How The Landsknecht Greatsword Soldiers Fought!
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 8 ก.ย. 2024
- The Landsknecht were a body of German mercenary soldiers who dominated the European battlefields of the renaissance, until the increasing use of gunpowder eventually rendered blocks of pikemen obsolete. Some select of their troops were armed with greatswords and were used as shock troops, whose mission was to break up pike formations. But how did they go about performing such a formidable task? Let's find out!
Remember to Like and Subscribe, as it really helps the channel grow!
![[UNCUT] The Loyal Pin ปิ่นภักดิ์ EP.6 (2/4)](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/GgeGQOP10RQ/mqdefault.jpg)
Bro, you need Grass Crest Shield, Giant's armor and Father's mask to complete the look
*giants* giants g i a n t s GIANTS G I A N T S
@@minihali become unstoppable. What rings you got bits
@@codiserville593 Havel's ring, Ring of favor and protection
Chaos infused Zweihander and 2 Blackflame
They now have "fanatics armor" for true landsknecht cospvp.
Can we just talk about how awesome his outfit is please!?
I heard there was never a standard issues dress
So they could of came in many colours
It's not really all that impressive comparing to what Landsknechts actually wore.
Kult of Athena.
one day a man came upon a jacket that did not fit him so he slashed it open to allow it to breathe. he wore it over his clothes and created the Slashed look, as well as the intense two tones.
Who? The jester?
From my experience with fighting polearms with a Zweihänder, alot of things are forgotten in videos like these:
The density of formations on both sides.
you can barely work with any big swings that are not oberhau. And you can most of the time only do one oberhau to initiate, after that you are forced to use your great sword as a "tool" to wind polearms away.
The winding has several effects.
a. the greatsword can "catch" multiple polearms with one move and it has a better angle and can therefor just turn them aside. No need to cut the polearm or even break it. You make a gap like you do with your arm when moving through a dense wood with low hanging branches.
b. the winding will get you closer to the enemy, so provided you are more heavily armored, you can now start working with your dagger or other sidearm to be effective.
Any damage the greatsword could still do must be done by halfswording.
I believe they did both cuts and thrusts based on the situation there.
c. the open gap behind the greatsword fighter can be used by your own pikeman to provide support or for shield/sword or other fighters to exploit like the romans did with the greek phalanx.
In general I believe the role of the Zweihänder, same as Mordaxt in all heavy armor was very similar to that of the pilum in roman times.
Focus fire/attack on a small portion of the enemy phalanx, open up a gap and then destroy the entire formation from that gap onwards.
In short:
I think the Zweihänder was primarily used as a tool to catch poles and not destroy them or even kill alot of the pole arm soldiers by itself.
The Flamberge I believe was used to cut easier in dense formations.
When you thrust with a flamberge and miss just closely, it might still do damage to skin. Same when pulling it back with force. Maybe like sawing in a way, when your blade is stuck between bodyparts of your enemies.
Same time, pole armes cannot just travel down your great sword blade when it has a flamed blade. it will travel to the side and increase the chance of missing the greatsword fighter.
These are just my theories from practical use of the zweihänder, combined with some stuff I got from historians or vids like yours.
good post
Flamberges have not been demonstrated to have any significant improved cutting capacity, by and large. Otherwise, this is what I have come to think as well, although I think that, like the rodelleros, it was too niche and had too a fatality rate to continue to be logistically viable and hence their phasing out of use.
@@nevisysbryd7450 I dont mean "cutting" but using them like a saw when in close combat. A sword cannot cut well in that situation, but maybe a flamed blade, dunno, maybe someone can make a test :D
I think the zweihänder was phased out when the pikes phased out too :)
@@nevisysbryd7450 by all account the bread knife is not particularly sharp. but the serrated edge allows it to cut more effectively both the tougher crust of bread as well as the thin skin of the tomato. the shape makes all the difference here. in fact i'd go as far as saying my bread knife is arguably the dullest knife i have yet uses the least effort when cutting bread and tomato which are both difficult to cut items.
I fully agree. If held point down while halfswording, it's very easy to catch a polearm or spear with the zweihander (the parrying hooks are awesome for protecting hands when doing this!). In boffer fighting I once caught a spear like this, then ran sideways and pushed several other spears until the spearmen were bunched together, having their weapons shoved aside. I could do nothing more at this point, but my fellow spearmen behind me could now proceed to stab the sides of the enemy spearmen with liberity. It's sort of the tactic this video suggests, but I would never just crash down with a single overhead swing. You don't gain much control over the spears, you leave yourself very open before and after swing, you catch only spears that come in contact during the swing and lastly you would have hard time catching spears that have tips held low (which is not an issue if you yoursef held the zwei tip pointing down).
TH-cam monetization should pay you double for this video.
TH-cam are scum. Rather than continuing appeal tennis with me on the 4-5M views my 10 channels (12+ years, all TH-cam Partner Program) earned they paid me $0.08 and deleted my gmail for 'grievous breach' (even though I'd never used it) to get rid of me instead. This is why it's best to use ad blocker and support people you appreciate directly.
What I would like the most is good videos being suggested.
@@TheApocalypticKnight have you tried cutting pikes with a sword as an experiment
Hello just wanted to make some smaller points,
I would like to point out that the there is a Unterhau for the Greatsword which can be connected to an 8 type windmill pattern. Alfieri, Diogo Gomez , di Grassi and many other Describe them. Alfieri calls them Moulinellos or Montanti. Diogo Gomez simply refers to them as Talho or Revezs form behind from low to high and Meyer had the quarterstaff/Longsword for this. Especially Alfieri and Diogo Gomez advice that you use the moulinellos from right and left(which create an 8-type pattern) to defend and advance against polearms and staff weapons of all kinds. Diogo Gomez even calls this the most graceful regla of them all. This brings me to my next point how the swords were used. I agree that the 8 types werent probably used in formation there was simply not enough space for it. It should be noted that the cutting off pikes is also a myth and a mistranslation from Hans Delmer who quoted Frundsberg. It could happen sometimes when the shaft was already damaged but mostly they were protected by langets and oak shafts which are flexible etc. The armor would also not really protect them since like many swiss Reisläufer mention that the pikes aimed for the groins and armpits but thats basically what you already said so just wanted to reinforce the point. Their main and most important goal was to defend the banners. Alfieri and die Grassi mention that in their treatises. Branccacio writes that they were put in the second or third rank together with halberdiers to defend against charges. They seemed to be used for skirmishing too attacking the flanks of enemy formations. They are also great for defending ones own life since like di Grassi and de Viedma say one can defend against many with it another purpose was creating space or shocktroopers often seen on ships and in the thirty years war(when enemy muskets where reloading they would storm the trenches and slaughter them seen in the siege of Regensburg). Also found in the hands of officers and high ranking bodyguards or to hold certain choke points. Basically it was a weapon to create space and to hold and defend certain points or banners etc. One thing about the pikes. They never attacked them head on at least on the first charge since tehre would be too many ranks of pikes and halberds waiting for them. Sometimes the idea was after the first line broke to send out halberdiers and Greatswords to put on preassure and break the formation but never to directly face pikes. Regarding the half swords techniques there is from achille marozzo the guardia contra arma inastate where he tells how to advance against staff weapons by using the ricasso of the sword and bind it with the staff weapon.
So basically the most important job was to guard the banners which is mentioned in the woodcut " Triumphzug Kaiser Maximilians" where Greatsword bearers talk about their job. Other Woodcuts and drawings from Urs Graf and Holbein reinforce this. Hope this helps!
Regarding the unterhau, sure it can be done if you angle it too much upwards, but nobody would risk doing it while running on uneven ground, too much of a chance it would hit the ground, plus the issue of a returning strike from a struck halberd. Regarding the shaft-breaking you're right, I already mentioned it in a comment: unlikely to break the shaft, but once past the point, you don't really need to. As for charging head on against pike walls, it seemed to work quite nicely in Sempach, and the Swiss didn't even have half the amount of armour the Landsknecht would wear. They just used a guy named Arnold as a meat shield instead (not even kidding!).
Great swords were exclusively used by taller and stronger men wich were called double soliders because they were paid more or double idk, and yes they could occupy a lot of space by swinging it around if facing opponents with short blades
@@radogost1536 Doppelsöldner were paid more, because they had important jobs like guarding the banner or an officer. They also did not need to be taller or stronger... They just needed to be really good at fighting with a greatsword.
@@TheApocalypticKnight If you have a source were they talk about greatswords running into pikes before the melee starts as an actual strategy (so not a single soldier, bcs that would unfortunately just be anecdotal) then please share the source. That would be really helpful.
"By the way, would the superior advanced weaponry such as, the late 15th century to early 16th century Renaissance, 🎨 Southern German,🇩🇪 Landsknecht mercenary great sword,🗡⚔ alongside the short sword, 🗡⚔ called,🤙the Katzbalger, used by the Southern German,🇩🇪 Landsknecht mercenaries on horseback,🏇of an English,🏴 standard thoroughbred horses,🐴 wearing Southern German,🇩🇪 Gothic plate, 🍽 armor and chainmail,🔗⛓ worn for protection, are payed,🪙 by the King,🤴 Charles the fifth of Granada, Habsburg Spain,🇪🇸 to explore,🔭 colonize christianize,💒☧ and conquer primitive stone,🪨 age ancient Mexico,🇲🇽 and Panama,🇵🇦 alongside Hernan Cortez, Pedro de Alvarado, and Bernal del Castillo, clash blades,🔪 with the inferior primitive stone,🪨 age ancient mesoamerican indigenous Mexican,🇲🇽 obsidian and flint rock,🪨 bladed,🔪 edge wooden sword,🗡⚔ club,♧ and wooden feathery shield,🛡 called,🤙 the Macuahuitl and Chimali shield,🛡 of the primitive stone,🪨 age ancient aztec jaguar,🐆 and eagle,🦅 warriors alongside the coyote,🐺 warrior priests of primitive stone,🪨 age ancient Mexico,🇲🇽 and Panama,🇵🇦 in a sword,🗡⚔ fight,🤺 on horseback,🏇of an English,🏴 standard thoroughbred horses,🐴 wearing Southern German,🇩🇪 Gothic plate, 🍽 armor and chainmail,🔗⛓ worn by the Spanish,🇪🇸 conquistadors and southern German,🇩🇪 Landsknecht mercenaries for protection from the primitive stone,🪨 age indigenous Mexican,🇲🇽 warriors, in the year of fifteen hundred twenty-one, during the age of exploration,🔭 of the new world,🗺 in the year of fifteen hundred nineteen, to the year of fifteen hundred fifty-three?"
Interesting ideas. I’ve been thinking about the battlefield application of great sword, as it’s still kind of a mystery apparently. What you said definitely makes sense. 👍🏻
doppelsöldner got payed twice as the regular mercenarys, because of mainly 2 things: they were usualy more experienced and it was often ordered specifically how many experienced mercenarys a fähnlain needed to recruit , and second their equipment was more expensive and usualy they had to pay for the equipments upkeep and transport, also they were often from lower nobility, so they would be used to have maybe a servant or such, and would employ him to care for the equipment etc,
basicly the doppelsöldners were used to train the others, and to do the majority of the actual fighting, yes it was more dangerous, but that's why they had more protective gear on them.
for some period and occasions doppelsöldners who wanted to wield the schlachtschwert had also to show a certificate that profed that they were trained in the art of fighting with a longsword or greatsword or such. also a cost factor.
they were sent to do the dangerous things basicly because they were the most likely ones to actualy survive it.
Feel like something enter in my left ears at 0:43 D:
There is absolutely no evidence that Greatswords (Schlachtenschwert in german) were used for breaking pike formations. Treaties never mention it, it is never written in any historical source of the time and even the pictoral evidence is not there. Yes greatswords are shown inside of pike formations, but not at the front of it. Also they are shown doing some independent flanking maneuver outside of formations all together.
All we really know is that it was used as a guarding weapon (guarding a banner, a person or a door/gate) as that is what most treaties focus on. These were also the Doppelsöldner you mentioned. And we also know that it was used by some soldiers, but we actually don't know why. There are payrolls of armies from these times and greatswords are listed in one fellow swoop with all pike and halberd wielders. They even got paid the same.
Therefor, the greatsword saw use with soldiers in guarding positions, then as a flanking weapon, which makes the most sense since if you aren't in a formation you actually got the space to wield it and as just another weapon in a pike square.
Fun fact: they myth that greatswords were used for breaking pike formations came up during the 19th century. At least the earliest sources were that use is mentioned is from that time that I heard of.
If I well recall, Dürer made some paintings of fighting Landsknechts and you can see in a pike-formation also one or two Greatswords fighting in the first line ...
@@fioredeiliberi9552 Cool, do you know the names or do you have links?:-)
I tried finding them, but couldn't.
Even so my argument still stands. Even if sometimes guys with a Schlachtschwert were standing in the first row, they were not in front of it running into pikes to disrupt the formation, as is claimed all the time.
Think about the space you need to effectively use a Schlachtschwert as well, as else you would only use it as a kind of hacking/poking kind of poleweapon. If they are standing in the first row they absolutely can't make any complicating swinging motions without hitting their comrades.
So I would still not really count that as a very strong counter argument.
chears
@@1Aldreth Hi Aldreth, search on google with this words: „Die Schlacht von Therouanne“ and you will find one example. I am now waiting to receive my great sword (n. 8) from Regenyei and then I will tell you ;-))
@@fioredeiliberi9552 Thank you, very nice woodcut. And indeed the first art I've seen that depicted.
Have fun with your new sword. :-)
@@1Aldreth Hans Holbein, push of pike
Glad I found you, gave it a share.
Very good point about them not using the oberhaus. I think most of that ideology comes from the Portuguese manuals, and probably didn’t really apply much to the larger Landsknecht weapons.
I think you are mostly right. Except that crushing a Pike or any pole arm is almost impossible, even with a Zweihänder striking from above. You would need to hit the same spot multiple times, which is not possible when a row of Pikes is stabbing at you. I think some TH-camrs and historians have already demonstrated that. So what the strike does is create a gap, without destroying the Pikes. And gaps is all you need for the regular Haufen to get into close combat with the enemy Haufen.
Surprised to see that Greek people are interested in weapons such as the zweihander, nice video man keep going (:
That uniform looks _supremely_ comfy.
Superb demonstration👍👍👍
Your explaination of the Technique makes logical sense, thank you for the interessting video. 👍
Yoooo that sword "ring" tho. It even SOUNDS cool
Half-swording DOES grant more control though and allows a shorter/smaller swing distance that way you're not somehow hitting your own men.
Right? It also gives way bigger leverage by wider hand positioning and slightly backs mass of the weapon towards the user. If they never grabbed their swords by this part there would be no reason for them to be blunt and often covered in leather.
I always wondered why the Zweihander was deployed against Pikes - now I see why. Great presentation!
Half-swording is more realistic, with a giant greatsword. Especially against spears and halberds, and or warpikes.
weight of Zweihänder: 3.5 kg. it only works with spinning attacks. no joke.
Most videos of this kind seem to do their analysis based on single combat. I understand why, because the reenactors and hema guys have most experience with one-on-one training and sparring,
but I think you must analyze how this sword was used, as a part of a team.
I don't think even a doppelsöldner would charge alone against a tight pike formation. There has to be some more effective way to do it as a team.
Maybe they worked in pairs with one swordsman striking down the tip of the enemy pikes to the ground and his partner stabbing at the momentarily defensless pikemen.
The odd shape of the flamberg sword may be a way of controling polearm.
Good points - teamwork would have been vital. Elite, well trained, experienced men working together.
Finally i find someone else who points it out. I hate when guys like Skallgrim do a duell with a sword against a guy with a pike and just goof around and then say that swords are useless on the battlefield. Yeah say that to the Knight who would slice you and 4 other guys at once.
I know I'm late the commenting party but it seems to me that if I had a lot of great swordsmen with me, I'd lock my pikes with thee enemy formation, get them nice and engaged and then send the two-handers at the flanks; almost like the old Zulu 'horns of the bull' maneuver.
You're not going to attack a pikeman's weapon dude. Due to the sheer length and mass distribution you'd bump it aside a few inches and go sailing into a sea of neighboring pikes like a fool. Greatswords are not designed to fight pikes themselves, the only solution to pikes is to parry and push in to the body of the formation and attack the monkey at the end of the stick.
You strike the pikes hard to move them aside and then you strike the soldiers holding them. Also, spears cannot penetrate plate armour, so the odds aren't too bad for the Landsknecht swordsman.
@@TheApocalypticKnight i have Heard that Great sword were mostly used to Protect the flag .
@@TheApocalypticKnight Best scenario you end up striking the pike in a way that breaks the head off leaving the pikeman with a broken piece of wood.
Well, greatswords were historically used by the Landsknechts to break into the opponent's pike formations so it somehow must have worked, otherwise, they wouldn't have been used for it. If somebody did it like you described he would have the same issue of getting in trouble with the neighboring pikes. Also, he would now be in close combat which is not what a heavy slow and long-ranged sword is made for. Instead, I think the greatsword took more of a supporting role in a battle. A doppelsöldner would advance before his fellow pikemen and clear away the enemy pikes in heavy horizontal swings. This would disrupt the enemy formation and allow the own pikemen to attack with a clear advantage. Of course, being the first one to attack isn't quite the safest thing to do, which is the reason why the doppelsöldner were paid the double amount of money.
They did use great swords to attack pikes, it was an awful strategy, it failed and the Swiss army won because they were using proper tactics.
Συμφωνώ με αρκετά σημεία της προσέγγισης σου στο θέμα.Είναι ωραία να βλέπεις συμπατριώτες να ασχολούνται με τέτοιας φύσεως ιστορικά θέματα,μπαίνοντας στη διαδικασία να ντυθούν ανάλογα και να κρατήσουν τέτοια όπλα(έστω και αν είναι ρεπλικες),παραθέτοντας την άποψή τους.Στους διάφορους κακεντρεχείς αντιρρησίες μην δίνεις σημασία...:-)
Söldner means mercenary. Söldner comes from the word _Sold_ , which means pay. So a _Doppelsöldner_ is nothing more than a double mercenary.
Main reason you're hitting ground with unterhau is that you have your elbows bended. Try with straight arms and elbows and you'll see much difference.
Great video! Thank you for your effort and research! Nice sword
The LandsKnechts had that drip!
did you ever stand in a pike wall in reenactment?
the pike is a primary weapon and basicly the goal of pike vs pike is, to make the other side give up thier pikes first by threatening them somehow , becaus eas soon as they lost their piked they are unprotected agianst your pikes, or cavalry, etc, they will loose formation and the battle,
there is no one man vs all the pikes the, greatswords are there to threaten the opposing pikemen into drawing their swords and letting go of their pikes so your pikemen can push forward
the goal is never to kill the enemy, but to make them run away, armys always have the highest losses on route, when they have no supplies and order is broken down, then the enemy is easy to pick up
pike blocks are actualy very good at staying in order, and not routing, because the men in them feel kinda protected in their formation, other dudes with pointy sticks all around, as long as the enemy is beyond the pointy sticks they feel save, but when the enemy is suddelns closer than the pikes point it becomes critical, one one hand the halbers and great swords then keep those in check,
on the on the otherhand, the schlachtschwerter were not too bad to realy threaten the pikemen into letting their pikes fall down and at least draw their swords,
Love your accent ! Greetings from Greece !
landskenchts early wore little armor, as armor was expensive to transport etc, and over time as the number of guns increased it became more and more common, because plate actualy was able to stop contemporary bullets at certain distances, from the mixed armors and just breatplates of the time around 1500 emerged relatively fast the half armor, or Knechtische Platte, Knechtischer harnisch,
which was a breat plate with either plate or chainmail neck ptotection worn seperate(bischofskragen was the mailvariant called)
tassets, shorter or longer ones , sometimes reaching to the knees, and interetingly often no arm protection
i think that the fluffy style of german doublet sleefs of the time actualy provided decent protection against cuts, the several layers of wool and linnen(and silk sometimes) would basicly fold and add to several more layers effective when hit by a blade, so there was no great need for arm ptotection
interestingly i've never seen a depiction where arms with such sleeves were cut, only depiction i've seen showed the wrist where ,there would be no protection form the layered sleeved, cut through, and the former hand owner staring in terror.
my homework will have to wait
the only way to break a pike formation are guns, windmills for Don Quijote...
We need men like you in Erengrad. There's a chaos invasion coming up.
Very comprehensive. Nice video
I did not think greatswords actually existed
A charged R2 from a zweihander would break any pike formation
Not until we have access to a time machine will we know for sure.
Wouldn't the two-handed sword infantry be mixed in with all kinds of pikemen and such in a mixed unit kind of tactic? I doubt you'd have a group of swordsman attempt to fight a group of pikemen by themselves.
Ja? (Yes?)
Bereit! (Ready!)
Auftrag? (Order?)
Jawohl! (Yes!)
Verstanden! (Understood!)
Wird erledigt! (It will be done!)
Angriff! (Attack!)
In den Kampf! (Into the fight!)
I don't see how this would work, as you indicated a beide Hände is assaulting a wall of pikes. Pike men are in serried ranks so there another blade about a half meter behind the first blade and so on and so on. Assuming that pike men can thrust their pike more than a half meter, the
beide Hände is in a world of shit, he'd be hard pressed to defend himself let alone go on the attack
The long battle swords where used to protect the regimental colors and the officers. And they where used to block a road in a town. One against many. They where never used to penetrate pike formations because it does not work. That would be suicidal. That is just a myth coming up by miss interpretation from Victorian times.
Γεια σου Γιανναρα! Τελεια τα ειπες!
I have a landsknecht greatsword which has leather guard above the crossguard up to the spikes on the blade below the flamberge. I think it was indeed used halfsworded.
Interesting thougths. I will say though, having gone up against pikes myself, there is no way zweihanders beats pikes head on. Yes armour vil do some work, but that wall of pikes will poke any man to death in the long run, their reach is just to good when massed in numbers
My left ear feels weird.
gia sou gianni :) thanks for all :)
I figured they all roll-stabbed like in Elden Ring pvp.
This weapon is ridiculous. I can only imagine what it is like to stand in a tight formation with a bunch of dudes having the same beast. How did they avoid decapitating each other?! I get the idea of mowing pikemen with its long blade, but how did they get as a group close to the enemy with such long weapons? Also, does it really cut a pike with a single hit - I though that the poles were quite thick and not so easy to snap.
you wouldnt really fight in formation with a zweihander, it was dedicated to very specifically trained troops
2:00 MEOW!
Great video!
Damn, I can still remember how you wrote me years ago that you wanted an excuse to wear the slashed Landsknecht style attire. Congratulations!
I wonder how it feels. I´m a big fan of wide shirts for summer. I´m particularly interested in this context about how the two textiles work together. The main jacket is usually made from a tougher, heavier weave, or leather and the inserts in the slashes are usually a finer weave. This means that the jacket itself should stop the wind, but the slashes let air in and out.
As a side-note: AFAIK, this style developed from looting. What do you do, when you got a fancy doublette/jacket that doesn´t fit you? Their answer was to slash it and extend it with a different fabric, allowing the otherwise tougher material to extend. Later, it became a fashion statement and IMHO some look really nice. In the modern world, I really miss individuality, more patterns and being a bit more colorful.
I highly doubt that's how the style developed, that is how the folktale goes of its origin however. But you'll notice that smaller incisions were common detailing on clothing for centuries. So it was probably a natural progression of the extreme. Picture 70's flares to 80's parachute pants.
@@dr.lexwinter8604 It´s a theory and it does make sense. I had something similar done to my trousers, though they were meant to look like normal, off the shelf, despite being adjusted in length and width.
That´s actually one reason, why I honestly hate modern Western clothing. Everything is so tight (especially when sitting, or when you actually use your full range of motion) and when you´re taller than others nothing fits and if you gain a little weight or muscle mass, then all you bought can be trashed or costly readjusted...
It's a fun thing to wear actually. Bystanders particularly thought so. 🙂
@@edi9892 no, it really doesn't. Ruining the integrity of your clothing, especially when it's made bespoke, is dumb. Cutting up your clothes today is fine because you A.) don't expect two outfits to last you several years and B.) you can get more. Also, it's an Italian style that spread north. You see it in Italian paintings from about the 1480s onward.
Doppelsöldner = double mercenary.
A Söldner is somebody who gets paid (Sold) to fight. So, one who is paid Sold is a Söldner.
btw where are you from? it's awesome to see that there are freaks like us even outside of Germany haha.
I'm from Greece, but I've got 3 half-German daughters.
@@TheApocalypticKnight beautiful. keep it up, Sir!
Any chance for a link to where I can buy one?
The sword?
facebook.com/groups/202906700459029/
@@TheApocalypticKnight yes
@@derPaul76 thank you!
I want one how much ? And we’re can I buy ?
People probably dont like to hear that, but this sword can only be used effective with SPINNING attacks and FLASHY moves. Yep i know what the "experts" who watched skallagrim will say now. but it´s true. you have to swing it in a way that allows you to use the momentum to keep your strikes being fluent. Look it up how to fight with a Zweihänder/Montante. It almost never stops to spin and twirl.
The videos that show those continuous flourishes are mostly talking about the greatsword in a bodyguard role, fending off multiple attackers until help arrives.
None of them are about battlefield use versus pike formations.
@@MansMan42069 it´s not smart to fight an army of pikes with shorter weapons.
@@pard2397 That wasn't my point though...
Hi, thanks for the video. Can I ask you where did you got the sword?
@4:26 unless of course one is left handed.
Man, long blades are so sexy af XD
You legit look like the engraving of landsknechts lol
How did they carry their greatsword? Didn't they wear helmets?
Many only wore cloth hats. Some of them also had iron caps underneath their cloth hats. Both wouldn't hinder the Zweihänder.
Were greatswords ever used against bayonets?
I believe - they could. That may have happened when the era of cold weapons crossed with the era of firearms. Not sure if first firearms adopted by military had bayonets tho
@@CapitanAP : I don' t think, that this happened. The bayonnets , which appeared in 1640s, had been long daggers with a conic round handle, to put it into the muskets muzzle ( up to very early 18. century). In early time of 1618 to 1648 ,30 Years War' the last Bidenhänder had been used for a short time.
Is this a battle ready sharp sword? Can you tell what brand its from?
This is how I cut my lawn,
I respectfully disagree on some minor points:
1) You can chop through pretty much any replica spear with any decent cutting blade, even a 30cm Kukri, but that doesn´t mean that you can do it to a spearman in combat.
a) modern wood is often of deplorable quality due to oven drying
b) You won´t get a nice perpendicular hit for the most part and many spearheads are reinforced with metal langets.
c) It´s not the same as hitting a broomstick in a vice. Pikes are long and wobbly and even stouter polearms will be knocked aside on impact diminishing the cutting potential.
2) Pikes are not meant to engage individual targets. You can´t thrust with a 5m long spear. You put one end on the floor and try to align the other end with an incoming enemy, mostly horseman. If you miss the enemy, there will be two to three rows behind you that have pikes filling the gaps in your defence. Now, when someone with a greatsword or poleaxe swipes them aside, you guys are in trouble! Your best chance is to drop your pike and engage him with your sword. In order to prevent this problem, many pike formations had spears and halberds mixed in that could engage anyone brave enough to step in range. AFAIK, they were often in the second row and in the flanks. The latter were often also protected with greatswords themselves.
3) here comes the half-swording issue: if you were a doppelsöldner, would your really drop your main weapon and give up on that hard-hitting, intimidating beast that gives you a significant advantage over any sword? Moreover, most Kazbalgers were cheap weapons made of poor quality steels. Thus, many of them didn´t even have a thrusting point as the tip would bend on the first stab! I´m sure you wouldn´t want to go up with that puny sword against an angry halberdier...
Long story short, before you drop your greatsword, you rather start halfswording until you get the distance needed to swing it again. I agree however that thrusting with a greatsword is a dumb idea. Most greatswords had a flat lenticular or hexagonal crosssection, which in combination with their long blades made for very poor thrusters. That´s why most of them had no decent thrusting point! The only exception I can think of are Danish greatswords (Albion swords got a nice reproduction of one).
Maybe in confined spaces draw- and push cuts were used to some extent, but in the grand scheme those weapons were only meant for big sweeps at unarmored targets (arms, legs)
As a side-note: Flammberge were probably designed to cut deeper into wooden poles as their blade profile prevents them from glancing off. They were moreover a status-symbol hard to forge and sharpen and they were excellent weapons for bodyguards (a poleaxe would be better against armour, but in a more civilian context such a sword would be the far superior choice as it could cut through multiple opponents in one swing).
Breaking a spear is not easy, but an oberhau with a massive sharp sword may pin it to the ground and break it. If it doesn't break it may be damaged enough to break later on in the battle. Spear shafts broke in battles even without being struck by swords. However, you don't really need to break it. Dashing it aside is enough to get past the point, and then the pikemen are almost helpless.
By the way you're Swiss if I remember correctly? Check out the Battle of Sempach for this theory in effect.
@@TheApocalypticKnight No, but close enough. I'm Austrian and I currently live in Switzerland.
Well Sempach was Austrians vs Swiss, so it's all about your folk, either way. 🙂
you CAN't cut a frickin oak or ashwood pike while someone is holding it up
hell
Μπρο αυτός που κρατάει την κάμερα ακουμπάει το μικρόφωνο συνέχεια
It makes a lot of sense to me. Get in clos fast, and then use wide seeping blows to lay your enemy's low quickly without the risk of getting your sword stuck in an opponent.
funny costume
very unlundsknechty but i guess you are more about the fighting than the clothes :D
Amazing, just Amazing (you wield that sword like a seasoned pro my man!)👍👍 At times, back in the late 1400s-mid 1500s, Broadsword armed Scottish Highland Redshanks & Irish Gallowglass axmen, mercenaries all, would accompany the Zweihander Doppelsoldners into opposing formations bristling with deadly sharp pikes, seeking to fiercely yet skillfully chop away & break up such super disciplined & formidable pike squares, all that horizontal, pointy deathiness😳😳😜😜😜😊👍 What undaunted bravery, what ferocious resoluteness, what exceptional dexterity, what reckless suicidal abandon, what fearsome battlefield prowess, what madness👍👍 Indeed the Samurai of Western Europe, or the rough W. European equivalent of that Japanese warrior breed thereof (the Irish Gallowglass, Scottish Highlanders & the German Landsknecht Doppelsoldner crazies!)!
Now call me crazy, and I have yet to experiment with a Bihander of my own, but perhaps the philosophy around the greatsword is that one can use it like a pointy quarterstaff/spear with sharp edges, while being able to switch to sword-mode when he wants? Because the renaissance was dominated by pikes, a bihander could be used like a pike---half swording with a greatsword gives you the reach of a spear against longswords, renaissance daggers, and halberds. Yes, it was definitely designed as a battlefield weapon, but can still be effective in Italian alleys for most one vs one, or even one bihander vs many pikes. Having a weapon that you can poke with reach AND swing with is a huge advantage.
As Lindybeige has proven: spears beat swords, but now you got a sword that is practically a spear and bigger than any other sword. I think a greatsword should be as tall or 6 inches taller than the user to get the most use out of it. But I haven't a clue, just conjecturing.
it was a figure of 8 and they did it . Jeez...
Command Structure of Landsknecht mercenary army regiments.
Some additional information on the Landsknecht soldiers and how they were organized, might serve to provide some insight. It appears as though the mercenary regiments of Landsknechts had three to four thousand men in each. And they would muster for a period of three to six months. How the economics of this operated, was the Landsknechts soldier had a capacity to earn twice the amount of money per month, as the highest paid worker of that period. Which was a skilled craftsman. Somebody like a stone mason. In other words, the Landsknechts could earn in six months of fighting, what a highly paid tradesman could earn in one whole year of working. Enlisted soldiers would swear an oath to a Colonel of their regiment. Order of ranks looked something like this. The main regiment was sub-divided into companies of four to five hundred men. Approximately six to ten companies per regiment. Companies being referred to as Fahnlein, that were each commanded by a captain. Who reported both to the overall Colonel and to a Lieutenant Colonel.
Now, as I explained in some of the other sequences of comments. A lot of focus seems to be placed, on how these 'large formations' of soldiers could be organized in these squares, using the pikes in larger numbers. And as the sixteenth century went on. The number of pikes graduated decreased within each 'company' in the Landsknechts regiments. Until it was mainly fire arms and only around a third of pike men (bearing in mind, that each Landsknechts mercenary soldier had been obliged to equip themselves). In other words, not every Landsknechts soldier could have afforded to buy armour and large swords. That was reserved for the experienced and skilled Doppelsoldner. The point that I would emphasize however. It was the ability of these regiments to fragment and reform themselves with great discipline into smaller or larger groups. At different times in the battle. Which probably was the major value that they provided to the armies that they worked for. And that is why I think that we ought to pay this much attention to the command structure of the Landsknechts regiments (and the part to play of the Doppelsoldner in that overall company). And in turn, the part to play of the regiment of Landsknechts under the command of it's Colonel, in the context of a whole wider army force.
From what I can establish, inside of each Fahnlein or company of soldiers, you are looking at a fifth of the soldiers in the company being the Doppelsoldner, or double paid mercenary. In other words, these Doppelsoldner capable of earning 'four times' per month, what the highest paid craftsman of that period would have earned. In a six months long campaign of war, it would be possible to earn 'two years' worth of income for a highly skilled craftsman. The drawback being, that each of these Doppelsoldner had to provide their own equipment of long swords or long guns. And importantly, the Doppelsoldner would also need to purchase and provide their own metal armour. None of this was offered to them, by their regiment. In the case of the lesser paid Landsknechts soldiers, they would also need to provide their own pikes and whatever else. Or if not able to provide them, would obtain a financial loan in order to acquire them. Then you get right down to a level of platoons or 'rotten'. Six to ten men in each. That is, the overall captain of the Fahnlein could have fifty or more 'rottenmeister' soldiers reporting to it. And the six to ten captains of each company. They would in turn report up to the overall regiment command.
What I did find interesting too, was that their happened to be a traveling circus of merchants and traders who seemed to follow around these regiments of Landsknecht soldiers. Probably providing 'credit' to the mercenary soldiers in order to purchased goods and services. As the whole regiment would travel to far flung places around the continent in search of employment and battles in which to wage war. The purpose of a Colonel command level in a Landsknechts regiment, was to communicate with the 'war lord' or regal. Whoever had deep enough pockets in order to pay the regiment over a season of three to six months duration approximately. In other words, it would be the task of the Landsknechts Regiment Colonel in the course of the battle. To pass its command orders from the war load, down a chain into their captain level of command. Who would in turn pass that message down as needed. Down to the level of the rottenmeister level (who more than likely, was also a Doppelsoldner himself), in order to re-deploy and organize each of the platoons as necessary. Each Colonel within each Landsknechts regiment of Landsknechts three to four thousand soldiers (of which a fifth might be composed of Doppelsoldner). Would need to report up to overall military command. And an army controlled by a king or 'war lord', might hire more than one regiments of Landsknechts. Who had to learn how to integrate themselves into the overall battle strategy for that overall 'war lord'.
What I do want to indicate is that is an extremely sophisticated system of command and communication. As far as the fifteenth or sixteenth centuries goes at least. I mean, even in the nineteenth century on battle fields with thousands of soldiers fighting on them. In the last days of this kind of infantry soldier war fare. That was seen during the American civil war period. The chain of command was extremely important. The major casualty within the Confederate army of northern Virginia in July of 1863, was actually that same command structure. That could never be replaced again. Many of the colonels, captains and platoon leaders (and even generals), were victims of the three day battle of Gettysburg. And from that point onward, the army was greatly constricted in what it could achieve. Owing to the loss of that command structure. One can replace individual soldiers. However, the loss of officer at all levels after a battle is pretty much fatal. That is what the Landsknechts regiments really seem to have been selling. A very much bullet proof system of command and control, used to organize these battle units, that could be joined together to make a 'square' of as large as three to four thousand soldiers. All of whom had different tasks to do.
A peasant with a dagger would've stabbed their throat a hundred times before that swing reached them.
i love this sword, ah glorious days in dark souls 😂😂
Try the one handed Conan style. You won't be able to change direction quickly but it would be a way to do that windmill style without hitting the ground.
Some other things about a 'Spanish Square' of interest.
Yiannis, there are some interesting contemporaneous illustrations, that show what a 'Spanish Square' actually looked like, when it was formed together on a battle field. I think you will agree that what it looks like is the equivalent of a 'super weapon' in it's size, scale and ferocity. The illustration that did interest me though, was the one that shows a 'floor plan' basically of what a 'Spanish Square' looked like. Where you have the twelve hundred pike men on the inner square. Those are surrounded on all four sides, by the fourteen hundred musket soldiers. And on each corner of the square, you have got the 'long guns'. It looks very like a Medieval 'stone' made defensive fortification. In the same way, as those battlements were constructed further out than the walls of a castle. In order to provide a light of sight for snipers, down along the length of exposed defensive stone walls. What I also noticed, is that the 'Spanish Square' did use sound as a weapon too. They protected around twenty drum players or musical band players. Inside in the middle of the twelve hundred pike soldiers. In other words, each 'Spanish Square' had it's own battle drum, when it was deployed in battle. And I presume that was an invention too. Which enabled the soldiers organized around this 'Spanish Square' to figure out where the 'centre point' of these square organization was. As they presumably moved from location to location, during the battle.
In other words, when we do take all of those sub-companies made up of 'thirty' men in each approximately. We can utilize that entire formation of almost 'three thousand' mercenary soldiers if we want to. Or any size of formation of 'Spanish Square' that you want to utilize. And you can then create this very large offensive looking 'super weapon' in the middle of a battle field. That is virtually like a large moving 'castle' structure. It is strong defensively. Where it utilized the 'long sword' or the long gun technology on the exposed corners of the structure. And it had men with muskets who were firing in all directions along the walls. And men that had pikes in the middle, in case anything broke through.
Now, you try to imagine how this large moving defensive castle, these 'Spanish Squares' would have been used on a battle field. And what you realize, is that if this thing with the men banging those large drums on the inside of it. If it decided to 'move' anywhere it wanted to move on a battle field. There is not much that you could do to stop it. Because as an infantry formation, it would basically flatten and push out of the way. All before it. The drums at the centre would dictate the pace of advance, and the whole periphery would organize themselves spatially, in relation to the audio signal given by the drum players at the centre. As they moved themselves gradually across the battle field.
I think that is what might have been meant by that German meaning of 'Landsknecht' too. Basically, a formation of pikes, muskets, long guns (or long swords), and the beating drums at the centre. That could be used to create a large gaping wide hole in the opposite lines of the enemy. Through which, the more conventional soldiers could also be capable of rushing through, and dividing the opposing army into two parts. Which would be a bad, bad outcome. From the opposing army's point of view.
However, I keep getting back to the same point. This 'Spanish Square' formation, as large and as formidable as it looks. It was not useful, except at critical moments during the course of battle. For the other times during the battle, you did not want to have this large 'Spanish Square' formation at all. For other times, it would be far more valuable to the army that hires the Spanish or the German mercenary soldiers. To have them re-deployed in much smaller numbers. At various points around the battle field. With the option then, if necessary. If the right opportunity did present itself. To re-deploy and re-organize the resource of the 'Tercio' into a large, and formidable unit like this. That could be used to flatten everything in front of it. To administer this 'knock out' blow to the opposition.
Looking at the historical side of it, as opposed to military side.
I have read all of the conversation underneath, about the various campaigns, battles, armies and monarchs that were present in Europe at the time of the Landsknecht soldiers. However, if we were to view the historical military side of it, in the broad strokes. We are looking at an evolution in the use of mercenary soldiers on the battle fields (across a lot of battles, a lot of different theatres and a lot of different wars spaced over decades and centuries). We are talking about the Swiss pike men mercenary armies, who were hired by French in order to fight wars. Later on, when the German monarchs were married into French ones. They created their own professional Landsknecht units in various ways. In order to defend titles and land against the French enemies who were hiring the pike men from Switzerland. And latest of all, at the time of the 'Holy Roman Empire', one is looking at mercenary armies that were trained all the ways over in Spain.
From what I can identify, the German mercenaries were raised in order to provide a solution to the use of the Swiss mercenaries units, that were hired out to the French armies. And the Spanish units, the 'Tercio' were trained in order to be hired out to the Dutch empire at various times too. And at each stage, we have the creation of their elite soldiers. One that is improving on the techniques and tactics of the previous one. In other words, this Archduke von Habsburg character. He seems to have wanted to create an equivalent German speaking soldier, that could compete against the Swiss professional soldier. In other words, he had learned from the Swiss. And the Spanish in turn, had developed things even further. And it is mainly on that Spanish 'Tercio' formation, that I think we should focus. Because they seem to have taken things to the ultimate point of it's evolution, although never in the large numbers of Landsknecht soldiers that were available.
The question I asked, at the bottom of the series of comments underneath. Is what was the Landsknechte fighting force, most efficient at doing?
There does appear to have been a period during which Landsknechte were being put together. They were still trying to figure out the basics. There seems to be a period during which Landsknechte were at their zenith point. And there seems to have been a period during which Landsknechte existed and were involved in much fighting. However, there were other mercenary type soldiers also around at that stage. Some of whom had advanced even further in tactics and skills, than the Landsknechte. There was a siege battle in 1502, where the Landsknechte participated in one of their many campaigns. Where they were hired to the Danish throne, in order to defend against the Swedish. Even though a number ten times as large of Swedish farmers had attacked, the battle had ended in massive catastrophic defeat for the Swedes against the German mercenary army. Who were only present in a very smaller number, but somehow they had managed to completely dominate in the battle. This seems to have marked one of the higher points for the Landsknechte. And what I would wish to point out, is the kind of opposition against which this German mercenary soldier seems to have been most deadly against. That is, non-professionally trained soldiers of invading armies. It would have seemed to the Swedish that with such a disproportionate advantage of numbers, that victory would have been assured. However, that was to prove otherwise. What it also proved to Archduke von Habsburg and such folk. Was the value of their investment in creating that professional army. That could be used to such a great advantage.
In order to 'book end' that high point apparently of how the Landsknechte soldiers could be effectively integrated into other armies throughout the continent of Europe. In what does appear to have been a time during the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries of large amounts of fighting going on. It is important I would argue to look at this advanced 'Terico' fighting mercenary system, that seems to have evolved towards the end of this Medieval fighting age. I would offer the following description of how 'small' units of 'Terico' from Spain were utilized on the battle fields. And I would also like to point out, how small in size we are talking here. For example, there was a deployment of Spanish 'Terico' mercenary soldiers that could only consist of thirty soldiers. Obviously, these were a resource that could be employed for very certain missions. Missions that formed part of a much larger strategy in terms of battle. And that is what I had wished to explained in the other sequence of comments that I had offered. We will assume for sake of argument, that our Spanish 'Tercio' soldiers had in turn constructed their tactics. On top of the tactics, which had already proven themselves. Whilst in use, by the Landsknechte soldiers or the Swiss Pike soldier units earlier. I am assuming therefore. The following description about the 'Tercio' system, bears some resemblance to what had happened before, in how the Landsknechte soldiers had operated.
Very interesting video, I agree with you that this is how these weapons were used in battle. At least from what I can tell logically.
I've seen other people demonstrate how these Great Zweihanders were used, and they show some crazy "helicopter-like" moves. Not saying these are wrong, but how are you ever going to do that while fighting in a formation? I just can't imagine someone spinning around a great sword in all directions while in the middle of a battle formation, maybe in situations where you were alone and had a lot of space it's effective?
The "helicopter" moves you have seen were most likely for crowd control in an entirely different situation, bodyguards often had halberds or Bidenhanders and were supposed to delay an attacking mob so the important person could flee. the "helicopter" moves make sure you protect yourself as the bodyguard, no angle is open to attack, you offend everyone and no one is willing to take the hit. One of these bodyguards fighting like this could block an entire street/alley by doing this. it's not for fighting on the battlefield or in formation at all, just letting you know! I hope it's useful to you
@@uoranosaurus That makes a lot of sense. Thanks for the reply man
Katzbalgers didn't have points generally. Cool video, though.
Probably just a fancy backup weapon
On a different note I wish to buy your outfit
what what?wtf's your name dude? yanispokaziaris...what?!
φιλε εισαι ελληνας ειμαι περηφανος για σενα
the Landsknecht hahahaha
🙂👍
Deutsche Qualität
Orea stoli re file.
Its weird though. A halberd is cheaper and you don't run the same risk of swinging it into friendlies. It seems unweildy and expensive.
idk most landsknecht doppelsöldners were of minor nobility like sons of knights or such,
we could check how the average for upper class hight was back then
but also i guess that doppelsöldners probably were above average for their time,
but that's a minor thing
the real thing it that oyu got there a rather late greatsword,
first half 16th century and especialy early 16th century you see the greatswords often were a bit shorter in relation to the bearers than we see later on, so i guess that rather 1, 40-1,50 was the norm for those swords, problem with surviving swords is that we don't know if those are repreentative of their time, or if especialy large ones survived or such.
from drawing i would tend to day they often were a on the shorter side of great swords,
which might make it possible to perform undercuts
on the other side unterhaue are not realy that powerful , and there are a lot of pikes, and people pressing them down,
i doubt that you could realy make much use of the swords that way
but we see in some paintings and drawings that schlachtschwerter were used in flanking maneuvers and then were used with oberhau and vom tag, to hit where the opponent formation had less well armored fighters.
also i would suggest the schlachtschwerter were used to cover the range between halberd and katzbalger so there was no large gab where no arms could be effektive,
later this was seemingly dropped, and small firearms, became more common, idk i guess there was a difference in general battlefield tactic between early and late 16th century
There is a lot of misguided thinking going on here I think. I think we need to turn this thinking all on it's head. What one really needs to do, is to think about the ebb and the flow of an armed and violent engagement. In fact, think about the way that the German soccer team play soccer against opposing teams. Even to this day.
The only way that you have have those 'dangerous' German midfield players work efficiently on a football field. And connecting with those dangerous striker players up front, who had the finishing touches. The only way that you can do that, is if you can rely on your 'back four'. And what is the real task of the 'back four'? In soccer. It is the defend a major amount of ground that makes up your own half of the football field. So players who tend to be good defensive players, may not be 'reliable' in terms of finishing off movements or sequences of play. However, they can be relied upon. In order to 'break down' opposing attacks that can come from many different angles. From the opposing team in a sport like soccer. If you don't have a really strong 'back four' however (and maybe a dynamic central defender, or defensive mid field player that helps out that 'back four', acting as a contingency player in times of greatest pressure). Then, it will gradually feed into the under confidence of your more 'attack' oriented players. Those are your attacking mid field players, and your strikers.
When your attacking mid field players, or your finishing strikers. When they begin to detect that if they do move forward and they attack. There is a chance that your 'back four' will not defend against counter blows into your half of the field. Then your offensive players begin to lose confidence in themselves. Because any effort they make to win goals for the team. Could be paid for, so to speak. Back at their own end of the field. When the opposing team counter attacks and your 'defensive' formation gets exposed. Getting ripped to shreds. And some attacking element of the opposing team, can get as far as your general in command, and inflict injury on that end. So it is very important in violent and armed engagement to think about battles like we generally think about team sports nowadays. There is an ebb and a flow to it. There is a physical element and a psychological element to these battles. And they aren't won or lost, over five minute engagements. They are won and lost over hours of effort. It is very possible to predict that a side that had won everything in the first half, would then get wiped out in the second half. Of a battle.
If your attack minded soldiers, are not of a mind that they can rely on some defensive 'third' or 'fourth' line, to the rear of them. To protect their half of the playing field so to speak. Then, your attack oriented and attack minded players, are just going to 'camp' out in your own half of the field. And that leads to a situation in a battle which is extremely dangerous. Because while you are 'sitting there'. You are not conceding much back to the opposing fighting force. You are not able to seize any advantage either. And that is dangerous. It is like that situation in a football match, where you can go one goal ahead. And then gamble it, by sitting on the lead until the clock runs out. It is important to think of battle in terms of waves of movement, in both directions. And in terms of personalities on either side, that are talented in terms of defensive minded tactics. Or in terms of offensive formations and strategies. Because, human beings do vary along those lines. And then there are the soldiers who are composite. They can be relied upon to assist in terms of defense, so that your 'back four' doesn't get overwhelmed. But have enough offensive skills too, that they can push up from the rear. And turn the defensive tactic into an offensive maneuver.
For some reason however, when we think of medieval battles. For some reason, we throw all of the obvious logic about 'team sports' out of the window. And we don't really understand what these things mean. Why do we have 'front' line troops? Why is there a 'second' or a 'third' line. Or a fourth and a fifth? What we forget, is that all lines are important. It is a 'not' a pecking order. What we forget, is that in any group of kids in any school yard playing with a football. There will be some who are oriented more towards offensive strategy, and some who are not. It is in their individual 'make up', and it cannot be thought or trained. It is the function of the 'manager' so to speak. To identify these characteristic traits and exploit them. That is why there is enormous attention paid in military pursuit, to a 'line of command' that extends from army level, right back down to individual unit level. And all stages in between. It is not just individuals. Some 'units' of soldiers, will be identified by command at certain levels in the whole army. As being more or less attack oriented. This kind of thinking is happening at different levels in an army.
I don't want to confuse it, by going too far up in scale. I mean, looking at it just in terms of a unit of a hundred soldiers, who are fighting that in the opposing army. At some part of the whole battlefield, in the duration of a battle. Even at that level of a hundred men on either side. There could be a huge amount of 'ebb and flow' of battle. A huge number of attacks and counter attacks going on, over the course of the entire engagement. What I am talking about. Is that the formation of your own, first, second and third lines of troops is going to fragment and become disorganized much quicker than you think. In that situation, optimal efficiency is obtained by re-grouping. And in the action of re-grouping. What used to be the 'fourth' line of soldiers, for a temporary amount of time. It now has to stand and become a 'front' line. So that the other lines can fall back and re-organize themselves. Why is that constant re-organization necessary? It doesn't happen like we see in Hollywood movies. Where soldiers meet in the middle and keep on swinging at each other, until everyone is knocked down. If they fought like that in the Medieval Times, then the Kings would get no men to fight at all. Because, there would be 'famine' across Europe, as no men would exist to plough the land and sow the crops. Everyone would starve simply owing to a scarcity of labour force, and fighting battles would be the last thing on anyone's mind.
AND THE WINGED HUSSAR ARRIVED ...
IN GDAŃSK UPRISING FEW HUNDRED OF POLISH HUSARIA BUTCHER FEW THOUSAND OF LANDSKNECHT LOL
What if those swordsman were the last remaining tartarian giant mercenaries & that is why the swords are realy that big🧐🇬🇧
Έλληνας?
Least horrendously dressed landsknecht: