@WILLIAM EWART GLADSTONE Decir que los suizos no se enfrentaron a los españoles porpque no llegaron al cuerpo a cuerpo es como decir que ya no hay guerras porque todo el mundo se mata a 2 kilómetros de distancia y nadie usa ballonetas. Los suizos no "chocaron" contra un terreno fangoso y una empalizada... el terreno estaba elegido y la empalizada construida por los imperiales, no hay nada fortuito. Que los arcabuceros españoles se hubiesen enfrentado cuerpo a cuerpo contra los piqueros suizos habría sido tan estupido como los suizos cargando solos contra una posicion atrincherada. Los españoles no corrieron como gallinitas... siguieron la estrategia planeada... en esta batalla simplemente se dio la circumstancia de que los piqueros eran alemanes... tienes todos los ejemplos que quieras en los que los piqueros eran españoles y tuvieron un rendimiento impecable (Nordlingen 1634, Rocroi 1643...). Como dijo Napoleon... nunca detengas a tu enemigo cuando esté cometiendo un error. Los suizos, con tu misma mentalidad infantil y caballeresca, fueron idiotas en esta batalla y pagaron por ello. Lo que tu estas pidiendo es que los españoles hubiesen sido igual de idiotas que los suizos. Vamos... es como pedir que un helicoptero se estrelle contra un tanque en lugar de usar sus misiles... ridículo. Por cierto, si tan horrible te parece que se luche a distancia, solo recordarte que los suizos usaban picas de 6 metros. Habrá campos de batalla llenos de caballeros nobles muertos con tu misma mentalidad a los que les parecía deshonroso que su espada fuese derrotada a distancia por plebeyos como los piqueros suizos, los arqueros ingleses o los arcabuceros españoles...
@WILLIAM EWART GLADSTONE No solo infantil, tambien racista. El pack completo. Sobre los piqueros españoles ya te he mencionado ejemplos claros demostrando que lo que dices no es en absoluto verdad (Nordlingen y Rocroi, entre otros), así que si vas a ignorar mis argumentos y seguir con tu corta/pega infantil y nacionalista, yo no voy a perder más el tiempo contigo. Por curiosidad, de dónde eres?
@@higochumbo8932 Parece que le distes en los morros el pobre es un troll // enajenado. El tío se pasa por todos los videos llorando y lanzando sangre menstrual por doquier.
Francis I biggest mistake wasn't to siege Pavia but not to leave the siege when the marquis of Pescara and Vasto approached with the imperial army. This because Francis was paying his army regularly while the landknechts and the spanish had not received pay for months, and in fact were quartering in the lombard counrtyside living off the local population, they were following Pescara just because he promised them a pitched battle in a few days and because he made a good speech. if the french had abandoned the siege and moved to the hills west of Pavia they would have been in a much stronger position and the imperial army imo would have just disbanded or refused to attack because of the lack of possibilities of victory and payment. That's also the opinion of Guicciardini when he writes about Pavia.
@@higochumbo8932 They were, the French captains adviced the king to do so but Francis thought the earthworks and palisades protected by artillery he made to defend his encampment would have been enough and his Italian mercenaries pretended to be double the numbers they were to get double pay.
I love these videos. You and BazBattles do a great job of keeping the non-informative content of the videos SIMPLE. No interspliced videos of Total War, standard symbols for cavalry and infantry. Great job!
collonnas actions are excellent he decides when and where the enemy will fight him, and the enemy driven by the lack of pay has to follow him as he leads them into a trap after the next
When you finish the Italian wars, you should do the Hungarian game of thrones, 1440-90 next!
ปีที่แล้ว +2
Contrary to what is mistakenly believed, the Spanish army had a large number of harquebusiers, who were decisive in both the Battle of Bicocca and the Battle of Sesia, although it must be recognized that at this time there was a huge component of pikemen; but by the time the Tercios were created in 1536 (the evolution of the Coronelias), the number of firearms practically equaled those of the pikes and each time this weapon was reduced in number in favor of the arquebuses and muskets, so It makes no sense to see the Spanish infantry as a unit that fought like the Swiss, in large, deeps and old-fashioned pike formations, when instead they used firearms combined with pikes and in smaller and more mobile formations than is believed commonly (companies gave great flexibility to the Tercios, forming them in different ways depending on the situation).
To me he sounds exactly like Donald Tusk, president of EU Council. Like I said before, listening to pike&shot seems to me like being told the history of Europe by the President of Europe! :)
@pike&shotBattles Another excellent video. Where did you get that baseman from? What are you using to make such high quality maps? Do you know where I could find a relief map like that?
It's all done in photoshop with some custom brushes and a very large google map as the template. After I set up a patreon the maps and artwork will be available for download.
There are so many things I can't mention due to time constraints... But I think I will mention them in an upcoming video dealing specifically with the military innovations of the renaissance. And certainly as a footnote if I ever publish a book on the Italian War.
btw at the battle of sesia, were those musketeers real musketeers or arquebusiers? becuase in the early 16th cnetury muskets were especialy large argquebuses built for wall defence that were used as basicly armor pircing weapons, often in low numbers only but as they manage to wound and kill heavily armored french troops i could imagine those are actualy those heavy musket troops, normal arquebuses often had not the power to pirce plate armor, especialy with disctance and the fact that the angles usualy were not favorable
@William Ewart Gladstone From what I read the Italians were but a small contingent. Most were Spanish and German. The Spanish came from Naples under Gonzaga and he had a small Italian contingent with him.
@@charptho France had a numeral advantage at Bicocca, anywhere between 19,000 to 31,000 troops against 7,000 Spaniards and Italians. Also, having an alliance with the Ottomans against your own Christian brothers when the Persians and Moroccans were the reason why the Ottomans didn't push into India and the Atlantic is kind of back-stabby.
Fun fact: Bicoca is still used in modern Spanish as a word to indicate that something went flawlessly.
True story!
@WILLIAM EWART GLADSTONE Decir que los suizos no se enfrentaron a los españoles porpque no llegaron al cuerpo a cuerpo es como decir que ya no hay guerras porque todo el mundo se mata a 2 kilómetros de distancia y nadie usa ballonetas.
Los suizos no "chocaron" contra un terreno fangoso y una empalizada... el terreno estaba elegido y la empalizada construida por los imperiales, no hay nada fortuito.
Que los arcabuceros españoles se hubiesen enfrentado cuerpo a cuerpo contra los piqueros suizos habría sido tan estupido como los suizos cargando solos contra una posicion atrincherada.
Los españoles no corrieron como gallinitas... siguieron la estrategia planeada... en esta batalla simplemente se dio la circumstancia de que los piqueros eran alemanes... tienes todos los ejemplos que quieras en los que los piqueros eran españoles y tuvieron un rendimiento impecable (Nordlingen 1634, Rocroi 1643...).
Como dijo Napoleon... nunca detengas a tu enemigo cuando esté cometiendo un error. Los suizos, con tu misma mentalidad infantil y caballeresca, fueron idiotas en esta batalla y pagaron por ello. Lo que tu estas pidiendo es que los españoles hubiesen sido igual de idiotas que los suizos. Vamos... es como pedir que un helicoptero se estrelle contra un tanque en lugar de usar sus misiles... ridículo.
Por cierto, si tan horrible te parece que se luche a distancia, solo recordarte que los suizos usaban picas de 6 metros. Habrá campos de batalla llenos de caballeros nobles muertos con tu misma mentalidad a los que les parecía deshonroso que su espada fuese derrotada a distancia por plebeyos como los piqueros suizos, los arqueros ingleses o los arcabuceros españoles...
@WILLIAM EWART GLADSTONE No solo infantil, tambien racista. El pack completo.
Sobre los piqueros españoles ya te he mencionado ejemplos claros demostrando que lo que dices no es en absoluto verdad (Nordlingen y Rocroi, entre otros), así que si vas a ignorar mis argumentos y seguir con tu corta/pega infantil y nacionalista, yo no voy a perder más el tiempo contigo.
Por curiosidad, de dónde eres?
@@higochumbo8932 veo que el mexicano con nombre anglosajón se ha fugado apaleado de esta conversación
@@higochumbo8932 Parece que le distes en los morros el pobre es un troll // enajenado. El tío se pasa por todos los videos llorando y lanzando sangre menstrual por doquier.
Francis I biggest mistake wasn't to siege Pavia but not to leave the siege when the marquis of Pescara and Vasto approached with the imperial army. This because Francis was paying his army regularly while the landknechts and the spanish had not received pay for months, and in fact were quartering in the lombard counrtyside living off the local population, they were following Pescara just because he promised them a pitched battle in a few days and because he made a good speech. if the french had abandoned the siege and moved to the hills west of Pavia they would have been in a much stronger position and the imperial army imo would have just disbanded or refused to attack because of the lack of possibilities of victory and payment. That's also the opinion of Guicciardini when he writes about Pavia.
That's for the next episode...
@@pikeshotBattles sorry, your videos are the only ones I comment so compulsively
Were the french aware of all that? Otherwise it's kind of hindsight and we can't really call it a mistake.
@@higochumbo8932 They were, the French captains adviced the king to do so but Francis thought the earthworks and palisades protected by artillery he made to defend his encampment would have been enough and his Italian mercenaries pretended to be double the numbers they were to get double pay.
@@paolostival6972 Francis was a moron plain and simple and deserved to lose.
What luck! I enjoyed a good plate of Spaghetti Bolognese with this video, thank you!
I love these videos. You and BazBattles do a great job of keeping the non-informative content of the videos SIMPLE. No interspliced videos of Total War, standard symbols for cavalry and infantry. Great job!
collonnas actions are excellent he decides when and where the enemy will fight him, and the enemy driven by the lack of pay has to follow him as he leads them into a trap after the next
When you finish the Italian wars, you should do the Hungarian game of thrones, 1440-90 next!
Contrary to what is mistakenly believed, the Spanish army had a large number of harquebusiers, who were decisive in both the Battle of Bicocca and the Battle of Sesia, although it must be recognized that at this time there was a huge component of pikemen; but by the time the Tercios were created in 1536 (the evolution of the Coronelias), the number of firearms practically equaled those of the pikes and each time this weapon was reduced in number in favor of the arquebuses and muskets, so It makes no sense to see the Spanish infantry as a unit that fought like the Swiss, in large, deeps and old-fashioned pike formations, when instead they used firearms combined with pikes and in smaller and more mobile formations than is believed commonly (companies gave great flexibility to the Tercios, forming them in different ways depending on the situation).
What an excellent series on a war I had never even known about. Absolutely riveting.
"We do a little trolling"
-- Colonna (circa. 1522)
Hell yes he's back
Wow New content from pike&shoitBattles!
I like the accent, it sounds great but still very easy ti understand.
It's Hungarian.
To me he sounds exactly like Donald Tusk, president of EU Council. Like I said before, listening to pike&shot seems to me like being told the history of Europe by the President of Europe! :)
@@pikeshotBattles I back up Khasidon statement.
I hope u cover the wars during the reign of Matthias Corvinus
the subtitles help
You forgot to add #8 (this one) into your Italian Wars playlist.
Please keep at it, these videos are great.
0:58 The elector must be happy they are getting lot of money.
Brilliant work as always! :)
Great video! Lively and thrilling. Thanks !! Congratulations man
love the videos, onwards to Pavia!
Love your stuff, man!! Keep uo the great work!
damn man, I feel sorry for Chevalier de Bayard he was a good man
@pike&shotBattles
Another excellent video. Where did you get that baseman from? What are you using to make such high quality maps? Do you know where I could find a relief map like that?
It's all done in photoshop with some custom brushes and a very large google map as the template. After I set up a patreon the maps and artwork will be available for download.
How many times has Milan been sieged/taken at this point, like 10+ easy? Poor Milan.
Mian was definitely F'd, although first prize would go to Pavia.
Charles inherited Burgundy from his father Philip I, not (directly) Mary.
Thank you. Battle of PavÌa (the stress is on the i). You forgot to mention Giovanni delle bande nere.
There are so many things I can't mention due to time constraints... But I think I will mention them in an upcoming video dealing specifically with the military innovations of the renaissance. And certainly as a footnote if I ever publish a book on the Italian War.
th-cam.com/video/OZM4HDRK55s/w-d-xo.html ;)
What will mistake will francis do in the next episode? Hmm.
btw at the battle of sesia, were those musketeers real musketeers or arquebusiers? becuase in the early 16th cnetury muskets were especialy large argquebuses built for wall defence that were used as basicly armor pircing weapons, often in low numbers only
but as they manage to wound and kill heavily armored french troops i could imagine those are actualy those heavy musket troops,
normal arquebuses often had not the power to pirce plate armor, especialy with disctance and the fact that the angles usualy were not favorable
What a shame Catholics fought each other. They should have engaged in a crusade instead.
Indeed!
France was never Catholic.
@@garbancitolentejas486 ?
@@shelv9538 Really
@@garbancitolentejas486And why the hell are you even lying?
Swiss superiority was shattered by Spanish guns.
German Landsknechts are Lutheran
@William Ewart Gladstone From what I read the Italians were but a small contingent.
Most were Spanish and German.
The Spanish came from Naples under Gonzaga and he had a small Italian contingent with him.
@William Ewart Gladstone Nah, and by the way the core of all SPANISH TERCIOS, was always SPANISH.
@WILLIAM EWART GLADSTONE South Italy was Spain.
@WILLIAM EWART GLADSTONE why are you crying?
My ancestor lead the army that defeated the proxy French army in NAvarre
Why do you call the new world Colonies??? They were no colonies, check your facts
France is used to lose wars LOL
no
It was basically them against everyone else, that's why they eventually allied with the Ottoman.
Napoleonic wars 100 hundred years war ww1 crusades
@@charptho France had a numeral advantage at Bicocca, anywhere between 19,000 to 31,000 troops against 7,000 Spaniards and Italians.
Also, having an alliance with the Ottomans against your own Christian brothers when the Persians and Moroccans were the reason why the Ottomans didn't push into India and the Atlantic is kind of back-stabby.