Routs in battles - where do they start?
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 4 ส.ค. 2024
- Subscribe to my channel: th-cam.com/users/lindybei...
Support me on Patreon: / lindybeige
More weapons and armour videos here: • Weapons and armour
Whose fault is it when a big formation of troops turns and flees? Which men are the first to falter and bolt, abandoning their fellows, and precipitating a rout?
Lindybeige: a channel of archaeology, ancient and medieval warfare, rants, swing dance, travelogues, evolution, and whatever else occurs to me to make.
▼ Follow me...
Twitter: / lindybeige I may have some drivel to contribute to the Twittersphere, plus you get notice of uploads.
Facebook: / lindybeige (it's a 'page' and now seems to be working).
Google+: "google.com/+lindybeige"
website: www.LloydianAspects.co.uk
Routs in battles - where do they start?
/ user "Lindybeige"
"Our men are running from the battlefield! What a shameful display!"
shamefur* dispray*
Censor Duck SHAMEFURAH DISAPLAY!!!!!
Censor Duck I mean Rome 2 not Shogun.
+The Napoleonist The original Shogun: Total War had a funnier line.
"Your commander is shaming us all! He is running from an honourable death!"
AudieHolland Aahhh...good old days
This is precisely why Roman Legions had fresh recruits at the front and veterans in the back. Veterans, with additional buffer of cannon fodder in front of them aren't going to flee, and they are also not going to let the recruits in front of them flee. On top of these benefits, the more valuable troops aren't expended unnecessarily while the fresh recruits gain experience and become veterans themselves, if they survive.
Well there's a problem with that though - it's gonna increase casualties by a lot should the front lined decide to rout.
They try, but get pushed back by the back rows so that they get basically hammer and anviled by their own lines
well then if they got any brains they will stay in formation, run when the vets tell them to and hope for the best
@@duchessskye4072 Easy solution, captive slaves in the front. Too far from home to send them back for labor??? Promise them citizenship for military service, and then kill them lol
That was also my first thought: the Triari stood where the strongest mental strength was needed, not to despair and flee, but to move as a unit to where you were needed. They might decrease in physical strength already compared with the first two lines but not in experience. I think the Romans put Triari in the back also to prevent routs.
In 45BC in Munda, some soldiers in the back observed a movement by Labienus and saw it as flight and panicked. The rout that sealed Caesar's victory started in the back.
Draugr the Greedy yes but it’s proven even in modern armies you are less likely to retreat in front of friends and if you are under the eyes of veterans you are going to fight hard to gain their respect a whole front line trying to prove their better than the guy next to them seems like a really good way to win. And should they fall their place Is taken by experienced troops whereas as the enemy falls you are facing less and less experienced troops who are going to have seen better warriors die whereas the Roman veterans know they are the best and have seen comrades fall hundreds of times.
So what we've established from this video is that, most of the time, when a unit routed, the route began within the unit.
ha ha that's actually very funny .I'm laying on a bed in South Wales the happy bastard wife is down stairs watching fkn soaps. .ad this is one funny man
Abe Lowther oh alright Abe.
@@abelowther7531 When I was a kid I would light matches and drop them from my bedroom window to see how far they’d fall before they burnt out
Would drop a whole pack’s worth of matches like that, just a bored autist doing autist things
I got the bright idea of lighting a whole pack and dropping it (watch the world burn)
Not only doesn’t it burn out before it hit the ground, it conveniently landed in the basement window cutout that was partly underground leading to our basement
It drops into a huge pile of partially wet leaves and flame and smoke starts billowing out. I run in circles for about a minute in my room and ponder climbing down the wall with a sheet to sneak out to put the fire out
My good senses return to me and I walk downstairs past my sis and dad watching a movie (it’s like 4 pm). I grab a pot full of water and run outside to put out the fire. As soon as the water hits, the pile starts smoking like a smudge pot and I run away back upstairs to hide
I sit in my room under the covers and peek out and can see smoke surrounding the house. I run downstairs again and now my family’s getting suspicious. I run to the smoking pile of leaves and try to stomp on it with both feet. My one foot hits the window hard and kicks it open so all the burning leaves fall into my basement
So now I run downstairs to my basement to check out the scene and I see the leaves all fell in the open washing machine and now the washing machine is smoking heavy. I try to stop the fire by turning on the washing machine and more smoke billows everywhere. At this point my family runs down and starts yelling WTF? while I hear fire truck sirens in the background
I run out of there to my bedroom and just start bawling and waiting to die. I was 8 yo
Yes, Lindy is a sharp one.
Vishnu Xilo did the house get saved or was that the end of it
There was a very long stretch where the Romans put their most experienced infantry in the rear rank. They had problems with their experienced infantry getting bored and charging in when they weren't needed.
And the noobs were more afraid of the veterans behind them than the barbarians in front. Much less chance of slinking off unnoticed.
historia civilis channel?
The Triarii i think they were called
CassesVultus triarii
@@dereyebrow5813 triarii were a separate unit. He is talking about the individual unit here. In an individual unit its best to have the strongest men in front. If you put the weakest men in the front row, the enemy will only need to put his best men in the front row and you will loose.
It's not routing, it's advancing in an opposite direction.
+Hombre De Bano
I call it the "reverse charge" since the pacing is more akin to a charge.
+Hombre De Bano Your minstrels would be like "And they bravely ran away. They bravely ran away away. When danger reared its ugly head, they bravely turned their tails and fled. O gallantly they chickened out and bravely ran away.."
jeji000 Oh what is that from, I can't remember.
***** monty python and the holy grail
Oh Jesus I really should've known that.
This makes the roman strategy of switching lines to keep soldiers rested and to have all face battle make a lot more sense
Sebastian Villa wasn't that bollocks? I thought it was just a thing the Rome series invented?
+fuckingpippaman They did that. It was one of the reasons they were so good at fighting longer lasting battles battles.
Ah interesting, as i saw the tv series it seemed to make sense; but then reading on forums some people said it was not that common or ''effective'' as a tactic
Sebastian Villa Alduin101
Actually, they didn't "switch line" like the Rome serie make them do. They switched their maniples, men going in the gaps between the units in the back so the units in the back would become the front one.
+maaderllin The Maniple was still a thing during the Marian/Early Imperial armies? I thought they switched by Centuria.
However, the fact that even the Centuria's usual 8x10 formation had gaps can allude to row-by-row rotation. And to me, it looks like a viable tactic.
I love the insane professor look and feel this guy gives, fantastic.
Your typical Texan cowboy.
If Monty Python and the Holy Grail is an accurate historical source (and it must be, it has a historian in it), then English routs most usually started after short, intense conflicts with killer rabbits.
A Bear Who wouldn't run in a sudden confrontation with a killer bunny!
Someone who is in possession of the Holy Hand Grenade of Antioch!
Killer rabbits are more dangerous than getting encircled and having a supply line cut
to be pedantic the origin of the king arthur stories are brythonic not english
Well dont forget the women's institute of west by fleet re enacting the battle of Bosworth.
Those handbags could give you,a nasty bump .
I remember writing a paper for school once discussing Polybius' take on the legions and I recall precisely thinking when I read the concept of the Triarii that this is how to make the best use of your men. Men who have spent their lives creating reputations, are a bit stiffer in the knee, and aware that they are the survivors of many dangers in and out of battle seem the ideal material for backstopping your army. Conversely, since battle is a terrific opportunity for a young man to make a reputation and he has yet to realize fully the implications of mortality, he is the perfect fodder...er...soldier for leading the charge. I am sure many a Roman man kept his nerve precisely because he knew that less than a hundred yards behind, his father and uncles would be watching, counting on their boy to do his duty.
Eustace Stritchers seems logical
Does the word infantry really have something to do with infants or is that just coincidence?
[Edited for typo] They are cognates, yes, but the English word infant is not the origin of the word Infantry itself. The French term Infantrie, or Infanteria if you prefer the Spanish, basically means the youthful or young soldiers of an army who were generally unable to serve in the new prestigious cavalry formations developing in the 16th century. Over time, the term came to mean all the non-cavalry and non-artillery components of modern armies regardless.
@Romano Coombs They might have trained them at that age but a 12 year old is simply to weak and light to fight in the ranks of the front row. You would be trowing away men that could be 10 times more effective if you waited a few years. Men that survived battles were taller than the men that fell in general so size of the individual mattered. Ancient armies were very aware of this.
Yeah the Roman's had 20 years conscription ..
In the Red Army it takes more courage to retreat than to advance.
Why retreat, you're just going to starve anyway.
they'll be shot, before starving...
What do you mean by starving? Did soviet soldiers starve? I've never heard about it , even in hollywood movies.
JustAsPlanned1 dont look movies for accurate historical information
Kevineitor199 I do not. I meant that it's such a big bullshit that even Hollywood haven't tried to show it.
The Swiss, around 1475 from memory, had draconian rules for men who deserted the line.
The neighbouring soldiers on their side were to kill them as quickly as possible and it was this fear of retreating that may have led to some of thier stunning victories against Burgundy.
I think starting from the front is unlikely simply because you are hemmed in by your own men and turning your back on the enemy means you'll be the first to be cut down. The others all seem likely though, I'll also add that another reason a rout can be started with just a few guys is that you don't want to be the last person who flees. Each person who goes increases the likelihood of someone else going, partly because it reduces the strength of the unit, but also because if you are one of the ones to go early, you are very likely to survive because the enemy has to work their way through all your mates before they can reach you, but if you leave it too late, you'll be the one left stranded closest to the enemy, and therefore the first to get run down by pursuers. So as soon as a couple of people run, everyone else is going to run to try to get away before everyone else decides to do the same. We see the same mentality today driving stock market price fluctuations as everybody tries to pre-empt the market by buying/selling before everyone else has the same idea, thus creating the very peaks and crashes they were seeking to anticipate.
lancer D We know that fleeing from the front would be extremely dificult. Every tragedy at a concert or similar, shows this. Those at the front might want to get away, but they cant, because of the mob behind them. That isnt to say that, having them turn and being cut down has no effect. It would break up the front rank and propegate through the unit at some point.
WakarimasenKa I didn't mean it would have no effect, I meant they just wouldn't do it because every single person in the front rank would know their only chance of survival is to face the enemy because turning around to run would mean instant death. They might run though if faced with missile weapons rather than being trapped in a melee.
tane gurnick that's true but you are talking about separate units there. They weren't deployed in ranks with each other.
tane gurnick that's lines of small units called maniples. That's what gave them the advantage of tactical flexibility over the Greeks. Each unit could manouver independantly and take initiative as the situation called for it.
lancer D If your unit is facing a cavalry charge, the front men will be the first to see it and they will know that even if the unit manages to hold, _they_ will still be in a very precarious situation. In such cases I think it is absolutely the most likely scenario that the front rank breaks first, and frantically pushes back against the ranks behind them, causing disruption and chaos. What's more, fear is infectious, and when you see the rank in front of you desperately trying to push past you and clawing their way back, you might instinctively think that there is some immediate and grave danger from which you have to flee, and become just as panicked in turn - even if you cannot actually see the danger yourself. But in melées, I agree that the front rank is probably the least likely to break, as they are preoccupied - and turning your back to someone within hacking distance is not a tempting prospect.
Stuff like this was probably a big reason why it was important to reinforce the idea of a paradise for martyrs.
Only would have worked in religiously motivated conflicts, depends how much the scrubs knew I guess. I suppose their overlords might tell them, God wants Silesia to be German XD so they fight harder, especially before the translation of the bible and widespread literacy.
+Tobias Hagström there was no clear promised paradise in ancient times (where ancient = before middle ages), the only motivator for bravery in battle was the promise of glory
sonny19931
I wasn't necessarily saying that these concept of paradise for martyrs was allways wide spread, (allthoguh Bart Bols seem to argue that it was) I'm not well informed enough to do so. I'm just saying that I think the importance of battlefield morale was probably the reason why at least some cultures did make these promises.
way2tehdawn
I don't think it'd very difficult to put some amount of religious spin on almost any conflict, by stiring up national pride and exhagerating the things you percieve as godly and righteous your nation does, as well as parading some tales of how your nation has supposedly been helped by miracles and blessings before. You could also demonize your opponents and talk about all the things about them that can be conscrewed as wicked and so on. Rethoric and apeals to emotion, nationalism and religion could probably be used to convince the fighters that their god(s) approve of them and would surely reward them if they died for the cause.
That's kind of what I was saying, I expressed myself quite poorly.
There were of course concrete benefits for people who did well in battle, and the idea of gaining immortality trough heroism was very widespread (think Ilyad), but never such an explicit consequence of be good ---> go to heaven as in christian times. Most descriptions of the afterlife in ancient times are quite bleak, reserving real immortality or divinity just for exceptional characters, not common folks. Bart Bols
Maybe routs started when someone saw one of the enemy soldiers start unscrewing their pommel.
Uhm, pommels are no laughing matter, serious smithing there
The enemy are going to end me rightly! Run!
Shad caused all the routs in history
@@nathanthomas8251 Didnt skallagrim popularise the pommel throwing meme?
Heresy! The mighty Lloyd cannot be routed! Beige doesn't run.
Brave Sir Lloyd ran away
Bravely ran away, away
When danger reared its ugly head
He bravely turned his tail and fled
Doesn't comb either.
The mighty Lloyd says "screw you guys, i'm going home!"
Daniel Taylor Beige is too bland a color to run. It sort of wanders aimlessly.
GunFun ZS I don't know, i mean it really doesent clash with anything so that may make sense. perhaps there is nothing to run from in the first place?
Your enthusiasm is what school teachers are missing. People don't want to go to school, but at the same time they watch your videos by the millions. You actually caring about your subject and being very passionate about sharing your knowledge surely has a substantial effect on this huge difference.
Supernoxus
lindy beige is a strategic teacher.
he is a marshal of knowledge and understands well that knowing is half the battle.
Routs starter from routers. Just like internet.
Apocalyptic Knights 🤔
Routers is pronounced differently.
Nick No it's roo-ter, not row-ter. Row-ter just sounds bloody silly old chap.
Nick I’ve never heard a single person in my life pronounce router how you claim it is pronounced. Route and rout are different words.
@@tacticalchunder1207 I'm a telecoms engineer. It's pronounced however you want. Some companies like Cisco seem to prefer rau-ter. Others like Plusnet use roo-ter. It's potato/patato, and it doesn't matter at the end of the day
Haha. ROTFSOL
Rolling
On
The
Field
Screaming
Out
Loud
was looking for this
@@milosolej3833 Same! xD
I noticed that most people only died when they routed. It became quite clear when I noticed that in every battle the side that got defeated had a lot more casualties than those who won.
Essentially it seems that fighting to the last man when it seems hopeless actually gives you a better chance of living than running.
aListers This would not work, most people put their own self preservation first. If you decide to hold out and everyone else flees, you are toast.
TheFBIorange It does work. It is part of "the Art of War". If the army cannot flee, or dont think they can flee, they will fight that much harder. If they cannot surrender, same thing.
aListers Which is why Sunzi (/Sun Tzu) suggests to manoeuvre a weak army to a position from where it can't escape (swamps, mountains, dangerous rivers, the sea, etc.) if a battle against a stronger army is unavoidable. Men who know that their only chance to survive and ever see their family again is to fight like a manic and somehow break through the enemy lines are dangerous as fuck. Also because the enemy army, even if greater in numbers, has no interest in fighting to death and is more likely to flee/rout if their enemies act like this.
***** Yup and why it is important to give the enemy an escape route. If they have way to survival they will take it. Of course, then you send out the light cavalry and run them down, but they don't know that.
Also why the greek and roman formations where so formidable. Unit drills, if everyone trusted their comrades and knew instinctively that if they held they friends would protect them then they would feel a lot more secure. That or one goes full viking and seek a glorious death in battle, that works to.
That is so situational! One thing for sure, once you flee from a battle, no one will want you again. Not just generals, society aswell. I can’t imagine how shitty one’s life would get in ancient and medieval times when you have nowhere to go.
Well if the Mighty Lloyd is going, I am definitely out!
So basically a rout started where someone first lost their nerve.
our men are fleeing from the field of battle. SHAMEFUL DISPLAY!
I get that reference
Your men are running, SIR!
+fan9775
Damn lily-livered cowards!
shamefur dispray!!11
our men are running from the battle field
Tweeting a battle would just be a very inefficient way to call the medics
shurdi3 Hey, these medieval battles, right guys!? #StabbedInTheThroat
Just got stabbed in the neck. smh
shurdi3 omg lol literally dying #Dead
standingunder stubbed my fukn toe. #fml
Cryoshakespeare my fam just ran away. Guess it's time to leg it
we need to have a black adder-esque series with lloyd as different era soldiers
Then there's cavalry, you spend half of the battle fleeing, and the other half charging, for the most part, you probably ran when your horse started acting up.
Fucking Camels.
rome total war? camel cav is life, camel cav is love.
You do a great job in your portrayal of the story
I remember reading that the Hoplite forces were organised in a way that the most experienced warriors were placed at the back of a unit to prevent the younger members from routing as they would be kept in line by the veterans behind them.
I guess this is why they tried to avoid field battles as much as possible, the amount of people you risk losing in one of these battles is amazing. Hiding behind big walls is much safer when you know your forces have no where to run.
Casual Alien Yup, add the fact that a lot of the time the army simply was not adequatly trained due to difficulties with logistics. You can't rely on the troops a lot of the time. Add that they eat A LOT of food and you have to make that your primary priority. Battles in the 30 year war took place when armies reached the same places and fought over the same resources.
"An enemy that hides behind its fortifications is lost" - Napoleon.
We had a term for this in the Army. It came from the Korean War initially.. called "bugging out". The "bug out" was a massive retreat in the face of overwhelming odds. I saw this firsthand when we invaded Iraq in 2003. Many of their units ditched their weapons, uniforms and anything that could weigh them down to get out of there. Mobile units just bypassed the front lines and rounded them up as prisoners in the open desert anyway.
Welcome to history, I know you might have thought that was so incredible, but sadly no, this is called Routing and it exists since the dawn of warfare. In fact, nowadays it is minimal, for running from gunfire and artillery isn't much effective as running from spears and poleaxes.
+Kaiserlicher Ritter Yes, I know that. Served in the Army for 23 years, and have studied history of warfare since I was 10. A Rout is a massive disorganized retreat or flight from the enemy. Not sure where you were going with the "welcome" comment.
Tom Lockhart
I was under the impression you were surprised by it, because you only had knowledge of modern combat, not historical one. Most people, including military men, have little knowledge of history, not like us who take it as a hobby to learn and understand the past of warfare.
Modern day routing...for nerds
Mage: "Out of spells!"
Fighter: "healers down!"
Everyone: "RUN AWAY RUN AWAY, RUN AWAY!"
You don't "run out" of spells, you run out of mana. Otherwise spot on, I would just add the likely "Main tank is down!" cry that would start a rout.
Fenrir I am guessing you have never played D&D. Wizards have a limit to how many spells they can prepare each day. I thought using D&D would be more fitting given his appreciation for table top gaming.
+Argol228 fair enough. Can't say I have any experience with tabletop games.
Argol228 Pfft, clearly the enemy does not know the countertactics vs adventurers. Kill the mage first, soft target and the most dangerous foe. Then you can swarm them with beasts, undead or recruits and exhaust the healer. Order of the Stick had a nice comic about the value of attrition. I really like that one.
Argol228 Vegeta:"HEALER'S DOWN!"
Krillin:"NEED A REZ!"
Gohan:"OUT OF MANA!"
Everyone:"AAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!"
Spartan armies had the veterans in back, to constantly calm the greener hoplites and maintain formation. In a phalanx you had to keep discipline or your core strategy become garbage. Their biggest fear was being flanked, since even a disciplined army would break in that scenario.
They were also told by their wives, "Come back with your shield or on it". In other words, come back with honor (having not abandoned your weapon & shield in a rout), or dead (and carried home on your shield).
I don't think we're in disagreement. Perhaps the best correction I can make to what I said is they had their *older* veterans in back, since they were best able to stand the mental pressures, but not necessarily the physical. Those still in their prime were indeed at the front.
Daniel Hale
it was only my misunderstanding then good sir,have an excellent day
Daniel Hale Its the Athenians other city states whom would deploy the veterans at the back pushing the Green Hoplites forwards . plus being at the front was an honour being a front ranker . but a view on a standard hoplite formation would but the most experinced at the back and the sides Protecting the flanks . though its depends on what century we are in here . everything is possible . but in Spartan view everyone was an Equal to one other
Leonidas Carl That's a good point, many tactics changed over time, and also I'm probably mixing up lots of details. My information is coming from memory of watching "The Peloponnesian War" by Kenneth W. Harl (The Great Courses), so it covers that time period mainly (and a little bit the period before the war). I should use this as an excuse to re-watch those episodes and find out if memory served me well. The course is that good. ^_^
I also remember the position of honor being in the front like you said, I think particularly at the right because that was the most vulnerable point in the front lines (you didn't have an ally on your right to cover you with his shield). The person on the right also had to try to control the phalanx's tendency to curve to the right as the men on that side sought more and more protection. But I may have directions reversed.
Again, more excuses for me to go back and watch those. :)
well if you want to go in to the Spartan society
she is to bright on some places but she has some points elysiumgates.com/~helena/index.html
This is a classic example of why i love this channel, 12 minutes to say "IDK where routs start, it could be anywhere." Love your work Lloyd, keep it up!
If the comment section has taught me anything, it's that ancient = Roman Republic.
SerAlgernop BlitzKrieger Well they are well documented and popular. Easily understood as well. It gets interesting when you compare them to the hellinistic, the celtogerman, the eastern horse tactics. So many different styles and forms. I'd argue that most developements in warfare happens in regions where different cultures intermix: Macedonia, Seleucia, Rome, East Rome, Hungary etc.
angelowl89 that's not the point, though. The vast majority of people have let the point of the video, i.e. Routing, and gone for "NAH BRO THE ROMANS PUT THE VETS AT THE BACK SO IT COULD NEVA START UP FRONT"
been though that was one formation, and I'm sure vets routed in their time.
Now that is just silly. I took the video to be about where in the individual unit so the army formation of the old romans is irrelevant to the subject.
angelowl89 but the army formations of the Roman Republic are what's being debated in the comments.
They went off topic then. :P
we now all wheer they start...
France
You don't just explain it, you put us the viewer in the mindset of the soldier. Great video.
4:50 - the back
No, the inexperienced were at the front, at least for the Romans. Triarii were in the rear.
+Greg Cyr The triarii formed units in the third row, yes, but within a unit, they generally put their best at the front, probably. For many time and places, we just have to guess.
+Lindybeige
Res ad triaros venit.
It is very unlikely for new troops to be put in the back in any army for a number of reasons:
1. Seniority -'I survived it, now it's your time newbie'. Officers would very much respect that.
2. Experienced soldiers in the back wouldn't be terrified at the sight of recruits dying. They are new, they are not my friends, I don't know their names and they don't know shit about fighting. On the other hand for the new troops to see veterans dying in the front row would be absolutely terrifying.
3. Why would you put your best troops up front? So more of them get killed by projectiles before the real battle even starts?
4. If you win, you will end up with some dead, replaceable recruits and the whole new batch of experienced soldiers - those that survived the front row.
5. And most of all to delay the panic in critical moment of the battle. Veterans in the back would be likely to kill any recruits trying to flee and the recruits would be informed of that during training (officially or not).
6. There would be plenty of soldiers with more experience to stand among them unless your army consists of more then 25% of green recruits in which case you are screwed anyways.
+Kavetrol Valid points.
+Kavetrol 1. Little respect for those who put the inexoerienced in the most danger.
2. Wouldn't they? Are they not friends? If the front of you unit gets thoroughly mangled without doing damage to the enemy first, you're stuffed anyway.
3. No, so that they remain steady and keep the formation, do as they are told, engage and then stay alive and do damage. If one side puts the men who will actually have to do the fighting at the front, and the other does not, the first wins. Vets vs green is the ideal situation to be in.
4. Winning is far and away the most important thing. If you win, casualties should be light.
5. If your front row panics and your back row slaughters it, then the enemy just has to shout and then watch and laugh. You've done its job for it.
6. Many ancient armies would have many people who had never fought hand to hand in battle. Your sixth point somewhat contradicts your first five. If you see it as such a good thing to have 'plenty' of experienced soldiers at the front, and even consider 25% green troops to be a hopeless situation, then you would not and could not have the green troops up front.
Lindybeige
1. Respect is the most important thing for those in charge and they would never had any if they favored recruits over veterans.
2-5. Are you sure you are not talking about some computer(or else) game right now? If not, you are talking from who's perspective? A soldier, commander, tactician, historian?
6. I never said that there would never be any veterans in the front row or no single recruit in the back. I was trying to point out reasons why the bulk of the recruits would be in the front.
I was convinced that we were talking about professional and semi-professional armies that can absorb 15-20% replacements without loosing much combat value. If we talk about groups of militia with mostly inexperienced soldiers then talking of tactics makes not much sense because we are not going to have any.
7. Can you make some videos on money, prices, wages, cost of living, shopping etc.? Keep up the good work.
I believe most routs would begin with all of these situations happening at the same time. The guys at the front taking losses and ceding some ground, the guys in the middle going backwards because of the front ones, making the side guys do the same, which in turn makes the rear do the same, this makes all parts of a unit worried about their chances and increases the chance of a handful to start running in fear.
"We didn't retreat! We maneuvered in retrograde!"
Your organic grasp of the physics of large-scale, hand-to-hand combat is always so excellent! It seems so simple, yet so many others imagine something more mathematical than human.
A rout in fact starts in the pants. Once they are soiled, it's all over!
Man, you're one interesting speaker!
I never was interested in history or whatever because of the lack of effort of the teachers to make it interesting... thumbs up to this guy.
This video is why im subscribed, a lot of explanation to your views and youre very well researched in them!
I love all of your random discussions about battles Lindybeige. I don't have any money to pledge to support you and I'm sincerely sorry for that but I do thank you for all of the stimulating talks and points of views about ancient and medieval warfare.
I usually consider rout and flee as the same thing. Possibly, fleeing occurs on a smaller scale. A rout is when the entire unit breaks and just buggers off ASAP. Flight can occur in individual cases, with people also legging it right off the battlefield.
I haven't watched the video yet but I thought it was always analogous to doing "the wave" at some big stadium event. Noone really knows who starts it or why it spreads it just sort if happens
That was great. I love your ancient battles videos.
I truly love your channel Sir. Thank you for the interesting and engaging content.
Did they ever switch out soldiers through the ranks? Obviously, it doesn't feel very reasonable that the first couple of ranks would fight without stop for the remainder of the battle or until they fell. It must have been extremely tiring.
ThatsLeoYKnow Yes
+ThatsLeoYKnow If the commander has enough men to support a tactical reserve, yes.
ThatsLeoYKnow I don't see how else battles could last multiple hours or days. Switching out folks from the first rank with those of the second rank might have been possible.
I believe the Romans would alternate ranks. On a grander scale, Premarin triple axis formation is an example. The hastati would fight first and if they failed to break the enemy they would be recalled and the principes would commit then the triarii
+DushinSC They'd go for days because everyone would get tired, they'd call a time out, do what they need to do for the night, then resume the next day (simplified explanation haha) The battle didn't literally go for days :P
6:17 I want all of my guys to use the numbers-advantage and *swoop* the enemy?
But *swooping is bad*...
Hah, and we all know that routs start when the first sorry excuse of a soldier shouts: *"IT'S LU BU!!!"*
:D
RuSosan fan of RTK like me my friend =D
the mentality of a desperate third and last rank soldier - by lindybeige, adds sooo much to the whole enterprise of war, organizing a battle and so on. goddamnit so many nuances in these ancient battles! it baffles me how people didn't turn these kind of details into movies or other mass media products. i can only think of one movie that did somenthing similar, and thats one of my favorite movies of all time, barry lyndon!
This is one of the greatest videos I've ever watched tbh
Its like a domino effect; when you see your best mate running, you are likely to think " well if bob is running, im also running." Now the guy next to is thinking "if they are running im also running. " People are afraid in battles, to put it mildly, and wants to run away, but they stay because everyone else is staying. So when someone runs it suddenly feels more acceptable to run. And before you know it, the entire unit has broken apart.
I don't see why there has to be 1 answer, im sure each of those possibilities happened numerous times in many different circumstances.
If the mighty Lloyd is going, I am already home awaiting his upload 😂
"A rout starts with the soldier who wrongly thinks he's experianced enough to understand the battle situation better than his general; therefore generals who fraternise with their men lead either the bravest or the cowardliest units, depending on how they behave whilst intoxicated at victory parties" Cao Cao- Cao Mengde (China, Latter Han/Three Kingdoms periods)
Actually the more veteran soldiers went to third and beyond ranks as we see in the Republican Roman Army. Order were hastati princeps and triarii ( by age). The Napoleonic imperial guard, composed of veterans never were used by napoleon exept in the Waterloo battle, were he need all the troops, even there the army received a morale shock when the imperia guards start to die.
Other thing is that in the front line goes the younger and newbies who need to prove themselves.
**Me getting routed in an ancient battle**
**Throws away my weapon**
**My unit rallies**
"Oh um, hey guys, I um...Threw my sword...At an enemy and killed him, anyone got a spare?"
Decisive as always, Lloyd.
Love it. :-D
the animated way you describe this is great ! :)
We didn't retreat, simply advanced in the opposite direction.
I always get angry when my men in Total War retreat for "no reason" and for some reasons do not just want to give it another' try of running into the enemy, heh
the historical solution is to stab them with a pointy object until they turn around and keep fighting.
I like this vid! it is informative and well researched. Good job.
This video was very entertaining and interesting. Cheers, good sir.
the rout starts at the cowards! >.
That's why you need a Commissar.
friendly face They didn't fare too well. They did the research and it turned out commissars and those blocking units designed to shoot their own troops that fled the battle actually had minimal effect and couldn't stop shit.
+friendly face your avatar has the perfect facial expression.
friendly face 85% of the comissars were jews =)
I really enjoyed this video. Growing up with Hollywood films I never thought about what battles really might have looked like.
I must say, your messy hair fits the look of a panicked soldiers so well it made this very immersive... Google doesn't know the word "Immersive" it seems... That aside I do like the messy hair look and tend to have it myself
I'm inferring that #ROTFSOL is short for 'roll on the floor screaming out loud'
I can't think of what that acronym means and it's bothering me.
Rolls On The Floor Screaming Out Loud
Dan Pearman Thank you very much, friend.
thanx for yor werk mr lindy i thoroughly enjoi it.
i love your actor skill. i would love a movie by your script and with you as one of the secondary roles.
The Chinese, and those nations with a military tradition influenced by the Chinese, had a thing for fighting with their backs against the wall, generals especially ones with weaker armies would for example chose to fight within a loop of a river so that the river would not only anchor both flanks but act as a stop to any kind of retreat, even if a soldier wanted to run the only way open was to go forward. There's a saying "To smash ones pots, and sink ones boats" to describe this tactic, not only was there no possibility of retreat, but the armies cooking pots were destroyed, the only food a soldier was going to get would be that that he could take from the enemy. When this strategm didn't work you ended up losing armies though, often to drowning.
Lindy I find your videos endlessly entertaining, but often myopic in your opinions, many armies for example used the rotation of units so that the troops in front weren't ground down, that was the whole idea of the Roman maniple system. even the Aztecs did this. As to having all your best troops in the front, sure this was one way of doing things, especially in tribal and feudal armies and societies in which honour was to be at the front and it was seen as cowardly to skulk at the back, but this is not and was not the only way to do things. For example holding back your very best troops as a reserve to plug up any holes that appear in your line. Or having your very best troops concentrated together into a single unit in the centre or the flanks and having the rest of your army echeloned back from it.
A good general would also purposeful deploy weaker troops, in the knowledge that they will break to draw lure away part of the enemy line to break the enemy formation, e.g. at Cannae where the Carthaginians had their best troops on the flanks, and the collapse of the centre led to the Romans encircling themselves.
I only disagree about the first rank being better than the third. In roman leagions at least they were not. The green soldiers were the first rank, and every battle they survived moved them back one row, because forcing a man that knew the truth of melee combat to go in first was really hard and also because seasoned soldiers were more valuable. Also, if the battle was hard and the third row came into battle (either because the first 2 went down or because they shifted position - something they did to allow rested troops to take the front of battle - they were really lethal, fighting tired men that didn't expect such expert fighters late in the battle.
+Sagramorbald They only did that during the Polybian era (Manipular legions). After the Marian reforms, every Miles in a Centuria was supposed to be as equally trained, so that didn't matter anymore.
Thats why in Warhammer 40k the Astra millitarum has commissars, if you run away in any way from the front you are shot in the face. Keeps routing to the bare minimum when you fear the officer behind you far more than the enemy. Great video
Great video again from Lindy. A point I would like to add, is that when a soldier engaged into a combat he is most often forced to resist the counter force.. so all activity would rise naturally (by itself). Would be strange if a soldier just before combat or during the combat would flee - it would be the same as fisherman would turn back when reach the sea... why would he turn back to inland, he came to fish (a soldier goes to fight).
Sleep? Why would I need that?
they start when the flag starts blinking white
Excellent acting, lindy!
i love how you describe it all, feels like im listening to a story its awesome lol
See, this is why ancient Spartans were taught to never rout. Τάν ή επί τάς. You either come back alive with your shield in hand, victorious, or you come back dead on the shield and receive the greatest honors. That's how dad did it, that's how America does it, and it's worked out pretty well so far.
So, all the deserters and wounded just don't exist, then?
SerAlgernop BlitzKrieger What do you mean? Ancient Spartan men after the great slave rebellions were all taught from a young age how to fight and to always fight to the death. Of course, not every Spartan soldier obeyed this, and of course after every fight, the surviving wounded would not be forced to keep fighting unless they really needed to. Where do you object?
George Perakis I'm talking about you Yanks.
SerAlgernop BlitzKrieger A) I'm not American. B) That was just a joke and a reference to the movie "Iron Man", from the part where Tony talks about weapons you only need to use once.
George Perakis Except americans do what they can to hide their dead, and muddy the numbers... False images, propaganda, and staged events.....
There is no honor in the american war machine.... Dont kid yourself.
Imagine being that 1 guy who starts a route when his side was doing pretty well, but lost because of a breach in formation. He's indirectly responsible for the deaths of his allies and many innocent women/children being raped, many sold to slavery and the fall of an nation. Imagine living with that for the rest of your life
Lindybeige, thanks for showing me how to run away from a battle, whether at the front, rear or the flank!
A very entertaining video with those hilarious small acting lindy
The new French tank has 17 gears.
16 to go in reverse and 1 to go forward in case the enemy attack from behind.
Your description of the thoughts of the men at the back of a unit explains much of why commanders would want to "waste" a very effective and disciplined unit as a reserve to rarely fight, noones going to run away when the great palace guards are behind them
Mistaking friendlies for hostiles, or vice versa, could trigger routs. I think that happened at Barnet in 1471 where a banner that loomed out of the mist was misinterpreted. By the 17th or 18th century armies often had second lines as a reserve or blocking force to deal with emergencies and hopefully stop routs from spreading.
I strongly recommend looking at the Battle of the Greasy Grass (Little Bighorn). I realize that it is a more modern battle, but the use of firearms mean that Archaeologists can track positions based on the bullets left behind and use first person accounts from the veterans to build the story. There are three major engagements in that battle. First, there's Reno vs the first responders (flowing robe woman, wooden keg, etc.) that ended with a rout. Then, Custer and Keogh vs crazy horse and others, which ended in a rout. Finally, the siege against Benteen and the 7th Calvary survivors. The Lakota/Cheyenne push against Keogh came after a series of excellent ambushes by warriors with some serious firepower and big brass balls. This group fled the ambushes to the reserve unit, who then fled to Custer. All the while, the native warriors were quick to exploit the rout. You're right that the source of a rout can vary, but I'd bet money that the majority began in a unit that was fighting at that time.
You make a very good argument, which is probably why the ancient Spartans put the young soldiers at the front of their phalanx formations, the experienced ones in the middle, and older veterans at the back. This meant that those at the front had nowhere to run, or were too busy fighting to think of running, those in the middle knew they were the best and could reliably stop the enemy, and those in the back had seen enough battles not to get discouraged easily (and were probably the slowest runners anyway) ;)
The fact that I belong to the population of people that ask these strange questions and this guy answers them like a God makes my life complete.
Absolutely brilliant. When the French Guards broke at Waterloo their rout began from the back, those at the front actually did fight to the end.
I'd love to learn more about crowd psychology.
Subbed cause of this video cause I love Napoleon/empire total war and am super into early modern warfare
as a modern day warrior I really appreciate your show there's not too many shows if not any at all that are like yours I really like the insight you give I am A Iraq veteran 2011 infantry the new imperialist your welcome taking over for the old Brits
There are additional significant factors that are likely to have the soldiers engaged at the front stay put. There is the practical concern of turning your back on your opposite number. If he is in close proximity then turning your back on him might quite literally be the last thing you'd do. Staying put might not seem so bad by comparison to the dangers of giving your opponent such an easy chance.
And there is the peer pressure. These are your brothers in arms you have to squeeze through on the way to the rear. If shame does not prevent you from fleeing, a blow from a disgruntled comrade or commander just might.
One of the things I read by Victor Davis Hanson on Hoplite combat is that the veterans in peak condition (late 20s, early 30s) would be on the front line, the newest troops in the middle for pushing power and so it was harder to run since they're packed in tight, and the oldest veterans at the rear to keep people from running to try and prevent this. When it did happen, casualties were tremendous
your videos are really interesting.
Great video!
Good points, which just stresses the importance of confidence in your commanders and officers and comrades-in-arms and their and your training. I think that often soldiers began routing when their officers or petty officers went down or lost confidence.
lol the "3rd rank guy rationalizing how he isn't as good as the front 2 rows which just went down so I'm out" was Monty Pythonesque :)
Very good thoughts, I would like to give in my two denarii though. What about the formation sergeants/commanders? I think they could have been highly responsible for the morale of a given rank (depending on their skills, charisma and exterior circumstances of course), and could hold the people in place or command the routing on the other hand. Also, wouldn't people from the same rank would at least make an attempt (at least some of them) to put down the rout, hold their buddies in rank? By yelling, or just physical force? I want to stress it could just be an important element of the whole phenomena, , , something that was missing here for me. And it is highly dependant on the soldiers' training and their attitude of course. Thanks for the video again, your channel is very interesting. Subscribed!
+DaveGbk Oh, and another thing to the topic. I've just started to see another reason for all this military obedience, hierarchy and drill. If you are the soldier, the one who does the fighting (especially in the front line), you are supposed to do the job, you are an element of the scheme, a tool. You are not supposed to be disturbed by subjective fear and other emotions, which are increasing the risk of failure, routing. You have your level of competence and limited tactical thinking, the rest is up to the command. When to run, for example. If I got the wrong idea please go on and answer, thanks.