And most thought that the Waterloo and Austerlitz battles occured like in the new movie about Napoleon. There is SOOOOO much more to it than maybe 10 minutes of each battle that lasted several hours or days in reality....
I don't think that any Hollywood movie can accurately compare to the reality. For instance, how do you translate the smell of the dead on the silver screen?
@@althesmith Have you noticed any blotches on the sword, that might look like a deep, or faded reddish colour? That could be iron-oxide from blood content. Dried blood changes colour over time, and could resemble that of rust, but without the texture of rust.
@@cadderley100 However, anything on the sword would be cleaned up as part of regular maintenance. Issue swords in these units were kept cleaned and oiled throughout their service life and the 1796 HC wasn't replaced in service until several years after Waterloo. The blade has some surface staining but no deep pitting and is still in excellent condition with a very springy temper. You'd only see bloodstains on something which had been lost or dropped on the field. Troopers were trained to keep their weapons and equipment in top shape. The tip, which has a spear-point modification, is slightly chipped at the very point, which may be a sign of going through bone but otherwise not any real damage.
@@althesmith Do you know precisely what unit it's from? What type of sword is it? I.E Rapier, Cutlass etc? Is it ceremonial? It is inscribed with any names etc? Does the sword have a fuller? Does the edge have any chips in it? If the blade is clean and still serviceable, then it likely hasn't seen battle. That's another way you can tell if it's seen use, if there are chips down the surface of the blade. Have you tested it to see if there are any cracks under the surface of the blade? If you tap the sword, and there's a dull "Thud", when you tap it, that could indicate that the blade has a crack under the surface. Where as, if its more a high pitched "ding", all the way down the blade, then it is in remarkably good condition for it's age. Yeah, see that's what I am talking about, the chip, like a thrusting motion, as if it's been thrust at something? That could just so easily be through training as through combat though, so that's no guarantee that it has been used in combat. It's only a guarantee that it has been used for "Something".
The Duke was much maligned. Not a military genius, nor merely a privileged royal blunderer. A brave man, and most importantly, a friend to the soldier.
23:13 Except it wasnt a Charge . The 3 units of the Union Brigade were with the Household Brigade who attacked to the right of LeHaye Sainte into the French Cuirassiers . They had to infiltrate the 9th Brigade Highlanders first , then cross a slope lined with hedges, then cross a sunken road in relation to mounds on both sides of path then start attacking the French Columns who were in a Field of high crops in very sticky mud . That painting was done 10 years after back in England and is innaccurate . The French were too close to the Highlanders and being poorly trained they never got into square . What was killed rallied later on and kept the left flank occupied until the Prussians came
Small point, perhaps, but Lady Butler's 'Scotland Forever' was painted in 1881, some sixty six years after the battle, but, yes- although if you encountered a force of large men with large swords on large horses, bearing down on you, you might not argue the toss. They did, however, gallop on afterwards, got out of hand, and into serious trouble.
The serjeant re-enactor seems to know little of the British army of the Seven Years War or the American War of Independence when, at its best, it was a thoroughly professional and effective force.
What you don't realise, is that things deteriorated between the French Revolutionary Wars, and the Napoleonic Wars. The expense of the Seven Years Wars, and the American War of Independence, had seriously stretched the British national budget. This raised the national debt, and forced cutbacks on the British army, and the Royal Navy. As a result of these cutbacks, things had deteriorated in the approximately ten or so years between the end of the American War of Independence, and the start of the French Revolution...
@NobleKorhedron I am intrigued as to how you might know what I do or do not realise. As it is, I am perfecty aware of the prevailing circumstances circa 1783-1793. You would be better directing your lecture to the re-enactor who seems to be unaware of the history of the British army outside his hobby area and gives the impression that innovations presided over by the Duke of York brought standards in the British Army to levels that had never existed before. In 1793 there remained a core of dedicated, professional younger officers and disciplined, effective regiments that, despite being at the mercy of mediocre or incompetent generals, saw repeated success in the Low Countries until the alliance collapsed. These formed the basis on which Abercrombie, Moore and Wellington, supported by York, built the army into an effective force once again.
25:30 "The French must have hated this." 🙄 The French light cavalry used similar swords. So did the Austrians, Russians, Prussians and everyone else. Anyone would hate that who was on the receiving end.
Reportedly, the poorly mounted French cavalry in the Low Countries referred to the British Light cavalry on their bigger horses, with their weighty swords, as the 'English Butchers.'
Within 4 minutes of this video the Bias kicks in. The voice over says: …to Belgium where the Brittish and the Pruisian Army’s assembled”. Not a word of the other army’s like the Hanoverian, Brunswick, Nassau- and last but not least the Belgian-Dutch army’s. Those B/D army’s were in fact the North and South Netherlands army’s, numbering in Manpower as large as the English contingent. General Wellesly was commanding a multi national army as he was used to do in Portugal and in Spain. As useual the Brit annexed the Victory. If this battle was lost it would have been caused by the poor showing of the others.
Within one paragraph jeroenbons bias kicks in. The English contingent or the British contingent? No non English in the British army? Perhaps it's just short hand for this style of programme since it was Wellington's forces , definitely a Briton in charge of it . Bit like your short hand of English rather than British.
100% agree. I was inaugarated into Dutch Army at that Waterloo battlefield location, just under the monument. Because my Royal Dutch Army unit fought at the Quartre Bras crossing as part of the Waterloo campaign. It is sad that these "documentaries" are so single vision minded and mostly forget the true overall picture. Especially those brits, that think they did it all themselves.
How different was the Scots grey saber compared to a French Currassier Saber? Both appear to be of the same length. The Currassier Saber had a brass handle was surrounded by a brass shroud tom protect the entire hand.
How can you say, for the context of their time, that Waterloo was any worse than Azincourt? The only difference was the technology. The tactics, for the most part, were still the same. There's only so many ways you can kill someone. We know most of them.
There are stories of Napoleon falling ill on his march to begium. That may have affected his ability to rationalize and affected his cognitive function
BTW "wellingtons" army was about 31k British with 17k dutch and a bunch of other small country's, i dont know British people always give themselves 100% of the credit and ignore the rest...
Anyone who spends ten seconds reading anything about Waterloo will read about the ‘Anglo-allied’ army, making it clear that, whilst British soldiers made up the largest contingent of Wellingtons army, they were not the only nationality within it
The commentator does not know how to pronounce Some foreign namens. At 12:10 he calls Grouchy something like Graochy while the generals name is pronounced like Groochi, with an oo like whoopy. It annoys me very much.
@@thomasbenck9525 ah Well indeed but to my amusement I thought that Rod Steiger was rather convincing as Napoleon in the film Waterloo. Probably a question of smart typecasting.
The round shown was designed for use at sea. What was called 'grapeshot' in British circles was in fact a larger version of caseshot, sometimes referrred to as 'canister' and closer to musket ball size. Still evil in effect. Famously, grapeshot shattered the leg of the Earl of Uxbridge at the end of the battle.
Watch part 2 of the documentary here - th-cam.com/video/v3yht5sAN2E/w-d-xo.html
And most thought that the Waterloo and Austerlitz battles occured like in the new movie about Napoleon. There is SOOOOO much more to it than maybe 10 minutes of each battle that lasted several hours or days in reality....
I don't think that any Hollywood movie can accurately compare to the reality. For instance, how do you translate the smell of the dead on the silver screen?
One of my items I take great pride in acquiring is an original 1796 Heavy Cavalry sword from the period.
used or unused?
@@cadderley100 I would say the former. Barring access to a time machine rather difficult to know for sure.
@@althesmith Have you noticed any blotches on the sword, that might look like a deep, or faded reddish colour? That could be iron-oxide from blood content. Dried blood changes colour over time, and could resemble that of rust, but without the texture of rust.
@@cadderley100 However, anything on the sword would be cleaned up as part of regular maintenance. Issue swords in these units were kept cleaned and oiled throughout their service life and the 1796 HC wasn't replaced in service until several years after Waterloo. The blade has some surface staining but no deep pitting and is still in excellent condition with a very springy temper. You'd only see bloodstains on something which had been lost or dropped on the field. Troopers were trained to keep their weapons and equipment in top shape. The tip, which has a spear-point modification, is slightly chipped at the very point, which may be a sign of going through bone but otherwise not any real damage.
@@althesmith Do you know precisely what unit it's from? What type of sword is it? I.E Rapier, Cutlass etc? Is it ceremonial? It is inscribed with any names etc? Does the sword have a fuller? Does the edge have any chips in it? If the blade is clean and still serviceable, then it likely hasn't seen battle. That's another way you can tell if it's seen use, if there are chips down the surface of the blade. Have you tested it to see if there are any cracks under the surface of the blade? If you tap the sword, and there's a dull "Thud", when you tap it, that could indicate that the blade has a crack under the surface. Where as, if its more a high pitched "ding", all the way down the blade, then it is in remarkably good condition for it's age. Yeah, see that's what I am talking about, the chip, like a thrusting motion, as if it's been thrust at something? That could just so easily be through training as through combat though, so that's no guarantee that it has been used in combat. It's only a guarantee that it has been used for "Something".
"give me the night...or give me blucher"....wellington!
Now I know and understand the meaning behind that old nursery rhyme I heard when I was a child " The Grand Old Duke of York ".
The Duke was much maligned. Not a military genius, nor merely a privileged royal blunderer. A brave man, and most importantly, a friend to the soldier.
3:47 @thehistorysquad I was like I know that guy!!
"If there is one thing of which I know nothing...it is agriculture" (Wellington probably)
23:13 Except it wasnt a Charge . The 3 units of the Union Brigade were with the Household Brigade who attacked to the right of LeHaye Sainte into the French Cuirassiers . They had to infiltrate the 9th Brigade Highlanders first , then cross a slope lined with hedges, then cross a sunken road in relation to mounds on both sides of path then start attacking the French Columns who were in a Field of high crops in very sticky mud . That painting was done 10 years after back in England and is innaccurate . The French were too close to the Highlanders and being poorly trained they never got into square . What was killed rallied later on and kept the left flank occupied until the Prussians came
Small point, perhaps, but Lady Butler's 'Scotland Forever' was painted in 1881, some sixty six years after the battle, but, yes-
although if you encountered a force of large men with large swords on large horses, bearing down on you, you might not argue the toss. They did, however, gallop on afterwards, got out of hand, and into serious trouble.
The serjeant re-enactor seems to know little of the British army of the Seven Years War or the American War of Independence when, at its best, it was a thoroughly professional and effective force.
What you don't realise, is that things deteriorated between the French Revolutionary Wars, and the Napoleonic Wars.
The expense of the Seven Years Wars, and the American War of Independence, had seriously stretched the British national budget.
This raised the national debt, and forced cutbacks on the British army, and the Royal Navy.
As a result of these cutbacks, things had deteriorated in the approximately ten or so years between the end of the American War of Independence, and the start of the French Revolution...
@NobleKorhedron I am intrigued as to how you might know what I do or do not realise. As it is, I am perfecty aware of the prevailing circumstances circa 1783-1793.
You would be better directing your lecture to the re-enactor who seems to be unaware of the history of the British army outside his hobby area and gives the impression that innovations presided over by the Duke of York brought standards in the British Army to levels that had never existed before.
In 1793 there remained a core of dedicated, professional younger officers and disciplined, effective regiments that, despite being at the mercy of mediocre or incompetent generals, saw repeated success in the Low Countries until the alliance collapsed. These formed the basis on which Abercrombie, Moore and Wellington, supported by York, built the army into an effective force once again.
he has his own channel called the history squad and responds to a lot of comments so u can address ur complaints to him directly
He's a corporal
@@marioguidotomasone1265
Ahem.Let me rephrase that: "The corporal re-enactor..."etc.,etc.
More history and ancient history please 😬
25:30 "The French must have hated this." 🙄 The French light cavalry used similar swords. So did the Austrians, Russians, Prussians and everyone else. Anyone would hate that who was on the receiving end.
A very english-centric documentary. Right down to mis-pronounciations.
Reportedly, the poorly mounted French cavalry in the Low Countries referred to the British Light cavalry on their bigger horses, with their weighty swords, as the 'English Butchers.'
Within 4 minutes of this video the Bias kicks in. The voice over says: …to Belgium where the Brittish and the Pruisian Army’s assembled”. Not a word of the other army’s like the Hanoverian, Brunswick, Nassau- and last but not least the Belgian-Dutch army’s. Those B/D army’s were in fact the North and South Netherlands army’s, numbering in Manpower as large as the English contingent. General Wellesly was commanding a multi national army as he was used to do in Portugal and in Spain. As useual the Brit annexed the Victory. If this battle was lost it would have been caused by the poor showing of the others.
Within one paragraph jeroenbons bias kicks in. The English contingent or the British contingent? No non English in the British army?
Perhaps it's just short hand for this style of programme since it was Wellington's forces , definitely a Briton in charge of it . Bit like your short hand of English rather than British.
And yet again we have a British-made Waterloo documentary that barely mentions the Prussian contribution.
Spot on. This is no more than sadist titalation .
100% agree. I was inaugarated into Dutch Army at that Waterloo battlefield location, just under the monument.
Because my Royal Dutch Army unit fought at the Quartre Bras crossing as part of the Waterloo campaign.
It is sad that these "documentaries" are so single vision minded and mostly forget the true overall picture.
Especially those brits, that think they did it all themselves.
3:57 hey its Kevin from history squad.
He appears in several episodes of "Instruments of Death", f.e. Towton.
His giggling at the wouds is pretty weird
How nice it would be if for once,the "FIRE ARMS EXPERT" had a hint, of a clue,of facts.
If your reading this, go watch the movie Waterloo trust me you'll love it.
My reading this ?
@@reluctantheist5224 what kind of question is that?
That screamin in the beginning was a big cheese sandwich 😔
That sabre Must bê hell for foot soldiers
How different was the Scots grey saber compared to a French Currassier Saber? Both appear to be of the same length. The Currassier Saber had a brass handle was surrounded by a brass shroud tom protect the entire hand.
Heavy cavalry such as the Greys, the Blues, the Inniskilling or the French Cuirassiers had no sabres. They had heavy straight edge swords
Nice movie :)) More about polish husar cavalry saber....szablotłuk polski
2 shots a minute, standing up whilst "they" are shooting back! Stupidly brave, coming from a South African Boer descendant
17:39 did cannons have grooves?
Only at about the time of the Civil War
The guy playing the redcoat has his own channel and it's amazing it's called history hit or maybe squad I can't remember lol
was that a billhook and a hatchet in his kit? was that standard issue? why?
For cutting firewood and building shelters
How can you say, for the context of their time, that Waterloo was any worse than Azincourt? The only difference was the technology. The tactics, for the most part, were still the same. There's only so many ways you can kill someone. We know most of them.
There are stories of Napoleon falling ill on his march to begium. That may have affected his ability to rationalize and affected his cognitive function
26:06 sabre or machete....
I've seen many people do 4 shots a minute.
"Now thats soldiering"...🤣🤣🤣
0:41 sorry but i couldn't help laughing.
BTW "wellingtons" army was about 31k British with 17k dutch and a bunch of other small country's, i dont know British people always give themselves 100% of the credit and ignore the rest...
Anyone who spends ten seconds reading anything about Waterloo will read about the ‘Anglo-allied’ army, making it clear that, whilst British soldiers made up the largest contingent of Wellingtons army, they were not the only nationality within it
They should use paper cartridges and a patched ball , much faster than what they are doing
Sharpe
British soldiers WERE taught to aim at specific opponents. Not impressive.
The commentator does not know how to pronounce Some foreign namens. At 12:10 he calls Grouchy something like Graochy while the generals name is pronounced like Groochi, with an oo like whoopy. It annoys me very much.
And this is a British production.
If this pains you never watch any US doc on the Napoleonic wars.😂
@@thomasbenck9525 ah Well indeed but to my amusement I thought that Rod Steiger was rather convincing as Napoleon in the film Waterloo. Probably a question of smart typecasting.
And look at Europe now 💩
what's your point?
One thing us Human are Amazing at, Finding better ways of killing each other. Who thought up Grape-Shot 🫢😵💫 So nasty
The round shown was designed for use at sea. What was called 'grapeshot' in British circles was in fact a larger version of caseshot, sometimes referrred to as 'canister' and closer to musket ball size. Still evil in effect. Famously, grapeshot shattered the leg of the Earl of Uxbridge at the end of the battle.