribed , apologies for the mistake! xD
RE: 14:22, My suggestion is a research question and a look into a specific period: What was going on in the period of time three generations before the lifetime of Heroditus? Thanks for another great video, Shea
As a note about greek terrain; the standard known greek infantry tactics were also poorly suited towards rough terrain and there was even something of an unwritten rule to arrange battles on flat plains, likely related to just how long and impractical sieges were in the ancient era (e.g. 10 year troy), so chariots may have been more feasible then might be expected in the rough terrain.
The earliest two wheeled light chariots seem to have appeared with the Sintashta culture on the Eurasian steel in the mid-3rd millenium BC and from there diffused south and west inti the Neart East and Europe and east to China. The 4-wheeled onager- drawn waggons on the :Royal Sstadard of Ur circa 2400 BC seem to stem from a different tradition.
I once read the library records of the Hittites show two centuries of horse breeding. They would overfeeding their herds of horses , push them to exhaustion, and breed the strongest.
What fascinates me most about chariot warfare is that there seems to have been a (silent?) agreement to meet on chariot suitable grounds for battle?!? Whereever I have been in the last 4 decades a chariot would be stationary for one reason or another! (woods, marshes, deep sand rocky ground.......)
I wonder how my horses would do on the battlefield, through bred race horses their grandparents won many races winning me much money. 2x my size, dark brown with a light stomach. I can only imagine horse armor on him
10:20 Well the Ardennes weren't really a good terrain for tanks and truck but the bad guys still managed to punch through in 1940. I wouldn't disregard this possibility, especially considering the geographical vicinity of the Hittites, inhabiting similarly rugged terrain
I love this series! A cool idea can be the Kushite archers. Kush is often overlooked, but I find it extremely interesting. Other ideas can be Cataphracts (from various countries and periods), Genoese Crossbowmen, Egyptian Marines, Indian War Elephants and Phoenician Marines
Here is one thing that should be mentioned. Horses were a lot smaller back then. In fact, some chariots were pulled by donkeys. The reason that they did not ride horses is that they were so small. Well, he covered it, lol.
You can ride small horses too, but fighting on one is inconvenient without proper saddle and stirrups. Its just a faster way to die. Cavalry came to be after the invention of the saddle.
@@SHrepairs Sure, there are examples, including Alexander the Great's Companion Cavalry. Dont need to go looking for weird examples. But a moving horse is not a very stable platform for stabbing an armored man, you are pushing yourself from the saddle with equal force as you are stabbing him, and thats kinda a problem. Nothing that would inconvenience a trained rider, but stirrups are the real difference between light and fast harassing forces and the murder machines called knights. Without stirrups you sit on your ass, with them you can stand. That makes it easier to move, maneuver, and go faster. But the real difference is you swing a sword with full body strength, not with just arm. Did you ever do karate? Remember what sensei said? Punch starts from the toes, not the shoulder. Stirrups let you do that. Stirrups are the difference between a spear and a lance. With spear you stab with your own strength. With a lance, you hold it, and stab transfering the strength AND momentum of the horse. Thats a massive difference. Thats why you can dismount riders in heavy plate, or punch through the steel of that plate. There are of course examples of elite cavalries without stirrups, yes, but from a military point of view its difference of longbow and muskets. Sure a longbowman can defeat a musketeer, but thats after 12 years of training. With the better equipment, you get similar results after 12 days of training. The differences in utility are huge.
And people who are just figuring out how a horse works, sometimes. The bronze age world is just starting to figure out stuff we take for granted. Stuff like which spot on the horse you're supposed to sit on, how to use a horse without falling off and getting crushed, little things like how to clean the beast. The difference is huge between nomadic horsemen and the settled cities. You can have an army where maybe 10-20% are mounted and understand the basics of a horse meeting an army where everyone is on a horse and know how to use them without falling off.
@@SusCalvin And thats late bronze age. Early bronze age didnt have cavalry, just chariots, because the whole riding thing wasnt a thing yet. So its chariots, not cavalry. And chariots are super expensive, so 10% mounted is already pushing it. I would go so far that 10% of an army, mounted in battle was not achieved until medieval times and became common after renaissance. Not counting the tribals of course. But, remember, in most tribal societies, including the steppe peoples, most people didnt own a horse, and even with the mongols, there was riding horses but not horses trained for war. Meaning that even for mongol armies, most men rode to battle, but fought on foot. So you are absolutely right, but still guess too high. Think of Egyptian Early Dynasties. An army of 30000 men and 300 chariots is just 2% mounted. But of course those 2% punch far above their weight. Its the same thing as WW2, where most infantrymen had never seen a tank, in some cases, never seen an automobile. In the start of the war, whole units could break at the sight of an armored car. And chariots, like tanks, were LOUD.
Currently in US special operations command there is a course to learn how to ride horses. And horses we're famously used in the initial insertion of troops in Afghanistan. So though extremely unlikely, we do have the capacity to implement chariot use in asymmetric warfare today. When local sources of fuel are unavailable for vehicles a chariot with the machine gun on the back could be an option.
Hat kinda makes sense, you could use a chariot as an auxiliary dismountable unit, spears and arrows to harass and enemy, then dismount into an organized light infantry. Nothing really out of the ordinary, it's a practice that's constantly reinvented. Like helicopters in Vietnam.
I find the chariot battles described in the illiad quite interesting. They fight another chariot, stop, get off, loot the armor of the fallen foes, then get back on the chariots, and retreat to their own lines. It is kinda crazy to think they would do that, but it's the illiad, so no idea if they would actually do that (I bet not).
@Invicta you know how in 300 there is a scene with Leonidas explaining to Ephialtes the Spartan Hoplite shield wall formation? Well most of these documentaries are focused generally on just weapons, a unit, or an army. This time it was about chariots, which is great. But I've never seen one about shields and their differences throughout human civilizations, as well as their impact on formations etc. This might make an interesting video if you have enough reference material.
The iconic round hoplite shield is big and heavy at least. You don't run with the damn thing, you and your pals walk in formation at a relatively slow pace with all the kit you are wearing.
Really good on the different types of chariot…and on we don’t know how they were used but perhaps…. IMHO the statement that Hittite chariots at Kadesh were spear armed shock platforms is only one interpretation - there are other theories such as they were generally archer platforms temporarily carrying an extra chariot runner.
You got a transport that can't carry a squad A battle unit that isn't armored, but could blow through a line of soldiers A fast moving unit that falls apart on rocky ground... Did they need a big sign that says in seven tongues: "I am not cavalry, please don't shoot me?"
About the depiction of the Hitite chariot . I believe the axel was to the rear of the chariot . The depiction shows the axle at mid point of the chariot .
It's possible chariots where used to rout and break less experienced peasant levy's or a bit like mounted infantry (i.e. dragoons), a likely scenario is they where used by generals to quickly cross from one region to another surveying their troops and rallying fleeing troops (or pursuing the enemies).
I can imagine chariots useful as an intelligence platform. They are a step above for line of sight. They have speed for covering distance quickly to convey orders. Initial harassment moves might have provoked a preview of tactics, capabilities, concealed weapons, and skill level and fighting style of opponents.
Total War Saga: Troy is free on the Epic store if you claim it in the first 24 hours of launch on August 13th www.epicgames.com/store/en-US/product/a-total-war-saga-troy/home??sub_id=sega_games
this the 2nd Trojan war video I see today I know this looks like a a conspiracy theory but does it have something to do with the recent tensions between Greece & Turkey
@@hadtrio6629 Ancient Anatolians were not turks, turks were migrants from (surprise surprise!!!) Turkmentistan that arrived some centuries later after the fall of Rome. Ancient anatolians have literally nothing in common with turks.
Why do you guys always put DOCUMENTARY in the title? There's no need
@@arturoroldan4839 I know that but this subject feels a bit in line with Greek nationalism and there was no Turkmenistan at the time they came from Eurasia
@@Direblade11 I think it's kinda professional from them
About the utility of chariots as "battle taxi" there is a revealing passage in the Iliad where Aenea questions the renowed archer Pandarus (an ally of the Trojans) why he wasn't targeting Diomedes that was salughtering the Trojan first line. Pandarus answered that he hit Diomedes from afar, with no effect, and complained that, having left his chariots and horses home when he departed for Troy, fearing for them to starve in a siege, he couldn't get close to fight him, and so he felt to be useless.
In a warfare based on personal duels between heavily armoured and perfectly armed heroes (while infantrymen just had a shield and a one-anded spear, or a mace), not having a chariot was a huge disadvantage. You had to run, in a heavy armor, to reach your target, only to see him carried somewere else, and without possibility to escape if things got bad. An hero with a chariot instead could dictate the time of the battle, since he could decide to fight when, and where, he thought to have an advantage.
Unless you think the heroic tales are fictional as well, and there was no reason to have individual heroes skirmishing ahead of the main body of hoplites except for dramatic effect in storytelling.
The average skirmisher in the greek city-states is a bloke with light armour and javelins or slings. He can just outrun the heavy infantry if necessary, and is expected to do so. He is of a lower social standing than the hoplite with a more expensive kit.
@@SusCalvin There were no hoplites in bronze age. They were an iron-age classical Greek thing.
@@neutronalchemist3241 What does the typical greek infantry look like at the time?
@@SusCalvin Based on archeological evidence and the accounts of the Illiad, they were very different and much less armored than the classical Greeks. Linen greaves, linen or leather chest armor, a conical bronze helmet, a short sword or spear and a leather shield. The heroes had actual bronze armor and greaves. Check out Salimbeti's books.
@Neutron Alchemist but didn't Homer also tell of Achilles chasing Hector around the city 7 times on foot? So why would in that story then the lack of a chariot have been important?
Also as Homer wrote long after the times where chariots were used his accounts are highly dubious at best and completely fantastical at worst.
The beginning of use of horses in warfare is certainly an interesting topic. I look forward to seeing the video
Raiding warfare of the early western Indo-Europeans is where to look
Lindy Beige sort of touched on part of that though he focused on mounted units.
The First to use Chariots in War where the Sumerians 8000 Years ago. They used Chariots because the Horses of the Time werent capable of bring ridden.
@F.W. Because what you say is incorrect. Nobody invaded from the north as both archeology and genetic studies show. Furthermore the landscape of Greece is very mountainous and chariots are useless for warfare let alone no evidence of north-to-south chariot spread. Greece since at least Minoan times heavily interacted with the Near East which makes it the most logical scenario for the origin of the chariot in Greece, possibly along with the Greek language (Greek is closer to Armenian than to NW European languages).
@@Deepak_Dhakad Technically both Mesopotamians and Iranians (Persians-Aryans). Depictions of chariots, especially in warfare date to 3000 bce in their areas. Depictions of spoked wheels are even older in those areas, dating to Chalcolithic.
if "Top Gun" had been written back then, it would have been the epic saga of a chariot crew, Mavriccus and Goozus
I would actually watch it!
It's "Top Bow" actually
The Persians still used chariots with scythes during Alexanders campaign. And the Bretons used chariots against Ceasar.
Bretons, and Britons are different regions, Bretons come from Bretagne, britons from Britannia.
@@beeldpuntXVI Bretons are Britons that come to France in the dark ages.
True true,
But i find confusing, how convey old names iin mordern context. P e how to talk about normandy before the gift to the Norman rolo...
Talk about Bretagne before the britons come. How to talk about flanders before flandria :) (iets ab example)
@@beeldpuntXVI Coastal Austrasia, part of the Merovingian kingdom.
Chariots in that era of history: Fast vehicles used for transportation and perhaps some shock tactics when terrain permits
Chariots in Total War Troy: THE STEAMROLLERS OF ARES
Not
Mycenaean maxim - "No chariot survives contact with the enemy!"
Are you the keymaster? Also, that came later when Persians and later Saharan tribes and Britons started getting into scythe chariots where the crew would just bail and let the thing crash into the enemy line, hoping it broke them up.
@@sentinelmoonfang I've never heard of someone using them in such an idiotic way. Also, Britons didn't have scythed chariots.
Can you do an episode on DUELS between champions before major battles? Was this common?
I think kings and generals has a series about the rise and fall of some of the muslim caliphates and there was alot of dueling before battles.
Hope thats the right series, but generally it seemed to happen more in the east
@@421less1 there are also records stating that there were (although rear) duels even as late as the 15th and 16th centuries.
Seems kinda risky for a King/Leader to agree to a champion v champion duel ALA Troy the movie. "Boaaagriusss"...."Achilleees". If it was decided that the outcome of the champions duel decided the outcome of the battle, I mean. You would have to be supremely confident in the ability of your champion. Now if the champions just wanted some 1v1 fun before the free for all melee of battle then that's different 😄 You can imagine certain courageous individuals who may want to enhance their own reputation walking out from the lines and challenging an opponent to face him in a duel. I imagine that would be highly motivating for the men if your guy wins.
@@-andyk-3069 The structure of just about every army prior to the Romans (and most afterwards until the late medieval) was a king, prince, or other warlord-type leader, with a small group of bodyguards or personal retainers, but the bulk of the rank and file was drawn from the state's agricultural and urban workforce (with military training if they were lucky). It makes perfect sense to have a duel of champions in the context of wars which were about border squabbles and cattle raiding rather than outright conquest. Getting all your farmers killed is a good way to wreck your economy, while a single leader can be more easily replaced. Although Homer isn't always reliable, he frequently suggests chariots acting as ambulances to haul wounded leaders away, thus improving the odds of personal survival in a duel.
@@seanbissett-powell5916 Very informative my man and i completely agree. When I say it's a risk i mean like how they portray a champion duel such as in Troy. Where the winner basically takes control of the other Kings army. For a King that's risky. Especially if your army is bigger/better trained/veterans it would make sense to go ahead with the battle. But like you say it wouldve depended entirely on what the situation was, what the stakes were, the type of army you have, professional army or common folk ✌️
I had never thought or heard of disassembling the chariots for transport. That's a really interesting idea.
I question that the disassembly was for anything other than water transport. Otherwise to me it’s like bringing a truck to haul your motorcycle around.
@@walker1812 what about for reducing the wear and tear on compoants. There made from wood parts that can be fix on the move but maybe they couldn't produce parts at the same tolarnces or quality that could be made in their cities. The modern military doesn't drive tanks to the battlefield. Their delivered on trailers to reduce maintenance cost.
Even today nascar racers are moved about it trucks until day of action
"We would consider horses of this size to be ponies..."
**My Little Pony theme music begins to play in my head**
**Eyes widen in abject horror**
There is no need to feel sorry, for he accepted his purpose in offering his seed to the ponies. Or what's left of them when considering the gore part
Hmmm... Hercules vs. The flesh-eating ponies...
A Different Kind of Space Marine.
No my little ponies, friendship is fuck
The Britons and native Caledonii still used chariots in their army against the Romans all the way up to 84 AD. Until they noticed that mounted cavalry was superior in almost every aspect.
Most evidence suggests they mostly actually used them as transports rather then as "cavalry" The typical "chariot" seems to have been a large platform with no sides ideal for carrying a group of men who could quickly jump in/out.
Makes sense when you consider that mobility and not war fighting is the goal of the technology. You want to get rid of as much junk as possible and still have the usability. A saddle with stirrups is a much simpler piece of technology than an entire chariot that required two people to use effectively.
@@walker1812 There's one and only one reason for chariots: a horse not strong enough to carry a rider can still pull a cart,
@@alexanderhay-whitton4993 and a chariot-cart can use more than one "too small" horse with the advantage of wheels
Your new high quality art on your later videos is stunning, the videos are unrivalled amongst the other channels in this kind of polish imo. Ace work.
Reading the Illiad, we get the impression that armies lined up the infantry in a long battleline, with commanders in their chariots making token duels. The main chariot force was however set aside for the decisive moment of the skirmish, when somewhere in the battleline an advantage had been gained - most frequently on the flank. Then the chariots would "taxi" their warrior aces to the spot where a decision was within reach. In so case the part getting the worst of it would hurry back to the defended base, i.e. city or fortified camp. Skirmish won or lost - rarely lasting more than half an hour and seldom more than one skirmish a day.
Ive only ever heard of the Britons using their chariots like that. Mind if i ask where you read that? Just curious, is all
@@Number1Irishlad He said, from reading the Illiad.
I also remember reading it on the Illiad, wwwway back in 1985. It was pointed out to me at the time, that though the description seemed strange, it matched Caesar's account of chariot usage by the Briton's, in Bellum Gallicum... all be it, over a thousand years later.
@@mombaassa well then i wonder if they were really used that way, or if homer was writing about them in ways he had heard from his understanding of chariots at his point in time
@@Number1Irishlad More the latter, but his understanding of it would have come from a Mycenean source. It's hard for me to explain, in less than 3 of 4 pages, how oral poetry using formulae was constructed. The important point is, Homer would have been drawing on thousands of memorise blocks of poetry (some as small as two words, others as big as several paragraphs) to fit the rhythm and metre of his composition. Some of those blocks/formulae, would have been composed several hundred years before Homer was born. As such, they come from poets who were alive, shortly after the events in the story occurred.
So it is, that Homer (verified by archaeology) is sometimes accurate about things that he had no knowledge or understanding of.
There is a revealing passage in the Iliad where Aenea questions the renowed archer Pandarus (an ally of the Trojans) why he wasn't targeting Diomedes that was salughtering the Trojan first line. Pandarus answered that he hit Diomedes from afar, with no effect, and complained that, having left his chariots and horses home when he departed for Troy, fearing for them to starve in a siege, he couldn't get close to fight him, and so he felt to be useless.
In a warfare based on personal duels between heavily armoured and perfectly armed heroes (while infantrymen just had a shield and a one-anded spear, or a mace), not having a chariot was a huge disadvantage. You had to run, in a heavy armor, to reach your target, only to see him carried somewere else, and without possibility to escape if things got bad.
Non Indo-Europeans: “Why do I hear boss music?”
Everybody wants to be tough until the aryans show up. ✋🏻
Klaidi Rubiku everybody wants to be tough till the plague shows up
Klaidi Rubiku nobody expects the sea people’s
Ancient Egyptians weren't indo-european
jawhar Z perhaps they were considering king tut and his family were white
Informative and love the art style. More Bronze Age content please!
For those who don’t know total war Troy is free now for today only. Just google it
Richard Hale not in steam
LagiNaLangAko23 keep
@Richard Hale Epic Games Store. Because Troy: Total War doesn't look like a good game - not even the publisher has much confidence in it. Hence they are giving it away for free.
LagiNaLangAko23 free to keep forever
LagiNaLangAko23 yes free no purchase need
Just got finished downloading Total war Troy thanks for the heads up Invicta! Best channel.
I cannot believe why you omitted that the Proto-Indo-Europeans were the first domesticators of horses and inventors of the chariot before the peoples you mentioned who inherited the technology from them.
Imagine your a lowly infantryman crammed into the tight formation of initiates from your unit. Your marching forward & over the next birm you spot 50+ enemy war chariots racing your direction. You watch your men fire off arrows, toss javelins at the charging marauders. Only a few meet their target & the rest of the charioteers crash into your ranks. You see the sickle blades attached to the wheels chopping through squads of guys leaving men with no legs & arms. Huge nasty open wounds, entrails flying about & men yelling for their mothers. You can only watch in terror as a large scythed chariot barrels through your close squad. You look to you your unguarded meaty legs & gulp as you see the massive blades envelope you. You wake up a few moments later to realize your missing both your legs. You pick one up off the ground but the other is stuck to the chariot that’s still wreaking havoc close by. A loose arrow strikes you in the stomach. The world fades to black.
Not to brag but if that were me i would've done somn different
Except horses, especially chariots didn't simply charge at formations where they would've ran headlong into spears.
It was probably closer to the Numidian and other skirmish cavalry that were used for harassing flanks and running down fleeing or scattered enemies.
Bah, poncy posh boys with there fancy chariots.
Only any good for running back to their city to hide behind its walls.
They dare not stand against resolute men !
Shoulder to shoulder with spear point and shield wall let them charge about and waste their energy.
Listen to your captains, and when they come in range loose arrows and volley javelins, aim for the horses and when the screaming animals and those dead in their traces sow panic and confusion on those once proud now imobile fearful fools, go forward and slaughter them, cut them down strip their lifeless bodies of their armour and weapons.
Remember, although the chariot riders may be vainglorious fools, the horses are not.
No horse will charge a spear wall.
Falced chariots with blades in the side are posterior.
I must say total war is really pushing this game, two complete ad campaigns by two different huge history channels says something.
I know right... But who did a better video?
@@maneco88 comparitively speaking K&G
Why are they putting so much effort into pushing a free game? I guess youtube channels will be cheap to pay for promotions.
@conan263 It's actually pretty good, if you take it for what it is, a game about Homers Illiad. Historicly it's perhaps a bit lacking. But then again, it's a Saga series.
@conan263 It's surprisingly good. Coming from a TW veteran. It's certainly way better than I expected. I almost feel bad that I got it for free :))
Epic game store passing out free games because they're desperate for that Steam power.
I downloaded their platform once, and it was one of the most sketchy downloads I've ever done. They probably Just want suckers to download it- they make enough money off kids who play fortnight with their parent's credit cards right?
@@sonofthebearking3335 well as soon as it's free i don't have any problem but i will never buy something fron the store
@@sonofthebearking3335 ? How was the download sketchy?
@@sonofthebearking3335 That and its extremely laggy for me with noticeable delays on the client itself which never happened on Steam.
It's a competitive market of course they're going to try a different tactic to bring people to their platform. I've downloaded a few games on Epic and it's been fine. Good luck to them.
I recall seeing an old anthropology documentary showing isolated primitive New Guinea tribes facing off against each other in a ritual combat. The leaders and warriors strutted around in front waving their short spears and clubs and mocking & threatening the opposite warriors and their tribe, while their people danced and hooted derision behind them. Sometimes arrows would fly, mostly harmlessly, and sometimes warriors would feint an attack. It was mostly all for show, but there were occasions when the warriors did engage in hand-to-hand combat. On rare occasions, several combats would get going at the same time and someone actually got themselves killed. The tribes would then separate to nurse their grudges until the next time.
In the early-mid Bronze Age, it seems likely to me that just such ritual chariot combat scenes took place between cities or towns in no-man's-land territory. Most of the common people, having few actual weapons, would stay back and make a lot of noise, but the aristocrats & maybe even royalty with chariots would parade out front, daring the others to attack. They would engage the chariots of the enemy in a ritualized one-to-one matter, almost like jousting. Only the nobles had the horses and the chariots for such "honourable" activity (and they did not want to arm the peasants anyway). So there may actually have been one-on-on chariot battles on the rough ground of Hellas because a large space was not needed. This would answer a great many questions about how chariot warfare was done in Greece.
One of the best channels. Pushing the boundaries of TH-cam
Maybe do an episode on camel usage in warfare next
hell, yeah! Age of Empires II was my last "source" about that type of warfare. An update would be nice.
THIS
YES. Camalry needs a spotlight
@@Number1Irishlad yeah as they can be used in many different ways, from logistical to cataphract mounts
@@OmarSlloum i believe the term is Camelphract
I honestly dont know, but i hope thats a real term 😂
Two of my most favourite channels just released a video on the Trojan war, Simultaneously. What a time to be alive!
Its almost like they are being sponsored by the same company who is releasing a certain title for free on Epic Game store today! ;) Prepare for most of the major history/startegy gaming channels to release content about the Trojan War in the next few days.
@@mjwoodroff8446 as i said, what a time to be alive.
9:40 This raises two questions:
1. How long did it take to assemble the chariots and then organize the chariots into coherent formations?
2. If the answer to the above was a significant amount of time, then could an opposing army have pre-empted chariot assembly by rushing base?
When caesar "invaded" Britain the natives used similar tactics as Homer describes in Troj. Chariots carrying small groups of warriors would stop close to the enemy. The warriors would charge at the enemy, and the chariot would wait, ready to take off at a moment's notice if the fighting turned badly.
7:50 but that's only a drawback if you're fighting on foot. But he's not. He's in a chariot so doesn't have to worry about fatigue or restricted movement.
Increasing the weight of the ocupants will slow the chariot, increase the risk of it breaking down, and tire out the horses faster.
Remember kids: If something exists, It can become a Weapon.
All of your videos seem so in depth, it's rare to find a channel that covers things like armaments or daily life instead of just the generic political/military history. 👍👍
I think this comment is copied
Love your work Invicta. Keep up the great work.
All domestic horses today descend from the European("Yamnaya") domestication event. The przewalski horse is the descendant of the Asian("Botai") ones
Did the Yamnaya have a different domestication event or did they get them from the Botai?
The Yamnaya were people who descend from Steppe mongol like people.
@@raan2deep Those people spread through central asia during the middle ages, whereas the yamnaya come from what's modern ukraine. The people with the most yamnaya descent are Norwegians at half
@@raan2deep Yamnaya in their later periods were not a homogenous group they mixed with populations from the steppe to far east
There is a theors that Homerus misunderstood how a chariot was used. As he lived centuries after chariots disappeared, he could only assume past warriors used chariots as horses were used by his time. By Homerus' age horses were strong enough to support the weight of a rider but as saddles, stirrups etc were not yet invented, fighting on horseback was inefficient; so by that age nobles used to travel on horseback but fought the battle on foot. Homerus supposed chariots worked like the same, although real bronze age people could have used chariots for actual fighting.
Yeah but they were fragile, it is unlikely that they would be able to sustain the tumultuous nature of physical combat
The Persians used chariots in battle long after Homer.
@@_--Reaper--_ fragile or not, even a broken chariot charge could rip apart an infantry formation to shreds.
@@nvmtt Yeah but they were kinda expensive so using them that way doesnt seem to make much sense but im no expert
Not true fighting on horseback without stirrups was inefficient see companion cavalry of Alexander the Great.
Sumerian Warcart........
*CIV 6 Gilgamesh PTSD intensifies*
As much as I like Invicta’s own voice, this guy is simply much more professional
I agree. It's only a matter of time that all TH-cam history channels use professional (preferably British) voice narrators.
I like the direction this channel is going
Your videos are getting better, the art is amazing
Fascinating information, and the video's animation is really well done. If you haven't done so already, it would be interesting to see a video about the Sarmatian heavy cavalry. They used a type of horse that was larger than other horses of the time, a type known as the Nisean. They were the ancestors of modern day Akhal Teke horses. It would be an interesting topic to cover since some Sarmatian cavalry (light or heavy) units wound up serving in the Roman army and posted to places like Britain and North Africa.
I am really glad I discovered your channel few days ago. Your videos are so insightful, well documented and beautifully made! I was very positively surprised by the high quality content of the topics chosen and how well you explain them, but I was also very surprised by the beautiful art that really helps understand graphical aspects that would otherwise be difficult to imagine. Excellent work and keep it up!
One happy subscriber
As far as Chariots simply carrying a warrior around the battlefield, that sounds somewhat similar to descriptions I have heard of how the Britons used their chariots. They would sometimes act as skirmishing units and other times disembark warriors to fight on foot before re-embarking to run elsewhere.
Can you do Bronze Age life? Maybe something on clothing or what they ate? Or like justice from the time period. Everyday stuff from the Bronze Age is so cool to me.
Second that. I'm running a bronze age d&d game I wants it my precious.
@@jamesmachuta2010 yeah I’ve been designing a Bronze Age game and nobody ever does videos on the era :( it would help out so much
Love the video this will be a youtube channel that my kid will listen to growing up, GO HISTORY
I know that i'm a few weeks late to this, but that was just an amazing video. Truly smashing! Very well put together, and on an often overlooked topic of military history.
9:12 - Next, can you do a video on the ancient Ponytail-Tinman-Juggernaut suit? Now THAT was a game changer.
Imagine falling over in that thing
@@butterskywalker8785 it'll be fine. Most armor wouldn't be worn if the mobility loss was so bad you couldn't fight or get up by yourself lol
ya and agamemnon walks around in the heaviest armor on feet.... instrad hurling javalins down from a chariot.
4:14 - Damn, if that guy hits a rock or a bump, he's going to be sorry.
Splendid, well done Invicta & thank you!
I'm pretty sure chariot warfare spread in the opposite direction, considering they were an Indo-european invention, which spread along with their expansions throughout the second millennium. This includes the migrations/formations of the Mycenaean and Hittite peoples as well as the iranic peoples
@Pichkalu Pappita no, first chariots are from the Sintashta culture, which were fully genetically European, who then formed the Andronovo population which then invaded india
@Pichkalu Pappita modern uses for the word Aryan were formed in modern times.
"It all changed when the Dorian tribes attacked"
I'm glad this opens with Diomedes. He and Odysseus are the real MVPs of the Trojan War.
Me(Reading the title,after getting the game for free on Epic yesterday): hmmm, there must be some coincidence here..
Video: this video is sponsored by....
Me: ohhh, why didn't i see that coming.
Glad you brought this video out, I was subscribed to you and noticed somehow I must’ve unsubscribed by mistake somewhere down the line! :O Blasphemy , have re subscribed , apologies for the mistake! xD
I adore these videos. Thank you
RE: 14:22,
My suggestion is a research question and a look into a specific period:
What was going on in the period of time three generations before the lifetime of Heroditus?
Thanks for another great video,
Shea
Hero's had a tendency to one on one contests. Hector and Achilles both came to the fight in one and dismounted to fight.
800k congrats you’re the best
As a note about greek terrain; the standard known greek infantry tactics were also poorly suited towards rough terrain and there was even something of an unwritten rule to arrange battles on flat plains, likely related to just how long and impractical sieges were in the ancient era (e.g. 10 year troy), so chariots may have been more feasible then might be expected in the rough terrain.
Underrated channel
Don't you think it was like the Oscars? Half a block to the Red Carpet. 'Hector! Hector! Who are you wearing tonight?'
Yes! Looking forward to it!
The earliest two wheeled light chariots seem to have appeared with the Sintashta culture on the Eurasian steel in the mid-3rd millenium BC and from there diffused south and west inti the Neart East and Europe and east to China. The 4-wheeled onager- drawn waggons on the :Royal Sstadard of Ur circa 2400 BC seem to stem from a different tradition.
much respect good work
I once read the library records of the Hittites show two centuries of horse breeding.
They would overfeeding their herds of horses , push them to exhaustion, and breed the strongest.
Your chanel is the best i always learn something new
What fascinates me most about chariot warfare is that there seems to have been a (silent?) agreement to meet on chariot suitable grounds for battle?!? Whereever I have been in the last 4 decades a chariot would be stationary for one reason or another! (woods, marshes, deep sand rocky ground.......)
«Persian chariots and their death dealing wheels are formidable. No one dared to face them»
-Herodotus
So glad i have the bell on so i could get that sweet link to troy on time
Weird to see Total War footage in an ad that's actually for a Total War game.
I wonder how my horses would do on the battlefield, through bred race horses their grandparents won many races winning me much money. 2x my size, dark brown with a light stomach. I can only imagine horse armor on him
An expert on horses who cant spell "thorough bred". Sounds convincing. 😑
@@ribbitgoesthedoglastnamehe4681 it was probs a typo
Why do I keep thinking that the Battle of Kadesh was called that because of the sound the chariots made when they crashed into each other?
It would be cool to do a video on the changes roman armor went through over the years
hard to imagine the Mycenaeans wouldve created an open-sided chariot for warfare.
Perhaps, but they seem to have used them more as a taxi service than a fighting platform.
I recall those being more used for racing or archery
Thanks for the great video, thanks for the free game.
Your precious armory gratefully accepted, we will need it!
I cannot believe the confusion when it comes to Ancient History
Unbelievable absolutely
Came here just to see if you had posted a video for TW Saga...such an amazing game!
10:20 Well the Ardennes weren't really a good terrain for tanks and truck but the bad guys still managed to punch through in 1940.
I wouldn't disregard this possibility, especially considering the geographical vicinity of the Hittites, inhabiting similarly rugged terrain
Awesome video and awesome game. Thank you!
I love this series!
A cool idea can be the Kushite archers. Kush is often overlooked, but I find it extremely interesting.
Other ideas can be Cataphracts (from various countries and periods), Genoese Crossbowmen, Egyptian Marines, Indian War Elephants and Phoenician Marines
Gallowglass mercenaries, Samurai (very broad) and nepalese ghurkers
A hero wouldn’t want to walk into battle like a common soldier when he could burst onto the scene in a chariot like the god Apollo.
Here is one thing that should be mentioned. Horses were a lot smaller back then. In fact, some chariots were pulled by donkeys. The reason that they did not ride horses is that they were so small. Well, he covered it, lol.
You can ride small horses too, but fighting on one is inconvenient without proper saddle and stirrups. Its just a faster way to die.
Cavalry came to be after the invention of the saddle.
@@ribbitgoesthedoglastnamehe4681 Medium-heavy cav, for sure. But there are examples of light cav w/o saddle/stirrup. Most famously Numidian cavalry
@@SHrepairs Sure, there are examples, including Alexander the Great's Companion Cavalry. Dont need to go looking for weird examples.
But a moving horse is not a very stable platform for stabbing an armored man, you are pushing yourself from the saddle with equal force as you are stabbing him, and thats kinda a problem. Nothing that would inconvenience a trained rider, but stirrups are the real difference between light and fast harassing forces and the murder machines called knights.
Without stirrups you sit on your ass, with them you can stand. That makes it easier to move, maneuver, and go faster. But the real difference is you swing a sword with full body strength, not with just arm. Did you ever do karate? Remember what sensei said? Punch starts from the toes, not the shoulder. Stirrups let you do that.
Stirrups are the difference between a spear and a lance. With spear you stab with your own strength.
With a lance, you hold it, and stab transfering the strength AND momentum of the horse. Thats a massive difference. Thats why you can dismount riders in heavy plate, or punch through the steel of that plate.
There are of course examples of elite cavalries without stirrups, yes, but from a military point of view its difference of longbow and muskets. Sure a longbowman can defeat a musketeer, but thats after 12 years of training. With the better equipment, you get similar results after 12 days of training. The differences in utility are huge.
And people who are just figuring out how a horse works, sometimes. The bronze age world is just starting to figure out stuff we take for granted. Stuff like which spot on the horse you're supposed to sit on, how to use a horse without falling off and getting crushed, little things like how to clean the beast.
The difference is huge between nomadic horsemen and the settled cities. You can have an army where maybe 10-20% are mounted and understand the basics of a horse meeting an army where everyone is on a horse and know how to use them without falling off.
@@SusCalvin And thats late bronze age. Early bronze age didnt have cavalry, just chariots, because the whole riding thing wasnt a thing yet.
So its chariots, not cavalry. And chariots are super expensive, so 10% mounted is already pushing it.
I would go so far that 10% of an army, mounted in battle was not achieved until medieval times and became common after renaissance. Not counting the tribals of course.
But, remember, in most tribal societies, including the steppe peoples, most people didnt own a horse, and even with the mongols, there was riding horses but not horses trained for war. Meaning that even for mongol armies, most men rode to battle, but fought on foot. So you are absolutely right, but still guess too high. Think of Egyptian Early Dynasties. An army of 30000 men and 300 chariots is just 2% mounted.
But of course those 2% punch far above their weight. Its the same thing as WW2, where most infantrymen had never seen a tank, in some cases, never seen an automobile. In the start of the war, whole units could break at the sight of an armored car. And chariots, like tanks, were LOUD.
I am about to recruit my first one ingame so I might as well watch this ;) Keep up the excellent videos.
Currently in US special operations command there is a course to learn how to ride horses. And horses we're famously used in the initial insertion of troops in Afghanistan. So though extremely unlikely, we do have the capacity to implement chariot use in asymmetric warfare today. When local sources of fuel are unavailable for vehicles a chariot with the machine gun on the back could be an option.
Greek chariots during the Trojan war wasn’t probably used for combat. More for transportation.
Hat kinda makes sense, you could use a chariot as an auxiliary dismountable unit, spears and arrows to harass and enemy, then dismount into an organized light infantry. Nothing really out of the ordinary, it's a practice that's constantly reinvented. Like helicopters in Vietnam.
I find the chariot battles described in the illiad quite interesting. They fight another chariot, stop, get off, loot the armor of the fallen foes, then get back on the chariots, and retreat to their own lines. It is kinda crazy to think they would do that, but it's the illiad, so no idea if they would actually do that (I bet not).
Shoutout to Kikkuli who compiled the first chariot horse training manual.
Amazing work. Thanks.
I enjoyed the detail of this lesson. I think the broad story has been told and re-told; discerning myth from factoid... Good Job!
@Invicta you know how in 300 there is a scene with Leonidas explaining to Ephialtes the Spartan Hoplite shield wall formation?
Well most of these documentaries are focused generally on just weapons, a unit, or an army. This time it was about chariots, which is great.
But I've never seen one about shields and their differences throughout human civilizations, as well as their impact on formations etc.
This might make an interesting video if you have enough reference material.
The iconic round hoplite shield is big and heavy at least. You don't run with the damn thing, you and your pals walk in formation at a relatively slow pace with all the kit you are wearing.
@@SusCalvin And the targe was the shield of highlanders, charging into enemies after disrupting them with thrown javelins.
Have you thought to cover the Thessalian cavalry???
Really good on the different types of chariot…and on we don’t know how they were used but perhaps…. IMHO the statement that Hittite chariots at Kadesh were spear armed shock platforms is only one interpretation - there are other theories such as they were generally archer platforms temporarily carrying an extra chariot runner.
CA sponsored Invicta and Kings and Generals to promote Total War: Troy.
Probably many others but the videos need to be uploaded
Extra Credits joined the team
@@atzuras they uploaded at the same time (i got the notification at the same time )them and kings and generals
You got a transport that can't carry a squad
A battle unit that isn't armored, but could blow through a line of soldiers
A fast moving unit that falls apart on rocky ground...
Did they need a big sign that says in seven tongues: "I am not cavalry, please don't shoot me?"
But this is true of a lot of cavalry... likely the real benefit was the moral impact of a chariot against lighter units and in persuing a routing foe.
That's probably how Achilles looked like wearing dendra armor
5:21 that's because they didn't buy the Horse Armor dlc for 2.49$
About the depiction of the Hitite chariot . I believe the axel was to the rear of the chariot . The depiction shows the axle at mid point of the chariot .
It's possible chariots where used to rout and break less experienced peasant levy's or a bit like mounted infantry (i.e. dragoons), a likely scenario is they where used by generals to quickly cross from one region to another surveying their troops and rallying fleeing troops (or pursuing the enemies).
Invicta, Summarian chariots were slow and clumsy.
Me, a civ player: confused screams
I can imagine chariots useful as an intelligence platform. They are a step above for line of sight. They have speed for covering distance quickly to convey orders. Initial harassment moves might have provoked a preview of tactics, capabilities, concealed weapons, and skill level and fighting style of opponents.
1:40 ad ends
@@theghostofspookwagen4715 thanks
I needed that❤
So thank you
Glad you people exist