The Shocking Mass Burial Of Britain's Bloodiest Battle | Blood Red Roses | Chronicle
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 15 ก.ย. 2024
- The Battle of Towton in North Yorkshire, fought during the Wars of the Roses, was reputedly the bloodiest battle ever seen on English soil. In 1996, a mass grave of soldiers was discovered there by a farmer. This was the catalyst for a groundbreaking research project, which included a study of the skeletal remains, the battlefield itself contemporary arms and armour. Join these archaeologists as they discover the true history behind this remarkable event and develop a fascinating insight into the life of a medieval soldier.
Welcome to Chronicle; your home for all things medieval history! With documentaries covering everything from the collapse of the Roman Empire to the beginnings of the Renaissance, from Hastings to Charlemagne, we'll be exploring everything the Middle Ages have to offer.
Subscribe now so you don't miss out!
Chronicle is part of the History Hit Network. To get in touch please email owned-enquiries@littledotstudios.com.
It's like Netflix for history... 📺 Sign up to History Hit, the world's best history documentary service and get 50% off using the code 'CHRONICLE' 👉 bit.ly/3iVCZNl
![Shareปลาวาฬ ส่งท้าย SS1 พาเปียโน ขึ้น Ferrari ก่อนไปขาย แลก Nissan l [Nickynachat]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/KAknGkTNIvg/mqdefault.jpg)
In early ancient Rome, the poorer you were, the farther in the rear of the Army you served. The richer you were you moved to the front lines. I always liked this system.
I would like to see it implemented now actually.
The more of a stake holder in the outcome, the more rationale to fight. The early Usa was like that. Landowners have a stake, they are the voters. Imagine a company that instead of choosing the best person to run the company, you just picked a random person from the street? That’s today’s politics.
Harold's hauskerls filled the front ranks at Hastings.
The richer you were, the more likely you had armour.
Well that makes sense to the point that they bought their own equipment so of course the horses would be in the front etc
The amount of skill and strength that these men had during this time is inconceivable and fascinating.
Hard times breed strong men.
Yeah…..it’s currently being condemned
We see in Ukraine how web designers, lawyers, construction workers and criminals can turn into trench raiders.
Men taken our of their comfort zone, past the edge of their abilities, and then killed.
@@debbylou5729what is being condemned? Toxic masculinity?
Pretty common if you work manual labor all day, everyday. Many were probably farmers, blacksmiths, woodworkers, etc. I’m sure archers also hunted food for themselves often, so near daily practice made the bow almost an extension of themselves.
You could never imagine what hand to hand combat is like, never. At different kind of mindset and type of warfare that can't be compared to modern warfare. All I can imagine is the fear, I think you can die from fear alone. Poor souls RIP 🌹
One of my uncle fought in McCarthur's Island hopping campaigns, primarily in New Guinea and the Phillipines and they had to fight hand to hand. War is war and if you are infantry it's very brutal still. Better technology and intelligence eliminates some of the close contact but it still happens.
Not really, they dont even offer bayonet training at fort benning. I was infantry, went through OSUT Infantry school Benning 2009@@steveoconnor7069
Before age caught up to him, my husband was a bow hunter…it is a formidable weapon and instant death in the hands of a gifted archer, like him.
Sweet you sound like a cute couple
I'm a veteran of the war in Vietnam, in the years 1968-69. My best friend was killed at "Hamburger Hill", and I was seriously wounded, there. If my body were to be found and exhumed hundreds of years from now, I'm certain that it would interest scientists of that time. My wounds were extensive, and to a certain extent, would be interesting to some future scientists. They would immediately recognize the fact that my wounds would have been inflicted during war.
You served your country and suffered for it. Thank you. Very sorry about your friend. ❤🌹
Hopefully they'd find evidence of even better care than the wounded at Towton received. Glad you made it out of there, and sorry about your friend.
Bless you. I’m glad you came home.
@@foo219what care?
They refuse to teach the true horror of this place
A great video. To look at the face of a man from 500 years ago who, if you are from there, might even be an ancestor is incredible. War has always been one of brutality and the injuries to these soldiers is staggering. All we have done is to change the method, but the result is the same, the death of another person.
It was stunning to witness the reaction of the German lady when they showed her the sculpture, as if she formed a strange bond with him
I was srunned to see the re-creation of the man at the end, it really brought tears to my eyes to see that.
we are similar :)
I really hope they do isotope testing and show where the people came from originally, that would be fascinating.
Only to find out they were a bunch of down under Australian and Kiwi blokes fighting over a sheep.
All over the country. 6% of the male population was there.
I wish they'd allow DNA on royalty but the Queen would not approve, maybe Charles will. It would add a lot to science.
These men discovered in the mass grave were all the sons, brothers, husbands and farhers of families who never knew what had happened to them. They had marched off to war for their fuedal overlord, or in a company of professional archers, and never returned home - their fate or the whereabouts of their bodies was never known to their loved ones, who waited in vain for their homecoming.
How can you be so wrong when there is so much evidence otherwise. Have you moved on from picture books?
@@BiffUppercutt and you must be responsible for the burning of civilization. Or are you still calling them ‘peaceful protests’ ?
With the exception of that fearsome Swiss battle that was fought in 1444, Saint Jacob en Birs (where 1500 Swiss halberd & pikemen leveled their weapons & launched themselves fearlessly at this invading French led force of mostly mercenaries that was 30,000 strong, fighting to the last man in the brutal & bloody process yet not without inflicting savage casualties upon the French led invaders, in typical Swiss fashion!)...Towton was perhaps the fiercest, nastiest & bloodiest battle fought anywhere in Europe all throughout the 15th Century, horrifying, brutally devastating, merciless, murderously engaged & gore drenched as it was. Whole families were wiped out, as one side sought to exterminate the other (in a manner that was gruesomely & terrifyingly reminiscent of Clan vs Clan battles up in the Scottish Highlands & over in Ireland!).
Perhaps Towton was more ferocious & vicious than Saint Jacob en Birs of 17 years earlier. Savage!
Medieval warfare was certainly brutal...I wouldn't have lasted 10 minutes
All war is brutal, but from my studies civil war is particularly cruel and the rage it triggers lasts for generations.
Then vote wisely in 2024. It’s literally on the line.
Richard III was just a little boy during Towton, but over 10 years later as Duke of Gloucester, he personally paid for the exhumation of those who fought for York and had them moved to hallowed ground and reburied. He had a strong sense of loyalty to those who fought for the Yorkist cause unlike his brother, Edward. Loyalty Binds Me was his motto and he lived it well.
And the Tudors, allied with Lacastrians, defeated the Yorkists, the name from accepted royal lines (exterpated), and took power for centuries.
Twudrs? I can't spell Welsh. It's like someone spilled a bag of consenents.
And then he promptly usurped power.
I have around 20 small battle relics from Towton w COA I just procured them last week. From a dealer in York. I have procured many Roman , Saxon artifacts located in York area too
The wounds found on Richard III were brutal, or overkill, as we would say. He suffered several blows to his head. It seems he was draped over a horse and stabbed in the buttocks as well. If they treated a king like this, I can believe that others would be treated horribly as well.
Richard 3rd was thought then and now to be a child murderer, nor did he belong on his throne.
I saw this battle was between Henry VI and Edward IV. When you think about a mile it's not very long and there were 50 to 60,000 men in this battle that would take up quite a bit of space. There are probably graves all over that area.
@annm.7176 They have been difficult to find for multiple reasons, inaccurate or not enough detail about some of the battlefield etc. Time Team did on of their shows on the Battle and spells it out better than I can.
Well humans are very creative in inflicting pain and indignities.
They were not popular regents for their despicable deeds anyway.
This was an excellent Documentary!!! I enjoyed it greatly. Nicely and humanisticaly presented!!
The War of Roses was called "The Cousin's War". Like all civil wars , it was especially bloody. Edward IV lost his father and younger brother to the Lancastrians. Concentrating on revenge, Edward told his men not to take prisoners or hostages. He showed his enemies no mercy.
They raised the dragon. Give no quarter, take no prisoners. Bloodbath.
Interesting that it is mostly men that do this.
The idea that there ever was an age of "chivalry" is absurd. Mankind has always been so cruel to one another, no matter how they try to dress it up
@OneHairyGuy it is, in large part. You have to dehumanize the opposition, and if you can paint your own side as "in the right", all the better
They say the same thing about the Japanese, but they were also very brutal in war
I absolutely adore Chronicle!
This is a fantastic documentary. It shows you just barbaric Medieval warfare actually was.
Hand to hand combat still arises til this day, thats why they teach it in basic. All warfare is barbaric
@@jaime8317 Agreed.
It’s romantic to think otherwise.
War is mighty barbaric today, too...
Amazing that the bones are still there where they were buried all those years ago. Fascinating stuff.
If really 28,000 soldiers were killed in the battle of Towton, why haven't more skeletons of fallen soldiers and mass graves been found in the surroundings of the battlefield?
And they were very deep they said either didn't they? Evidently not in a wild animal area.
It can be a real lottery if bones survive.
It depends on moisture, soil PH and disturbance.
The Wars of the Roses were particularly brutal in that practically no pardon was given to any prisoners of both sides, irrespective of status. From high born to low, men were either slaughtered on the battlegrounds or, in the case of leaders of the parties, were publically executed shortly afterwards. Only the king was spared if taken prisoner, all others died horrible deaths. The age of chivalry was over by the 14th century.
The sad end of many to feed the ambitions of a few. We use words such as glory and honor to distract ourselves from the incalculable waste and stupidity. Not only were these people snuffed, so were potential descendants. Now add the plight of widows, orphans... sigh.
Oh the terror of battle that pits English archer against English archer!
You’re right. The first 10 minutes would have left the battlefield saturated with thousands of men dead and injured. A blizzard blowing in your face, facing an army of English bowman, I would have fled.
It’s very hard to imagine almost 30k people lying dead in a field. Gruesome stuff.
And now i hope most of you can see how we as humans can be to one another . We can be kind but in a flikker of a moment turn into utter beasts . It's human nature that comes into the light in this battle field and the ones raging on, in our day.
Weapons are obviously made for warfare, but it is men who weild such weapons - men who in the craze of battle go into overdrive, not merely disarming and wounding their opponents, but brutally massacring them in a rage of overkill, difficult for us to comprehend.
These men were summarily executed and laid to rest in the pit where they were killed.
Looks more like left to rot versus laid to rest from how they were basically tossed in all willy-nilly in an unorganized heap after being executed and mutilated. War is the worst, but so-called civil war bri gs out the worst dark side of human cruelty and atrocities.
Even had the one mans hands/arms been tied behind his back none of them were "innocent victims". They were all men at war. Know this is from an older documentary, but I'd be interested in seeing dna tests done on skeletal remains found from this era & possible links with descendants & if any, their location(s) in the world after over 5 almost 6 centuries now
Love the picture of the STEAM coming off of the power plants
My father always said, the grass is so green in England , from all the blood spilt
I love how the dude tasked with reconstructing #16 isn't doing the work it's the legendary Caroline Wilkinson.
she is an amazing artist in her own right
This is the Face of War. We never even found out which side he fought on…. But we can say for sure though that he was on the LOSING SIDE. What do they say ?: War doesn’t decide who is right; only who is Left.
Muito interessante. Obrigado por compartilhar.
It is war and civil war, which is the worst. Brutal, no yielding, death up close and personal. Brothers,sisters, mothers, fathers, uncles al against each other. Definitely, they knew each other.
Can we please get a documentary on the 1389 battle between the Europeans and the Turks on Kosovo Polje?
Very fascinating and interesting. Have always had and interest in military history and visiting battlefields. My favorite is Little Big Horn in Montana USA. One of only two battlefields where markers are placed where each soldier fell . Lots of digs on that site and bodies buried several times and moved. Interesting to see how they died. They even have a horse cemetery. Hope to get to England visit all the military museums and battlefields I can.
It boggles the mind how much of the public have never engaged in mortal combat, it's bloody messy miserable painful and there's never a true winner!
Let us see- every weapon had an edge- with limited exception and these were crushing weapons. So you were either cut apart, crushed body parts, or shot full of steel arrows. Yep that's Chivalrous alright.
Guns are easy mode, you get shot you die, you dont feel it. This warfare was awful imagine getting your eye slashed out surviving or having b one hacked away. It would have been unimaginably painful chaotic and bloody. And if you lived and got a infection even more so. Dying fast in battle is preferable to suffering.
One can actually say that those men who died suddenly by an arrow to the head or abdomen were the lucky ones compared to those who had been literally bludgeoned or hacked to death by swords, axes and maces.
Or survived their wounds to die later.
Wow😢😮. I ❤ gruesome history
They shouldn't have been moved from their resting place, it should have been left alone with a memorial to those who fought and died in a sad and brutal battle. The bodies could have been logged and photographed and then returned to the field where they can rest eternal.
Dash modern building development, it's a sacred and incredibly important historical site.
I feel the same way! They ought not to be digging on hallow ground!
When was this ORIGINALLY aired? I'm tired of clicking on things that say they've recently been posted...but in reality, it's a 8-10 year old video. That computer he was using was from 1999!!
Contrary to visuals on programs like this, apparently the vast majority of medieval combat archery involved sighted aimed archery. Apparently using archery like howitzers, firing high into the air to get maximum range in massed volleys was relatively rare.
It’s amazing they were able to give them a burial at all. I wonder how many injuries were post mortem? The battle would’ve raged on regardless of what they were standing on plus any horses
Very interesting. I love how the modern crime is unlocking old deaths.
'500 years ago' - actually, 37 years short of 600 years... What's the convention on rounding to the nearest hundred?
I am left wondering why do men have to fight and kill each other in history and now?
Romantic view of medieval warfare? What? Who? Ugh🤦♀️
Everyone I know, view it as viscous.
I think chivalry would be the first thing to go in a Civil War. Can you imagine fighting against men you most likely knew and fought with on other occasions. Nothing brings out the beast more than the sense of betrayal.
We are still Alive we are from the White Rose Family my 16th times Great Grandmother was Anne Plantagenet of York, and we come down through her daughter Ann St Leger she was my 15th times Great Grandmother, Anne Plantagenet of York her father was Richard Plantagenet Duke of York he was my 17th times Great Grandfather we live all the way down under Great Wild South Australian 🥇🦘🇦🇺⚜️👑⚜️🏴🇬🇧
1461 is not exactly the Middle Ages, nor would many people other than the odd poet, have had any idea of 'chivalry'. Leonardo da Vinci was already nine years old in 1461 and by that time medieval concepts of chivalric behavior would have been a thing of the past. Otherwise, a good doco.
He looks like "The Guv'nor", Lenny McLean.
I find it hard to believe sometimes that any of us are here at all, 2024
"Chivalry" in war was and will be for the most part a myth. The current Ukraine war proves that again. Wars are won by slaughtering your opponent in the most efficient way, not by being "chivalrous".
Feel sorry for all the horses that died because humans forced them to go into battle. 😙😡😡😠😠😠
The idea of no mercy as instructions to both sides, that says a lot.
Would like to see DNA testing
Me in the middle screaming " not in the face, not in the face"!! While filling my trousers .😢😂😅😢😊
'Blazing Saddles.' Dom Deluise.
I don't know who reads these comments, but can you imagine these guys? They're Warriors!! You're messing with their bones, their peace. I bet it is a really paranormal room where all the bones are; if not, it should be!
When the metal detector guy talked about finding personal items from the battle and realizing that they were so tied to an individual I thought of the parts of a Spitfire found on a hillside in Scotland. The throttle quadrant of the Spit was discovered at the site of the crash. The last hand that operated that throttle was the hand of my Uncle Phil who I never got to know. I am named after him and that struck me harder than I would ever have imagined especially as I am a veteran myself. Also, his war medals which he never got to receive were sold at auction and lost to me forever as the auction house were unwilling to reveal who had purchased them so that i could have possibly returned them to our family. War is such a destructive and sad thing for whatever reason. The greatest anti -war people I know are all veterans like myself I think.
That battle hammer or whatever you call it look like it could’ve Pierce to helmet pretty easily
What about the horses, skeletons…Edward would not be walking with his men..they would have been ridden, find the horses…want to see their wounds…no quarter given…all medieval war was terrible..always hand to hand,..brutal…
The scull with the cut marks above his ear could have been the result of ‘collecting’ ears to show how many of the enemy a swordsman had killed.
It was done in Viet Nam, the left ears were collected.
Very interesting. Do you also check DNA to see where his descendants are if any?
Regardless of the physical fitness of the individual, how long could someone fight before they become exhausted; e.g. 10, 15, 30 minutes? At that point, how effective would they be at defending themselves if they were surrounded?
We now know and can see that arrows played a lesser role than previously thought.
47:55 That`s Paul Blinkhorn!
33:10
Hard to keep a bad fitting helmet on when you’re fighting for your life. They were probably willing to sacrifice the hindrance of safety just to have peripheral vision. Not speaking from experience. Just an assumption.
You know this ring Starlight one of the questions I have always wondered about from time immemorial we have been told about huge armies mini thousand people goes back to the Roman times goes back to the Egyptian times goes back to everytime I can even imagine I really think the numbers are really skewed think about what it would take to maintain an army that size the Forty or fifty thousand troops let me tell you they're going to get real hungry real quick and not just that either it all has to do with Logistics we have been told about these Greek battles Roman battles battles from Samaria and and even Egypt and there is no possible way they had this many people available to fight a war on no breakfast!!!
Maybe not in all cases. But considering the organisation of the Roman army it's absolutely possible they were in fact able to field armies of 30 000 - 40 000. They certainly had the logitics aswell as the organisation for it. Snd so did most likely some of the other major civilizations of Antiquity. Don't underestimate our ancestors JUST because they did not have the same techical level of gear as we do today. Another point very well worth remebering is that large armies were usuay only drawn together in the same place at the same time during certain operations, such as a major battle. For the most part the armies were scattered over far larger areas in smaller units or "corps" for logistical purposes. There were no reason to march an army 40 000 to 50 000 strong along the same road and always encamp it together as it would only make you vulnerable to attack. It was far sounder tactically speaking to have your forces split into smaller formations to advance along different routes only to converge when needed. This would give you better chances of gathering supplies as you march aswell as keeping your forces more likely to detect enemy threats and to keep the initiative. But even with this in mind it's well documented that most armies, no matter how good their logistics was rutinely suffered from both starvation and disease. Unless you were the commanding king or general or oe other sort of high ranking officer the order of the day on campaign would be a lack of enough food. You see this in countless examples from antiquity up until the mid 19th century. It's true that many medieval chronicles are notoriously unreliable when it comes to the number of men in armies or ships in navies. But that doesn't mean that large armies in the tenth of thousands wasn't fielded. They were. But you would rarely find them all gathered at the same time in the same place. And when they were they litterally consumed everything edible in a large radius around them. That's why so many sieges for examples had to be abandoned. The large forces laying siege quickly ate everything in the surrounding areas until there was nothing left while the far smaller garrisons in the castles or cities under siege had large and long lasting stockpiles of food. And if they didn't they usually surrendered fairly quickly. Sadly the medieval period is a part of military history with relatively few written sources, beside chronicles, surviving to this day. Chronicles were usually written a very long time after the events they portray, and they were usually written with an agenda. Sadly most army list, like we have from later periods, are extremely rare from the medieval period. There is one, not sure if it's complete though, for the English army dating from Henry V's campaing in France in 1415. Considering the advanced bureaucracy and organisation of the Roman Empire they had similar lists aswell. And so did most likely every other literate country/state/kingdom in antiquity aswell as during the medieval period. We know for a fact that such detailed accounts of army strength exists from the 1600th century and onwards. Sadly the further back through the centuries you look the rarer it is for such first hand accounts to have survived until our day. But that doesn't mean very large armies was not fielded.
Resembles the Battle at Veins Deep in Lord Of The Rings...🤔
I notice that most ot the skull fractures images,
shows destruction to their left eye socks
We know that in today's special forces the soldiers carry tomahawks because they can pierce any know military helmet and the kill is quick and quiet. So, I'm not so sure these soldiers were actually without helmets as stated.
Look at the weapon in the thumbprint. If a sword then next to no cross guard, if a rondel dagger then awfully big. Then, an artist around those times would have known the weapons, and the armour. And....archery, when you see an illustration of an archer with an arrow on the 'wrong side' of the bow.
Imagine that for the (VAST!) majority of medieval battlefields we cannot even find any archeological evidence AT ALL! For this one we have found...THIS! (just ONE example among twelve others that I can remwember at least). God only knows how many more still lie there underneath that relatively small field - or - in the immediate surroundings of it, given most of the slaughter happened during the lancastrian rout.
That was no battle but a massacre
The bigger items represent real value so will have been "recovered" to be reused / re issued. Decent Armour and good weapons are expensive. Face it even arrows were well worth recovery. Even damaged arrows had value as English arrows are socketed arrow heads these take time and skill to make.
after they all surrendered a mile from the battle field, they were all killed, that’s all...
The opponents took off their weapons and armor, the peasants buried them and took clothes and other things for themselves
Actually a mile isn't that big and 28,000 plus people would take up a lot of space.
When the Legions returned to Germanica. Decade or so aftef the 3 Legions were ambushed in Germanica. In the final battle of that campaign. Approx 100k Germanic warriors and those in the baggage train were KIA in around 24hrs.. They estimated. Thats why I always say. Maybe humans are doing something correct. Given the efficiency of modern weapons. It could be a lot worse!
Romantic is the last thing word I would use for hacking each other apart using iron weapons. People have a generous view of the brutality of man.
If you're comparing bones, CT would have been better than mri.... Makes me wonder about the research.
Elizabeth Woodville is 16th grandmother and Sir John Goby my 16th grandmother. Not King Henry.
The shear numbers of dead is terrifying, writings stated there was a human dam of the Cock Beck Creek and more men who fell into the water were run over and drowned.
The trail of death was 2 miles wide and six miles deep. A lot drowned in the next river on, at Tadcaster, because the Lancaster usn Lords broke the bridge across to stop the yorkists chasing them, leaving their own soldiers trapped.
@@stephenhill545 It defies definition - thousands of men hacking away at each other with glorified farm tools, not to mention the horses.... a mind bending amount of carnage... not yet equaled on the British Isle.
What's up with the Audio? Barely hear it!
Why is it in cases involving U.S., and other nations sunken warships they’re deemed off limits as protected war graves. But it’s o.k to disturb Native Indian graves, these graves here in Britain ? I’m shocked that German and Russian soldiers killed in WW2 are dug up on TH-cam posts or the French and Germans of WW1. ? I don’t understand the reason. Is being repatriated after 80yrs being dead, buried and turning to dust right ? Maybe just me
How do we justify digging up the dead for curiosity?
I rather liked the facial reconstruction. He looked like he had seen some things and done some things nobody should have to see and do.
Wasn't a civil war it was nothing but a family disagreement
правильнее предположить, что они бежали и в версте от места боя эта группа была окружена и сдалась в плен
When I think of mid evil times, I definitely think “romance”…. Not sure where she got that from but ok
#16 resembles Shrek.
My guess is that the victors executed anyone who was not ransomable. It may have been mercy killings.
Not sure why the archeologists think people don’t know War is brutal?!🤨
If the death toll was in the thousands why only thirty five skeletons? Were the dead buried in multiple graves?
Yes, and many were later removed and reburied by Richard III, who was from Yorkshire himself.
I've read in other battles that they would grab the earls the Lord's and anyone that look like they had money and hold them for collateral to trade them back to their families for money.
If you were a peon I guess it didn't matter. I was surprised when I read about these local battles how people would go to a close building that have like an upstairs to watch the battles.
A lot of good looking female archaeologists shown.
Why would they be ugly?
Its really pompous for a women or academics to judge men from 500 years ago on how they killed another man during a life and death situation.
How long, oh Lord, must we endure this evil? Come, Lord Jesus, come.